Telephoto Lens Suggestions for Nikon

[Mark Garfinkel]

It comes down to what your looking for, telephoto or fixed.
Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 E FL ED VR with or without a TC-20EIII is a great combination which is what I have. Remember with the TC you loose 2 stops.
The Nikon 500 PF is 5.6 and here again with the TC you loose 2 stops and your fixed.

 

[Steve W]

The mk2 80-400 is the better choice as the mk1 was slow to focus and if you are looking at used ones the mk1s are still around.

Yep, you want the later AF-S version, the earlier one was quite ordinary by comparison.

 

[tclune]

The focus speed is surely linked to the light falling on the sensor and AF sensor and AFAIK the 1.4 mkiii will still loose you a stop, as does the mkii.

That's what I would have thought, too. I don't understand why a TC with essentially the same IQ impact on a given lens would nonetheless have a substantially different impact on the focusing speed for that lens. But I have seen that reported more than once as a substantial difference between the II and III. It may not be true, but it is a common enough claim that I thought that it was worth mentioning -- along with my own lack of experience to substantiate the claim. It is enough of a concern for me, though, that I am waiting for the III to come back in stock before I decide whether to buy it or not. And the addition of weatherproofing on the III just strengthens my resolve. Honestly, though, I would be using it with my 200-500 and I'm a bit wary of adding any TC to an f/5.6 lens.

 

[Ulterior]

Thanks for all the suggestions. Unfortunately many of them are way outside what I'm looking to spend at the moment. The 500pf seems to be getting some great feedback but at nearly $6000 it's 3 times the price of the 200-500. It's also less versatile than a zoom and right now I'd prefer a zoom to cover a range of different situations.

I had neglected to think about the image quality with a TC so thanks to those who pointed that out. While a 1.4 might still be a good choice on some lenses, it's still adding a $1000 to the price.

The 70-200 was just one I happened to see yesterday and while it'll be so much better than my kit lens, I'd be spending $2500 and not getting any extra reach.

Just if you missed it, I'm in NZ so there's not a big second hand market. - also makes things even more expensive!

What are people's experiences with tamron? I've read several reviews saying that it's a bit hit and miss with quality of them as Squatch mentioned. I'm also not sure about the f6.3 at 400mm - how usable is that in the real world?

I'm currently in lockdown so once I can get to a store I'll have a look at a 200-500 but it's a beast and possibly a bit large for easy travelling.

So realistically I'm looking at a third party 100-400 or 150-600
Or,
Nikon 200-500 or 80-400

Any others that would fit the bill I've not mentioned?

 

[dabhand16]

That's what I would have thought, too. I don't understand why a TC with essentially the same IQ impact on a given lens would nonetheless have a substantially different impact on the focusing speed for that lens. But I have seen that reported more than once as a substantial difference between the II and III. It may not be true, but it is a common enough claim that I thought that it was worth mentioning -- along with my own lack of experience to substantiate the claim. It is enough of a concern for me, though, that I am waiting for the III to come back in stock before I decide whether to buy it or not. And the addition of weatherproofing on the III just strengthens my resolve. Honestly, though, I would be using it with my 200-500 and I'm a bit wary of adding any TC to an f/5.6 lens.

FWIW I have a Sigma 150-600 Sport f5-6.3 and I bought it as a kit with a 1.4x TC. Only got the kit as it was cheaper that some places were selling the lens only! It works OK for me with a Nikon D850 with or without the TC, although with the TC it is a lot more light and lack of contrast sensitive.

I did not realise that the mkiii TC is weather sealed so that alone could make it worthwhile, but rain sleeves are cheap and easily available.......

 

[Mark Garfinkel]

Thanks for all the suggestions. Unfortunately many of them are way outside what I'm looking to spend at the moment. The 500pf seems to be getting some great feedback but at nearly $6000 it's 3 times the price of the 200-500. It's also less versatile than a zoom and right now I'd prefer a zoom to cover a range of different situations.

I had neglected to think about the image quality with a TC so thanks to those who pointed that out. While a 1.4 might still be a good choice on some lenses, it's still adding a $1000 to the price.

The 70-200 was just one I happened to see yesterday and while it'll be so much better than my kit lens, I'd be spending $2500 and not getting any extra reach.

Just if you missed it, I'm in NZ so there's not a big second hand market. - also makes things even more expensive!

What are people's experiences with tamron? I've read several reviews saying that it's a bit hit and miss with quality of them as Squatch mentioned. I'm also not sure about the f6.3 at 400mm - how usable is that in the real world?

I'm currently in lockdown so once I can get to a store I'll have a look at a 200-500 but it's a beast and possibly a bit large for easy travelling.

So realistically I'm looking at a third party 100-400 or 150-600
Or,
Nikon 200-500 or 80-400

Any others that would fit the bill I've not mentioned?

I had the 80-400 and traded it in towards the 200-500 as notes in my previous post. I found the 80-400 with a TC to slow on auto-focus.
AF-S Teleconverter Compatibility (nikon-cdn.com)
My two go to every day travel lenses is my Nikon 70-200 as is can be use with all TC's and my Nikon 16-35mm.
Do you have a high VAT in NZ on used items or it it built into the price?
Does it pay to order used from outside your country?

 

[fotogrob]

I have had the Nikon 200-500 for several years. It got heavier and heavier every year since I'm not getting any younger. Since I almost always found myself shooting at 500mm, I made the decision to purchase the 500 PF and it's stayed on my D500 almost elusively. Its pricey but worth every penny.

