KelloggKid

Right off the bat I need to mention that I'm a gross amateur at best. My wife and I are older than dirt and doing our best to live on our Social Security checks and minimize dipping into savings. About 18 months ago I picked up a Nikon D3400 kit package from Costco as a starter camera. I've had a few film cameras over the years and had a darkroom for many years. Back when I had an income I also went through numerous digital cameras as the technology improved.

I recognize the limitations of the D3400 but am hesitant to spend money switching cameras until I can become a better photographer. I learned a long time ago that whether it's photographic gear, ski equipment, or archery, buying better gear doesn't improve your skills. Only practice can do that.

I'd be perfectly happy with the D3400 and the two kit lenses for now but my wife is pushing me to pick up a lens that is stronger than the 70-300 zoom as she wants me to be able to take photos of wildlife where the subject appears large enough to actually identify.

I don't want to invest a large amount of money until I can determine whether or not I'm capable of improving. Given the limitations I've stated what would you wonderful folks recommend?

Jaackil Loc: Massachusetts

Most longer lenses are going to be quite expensive. Unless you can pick up something used. So two options that won’t break the bank. First look into a telephoto extender also know as a teleconverter. In your camera your 70-300 has the equivilant reach of 105-450. B&H has a Nikon refurbished 2x converter for $379. I can’t tell you for sure that it is compatible with your 70-300 lens but B&H can.
The second option is learn how to crop and post process using the same lens you have now. I shoot with that same lens on crop bodies and it has plenty of reach for me. If you are shooting wildlife and it is not recognizable maybe the issue is not reach but technique?
If you are really looking for longer glass and you wife is pushing for you to buy it, I say go for it! I wish my wife would push for me to buy more lenses. Strike while the iron is hot as they say. Just keep in mind you will be limited to certain lenses that have the auto focus motor built in as your 3400 does not have the auto focus motor built into the body.
Good Luck.

darekstudio Loc: Minnesota

Strongly recommended Tamron for Nikon 100 to 400 mm f4.5 fi VC / use price right now it's around $650 👍.
It is great lens with VR absolutely fantastic quality.

tommy2 Loc: Fort Worth, Texas

My 2 cents worth: The 300mm lens you have should do the job. You might want to look into some sort of software that will allow you to crop out the subject and enlarge it. Of course that has limitations but would be the least expensive way to get an up close and personal look. Maybe there is some software already on the computer you used to send in the above note that would work for you.

ORpilot Loc: Prineville, Or

Many photographers hate them and many love them. lots of bang for the buck. I'm guessing you already have in your kit the 70-300mm since you mentioned it. The best bang for the buck would be the Nikon 500mm mirror lens , Ebay lists them fro $50 and on up. Note: they are manual focus lenses. Only Minolta made a Auto Focus Mirror lens.. I have a Student (same situation as you) that purchased a Sigma 500mm mirror and is learning to use it. Mirror Lenses are light and compact compared to traditional telephoto lenses. Other wise you are looking at around $800 for a used Sigma or Tamron 150-600mm . Trust me those hog legs are big and heavy compared to the mirror lens. Unless you are a pixel peeper and blow thing above 8x10 you won't see $700 bucks difference. BTW I still own and use a 500mm mirror lens. Why do people hate Mirror lenses: Image quality is a bit less than a traditional lens. Note: the really cheep no-name mirror lenses are terrible. Only look at the major brands. The Boken (out of focus parts) are a doughnut and not a blob. They do not have a aperture so they tend to be any where from F-6 F-8 or F-11 depending on the lens. As my student said. For about $110 bucks I will give it a try and If I don't like it then I'll sell it for something better.

KelloggKid

Thank you all for the quick replies. While no where near as good as some of you, I do know my way around PS and more recently Affinity Photo. I do know how to crop and enlarge and will work to perfect those techniques further. Perhaps I was exaggerating a little with my comment about "recognizing". It's just that my wife loves eagles, hawks, owls etc. and she is expecting to see the gleam in their eyes - Ha.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Any lens over 300mm will be substantially more expensive.

The LEAST expensive among those are...

- Tamron 18-400mm f/3.5-6.3 VC HLD, $649, about 1.5 lb. No option for a tripod collar.
- Sigma 100-400mm f/5-6.3 OS HSM, $799, about 2.5 lb. No option to add a tripod collar.
- Tamron 100-400mm f/4.5-6.3 VC USD, $799, about 3 lb., optional tripod collar ($129).
- Nikkor AF-S 200-500mm f/5.6 VR, $1257, about 5 lb., includes tripod collar.
- Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 OS HSM "Contemporary", $899, 4 lb., incl. tripod collar.
- Tamron 150-600mm f/5-6.3 VC USD "G2", $1199, about 4.5 lb., incl. tripod collar.
- Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 OS HSM "Sports", $1699, about 6.3 lb., incl. tripod collar.
- Sigma 60-600mm f/5-6.3 OS HSM "Sports", $1759, about 6 lb., incl. tripod collar.

From there, the price, size and weight of the options go up, up and way, way up!

The Sigma "Sports" lens are more solidly built and better sealed for dust & weather resistance, than their less expensive "Contemporary" lenses.

