Your input requested for Sanity Check on lens selection

[gKhan]

I shoot all types of subjects but this post primarily concerns wildlife. I use a D780 with a Tamron 28-300 lens because most of my wildlife shots occur when I am hiking in the mountains. On any given hike I use a full range of focal lengths with the zoom lens. I have been shooting wildlife for almost 60 years and can no longer carry multiple lenses nor a very long lens such as a 500 or 600mm. Also, I never take a tripod but will use my hiking staff, trees or rocks etc to steady the camera when possible. Everything is hand held but I can get decent shots hand holding the 300mm zoom. I frequently leave the established trails in order to get shots , so in most cases, my wild life shots are usually taken at around 90 to 150mm. So, hand holding has not been a major problem, but I would like to increase the range.

Though picture quality is very important to me, the pictures I take are more for documentation of where I have been and what I have seen rather than for a magazine cover. I should add that the vast majority of pictures I have seen on this site significantly exceed what I generally see on magazine covers.

I want to lighten my load so have tried a Nikon Z6ii and really like the camera but the Tammy lens is not fully compatible with it. I also would like to increase the focal length for those situations where I cannot get close enough with my 300. But keep in mind that I want to retain the wide angle capability too, so a zoom is needed. I like the Z6ii but am limited in zoom lens choices---don't forget that I am also shooting landscapes, flowers, old mine sites and artifacts etc on most trips.

Here is what I have come up with and would appreciate any comments or suggestions that you may have.

I looked at a list of lenses that are compatible with the Z6ii and have pretty much settled on the Tammy 18-400. There are no mirrorless lenses that meet my needs.

I initially disregarded the 18-400 because it is for crop sensor cameras and the Z6 is full frame. But since I will need an adapter to make DSLR lenses fit, I can use a crop sensor lens on the camera by using the adapter. I gain a crop factor of 1.5 so the 400 mm lens now becomes 600 and the 18mm wide angle becomes only 27 mm--- which is about what I get with my current 28-300 FF lens. The 18-400 is physically larger than I would like but I can live with that for the advantage of gaining super long telephoto lens. Also, the footprint of the Z6 helps a lot towards the portability.

So far I have been quite pleased with the image quality and I assume it will be the same as with a FF, except for the crop factor difference. I think I would be comfortable printing them up to 20x30 and probably larger.

If this is not the case please let me know what you think. So far I have taken less than 500 shots with this combination and have not taken it on an extended hike but I have been very impressed with the results. I usually flunk these sanity checks so please give you your considered opinions. I really am greatly impressed with the quality of the shots posted on this site so any comments you make will be valued and appreciated. Thanks.

 

[FB101]

I don’t know if you have thought about the FX/DX conversion the right way.
your DX lens will not privide an image circle covering the full sensor of your D780. Each lens varies a bit but the theoretical 1.5 focal lens factor for Nikon translates to an image coverage and resolution 2.25 time smaller (1.5 squared).
so in theory your D780 with a DX lens will give you between 11 and 12mpx images. Now it’s likely this lens covers a bit better than strictly that image circle but it’s unlikely you’ll get a lot more than 13 or 14mpx.

that’s the fallacy of all those DX/FX “extra reach” arguments. You don’t get extra reach, you crop a 400mm image to the viewing angle of a 600mm. You don’t retain the full resolution.

the argument holds somewhat better for example if you said you will change the D780 for a D7200 Or the z6 to a z50 because they all have 24mp so you do get the full 24mp with the DX bodies.

So if you are comfortable with 12mp you can do what you intend but know there is no free lunch.

 

[FB101]

One small correction to my post, the z50 is 21mp like the D500, not 24mp Like the z6. But that would still be my advice if you plan on using a DX lens. At least you will use the full 21mp of the sensor.
i would also make sure the lens you picked is fully compatible with FTZ x many third party lenses “work” but speed and sometimes AF reliability go way down - so yes, they “work” but not great...

