Seeking recommendations for telephoto lens
Jan 14, 2018 14:15:38 #
Bobspez wrote:
Very nice shot. But you can't compare your Nikon D500 with the OP's D3300.
The attached moon shot was taken handheld with the Coolpix B700 12 nights ago. It's better than I have done so far with the 55-300mm lens on a D7000 dslr with a DX sensor, or on a Nikon 1 J1 dslr with a CX sensor and FT-1 autofocus adapter.
I got the Coolpix B700 camera used on ebay for $300 plus $18 shipping for Christmas.
The attached moon shot was taken handheld with the Coolpix B700 12 nights ago. It's better than I have done so far with the 55-300mm lens on a D7000 dslr with a DX sensor, or on a Nikon 1 J1 dslr with a CX sensor and FT-1 autofocus adapter.
I got the Coolpix B700 camera used on ebay for $300 plus $18 shipping for Christmas.
From a Panasonic DMC G5 (M4/3) and lens at 300mm. The Coolpix has a sensor the size of you smallest finger nail. It will never compete even in the right hands.
Jan 14, 2018 14:21:24 #
joer wrote:
From a Panasonic DMC G5 (M4/3) and lens at 300mm. The Coolpix has a sensor the size of you smallest finger nail. It will never compete even in the right hands.
Nice shot. When I was shooting my moon shot with the SX-50 and person next to me (at one of Oregon's state parks) was using a Panasonic. His photos were better than mine. From what I have observed, Panasonic has better lenses on their bridge cameras.
Jan 14, 2018 14:57:35 #
ragon wrote:
I have a Nikon D3300 and would like recommendation... (show quote)
Mostly all garbage lenses but you were looking for a "cheap" lens! Even an inexpensive telephoto in the range you want is over a thousand dollars!
bwa
Jan 14, 2018 14:57:51 #
I think you're wrong. I downloaded your pic and rotated and cropped it and downsized my pic and cropped it to show a similar area and pixel count for both pics. Look for yourself. I think my B700 shot on the left beats your G5 pic on the right.
joer wrote:
From a Panasonic DMC G5 (M4/3) and lens at 300mm. The Coolpix has a sensor the size of you smallest finger nail. It will never compete even in the right hands.
Jan 14, 2018 15:54:01 #
Bobspez wrote:
I think you're wrong. I downloaded your pic and rotated and cropped it and downsized my pic and cropped it to show a similar area and pixel count for both pics. Look for yourself. I think my B700 shot on the left beats your G5 pic on the right.
Yours is better processed. The one on the right has problems which is obvious from the blown out fringe! Of course, this assumes the same atmospheric conditions existed for the two images which is probably far from the case.
Under ideal conditions, which seldom exist, either camera can turn out a decent picture of the Moon.
bwa
Jan 14, 2018 16:06:02 #
RTCreed
Loc: Forest Park, IL
I'd suggest you look for a used Vivitar 500MM "T" mount lens. I've had one for 40+ years and it is a good piece of glass and probably relatively inexpensive on e-bay or other venues.
Jan 14, 2018 16:32:09 #
Bobspez wrote:
I think you're wrong. I downloaded your pic and rotated and cropped it and downsized my pic and cropped it to show a similar area and pixel count for both pics. Look for yourself. I think my B700 shot on the left beats your G5 pic on the right.
If you say so. Lets just agree to disagree after all anyone interested can form their own opinions.
Jan 14, 2018 17:18:44 #
ragon wrote:
I have a Nikon D3300 and would like recommendation... (show quote)
Cheap, third party telephotos are garbage and good telephotos are way over priced.
Look for a Nikon 70-300 DX lens to start with and start saving for a longer lens if you decide you need/want one.
Jan 14, 2018 17:29:47 #
Sounds like you are saying a coolpix B700 can compete with a G5 and 70-300mm lens, despite (or maybe because of)
the tiny censor.
the tiny censor.
joer wrote:
If you say so. Lets just agree to disagree after all anyone interested can form their own opinions.
Jan 14, 2018 18:16:41 #
I tried the Tamron 18-400. For 4 hours. Immediately sent it back. Jack of All Trades, Master of NONE.
Get a 100-400, or a 150-600. If you go cheap, you'll get what you pay for.
Get a 100-400, or a 150-600. If you go cheap, you'll get what you pay for.
Jan 14, 2018 20:00:34 #
DaveyDitzer
Loc: Western PA
BlueMorel wrote:
BTW, the cheap tripod that Amazon offers with the lens would guarantee you have to buy a new lens if you're mounting a 600 mm on it with no support. Liable to topple forward onto the rocks or off the cliff you're shooting from. Maybe that's why they offer the package deal so cheap?
This is a good point - the tripod and head. I recently bought a used Nikkor 300 mm f4 lens - the old model about 3 lbs. Even my excellent, Bogen tripod had to be tightened down a lot to keep the lens for sagging. The lens had the Nikon mount, which is not very good. Its weight bias is not centered. If you hand hold a long lens, you will have to shoot a fast shutter and it will require a high ISO due to the smaller apertures on less expensive telephoto lenses.
Jan 14, 2018 20:25:52 #
I have a Nikon D3300 and spent the money for a Sigma 150-600mm. It's a little heavy, but well worth what I paid for it. I believe the other folks who responded are correct in that cheap does not mean better when it comes to lenses.
Jan 14, 2018 21:56:47 #
Jan 15, 2018 21:02:17 #
ragon
Loc: Wisconsin
Thanks all for the tips and advice. I just ordered this one.
Nikon AF-P DX NIKKOR 70-300mm f/4.5-6.3G ED DSLR Lens - US Model Refurbished
Should get to me next Monday.
Nikon AF-P DX NIKKOR 70-300mm f/4.5-6.3G ED DSLR Lens - US Model Refurbished
Should get to me next Monday.
Jan 15, 2018 21:32:22 #
ragon wrote:
It'll probably do, till you want something a bit longer. Which you will.I just ordered this one. Nikon AF-P DX NIKKOR 70-300mm f/4.5-6.3G ED DSLR Lens - US Model Refurbished
I'd have gone with a 100-400, or a 150-600. But I think you made a reasonable choice.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.