Best Nikon Longer Lens Combination - Help Please

[O]

As this Thread has grown to consider most Nikon-fit Telephotos for wildlife photography - Here follows a bit more about Nikon's Telephoto Zooms: Good to read the 180-400 f4E TC14 being noted above, with queries about reviews. One way to rate this telephoto zoom, and with the newer 120-300 f2.8E SR is they are basically Prime-Good". Image quality of Nikon's zoom lenses has advanced remarkably over the past 4 decades, since they launched the successful 80-200 f4AIS (1981) and 80-200 f2.8AIS (1982). Back in the 1980s, not many of us could afford the expensive 80-200 f4AIS, now the even more exotic 200-400 AIS. It's took 2 decades until Nikon launched the 200-400 f4G VR AFS (upgraded to VRII in 2010).

The primary progress has been in the Holy Trinity of the f2.8 'Three Dragons' (14-24,24-40,70-200), which has peaked in the latest Z-mount models The 70-200 f2.8S is not markedly better than the 70-200 f2.8E FL, which Thom Hogan concluded outperformed all Nikon's primes, with only 2 exceptions (105 f1.4E and 200 f2G). the new 120-300 f2.8E SR and 180-400 extend this relam of Prime-Good realm. This is not only according to Brad Hill, who also a big fan of this lens, and the dissection and MTF comparisons by Roger C and Aaron C at LensRentals underscore its general excellence, notably:

"First, like every law, Roger’s Law that Zooms Are Never as Good as Primes has at least one very expensive exception. At one of its focal lengths. This zoom is ‘prime good’ at 300mm.

Second, we learned that the Nikkor AF-S 120-300mm f/2.8 lens is spectacularly good optically, particularly at the long end, which is probably the most important place to be spectacularly good optically."

more on history of Nikkors in the 1001 Nights series
eg https://imaging.nikon.com/history/story/0067/index.htm

NIKKOR - The Thousand and One Nights No.66 | NIKKOR - The Thousand and One Nights | Nikon Consumer

NIKKOR - The Thousand and One Nights No.35 | NIKKOR - The Thousand and One Nights | Nikon Consumer

I hear you, I came from the last of the 80-200 2.8 D amazing, straight into the FL 70-200 under Thom's suggestion.

NOW a warning, don't drop or knock the lens hard if the VR is actually working on your 70-200 FL, 24-70 VR........you will need to call 911.

Bottom line, I have found the 70-200 2.8 FL to be simply just insanely remarkable.

Mind you I do like the 80-200 2.8 D especially on the D850, and I could happily still live with one only if I had to.

These new zoom lenses are all great but gee mortgage the house material, their not for everyone's budget.

I keep a streamlined F2.8 trio with a 200-500 and a 300 2.8 VR II, I have some Zeiss and smaller lenses, I like to rent exotics when needed, its a tax deduction as well.

Only an opinion
Oz down under

 

[FB101]

Ok for me, I would work with less gear and use the most powerful lens in the industry called YOUR FEET and focus on the real power the compositional photography, the less lenses and gear the more I think about photography. Now this may not work in Africa as I might get eaten.

After all the gear dose only 20% of the work LOL.

I don't disagree with your post but in most safaris you are at the mercy of the driver an local laws dictating if you can get off road and how close you can get to the animals. I have done two safaris on foot, those are a very different kind of experience - definitely the most adrenaline-filled but also the poorer in terms of keep rate.

 

[O]

I don't disagree with your post but in most safaris you are at the mercy of the driver an local laws dictating if you can get off road and how close you can get to the animals. I have done two safaris on foot, those are a very different kind of experience - definitely the most adrenaline-filled but also the poorer in terms of keep rate.

Thankyou, Good to know, not being on foot then weight is not an issue, then I would prefer the 500 F4 that will tolerate the a 1.4 III TC (= 700mm) for tight compressed shots , 70-200 FL, and LOL 28-300 AKA the all round everything lens, Body is D850.