 

[Tom Reynolds]

I would switch your d-780 for a D-7200 or D-500 and use a Nikon 75-300DX lens.

 

[bleirer]

I don't shoot Nikon but I understand and relate to your issue. My experience with Canon is that image quality suffers when you go for zooms that are more than 4x or 5x, especially lower cost offerings . I like my 24-105 a lot but rejected the 24 to 240, for example. It's too difficult for the lens maker to get quality into such a wide range.

You have a difficult choice because there are tradeoffs and no free lunch as to cropping. One scenario is to decide what you are shooting today and carry that lens only. If it is wildlife carry a quality telephoto only and maybe take that same trail tomorrow with a landscape lens. My setup with Canon is to have the 24-105, the 100-400 with the 1.4, and the 100mm macro in the larger backpack, but carry a smaller backpack just for this trail today, with just the camera and one lens and polarizer or a couple other lightweight items. I put a quick release head on my walking stick so don't carry a tripod unless I know I need one for a particular shot, depending on how hard or far the hike is.

 

[AlexY]

I have a D500 and have been using a Tamron 18-400mm lens for almost 3 years now. It is my walking around lens and it affords very good images. I use it for wildlife, landscapes, and portraits, though I do have other lenses which I will use for special pictures - a Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 for landscapes, a Sigma 18-35mm f 1.8 for portraits and landscapes and a Tamron 150-600mm G2 for wildlife, as well as a Sigma 10-20mm for landscapes, plus a Sigma 105mm macro.
The 18-400 is still my lens of choice for wandering about, camera in hand, looking for adventure. Why not get a D500 to go with your 18-400 Tamron? Below, a photo taken with the D500 and the Tamron 18-400 (350mm or ~525mm FX field of view, f6.3, 1/800s, ISO 2000, hand held, Algonquin Park, one week ago)

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

cheers,
Alex

 

[Anjin San]

I would recommend a 2 lens combo…the Z6II gains 4 or 5 ounces compared to the D780. I would get the 24-0 Z lens which is excellent and the 70-200 Z lens and go with them. That gives you a length range of 24-200 and if you shift the Z6II to DX mode up to 350. Add in the 1.4 Z teleconvrter and that gets you to 280mm FF and 420 DX with essentially no IQ loss. It isn’t a single lens but you gain a lot for not much additional weight overall.

OTOH…as noted the Tamron 18-400 is also nice but that forces your Z6II into DX mode all the time. If a single lens and low weight is the goal…swap the Z6II for either a D500 or a Z50 depending on whether you want to stay MILC or not…but DSLRs are on the way out so the D500 would be a dead end there…not an argument against it but just a fact of tech advancement. I went from my D7500 to the Z7II for FF and new tech reasons…but then I normally carry 2 bodies on a double Black Rapid strap…and I’m a little younger than you but not that much.

 

[RichF]

As Neil suggest a 2 lens combo. I have the 24-200 Z and it is a great walk around lens. Other lens could be 500 PF, I know not a Z. Worked great for me on Z7 II for following BIF

 

[dabhand16]

Given what you say in your first post, have you considered switching to an Olympus OM-D E-M1 MFT system? Lenses especially are very light and I continue to be very impressed with the fantastic images I've seen from the people I know who own them, including hand held at 600mm (OM-D E-M1 + 300mm prime + 2x TC) and hand held macro shots.

For me the poor high ISO/noise performance was a nono, but if you don't need this there are huge advantages in terms of weight and you can carry more kit that weighs less. That's what i've found with my Fuji X mount kit.

 

[FB101]

Given what you say in your first post, have you considered switching to an Olympus OM-D E-M1 MFT system? Lenses especially are very light and I continue to be very impressed with the fantastic images I've seen from the people I know who own them, including hand held at 600mm (OM-D E-M1 + 300mm prime + 2x TC) and hand held macro shots.

