Nikon vs Canon for Birds? Let the fight begin!

largelylivin

OK. As you can see below I am a Pentax guy. For birds I rely on the Sigma 50-500 and the oh-so-sweet DA*300 with the Tamron 1.4x. I love the 300 so much that I really regret pulling out the Sigma at all, but some situations, especially BIFS and just walking about, really demand a good long zoom. Pentax et al made some great fixed primes, apparently no great long zooms, but they are very hard to find, very heavy, and very expensive frequently in the ball park of a new lens from Nikon or Canon.

I read elsewhere that the Nikon 200-400 is the best bird lens ever made. Then I saw the price. Then I saw very nice words about a Canon Zoom but they have so many I can't figure out which it was.

SO I am thinking of going to a new system for birds and using my slimmed down Pentax outfit for work. Which way to go? Requirements:
(1) Will accept last years Body to save $$ for lenses but I expect state -of-the-art picture quality and low noise levels
(2) Must be APS-C size sensor.
(3) Need 100ish-400ish zoom with option of TC
(4) Need 300 to 500 prime with optional TC. I'd like the option of both 300 and 500.
(5) I expect decent weather proofing.
(6) don't mention a Rebel as they are too small for my hands.

When you use a tripod, how much do you really gain from image stabilization on the Primes? Save big money?

Harryb

I can talk about the Nikon options. The D300 would fit your requirements for a body. It has an AF system that is fast and accurate. Noise levels are excellent up to ISO 800 in my experience. I've gotten useable results with ISOs up to 1600.

My favorite wildlife lens is the Nikon 300mm f/4. It works well with the 1.4 and 1.7 TCs giving you reach up to 510mm. Its a light lens which I use handheld while my 500mm is on the tripod.

The only Nikon lens that works with TCs in the 100mm-400mm range is the 200-400mm lens. The 80-400 vr lens is an OK lens but it doesn't work with Nikon TCs. Sigma and Tamron make lenses in that range though.

Mitchell

Harryb wrote:

The only Nikon lens that works with TCs in the 100mm-400mm range is the 200-400mm lens.

Harry, I use my 300mm, f2.8 VR with the TCs without any problem. I usually go with the 1,7 without any appreciable decrease in AF speed or IQ.

Harryb

Mitchell wrote:

Harry, I use my 300mm, f2.8 VR with the TCs without any problem. I usually go with the 1,7 without any appreciable decrease in AF speed or IQ.

I was referring to zoom lenses in that part of my response as opposed to primes. It would be great if Nikon comes out with the rumored upgrade of the 80-400mm zoom.

The 300mm 2.8 is a sweet lens but the current price of $5,000 may be an issue for Brad. I've found that the 300mm f/4 also works well with the 1.7 w/o too much of a trade off in AF speed or IQ.

swintonphoto

Well, it wasn't on your list, but I will put a word in for some great Olympus options. The E-3 which can be found for very affordable prices now has remarkably fast AF performance. Combined with one of Olympus's supersonic wave drive lenses such as the 50-200mm 2.8-3.5 lens would be an excellent combo. Olympus reports that the E-3 with their SWD lenses provides the fastest AF of any manufacturer and lens combo. While I am sure there are some on here that might dispute that, it is what Olympus reports. Plus you have the benefit of the 2x crop factor with the Olympus system making the 50-200mm SWD lens equivalent of a 100-400. If you want a superfast long prime their 300mm 2.8 lens is amazing (though expensive). The 150mm 2.0 lens is also fantastic. Though the lens I am always craving is the 90-250 2.8.
Just some other food for thought. You could get a used E-3 and the 50-200 2.8-3.5 SWD lens together for probably $2000. Add one of the teleconverters and you can really extend that length with the benefit of the 2x crop factor. Plus there is in-body IS, and horizontal IS which is nice for following moving birds in flight.

Check this link out: http://www.olympusamerica.com/e3/speed.asp

kini62

largelylivin wrote:

OK. As you can see below I am a Pentax guy. For birds I rely on the Sigma 50-500 and the oh-so-sweet DA*300 with the Tamron 1.4x. I love the 300 so much that I really regret pulling out the Sigma at all, but some situations, especially BIFS and just walking about, really demand a good long zoom. Pentax et al made some great fixed primes, apparently no great long zooms, but they are very hard to find, very heavy, and very expensive frequently in the ball park of a new lens from Nikon or Canon.