I hope the D850 upgrade sees 12 fps.

500 PF, I think the 500 pf is an excellent amazing lens, but in the real world I am hearing some of our club members say that despite it being ever so slightly better than the 200-500 the missed chances due to fixed focal length sees them gladly taking the 200-500 and only when they know the subject clearly will suite the 500 PF fixed length they will take the PF.

Digression - While informative and very interesting, I sometimes feel with our constant plus minus and choices of lenses and cameras can take away from enjoying the journey.

Being guilty, I detoxify often from this by taking the DF and a 50mm 1.4D with a B&W CP, shooting in Mono and Colour at the same time and in full manual focus mode, catch a train then the ferry and I just walk around the city and harbour, or drive through the country side, I find it makes me slow right down and work on myself, it exercises my skillsets, it keeps me grounded, and gee I feel good after a few days of that and I always end up with some really thoughtfully composed money shots. Its also a great way to relax, you can do this with any camera of course.

The DF with its retro look and 50mm lens is like stepping back in time, I become momentarily a photographer of yesteryear, not a modern day documenter with auto tracking and auto everything, I often do what is known as Leica shooting on moving subjects in full manual mode like the real photographers had to do before auto focus was invented, I sometimes even put on my 50mm 1.4 Zeiss lens just to make it more nostalgic LOL, gee the Zeiss looks different.


As always only an opinion

OZ down under

 

[FB101]

Thankyou, Good to know, not being on foot then weight is not an issue, then I would prefer the 500 F4 that will tolerate the a 1.4 III TC (= 700mm) for tight compressed shots , 70-200 FL, and LOL 28-300 AKA the all round everything lens, Body is D850.

I hope the D850 upgrade sees 12 fps.

500 PF, I think the 500 pf is an excellent amazing lens, but in the real world I am hearing some of our club members say that despite it being ever so slightly better than the 200-500 the missed chances due to fixed focal length sees them gladly taking the 200-500 and only when they know the subject clearly will suite the 500 PF fixed length they will take the PF.

Digression - While informative and very interesting, I sometimes feel with our constant plus minus and choices of lenses and cameras can take away from enjoying the journey.

Being guilty, I detoxify often from this by taking the DF and a 50mm 1.4D with a B&W CP, shooting in Mono and Colour at the same time and in full manual focus mode, catch a train then the ferry and I just walk around the city and harbour, or drive through the country side, I find it makes me slow right down and work on myself, it exercises my skillsets, it keeps me grounded, and gee I feel good after a few days of that and I always end up with some really thoughtfully composed money shots. Its also a great way to relax, you can do this with any camera of course.

The DF with its retro look and 50mm lens is like stepping back in time, I become momentarily a photographer of yesteryear, not a modern day documenter with auto tracking and auto everything, I often do what is known as Leica shooting on moving subjects in full manual mode like the real photographers had to do before auto focus was invented, I sometimes even put on my 50mm 1.4 Zeiss lens just to make it more nostalgic LOL, gee the Zeiss looks different.


As always only an opinion

OZ down under

I love the DF but I didn’t jump because I really couldn’t understand why they didn’t have a real manual focus viewfinder in there (like a split prism). I couldn’t get myself to rely on a tiny green dot as my sole MF assist. So I have an X-pro2 and a bunch of Fuji and adapted lenses that I use for my ”slow photography” purposes. The focusing aids are all digital but at least they are useful and accurate

 

[Ken Miracle]

First, since you shoot from a vehicle there is no need to hand hold big lenses. On most safaris, folks use bean bags. In South Africa we had totally open vehicles....no sides, windows or top. There I used a double Manfrotto clamp to secure my monopod to the rail behind the seats in front of me. Gimbal went on top of monopod.....then camera and lens were mounted on the monopod. Easy peasy!

The early versions of the 80-400 were poor, then subsequent versions became just "OK". HOWEVER, the latest version.... the 80-400 AF-S, is really excellent and very unrrate, IMHO. I have the 500 PF and the 300 PF. They both stay home when I go to Africa.