For me the poor high ISO/noise performance was a nono, but if you don't need this there are huge advantages in terms of weight and you can carry more kit that weighs less. That's what i've found with my Fuji X mount kit.

That’s a very fair point. Hard to beat Olympus when you want reach and lightweight. If the primary goal is not printing books and large magnifications, they do have great gear.

i love Fuji, i still grab my Xpro bodies over anything else for reportage, but I tried the XT3 for wildlife and I found it clunky for that use. No buffer depth, no real lens options besides their one longer zoom. AF was struggling a bit (but when it hits, wow, tack sharp - that zoom optically is in the same class as the Sony 200-600 or canon 100-500 but completely underestimated). So I eventually went D500 and never looked back.

 

[dabhand16]

That’s a very fair point. Hard to beat Olympus when you want reach and lightweight. If the primary goal is not printing books and large magnifications, they do have great gear.

i love Fuji, i still grab my Xpro bodies over anything else for reportage, but I tried the XT3 for wildlife and I found it clunky for that use. No buffer depth, no real lens options besides their one longer zoom. AF was struggling a bit (but when it hits, wow, tack sharp - that zoom optically is in the same class as the Sony 200-600 or canon 100-500 but completely underestimated). So I eventually went D500 and never looked back.

I have the Fringer Nikon F mount to Fuji X mount converter which allows all of my Nikon lanes with AF motors to AF on both of my Fujis and they work with my nikon 1.4x and 1.7x TCs. That gives me 900mm with my Sigma 150-600 Sport. The XT-4 gives 15 fps with the mechanical shutter and more with the electronic shutter. Not explored the buffer depth with it though.

 

[Tiago C]

That’s a very fair point. Hard to beat Olympus when you want reach and lightweight. If the primary goal is not printing books and large magnifications, they do have great gear.

i love Fuji, i still grab my Xpro bodies over anything else for reportage, but I tried the XT3 for wildlife and I found it clunky for that use. No buffer depth, no real lens options besides their one longer zoom. AF was struggling a bit (but when it hits, wow, tack sharp - that zoom optically is in the same class as the Sony 200-600 or canon 100-500 but completely underestimated). So I eventually went D500 and never looked back.

X-T3 buffer is not bad if you set continous shooting to 10fps. I get about 53 RAW shots with the X-T4. OK not D500 level but not bad. Regarding lens selection, you can adapt most telephoto lenses designed for Canon EF or Nikon F really well. Agreed that the Fujifilm 100-400 is a very good lens. Its quality is very understimated by the photo community.

 

[EricBowles]

You asked for a sanity check. Certainly the 18-400 covers almost everything you need, but there are a couple of compromises. It's not the best or sharpest lens at any focal length - good but not very good. You are cropping by using a DX lens, which limits cropping later and impacts ISO selection. But the biggest issue to me is that it's relatively heavy, and most of the time the 100-400mm portion of the range will be unused. That means you're carrying a lot of extra weight unnecessarily if wildlife is not expected.

Even with wildlife, the question is whether you are looking for snapshots or good photographs. People have different approaches to hiking. Are you one who would sit and watch an animal for a half an hour. If so, a longer lens is useful. Or are you someone who sees a subject, watches it briefly, and then moves on after a quick photo. If this is you, just skip the long lens most of the time.

My approach to a light kit is to be selective about what I plan to photograph, and to fill known needs with the lightest appropriate option. If I expect to be photographing wildlife, I'll take a 300 f/4 and 1.4 teleconverter or a 200-500. But most of the time I'm photographing landscapes and a single 24-70 f/4 is adequate. I might add a 105 macro as my long lens, or for lighter weight a 50mm or 60mm macro. I also find a wide lens is important for some locations, so I might take a 14-30 f/4 and that 50mm or 60mm macro. Sure - I might miss a shot, but most of the time I've got a single lens on my camera the entire day and only change for a specific reason.

