What Length for Wildlife?

eminarteminart Registered Users Posts: 49 Big grins
edited February 18, 2009 in Cameras
Not sure if this is the correct sub-forum, so feel free to move it, mods.

So, I don't have a "good" long lens yet. I've been shooting with an older Nikon 70-210mm that I picked up just so I'd have something. It does a decent job, but I'd like to upgrade as soon as possible.

Anyway, my question............... what is a good length lens for shooting wildlife? Obviously, I know it can vary a lot, but I'm just looking for an opinion on an everyday, go out and shoot whatever you see, type of lens. It seems like my 70-210 is too short to get good shots of most things. I can crop them afterwards and get a closer image, but the quality isn't there when I do that. I tried to shoot some waterfowl out on a refuge last week and they were just too far away to get a usable image. I know I could try to get closer, but it seems like the vast majority of the opportunities are a little out of reach of 210mm.

So, do most of you use something longer than 200mm? ARE there any good lenses longer than 200mm that don't cost 10K?

Comments

  • Art ScottArt Scott Registered Users Posts: 8,959 Major grins
    edited February 16, 2009
    You may want to consider something like the Sigma 170-500 which with your D80 wouod be like using a 250-750mm lens......but i have gotten really great photos of larger wildlife.....deer and squirrels with my 70-210.....it is the tiny birds that cause me probs..........
    "Genuine Fractals was, is and will always be the best solution for enlarging digital photos." ....Vincent Versace ... ... COPYRIGHT YOUR WORK ONLINE ... ... My Website

  • jonh68jonh68 Registered Users Posts: 2,711 Major grins
    edited February 16, 2009
    There is a wildlife forum that will better answer your question.

    Since you have the 70-210, I would suggest getting the Nikon 300 AFS f4 prime with a 1.4 TC or the sigma 100-300 f4 HMS and a 1.4 TC. These two may be the best combo of IQ and value in regards to getting 420 mm reach.

    The benefit of having one of these two is you have a reasonably fast lens without the TC when light gets low, and IQ doesn't suffer too much with the TC on them. These two are popular with wildlife shooters who want a relatively light lens, and great value. I would get either of these two over any of the Sigma 500mm zooms.

    You can get the 70-300 VR and it will work great too, but does not work well with a TC. There is never enough reach for wildlife. Also, you can get the Nikon 80-400 VR. It has great IQ, but the AF suffers a bit.
  • ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 24,133 moderator
    edited February 16, 2009
    A fair number of people use the Sigma "Bigma" 50-500mm, f/4-6.3 EX DG HSM as a general purpose wildlife lens. In good light and with appropriate post-processing it can produce decent results.

    For more ideas about wildlife lenses:

    http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=39768
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Major grins Rockledge, FL on the Space CoastPosts: 0 Major grins
    edited February 18, 2009
    Harryb "the amiable mod of the Wildlife forum" shoots Nikon so he will probably have a comment. There is a sticky over there on lenses for wildlife shooting that you could check if you have an hour or so :D

    Jim
  • eminarteminart Registered Users Posts: 49 Big grins
    edited February 18, 2009
    Hey, Thanks for the replies everyone! I appreciate all the good info.

    I actually started another thread on an alternative idea (I thought this thread was dead and gone) regarding an 80-200mm f2.8 + TC.

    See repetitive thread here: http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=121342
Sign In or Register to comment.