Wildlife camera

[David M-J]

All things being equal (accepting that they often are not), what recommendations would you have for a wildlife camera (hobbyist/enthusiast)? I have been considering the D500 and have drifted back and forth to the D850 too.
I'm unsure of a mirrorless at the moment due to the smaller range of lens.
Any and all recommendations welcomed. I am off to Costa Rica next year (postponed from this) so I want to get plenty of practice beforehand. Or, do I wait and see what comes to market by then?
Thanks in advance.
David

 

[Jmaes]

Hi David.

Just a few follow-up questions:

- Do you already have a (Nikon) body/lenses (if so, which?) or are you essentially starting from scratch?
- Any specific budget/limit you have in mind?

As a very generic recommendation, the D500 in combination with the Nikon 200-500 f5.6 is a great (and not too expensive) combination to start with.

 

[Steve]

Yup, more info would help for sure

Very generally, one thing to think about between the D850 and D500 is this - if you think you'll be cropping to DX size most of the time with the D850 (a lot of people buy them for cropping), then the D500 makes more sense. You'll get the same ISO performance between a DX cropped D850 and D500, but the D500 is less expensive and a faster overall camera.

However, without more to go on, that's all I have for now

 

[Callie]

All things being equal (accepting that they often are not), what recommendations would you have for a wildlife camera (hobbyist/enthusiast)? I have been considering the D500 and have drifted back and forth to the D850 too.
I'm unsure of a mirrorless at the moment due to the smaller range of lens.
Any and all recommendations welcomed. I am off to Costa Rica next year (postponed from this) so I want to get plenty of practice beforehand. Or, do I wait and see what comes to market by then?
Thanks in advance.
David

Ask yourself, what do I shoot the most, how often and what do I want to shoot?. The understand that the glass is more important than the body. I rather have great glass and a lesser speced body than vise versa. I have both the bodies referred to and both does what needs to be done for how and what I shoot. Consider renting a long zoom if you are going to the forests, if you do no own one. A rented body too. But also think about your flash setup with an external battery charger and off camera bracket. Any of the bodies you consider will do the job. Do not forget the new D780, I would let my D500 go for that if I could. You could aslo consider used or reconditioned bodies - I see on Nikon Rumour they often advertise same. I know lots of people like the 200-500 and it does great work but personally, I prefer the 80-400 and sacrifice the 100 mm for what I get, a larger zoom range.

 

[Tpap]

in addition, to get the d850 to try to "act" like a d500 and get the 9fps, it's a far greater investment than the d500 and 200-500 lens (2500$ max for d500 with 200-500 vs. roughly ~5000$ for the d850 with 200-500 and battery grip) you can get a full d500 kit for macro, landscape, wildlife for 5000.

The d500 essentially has the almost identical sensor of the d850 in terms of pixel pitch (pixels are the same size as the d850) so it has similar light gathering potential, meaning the photos you would take on a d850 and crop down to dx size (basically equivalent to the d500 photo out of camera) would have identical noise, quality as the d500.

I have had both and like steve mentions above, the d500 is a faster camera in terms of FPS (10 vs 6.. 9 if you have the grip with d5 battery in it) and also the d500 AF is in my opion FAR superior to d850.

I would recommend the d500, especially given you are a hobbyist/enthusiast. You can also but a FX body later on if you get more into it and have the funds for larger glass.

Good luck

 

[DRwyoming]

I agree with the posts above:

- Lenses are top priority
- If you'll crop your D850 images heavily, especially beyond the DX crop then the D500 probably makes more sense

Putting those two thoughts together and also adding a bit about the wildlife photography learning curve, it can be hard to get close enough or have long enough lenses when you first start out. Over time we learn how to get closer to wildlife but at the beginning it can seem really tough and very long fast lenses are quite expensive so we almost always need more 'reach' to bring in our subjects. So for a lot of folks starting in wildlife photography a good cropped sensor camera (and the D500 is a VERY good cropped sensor camera) can really help. If and when you either acquire longer faster lenses and ideally learn how to get closer to your subjects on a regular basis then going to full frame can start making more sense.

It's also good to weigh that with any other photo interests. Sure the D500 with appropriate DX wide angle lenses can capture stunning scenics and other wide angle shots but if you think you'll do a lot of wide angle photography, especially in lower light then a full frame camera starts looking pretty attractive.