If you want a light kit, there are some terrific and small older lenses. The 55mm f/2.8 and f/3.5 macro lenses (manual focus) are very small. The 70-300 ED (non-VR) was a pretty good lens.

I also like the idea of using consumer lenses that are mainly plastic. The 16-50 + 50-250 kit for the Z DX cameras is optically good and provides nice options. You can add a close up lens for macro type photos. The 50-250 lens has a 62mm filter thread so it works nicely with the 5T or 6T close up lens - or alternatives from Marumi or Canon. Close up lenses for macro are essentially filters - small and light as part of your kit.

 

[Woody Meristem]

"Given what you say in your first post, have you considered switching to an Olympus OM-D E-M1 MFT system? Lenses especially are very light and I continue to be very impressed with the fantastic images I've seen from the people I know who own them, including hand held at 600mm (OM-D E-M1 + 300mm prime + 2x TC) and hand held macro shots."

Yes, yes, yes! Either the Olympus E-M1 or Panasonic G9 with their 75-300mm zooms would give you the full frame equivalent of 150-600mm at a lot less wight and cost and they come with excellent stabilization. There's a wide range of superb lenses available and any MFT lens will work on either camera. Check the images on this website -- http://smallsensorphotography.com/ I have three MFT cameras, two Olympus and a Panasonic; I prefer the Olympus cameras to the Panasonic but the latter's menu is much more user friendly.

 

[DBS]

For hiking I have been using the Nikon AF-P 70-300. The image quality is good for the price, and the weight is slightly less than the Tamron. To cover wide angle shots I carry one of: an iPhone, a small point and shoot camera, or a short Nikon lens.

If you really want to limit what you're carrying another option is a mid to high end point and shoot camera. There are some compromises with this approach, but you can get some pretty amazing images with the point and shoot cameras.

 

[gKhan]

Wow!!! All of the responses to my inquiry have been really well thought out and reasonable. Though they may suggest different solutions to my problem they all seem to be well-intentioned and based on facts rather than opinion. I truly appreciate that and have seriously considered virtually all of them to be viable solutions.

I cannot reply to everyone individually so will try to comment on the most prevalent comments.

Regarding taking multiple lenses: I initially rejected that idea because it would require some life style changes on my part. After knocking around wildernesses in the Rockies and even some extreme excursions in Alaska I have had and have observed some really frightening things concerning getting lost, accidents and completely disoriented situations.

If I get out of sight of the vehicle or the trail head I always take a pack that has enough gear, clothing and food/water in it for me to survive at least one very uncomfortable night. That is probably overkill, especially on very short hikes, but I have done it for years and luckily never had to use any of that stuff in an emergency situation---but many folks have thanked me for using my water purification pump. I also carry a Garmin Inreach SOS GPS device, so I am probably not as dumb as I look.

I'm still here, but a good friend of a son in law of mine thought she could get by with just minimal gear/planning, tee shirt, water bottle and shorts and she has not been seen nor heard from in years. She had probably left the established trail like I occasionally do and who knows...??? People and organizations have looked for her or her remains for at least two or three summers with no luck. So, things will happen and you need to be prepared and aware.

BUT, due to some of your comments, I am seriously considering taking two lenses covering from about 24 to 200 or 300 mm. It is probably time for me to learn to stay on the established trails which are used by other people so I can leave behind some of that extra gear I take and make room for another lens.

A serious concern I have with doing that involves having to change lenses on a mirrorless camera outdoors in gusty, dusty, wet winds. Sitting on a soft rock or fallen tree juggling two lenses and a camera in a rocky dirty environment does not seem like my idea of happiness but I guess I can learn. Like all acquired skills I will start practicing that. I rarely change lenses out doors.

I do use my hiking staff as a monopod but the darn quick release pad keeps getting broken but it does help when used.

Suggestions about non-Nikon cameras are interesting and I may look into that depending on how other solutions pan out.