I noted the lens weight and whether or not they had or could have a tripod mounting ring, because personally I wouldn't consider a lens upwards of 200mm without one. Even with image stabilization (Nikon VR, Tamron VC and Sigma OS), these lenses can be difficult to hand hold or even to keep steady enough on a monopod. To me, a tripod mounting ring is pretty much mandatory on 300mm, 400mm and longer lenses.... especially when they are used upon an APS-C (DX) camera like yours. The smaller sensor format magnifies things, including any camera shake that leads to image blur. Plus, with their weight, most people wouldn't want to hand hold most of these lenses for more than a few minutes (and sometimes wildlife photography means waiting patiently for hours!)

The first lens on the list above, the Tamron 18-400mm, is a different type of lens... a "do it all" zoom that covers an extremely wide range of focal lengths. This type of lens has to compromise in a lot of ways... and this is the widest ranging of them all. It's pretty amazing for what it is, but has slower focus, more distortion, and isn't as sharp as most of the other lenses on the list. Still, it may be sufficient for your needs.

Some of these lenses might be available used or refurbished for a bit less $. There also was an earlier version of the Tamron 150-600mm (not as sharp as the G2), now largely only found used. And there were Sigma 120-400mm, 150-500mm and 50-500mm... the later versions of which all had OS (image stabilization). These also can be found used at lower prices, but none of them are as sharp as most of the above, more recent lenses.

Use the above as a guide and starting point to do a lot more detailed and careful research for any of the lenses that interest you.

Hopefully this helps! Have fun shopping.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Even with the crop factor of your D3400, a lens shorter than 400mm is too short for 'wildlife', especially eagles, hawks and so forth. Look for used equipment to lower the cost. You'll probably find a tripod to be helpful, another expense / barrier to entry for getting started in wildlife, even on the modest end. Although a zoom may seem more versatile, you may find a prime lens to be more useful and cheaper, especially one that can be 'extended' to a longer effective focal length. If your subjects are distant, you'll always be at the max zoom where many zoom lenses are not their best. Prime lenses will tend to be much sharper in comparison. A older used lens like the circa 2000 Nikon 300mm f/4 AF-S will autofocus on your camera alone and when 'extended' to 420mm with the AF-S Teleconverter TC-14E III. This set will be equally relevant if you should get a taste of success and want to change your camera later.

CO

Beware about using a teleconverter with the 70-300mm that came with the kit. That lens does not have vibration compensation. You may have a very hard time controlling camera shake as camera shake is amplified with long focal lengths.

I would recommend looking at the Nikon 200-500mm f/5.6 lens.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

An evaluation of the 4 150-600 lenses on the market by a group of wildlife photographers rated the older Tamron A011 as the best "bang for the buck" Cheapest of the 4 but still has image quality that they concluded produced publishable results - I used one from when they first came out until the G2 was available. I used mine in the Canon mount.
Ones in great condition can be gotten used for $800 or a bit less. B&H has the lens new for about $1199. Some of the bargain places have it for under $1000 but they are probably gray market.

Of the 4 150-600 lenses currently made those guys gave the Tamron G2 the #1 spot: tied for best IQ with the Sigma C and tied for best build/weather proofing with the Sigma Sport. It is about $1200 from the major trusted dealers.

Harry0 Loc: Gardena, Cal

First off- the D3400 really has no limitations.
The D5xxx and D7xxx series may have more data available, more menu items, etc.
Otherwise, same camera. Same sensors. Same pictures. More money.
A tripod doubles my image quality.
I get better sharpness, DOF, bokeh, etc by using the lens manually.
Get the lens. Get a lot of practice. Take the wife along to remind you what you did wrong. 8>}

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Ex-Clear-lens-Tamron-SP-A08-200-500mm-f-5-6-3-LD-AF-Di-IF-Nikon-fm-Japan-FedEx/184355974144?_trkparms=aid%3D1110006%26algo%3DHOMESPLICE.SIM%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D225086%26meid%3Ddf46515220b5467d9fa114d58f4ab251%26pid%3D100005%26rk%3D4%26rkt%3D12%26mehot%3Dpf%26sd%3D154006533182%26itm%3D184355974144%26pmt%3D1%26noa%3D0%26pg%3D2047675%26algv%3DSimplAMLv5PairwiseWebWithBBEV2bDemotionZeroArw%26brand%3DNikon&_trksid=p2047675.c100005.m1851

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

Sell your 70-300 and use this lens (Tamron 100-400) and CROP and use well applied pixel enlargement software for making larger reproductions.

ORpilot Loc: Prineville, Or

Go and checkout the new posting "Jupiter" Those shots were made with a Mirror Lens.

RWR Loc: La Mesa, CA

Your D3400 camera and 70-300 lens is plenty capable - rather than wasting money on new equipment, study your subject’s habits and work on improving your stalking and camouflage skills.

ClarkJohnson Loc: Fort Myers, FL and Cohasset, MA

I’ll add my vote to those that like both the D3400 and the Tamron 100-400. The D3400 is a good basic camera that just requires more time in the menu system than the higher level bodies. The 70-300 is not a bad lens, and for wildlife the settings with high shutter speeds would not use VR anyway. But the 100-400 continues to astonish me with the IQ that I can get. Bought mine on eBay and also picked up the Tap-in Console to get an immediate firmware update.

Good shooting, with whatever gear you end up with.