gary8803

I post earlier on this site for recommendation plus some other sites. Here is what I think I will get.

Nikon D500 $1200 used like new condition.

Nikon 300 2.8 vrii $3000.00 used ex condition.

teleconverter 1.4 have not priced yet.

my budget is $10000.00 but really would like to stay lower I'am not a professional just want good pictures in low light conditions weight limit is 10 pounds for camera and lens

Quixdraw Loc: x

Sounds good to me. I'd add a Nikon 50 1.8 or a 35, you will find either to be useful.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

The 1.4X TC III is the correct one for this lens. Are you aware of how heavy this is? The lens is 6.4 lbs, add another 2.6 lbs for the camera + TC and you've got quite a load. I routinely carry similar - D810 and a Sigma 150-600, which tips the scale at 8.4 lbs as well. I've been carrying this 60% of the time when I go out for wildlife, and it has not been an issue - beats carrying the tripod, head, and a decent camera bag to hold it all.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

What you really need is a current fast zoom going to at least 300mm (like 100-300 f4) - but nobody is really making one - but I guess you could think about a 70-200 2.8 with 1.4X. I really prefer primes but going to Costa Rica I think I would want a zoom for the versatility . Hand holding a 300 2.8 will wear you down .....quickly ! I really think I would also prefer a crop frame mirror less body - maybe the Sony A6500 or 6600 when it comes out......
.

martinfisherphoto Loc: Lake Placid Florida

Where do I start. I've been six times the last being for the month of April this year, so a couple of points. I Highly recommend a full frame camera because 80% of the action is under a heavy canopy. I used a Nikon D850 and the new Nikon 500mm pf this year. Only once did I get close enough to fill the frame and clip the birds wings. Most of the birds are Small.....The longer the lens the better. I like the 500 pf for it's size and weight. That said if I was to get all new equipment I would go mirrorless and with Sony.
Costa Rica just changed the laws that make it unlawful to feed the animals including the birds. A lot of the resorts/birding destinations are following the rules. Even in places like Monteverde you will not find many humming bird feeders. It's not as easy as walking up to a feeder and getting a shot. Most importantly I would recommend getting a guide at least your first visit. I still hire guides when going to new locations. Thousands of birds, but the trick is getting close, even with a 500mm to get a good image. Guides are a Big Plus for this. I would also try and stay in only a couple of locations for the 10 day trip as well. Traveling from point A to point B can take so much longer than here in the states. Just traveling 60 miles down the road can easily take 4 hrs. A Good Local guide will cost around $100 a day plus meals and lodging. A Good guide will save you lots of money with lodging and food. They get the Teco price {instead of the American price} plus know where to eat the best food for the best prices. I know the ropes now, but not the first couple of visits. If you hire guides around the tourist towns and resorts they will charge an arm and leg....... If you know exactly where you're going and the dates, drop me a PM and I'll see if I've been there and can make recommendations.
I love Costa Rica but you should know their are two different types of people there. One wants to get in your pocket, and the other wants to share their country with you. The same anytime you go to a foreign country.
PS let me know if your renting a car, only one honest car rental company in the country
I just loaded some images on 500px a few weeks ago taken with the D850 and 500mm pf back in April in CR.
https://500px.com/p/martinfisher?view=photos

nimbushopper Loc: Tampa, FL

This is excellent advise, and your photographs are superlative!

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

You will be walking a lot in Costa Rica, the last thing you want is to be carrying a 300 2.8 lens around.
I believe you are limiting your self to one angle of view and this will not do in Costa Rica, you need to quickly change your field of view, adding a 1.4 and coming up with a 675mm lens still does not deliver enough of an option.
And, when you come home, you'll still be stuck with a very heavy lens.
I have shot extensively in Florida wetlands with the 300 2.8, 500 5.6 FL, and the 200-500 5.6 on the Nikon D500. The Nikon 200-500 delivers a field of view of 300-750 mm, I have never needed anything else for birds in Florida.
Unless you are enlarging an image to say 30X40 you will not notice any loss in image quality in the three lenses listed above.
IMHO, I believe your better off with the Nikon 200-500, it is more versatile than either of the 500's, comes with a 5 year warranty, the 300 2.8 comes with no warranty and parts in a few years will be hard to find if it needs repaired.
Trust me, your going to constantly on the move in Costa Rica, you need one lens that offers a variety of viewing distances, you will be much better off with the 200-500 mm 5.6 E.
Below is just a grab shot in Florida of a Great Blue Heron carrying nesting material in the early morning, your D500 will handle low light just fine, this one was shot a 1/5000 sec. wide open at f5.6 on a D500 at ISO 1250. You be the judge.