I had done a lot of research on alternate lenses and today, by accident, I ran across a Nikon Z 24-200 lens that I somehow had overlooked when I looked into Z lenses. That will probably be the final solution or maybe I'll even go to a Nikon 24-300 DSLR lens but that is so darn heavy I will probably avoid it. And, of course, the two lens solution is still viable. We'll see.

Thanks again for everyone's help and advice. I appreciate it. It was helpful for several reasons. Sorry for rambling on for so long.

 

[RichF]

For your safety, how about GPS unit where you mark the trail head or the vehicle or one that let's you trace your trail back home I have an ap I use on my iPhone, Commander. The free version is works well enough for basic retrace to the vehicle. Just remember to have a full battery when you start your trek.

 

[gKhan]

Thanks for the reply and advice. I do what you suggest but it is not always that easy.

I actually use a GPS to keep track of my location and it leaves a trail on the map back to where I started. I also use a service called "Alltrails" that uses my phone GPS without having to be connected to the network and it provides good maps and details that I have previously downloaded onto my phone. It utilizes the phone's GPS to track my route and progress. I also keep the Garmin SOS device running so that I do not have to boot it up if I ever need it.

I always know where I am, but here is an hypothetical example of why that is not always the answer to a problem. Let's say I am on a circular hike that should take five hours and I have gone four hours and find the way ahead is blocked by a ravine, gully, massive deadfall, raging stream etc.

It might be too late in the day to try to make it back the way I came or maybe I sprain an ankle and cannot go forward. A hundred things can happen that would keep me from making it back to the trail head before dark. I cannot travel at night because the battery of my small flashlite and phone light will eventually die out and I'm stuck there in the dark til I can get help---hence the need for the extra gear. I'd set up a small camp before dark and gather fire wood etc while I can still see. I've never had to but it is best to be prepared.

You obviously know what you are talking about but if you would like some examples of this type of terrain I can probably post some pix. It would probably take some time to find them tho. And, yes, you are correct, I always check batteries before leaving.
Does that Commander app on your phone require connectivity to work? If it doesn't I will look into it and compare it to Alltrails. When I leave my house I lose all phone connectivity in about twenty minutes so cannot count on it all (except for it's built in GPS).

 

[dabhand16]

A serious concern I have with doing that involves having to change lenses on a mirrorless camera outdoors in gusty, dusty, wet winds. Sitting on a soft rock or fallen tree juggling two lenses and a camera in a rocky dirty environment does not seem like my idea of happiness but I guess I can learn. Like all acquired skills I will start practicing that. I rarely change lenses out doors.

You have just reinforced my suggestion to switch to Olympus MFT! The answer to this conundrum is to use 2 cameras One with a short zoom, the other with a longer one - or a Prime or what ever suits you. 2 Oly MFTs will weigh less than the other options you are considering.

 

[EricBowles]

Thanks for the reply and advice. I do what you suggest but it is not always that easy.

I actually use a GPS to keep track of my location and it leaves a trail on the map back to where I started. I also use a service called "Alltrails" that uses my phone GPS without having to be connected to the network and it provides good maps and details that I have previously downloaded onto my phone. It utilizes the phone's GPS to track my route and progress. I also keep the Garmin SOS device running so that I do not have to boot it up if I ever need it.

I always know where I am, but here is an hypothetical example of why that is not always the answer to a problem. Let's say I am on a circular hike that should take five hours and I have gone four hours and find the way ahead is blocked by a ravine, gully, massive deadfall, raging stream etc.

It might be too late in the day to try to make it back the way I came or maybe I sprain an ankle and cannot go forward. A hundred things can happen that would keep me from making it back to the trail head before dark. I cannot travel at night because the battery of my small flashlite and phone light will eventually die out and I'm stuck there in the dark til I can get help---hence the need for the extra gear. I'd set up a small camp before dark and gather fire wood etc while I can still see. I've never had to but it is best to be prepared.