Bottom line, either can work if they fit the budget but for anything, especially for wildlife, allocate at least half if not most of your budget to good lenses.

All in all it would be very hard to beat the D500 paired with the 200-500mm f/5.6 lens or similar lenses from Sigma or Tamron to get a really good start in wildlife photography.

 

[David M-J]

Hi David.

Just a few follow-up questions:

- Do you already have a (Nikon) body/lenses (if so, which?) or are you essentially starting from scratch?
- Any specific budget/limit you have in mind?

As a very generic recommendation, the D500 in combination with the Nikon 200-500 f5.6 is a great (and not too expensive) combination to start with.

 

[David M-J]

Thank you all for your swift responses. I hope you are all remaining safe and well.

I don't have any kit at the moment. I did have a Canon EOS 50D in the past (emphasis on the past), hence the leaning to DSLR. It's research and watching videos by Steve (esp What's in my bag - Costa Rica) that has led me to Nikon. I was due to be kitted out in March, however the pandemic put a halt to that. So I do have a blank canvas as such to consider options. I don't anticipate using video much, if at all.

Budget is probably mid-range. I'm not looking at lenses or bodies that I could buy a car for. That said, I have considered the D500 and D850 along with the 200-500 lens plus some others TBC. Again, this is flexible.

As for subject, it's generally anything involving wildlife and nature. I do want to get into macro, but not as a main focus (no pun intended). The UK is not awash with lots of reptiles or amphibians. Outside of Costa Rica I would envisage Scottish wildlife which will be predominantly deer and birds of prey.

Kind regards,

David

 

[DRwyoming]

As for subject, it's generally anything involving wildlife and nature. I do want to get into macro, but not as a main focus (no pun intended). The UK is not awash with lots of reptiles or amphibians. Outside of Costa Rica I would envisage Scottish wildlife which will be predominantly deer and birds of prey.

With those primary subjects in mind the D500 makes a lot of sense. You can still shoot scenics when you want if you get a wide DX lens but for everything else you mentioned the DX crop factor is a plus. For instance even in macro work a relatively affordable 105mm macro lens behaves like a 157mm macro lens on a full frame body and in the D500's 1.3x in camera crop mode it behaves like a 205mm macro lens which is just about ideal for living macro like skittish bugs, butterflies and the like.

 

[JKoerner007]

Yup, more info would help for sure

Very generally, one thing to think about between the D850 and D500 is this - if you think you'll be cropping to DX size most of the time with the D850 (a lot of people buy them for cropping), then the D500 makes more sense. You'll get the same ISO performance between a DX cropped D850 and D500, but the D500 is less expensive and a faster overall camera.

However, without more to go on, that's all I have for now

For sure, this.

I have the D5, D850, and the D500. I also have the Z7.

The real questions boil down to two: 1) Will you be cropping more often than not, and 2) where will your ISO be, mostly?

If you're going to be cropping (and, for most wildlife you will—esp. smaller wildlife), you need to realize that the D500 will actually out-perform every Nikon camera (as well as non-Nikon camera), up to ISO 2500:

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

Keep in mind, these readings are at DX. If you are cropping, the D500 outperforms every other Nikon camera, up to ISO 2500.

At ISO 2500, only the D5 outperforms the D500.
(No, the D6 does not. While the D6 has better advancements in some regards than the D5, the high ISO performance of the D5 still betters the D6, in both low-noise as well as PDR. Forget what subjective reviews say, pay attention to all actual measurements.) Go ahead and look at the PDR of all Nikon's finest in this link, shot at DX. (You can compare them all, but make sure you're selecting "DX = crop" mode for the comparisons.

The point being, if you're shooting larger animals, or landscapes, there are many better cameras than the D500.

But if you shooting birds, or macro, or any other subjects where you're going to need to crop-in — there is no finer camera than the Nikon D500, all across the ISO performance range, except past ISO 2500.

At this point, the D500 is still your best choice, unless you're shooting the D5. (The D500 surpasses all Canon cameras, all Sony cameras, and all Nikon cameras, at DX, "crop," save the Nikon D5, and then only passed ISO 2500.)

This is as measured formally, and confirmed by my own experience.

If, however, you're filling the frame mostly, then the D850 is the best camera you can use, unless you're shooting over ISO 2500, where the D5, D6, and Z6 will be the better options.