If you shoot a D6....why not get a "proper" fast prime like the 500mm or 600 f4? Your backgrounds will thank you in addition to lower ISOs............ Just a thought.

My last trip to Tanzania, the 1.4 tele was pretty much married to the 600mm..... but I was still shooting f5.6........

Hi Karen ... I started another thread after you and Steve got me to thinking further about the new AF-S NIKKOR 600mm f/4E FL ED VR and others. A number of answers and more research led me to decide it was hand holdable (and I already have the 1.4 TC and even the really right stuff 6" foot plate, Wimberly etc. if I do want to use a tripod) so when Nikon had a refurbished 600 F/4E on sale today I ordered a "proper" fast prime. Thanks for your thoughts and information. I am in the process of selling some surplus lenses and my spare D00 and the 80-400 is next up

 

[ButlerKid]

Hi Karen ... I started another thread after you and Steve got me to thinking further about the new AF-S NIKKOR 600mm f/4E FL ED VR and others. A number of answers and more research led me to decide it was hand holdable (and I already have the 1.4 TC and even the really right stuff 6" foot plate, Wimberly etc. if I do want to use a tripod) so when Nikon had a refurbished 600 F/4E on sale today I ordered a "proper" fast prime. Thanks for your thoughts and information. I am in the process of selling some surplus lenses and my spare D00 and the 80-400 is next up

I think you will really enjoy the 600mm! If your 80-400 is not the AF-S version, selling it is the right decision. Since I'm not that strong, my 80-400 AF-S is a great complement to the 600mm for me. I know it is heresy, but often I just don't care for the backgrounds in shots taken with the 200-500. Some shots are nice especially if there is a clean background, but others not so much. And the ergonomics are a no go for me.

 

[Ken Miracle]

I think you will really enjoy the 600mm! If your 80-400 is not the AF-S version, selling it is the right decision. Since I'm not that strong, my 80-400 AF-S is a great complement to the 600mm for me. I know it is heresy, but often I just don't care for the backgrounds in shots taken with the 200-500. Some shots are nice especially if there is a clean background, but others not so much. And the ergonomics are a no go for me.

I confused you and had a typo ... my bad ... I am selling other lenses and my spare D500 ... working on purchasing a 80-400 AF-S is whats up next I long ago sold my 200-500 ... and replaced it with a lens I am keeping a Tamron 150-600 G2 it is not as fast to focus as my 500 pf or my Tamron 70-200 even with a 1.4 TC but it is a very versatile lens ... no the background (bokeh) not as nice as their 70-200 or 24-70 or my 500 pf but it is surprising for the price. However shooting small in the brush varied lighting etc. with my D6 the 500pf is better and I expect the same from the 600. From talking to a partner in my favorite camera store who just got back from their Alaska Eagle trip, I expect that when I get an 80-400 it will be on my D850 most of the time when wildlife is involved.

 

[ButlerKid]

I confused you and had a typo ... my bad ... I am selling other lenses and my spare D500 ... working on purchasing a 80-400 AF-S is whats up next I long ago sold my 200-500 ... and replaced it with a lens I am keeping a Tamron 150-600 G2 it is not as fast to focus as my 500 pf or my Tamron 70-200 even with a 1.4 TC but it is a very versatile lens ... no the background (bokeh) not as nice as their 70-200 or 24-70 or my 500 pf but it is surprising for the price. However shooting small in the brush varied lighting etc. with my D6 the 500pf is better and I expect the same from the 600. From talking to a partner in my favorite camera store who just got back from their Alaska Eagle trip, I expect that when I get an 80-400 it will be on my D850 most of the time when wildlife is involved.

The 80-400 AF-S can be a bit short for birds....but if you are lucky to get up close it does the job. This lilac breasted roller landed on a bush near our vehicle. I managed to get him as he flew off..... D850 , 80-400 AF-s, 380mm, 1/2500, f6.3, ISO 640.