 

[Ulterior]

I had the 80-400 and traded it in towards the 200-500 as notes in my previous post. I found the 80-400 with a TC to slow on auto-focus.
AF-S Teleconverter Compatibility (nikon-cdn.com)
My two go to every day travel lenses is my Nikon 70-200 as is can be use with all TC's and my Nikon 16-35mm.
Do you have a high VAT in NZ on used items or it it built into the price?
Does it pay to order used from outside your country?

Sales tax is 15% on everything. I'd still get charged it if I bought a lens overseas too so on balance it's probably just as expensive, if not more.

I'll have a good look at the 200-500 and see if the size and weight will be manageable.

Appreciate the responses!

 

[Steve W]

I had the 80-400 and traded it in towards the 200-500 as notes in my previous post. I found the 80-400 with a TC to slow on auto-focus.
AF-S Teleconverter Compatibility (nikon-cdn.com)
My two go to every day travel lenses is my Nikon 70-200 as is can be use with all TC's and my Nikon 16-35mm.
Do you have a high VAT in NZ on used items or it it built into the price?
Does it pay to order used from outside your country?

The 80-400 AF-S is good by itself but i doesn’t play particularly well with a TC, even the TC14E-III. Issues with both AF & IQ.

 

[Abinoone]

Hi all,

I'm very much an amateur and love to capture my travels as best I can. It seems every trip I go on I discover a new gear or skill limitation! I started on a D3100 back in 2012 and moved up to a D7500 last year and I love it!

I'm still using the 55-200mm f4-5.6 G ED VR kit lens from the D3100, and I have a 35mm f1.8 G.

After my last trip to Queenstown (I'm from NZ), I found I couldn't get some landscapes I wanted, and also couldn't get close enough at the far end. I managed to get a good deal on a used Nikon 12-24mm f4 G ED so I've hopefully closed the gap and wide end of my lens collection.

I'd really appreciate some thoughts on what telephoto lens to get next. I think the main reason would be to get closer to wildlife to get those great shots. Secondary to that would be some landscapes at the longer end. I've been practicing the tips Steve meantions and really enjoy seeing those wildlife shots pop.

A salesman at a local store suggest I'd only get frustrated by a 300mm lens which is what I was originally thinking. After trying one in store and comparing to 200mm, I'm tending to agree. He sugggested the Tamron 100-400mm f4.5-6.3 might be a good choice. I've also been looking at a Nikon 200-500 f5.6 as a possible option.

On the Tamron, I'm unsure mainly on the high min aperture at the long end and also to some extent, how would the performance compare to the Nikon?

What other lenses could be an option for me to look at? For example I saw a Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 E FL ED VR today used for $2500 - I wondered if that plus a TC-20EIII might be a good combo. The new TC is another $1200 though......
The Tamron is $1375
The 200-500 is $2100.

I'm okay around the $2000 mark and could go a little higher for a good option. I'm really looking to round out my lens collection so if anyone has some suggestions or ideas for where I should look, I'd really appreciate it!

For the money, the Nikon 200-500 f5.6 would be an excellent choice. It's a solid, well made lens with lots of versatility - I use mine often, and have been very pleased with the results. Before buying it, I rented Sigma 150-600, Tamron 150-600, and the Nikon 200-500 and, in the final analysis, found the Nikon to be superior on nearly all counts, especially image quality and AF. While it's relatively heavy, I still have no trouble carrying it and hand holding for extended periods. For example, I was in Yellowstone last month and used it almost exclusively for bison, grizzlies, pronghorn, and elk, with very good results. There are better primes to be sure, but then you're talking about a lot more money, plus the lack of flexibility the zoom provides. A 1.4 TC can add extra reach to the lens for more stationary subjects, but isn't a good option for fast moving one, such as BIF. Good luck with your decision!

 

[splatbass]

I have the Nikon 200-500 and it is super wildlife lens but I have to use it on a tripod or monopod due to the weight. It is not my everyday walk around lens!

I use the Nikon 300 PF 90% of the time with the 1.4 TC and love it. Super quality images, and at 420mm with the TC has good reach. The entire setup is ultra light. I use the 300 PF for most of my macro shots because it has a reasonably short minimum focus distance.

This is exactly my setup. The 300PF with 1.4x III is excellent, and lightweight. I love the 200-500, but I rarely take it with me because of the size and weight, especially if there is any hiking involved (which there usually is). I recently got the Think Tank Speed Belt and Lens Changer 150 lens case (that goes on the belt) and it is surprisingly comfortable to carry that way, so I may be taking the 200-500 lens more often now.

 

[TRW]

I’m using the Nikon 200-500 on my D7500 and am extremely happy with the lense. as others have stated it’s a bit heavy for handheld carry. I’ve added a monopod and Wimberley monogimabal that has made it a joy to use.

 

[Turberticus]

I’m using the Nikon 200-500 on my D7500 and am extremely happy with the lense. as others have stated it’s a bit heavy for handheld carry. I’ve added a monopod and Wimberley monogimabal that has made it a joy to use.

I'm also a D7500 + 200-500 user and I love it.

 

[Patrick M]

I used the D7500 with the 200-500 on a monopod with a wimberley monogimbel for an Antarctica cruise in Feb last year. Loved it. No strain, and with the set up it was so easy to swing it around. many others shooters checked out my gear. They loved it. I could shoot whales, sea otters, then swing up for albatross.
since then I’ve gone to a z6 with the z70-200 f2.8 with the TCx2 a bc it’s awesome,
I just bought the z24-200 for a Greek island cruise, where I wanted the lightness and flexibility the focal range offered, without carrying 3 f2.8;lenses where light was t going to be an issue.