Study the charts carefully, mixing DX and FX, assess where you're going to be, and choose accordingly.

 

[FHaluska]

For sure, this.

I have the D5, D850, and the D500. I also have the Z7.

The real questions boil down to two: 1) Will you be cropping more often than not, and 2) where will your ISO be, mostly?

If you're going to be cropping (and, for most wildlife you will—esp. smaller wildlife), you need to realize that the D500 will actually out-perform every Nikon camera (as well as non-Nikon camera), up to ISO 2500:

View attachment 1960

Keep in mind, these readings are at DX. If you are cropping, the D500 outperforms every other Nikon camera, up to ISO 2500.

At ISO 2500, only the D5 outperforms the D500.
(No, the D6 does not. While the D6 has better advancements in some regards than the D5, the high ISO performance of the D5 still betters the D6, in both low-noise as well as PDR. Forget what subjective reviews say, pay attention to all actual measurements.) Go ahead and look at the PDR of all Nikon's finest in this link, shot at DX. (You can compare them all, but make sure you're selecting "DX = crop" mode for the comparisons.

The point being, if you're shooting larger animals, or landscapes, there are many better cameras than the D500.

But if you shooting birds, or macro, or any other subjects where you're going to need to crop-in — there is no finer camera than the Nikon D500, all across the ISO performance range, except past ISO 2500.

At this point, the D500 is still your best choice, unless you're shooting the D5. (The D500 surpasses all Canon cameras, all Sony cameras, and all Nikon cameras, at DX, "crop," save the Nikon D5, and then only passed ISO 2500.)

This is as measured formally, and confirmed by my own experience.

If, however, you're filling the frame mostly, then the D850 is the best camera you can use, unless you're shooting over ISO 2500, where the D5, D6, and Z6 will be the better options.

Study the charts carefully, mixing DX and FX, assess where you're going to be, and choose accordingly.

Fantastic reply! I was going to try and summarize to that effect, but you nailed it.

So my advice will be, think about what you intend to shoot and go from there...If the goal is wildlife, you should have no reservations at all getting the D500. If you are looking more towards scenics (or other frame filling images), a case can be made for a full frame camera. But honestly, the D500 is no slouch for those shots either, and compares favorably for virtually all uses other than professional display of large prints. As someone new to the the current selection of DSLR's, I'm confident that almost any of them will blow you away! And they are all capable of capturing gorgeous images. Like many people have said, I think it is wise to slant your priorities towards solid glass, and that will show far greater gains in image quality right off the bat, as well as paying dividends for the life of the lens.

I agree with those that have suggested the D500 and the 200-500, plus maybe a wider angle zoom and a macro (or something that allows close focus). I also can highly recommend the 80-400 (which doesn't get nearly as much love as the 200-500 for some reason) if the zoom range is more important to you than absolute reach.

Good luck with your trip, and definitely get your equipment now and practice with it! Having been to Costa Rica many times, the wildlife is amazing! It is stunning and abundant, but can be fast moving and the lighting can be tricky. Knowing your gear is probably more important than the choice of gear when it comes to bringing back good pics.

 

[Texspeel]

I'd be interested in seeing a copy of the above chart but, instead of having all the cameras in DX mode, show the FX cameras in their full FX mode rather showing them shot in DX mode. No clue what the results would look like but would be interested to see.

 

[JKoerner007]

I'd be interested in seeing a copy of the above chart but, instead of having all the cameras in DX mode, show the FX cameras in their full FX mode rather showing them shot in DX mode. No clue what the results would look like but would be interested to see.

I provided the link.

All you have to do is click it and see.

In FX mode, there are many FF cameras superior to the D500.

However, when you're cropping (and, believe me, for wildlife -- especially birds) you will be cropping (even shooting DX), the D500 eclipses them all ... all across the ISO range ... except for the D5 ... and then only up passed 2500 ISO.

 

[DRwyoming]

I clicked it and all I got was an enlargement of the current chart that shows the D500 compared to all the FX cameras reduced to the DX mode. And I've done my share of cropping. I prefer to start with an image from the D850 because it has a lot more pixels.

All you've got to do in that link is scroll down the camera selector bar on the right and click on a camera you want to add to the comparison.