I read elsewhere that the Nikon 200-400 is the best bird lens ever made. Then I saw the price. Then I saw very nice words about a Canon Zoom but they have so many I can't figure out which it was.

SO I am thinking of going to a new system for birds and using my slimmed down Pentax outfit for work. Which way to go? Requirements:
(1) Will accept last years Body to save $$ for lenses but I expect state -of-the-art picture quality and low noise levels
(2) Must be APS-C size sensor.
(3) Need 100ish-400ish zoom with option of TC
(4) Need 300 to 500 prime with optional TC. I'd like the option of both 300 and 500.
(5) I expect decent weather proofing.
(6) don't mention a Rebel as they are too small for my hands.

When you use a tripod, how much do you really gain from image stabilization on the Primes? Save big money?

Canon 40D/50D with the 100-400IS. Can't really use a TC though (some can, some can't). Old design push/pull zoom but reasonably priced with good AF.

Canon 400/5.6. Super lens in regard to AF and IQ. Again TC most likely will not AF, but very reasonably priced.

Used 1DMKII, IIN with above lenses. AF will work with 1.4TCs on the 1D bodies.
300/4IS
300/2.8IS
400/2.8IS Go used sometimes for less than $5000.

IMO Canon has more choice, plus the long fast primes are less expensive and there are more on the used market.

With Canon I'd avoid anything made by Sigma. Sigma and Canon cameras do not get along well. A lot of trial and error and calibration is required to get even mediocre IQ.

Gene

Manfr3d

I would pick glas first then the camera.

Thsese:

+ Canon 400mm f/5.6 L
+ Sigma 500mm f/4.5 EX

are quite inexpensive when bought used.
Both excellent optics.

Scott_Quier

With respect to bodies, lenses, etc - that's all been covered quite well above. However, if you go with Canon, I can strongly recommend the 50D. Because the lenses and cameras are mass produced, there can be some minor mis-matches in the combination that can result in less than great focusing. The AF Microadjustment is something that can, sometimes, turn a good performing lens into a stellar lens.

One question you asked that has not been address is the use of IS while mounted on a tripod. The answer is, You don't want or need IS when mounted. The IS circuitry senses lens/camera movement and counters that by moving one or more elements in the lens to compensate. When the camera/lens is mounted on a tripod, the lack of motion can confuse some lenses and you end up with very poor IQ. So, just turn it off and save the battery juice.

largelylivin

Thanks everyone,

I went to my local dealer last night. He has his own agenda but is very knowledgable. His perspective was interesting and pushed me towards a Canon50D or used 40D.

1. He pointed out what I already knew: why get hung-up about the Nikon 400-500 ($6500) unless you're actually ready to part with the money now. Good point, that much will get me a whole Canon system.
2. There is Canon rebate program on until July 11th.
3. There is a Canon repair facility less than 10 miles away and they take walk-ins. (Another salesman chimed in that a Nikon never needs repair.)
4. More used Canon equipment, easy to locate a 300/2.8.

His prices were:

1. 50D with 18-200 IS: 1599 (the 50D alone was 1199)
2. 100-400L IS: 1650
3. 1.4x: 399

So that's approaching $4000 plus I'd need a powerful flash and maybe the grip.

If I hit the lottery:

800L IS $12,000)

kdog

largelylivin wrote:

1. He pointed out what I already knew: why get hung-up about the Nikon 400-500 ($6500) unless you're actually ready to part with the money now.

I think you meant 200-400, right? 400 is too short for birds in the wild anyway. Serious birders are using the 500, 600 (with and without TCs), and even the 800 now. Even though you won't be buying a big gun like that now, birding is extremely addictive, and you should plan ahead just in case. So you should look at your options for the big guns in both camps, including purchase prices.

-joel

largelylivin

I can testify exactly how addictive bird photography is! I may have to join AA.
Yes I meant the Nikon 200-400 zoom ($6500).

I am certain the Canon 100-400L will be much better than the Sigma 50-500 which has become almost intolerable for me.

Big Primes: Yep. Canons are less $$ and more readily available. That's the future plan, nothing I can afford right now.