Attached file:
(Download)

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Excellent advice from a veteran! I agree with everything you wrote - D850 over a D500, 500mm PF over a 12 yr old 300mm F2.8+TC, and Sony mirrorless, for what may be the best performing camera on the market, especially for wildlife and sports.

Under heavy forest canopy, it is not uncommon to need ISO 8,000 and considerably higher, even with a relatively fast lens. For depth of field considerations, shooting at F7.1 - F9 will make sense, even if that means higher ISO. I've recently purchased ON1 NoNoise, and it is pure magic in that not only does it reduce noise, but it does the best job at revealing fine detail that other noise reduction programs can't seem to be able to do.

Here is a test image I did last week. The first is without noise reduction the second is with NoNoise. This was taken in early morning twilight, overcast, With a D810 and Sigma Sport 150-600 @ ISO 11,400 1/500 sec F7.1. Image is cropped from 7360x4910 to 3258x2958.

There are a very few artifacts - some poor anti-aliasing along the lower part of the beak, and some weird rendering of the right forward toenail. A little fine tuning with the sliders and some careful editing in Photoshop to clean up any remaining artifacts and there is no reason to stay at low ISO any more.

I do enjoy viewing your photos - it's always nice to see such consistent quality and creativity. Unlike many photographers (myself included) all too often the bird or other subject is presented out of context - yours are not at all like that - refreshing change!

(Download)


(Download)

photoman43

I own both the Nikon 300mm f2.8 and the Nikon 300mm f4 pf. There is no way I would take the 300mm f2.8 to CR vs the 300mm f4. It is so much heavier and needs a tripod or monopod to use properly unless you have fantastic upper body muscles. You are likely going to be in places where you will be walking or standing up in heat and humidity. You may end up hating the 300mm f2.8. I had both before I went to CR--and I took the 300mm f4.

FredCM Loc: Central Illinois

No one seems to mention the weather. During our winter and early spring it's the dry season on the west of the central highlands. Rain shouldn't be an issue. It's foggy and drizzly in the central mountains in March. Not a huge issue. BUT east of the highlands it's like the west coast of Florida in June. Sudden downpours. Everytrhing is wonderful when boarding the river boat and 20 minutes later they're passing out ponchos. WHAM! down comes the rain, for maybe 5-10 minutes.

Something to keep in mind with an expensive D500. Isn't the 7000 series supposed to be more or less weather proof?

Other than the showers the weather was great. Hotels and resorts without window screens, no bugs, no oppressive heat.

I had my old D5000 with the Nikon 70-300 G lens. They fit inside a gallon zip lock plastic bag.

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

I would consider Gene51's suggestions for equipment. I would still suggest reconsideration of 4/3rds by going to professional Thomas Stirr's website and read why he changed. Your indicated choice is perfectly acceptable and will basically meet your requirements well. But that system will get "heavier" as you get older in years and will require your accommodating the size and weight on all your future trips. Since you not going to be shooting professional, do you really need the upmost quality versus the size and weight? Again, if the answer is "yes" to the question, I personally would consider Gene51's suggestions.

Rhl0630

I agave canon pentax Nikon etc. I’d take my Olympus micro 4/3. it has the best water resistance very sharp lenses

MG Audet

Consider: Nikon D850 w/300 mm F/4.0 both used in excellent condition from KEH total price used about $4,300 about what you were going to buy. Better camera and sensor and the 300 pf is a great lens (one stop slower than 2.8) and lighter than the 2.8. With the 1.4 extender ($495 new) your reach will be 420mm. Pretty light rig.
Good luck

joecichjr Loc: Chicago S. Suburbs, Illinois, USA

Excellent 💚❤️❤️💚

LEWHITE7747 Loc: 33773

The problem with Nikon is the lens weight. The 300 prime is a load. The 500 is a superb camera. I wish you would have considered a Canon 7D MKll with the 100-400 ll. Less weight, More versatililty and save yourself some money. Just my choice. I am sure you are strong and can carry the weight. (see pic) I get great results from this setup!

(Download)