Here's the same chart with the D850 in FX mode added for comparison:

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

 

[VStammer]

Interesting! I don't mean to get off topic from the original question but as an owner of both the D500 & D850 remind me then why I am still wanting a D5 for bird photography? (I was thinking because of superior action focus tracking and locking abilities, better low light performance, faster shutter); ...but maybe as a hobbyist I should just be happy with what I have and work on my technique!

 

[Capturingtheunseen.com]

First of all, if your version of wildlife photography includes low-light conditions, (i.e., Cost Rica) then by all means go to a full-frame camera. All cropped sensor cameras have the same problem: noise in low light conditions. I live in the woods and swamps of South Carolina. I had a D500 for a while and hated it.

A good, and reasonably inexpensive model to start with would be Nikon D750. If you can afford it, go to a pro model Nikon. They put the consumer models to shame.

Good luck.

Another tip: Forget all the charts, stats and specifications. I used to teach land navigation in the military and I always told my students this: "The map is not the territory". Meaning, what is on paper is not always reality. Get the camera in your hands and use it. Only then can you make a decision about which is best for you. There are so many variables in photography. Buy from someone who has a 30 day No-Questions-Asked return policy. If you don't like the camera, you're only out the cost of shipping it back.

 

[Capturingtheunseen.com]

Interesting! I don't mean to get off topic from the original question but as an owner of both the D500 & D850 remind me then why I am still wanting a D5 for bird photography? (I was thinking because of superior action focus tracking and locking abilities, better low light performance, faster shutter); ...but maybe as a hobbyist I should just be happy with what I have and work on my technique!

I just took possession of a D5 and it blows any other camera I have ever had, away. Including the D500. I have not used the D850 but I am not interested in a 45 megapixel camera for the kind of wildlife photography I do.

 

[Steve]

Thank you all for your swift responses. I hope you are all remaining safe and well.

I don't have any kit at the moment. I did have a Canon EOS 50D in the past (emphasis on the past), hence the leaning to DSLR. It's research and watching videos by Steve (esp What's in my bag - Costa Rica) that has led me to Nikon. I was due to be kitted out in March, however the pandemic put a halt to that. So I do have a blank canvas as such to consider options. I don't anticipate using video much, if at all.

Budget is probably mid-range. I'm not looking at lenses or bodies that I could buy a car for. That said, I have considered the D500 and D850 along with the 200-500 lens plus some others TBC. Again, this is flexible.

As for subject, it's generally anything involving wildlife and nature. I do want to get into macro, but not as a main focus (no pun intended). The UK is not awash with lots of reptiles or amphibians. Outside of Costa Rica I would envisage Scottish wildlife which will be predominantly deer and birds of prey.

Kind regards,

David

It's honestly a tough call - as you can see by the responses here, there are more than a few variables. And there's a LOT of overlap too. In many cases, you will be just as happy with the results of a D500 as a D5 or D850 - it depends on the subject. And the truth is, sometimes you'll be out shooting and wish you would have picked a different body - whatever you buy won't be perfect all the time.

So, the trick is to find a camera and lens combo that will work well most of the time for what you're planning to shoot. Right now, the most flexible wildlife camera is the D850. From a practical standpoint, the DX cropped D850 files are virtually identical to the D500 files (within a quarter stop), however, you also have the option to use the entire frame or anywhere in between too. When you're in that "zone" the D850's output is better. I'd also consider the D5 battery and grip option to get to 9FPS. I use that combo all the time and it's incredibly versatile and is effective for 90% of what I shoot. And the D850 is also the most common camera is see my participants using in CR.

That said, if you think you'll be shooting more in lower light, then a D780, D750, or D5/6 is a better option as long as you're not cropping them too much. Again though, there's not one single body that's perfect for everything.

As for lenses, I'd recommend the 200-500 if you want to keep it affordable and still enjoy great optical quality (although the 200-500 isn't as weather-sealed as the higher end glass). If you have the funds, the 500PF is another favorite option. You may also be able to find a good used 400mm, 500mm, or 600mm "G" series lens that gains you an extra stop (or two in the case of the 400) and plays better with TCs. Like the cameras, you won't find a perfect solution for every situation here either. Finally, remember that you can also rent lenses too if you don't anticipate needed the big glass for everything.