You obviously know what you are talking about but if you would like some examples of this type of terrain I can probably post some pix. It would probably take some time to find them tho. And, yes, you are correct, I always check batteries before leaving.
Does that Commander app on your phone require connectivity to work? If it doesn't I will look into it and compare it to Alltrails. When I leave my house I lose all phone connectivity in about twenty minutes so cannot count on it all (except for it's built in GPS).

Really good posts. It would be worthwhile to have a separate thread focusing on preparation, how you decide what to carry on a normal trail, off-trail, etc.

A few years ago I invited a photographer friend who was reasonably fit to join me on a trip to a hike-in lodge. The trail was 7 miles with an average grade of 8%. We both brought full camera bags with about 20 pounds of gear - along with rain gear, water, snacks, and other things for overnight. He is a medical doctor with emergency room training and had some emergency medical supplies. A little past halfway, his legs started to cramp. I ended up carrying his full pack and mine while we would walk 100 feet and then rest for the last two miles. A three hour hike turned into 8+ hours. He was prepared to spend the night on the trail if needed. We made it alright, but it was certainly unexpected for both of us. The next year we made the same hike without any issues - and he had dropped 25 pounds of body weight and was exercising regularly. Two years later he was certified and provided medical support for a month at Everest Base Camp. Certification required a timed hike/jog with a heavy pack over a grade.

 

[bleirer]

Changing lenses on the trail can be done without too much risk. Just think through the steps in advance. I open out my backpack in the best spot I can find, on a rock or the ground, enough to reveal a flattish clean area inside the backpack to stage the transfer. You'll figure out your own procedure.

 

[gKhan]

Really good posts. It would be worthwhile to have a separate thread focusing on preparation, how you decide what to carry on a normal trail, off-trail, etc.

A few years ago I invited a photographer friend who was reasonably fit to join me on a trip to a hike-in lodge. The trail was 7 miles with an average grade of 8%. We both brought full camera bags with about 20 pounds of gear - along with rain gear, water, snacks, and other things for overnight. He is a medical doctor with emergency room training and had some emergency medical supplies. A little past halfway, his legs started to cramp. I ended up carrying his full pack and mine while we would walk 100 feet and then rest for the last two miles. A three hour hike turned into 8+ hours. He was prepared to spend the night on the trail if needed. We made it alright, but it was certainly unexpected for both of us. The next year we made the same hike without any issues - and he had dropped 25 pounds of body weight and was exercising regularly. Two years later he was certified and provided medical support for a month at Everest Base Camp. Certification required a timed hike/jog with a heavy pack over a grade.

That's a great feel good story about the doctor's progress to his present condition. I agree that a thread about what to take would be interesting. I know I would learn something.

 

[gKhan]

Changing lenses on the trail can be done without too much risk. Just think through the steps in advance. I open out my backpack in the best spot I can find, on a rock or the ground, enough to reveal a flattish clean area inside the backpack to stage the transfer. You'll figure out your own procedure.

Using the backpack as a changing room is a good idea. I will probably modify that a bit and use a large clear plastic bag. It would be quite a chore emptying my pack but changing lenses in an enclosed but roomy space is a great way to handle the problem. If I decide to go with multiple lenses I'll certainly do something like that.
Thanks for the tip.

 

[dabhand16]

Using the backpack as a changing room is a good idea. I will probably modify that a bit and use a large clear plastic bag. It would be quite a chore emptying my pack but changing lenses in an enclosed but roomy space is a great way to handle the problem. If I decide to go with multiple lenses I'll certainly do something like that.
Thanks for the tip.

A bit like using a changing bag in the darkroom to load film onto the reel of a developing tank with the advantage that the bag is not light-tight.

 

[Rodamu]

I recommend the Nikon Z50 with the Nikon 28-300mm best quality lens and the necessary adapter. It will give you a range of 40-450mm equivalent with a lightweight system that will take high quality photos. You can add the Z50's 16-50mm lens for wide angle photos. The lens is very small and light.