 

[DavidT]

Costa Rica will require fast glass and high iso. Since that isn’t your normal shooting I would suggest buying a used D5 ($3000 or so US$) and rent a 500 or 600mm f4. The 200-500 is a great lens for the price however it’s not fast in focus and it’s a F5.6. I’d also take a 105 micro and a speed light for the little critters. A 400 f2.8 would be pretty awesome as well.

 

[David M-J]

Thank you everyone for the time you have taken and the great advice and suggestions. It is much appreciated.

Take care and remain safe.

 

[David M-J]

Just before I leave this topic, would anyone have any recommendations or suggestions for the ideal lens for whale watching? I'm hoping to do this for the first time and I'm mindful that something like a 200-500 may be a tad big on a rocking boat (gently or otherwise).

Any hints and tips are welcomed

 

[DRwyoming]

Just before I leave this topic, would anyone have any recommendations or suggestions for the ideal lens for whale watching? I'm hoping to do this for the first time and I'm mindful that something like a 200-500 may be a tad big on a rocking boat (gently or otherwise).

Any hints and tips are welcomed

I'd recommend something wider, much wider for whale watching tours from boats.

The first time I went on an Orca tour in the Puget Sound I carried my biggest glass which proved very difficult. When the whales rise and breach at a distance you really don't have much time to find, focus and shoot and don't really know where they'll surface again until they do. The long lenses are great for the inevitable sea birds near feeding whales but for the whales themselves all my best images came from short focal length zooms like my 24-120 or 70-200. I've been whale watching about a dozen times since and though I may bring the longer glass for other sea critters we come across (e.g. Seals, Sea Lions, Otters, etc.) for the actual whales I have much better luck shooting wider. The boat captains are pretty good at getting you close and just about every time I've been whale watching one or more curious whales will swim over to check out the boat often submerging and coming back up on the other side, long glass in those situations will give you eyeballs or nothing.

 

[David M-J]

I'd recommend something wider, much wider for whale watching tours.

The first time I went on an Orca tour in the Puget Sound I carried my biggest glass which proved very difficult. When the whales rise and breach at a distance you really don't have much time to find, focus and shoot and don't really know where they'll surface again until they do. The long lenses are great for the inevitable sea birds near feeding whales but for the whales themselves all my best images came from short focal length zooms like my 24-120 or 70-200. I've been whale watching about a dozen times since andI though I may bring the longer glass for other sea critters we come across (e.g. Seals, Sea Lions, Otters, etc.) for the actual whales I have much better luck shooting wider. The boat captains are pretty good at getting you close and just about every time I've been whale watching one or more curious whales will swim over to check out the boat often submerging and coming back up on the other side, long glass in those situations will give you eyeballs or nothing.

Thank you very much, this is most helpful

 

[joe43]

I was in Coasta Rica in 2019 on a photo tour. I loved it and want to go back. I had two cameras with me, a D 500 and a D810. And two long lenses, Nikon 500mm f5.6 pf and Nikon 300mm f4 PF lens. I often used both at the same time. I also had a Nikon flash and extension tubes. I added the extension tubves to my 300mm f4 to use it as a macro lens. Often you need both bodies. If you only can take one body, the final decisiopn rests with you.

 

[Woodpecker]

As for lenses, I'd recommend the 200-500 if you want to keep it affordable and still enjoy great optical quality (although the 200-500 isn't as weather-sealed as the higher end glass). If you have the funds, the 500PF is another favorite option.

Knowing it is probably getting too much already, but just becuse of the money question at the long end of the range, here is what happened to me:

1. Ordered the 200-500 from big A and spent about a day with it.
2. Read/watched the 500PF review that @Steve did
3. Went to a photo store in Cologne and got an hour in front of the shop with 500PF (laptop was in the car for checking)
4. Bouhgt the 500PF, drove home and 2 hours later the 200-500 was packed at the post office to find its way back

I did this although I have the 500 f/4, because the 500PF is just a breeze to use and oyu are so agile with it. Normally I love the flexibility with zooms but at the long end it is a different story, unless you have the money to afford things like 180-400 with integrated TC. If I didn't have the big one already I probably would have started with the 500PF and at the moment I use it far more than the big one, especially because it is a "hikeable" 500 that is small and light enough to allow for some other gear even if you have to go small and light (around 3/4 of a kilo lighter than even the 200-500 and about 1/3 (!) of the weight of teh 500 f/4 G.

Allthe best with your decisions ...