Nikon for Birds in FL -- 300 f/4 or 200-500 f/5.6?

[ColSebastianMoran]

But imagine how much of a pain it would be to carry compare to a more sensible crop body with a 300 on it!

This is exactly my view. With a 300 on a DX body, there are shots I can't get for lack of reach.

Well, there are always shots you can't get, and I get a lot by being able to move. Heck, it's more serious than that... I like to move, move on, walk all the way around the place. Part of my pleasure in nature photography.

 

[ColSebastianMoran]

So here's my dilemma I have a Nikon 80-400 f/4.5-5.6 (the older one) and a D3x. So would you think that I'd be better of spending money on a faster 300mm lens the you can use a teleconverter on, or spend the money on a crop body? KEH has for example a EX+ D7100 for ~$600...

Joe, that's a dilemma. The D3x is a great pro camera, but only 12MPx and FX.

I have been shooting birds with a 12MPx camera D300. Recently did a comparison; I now think a 24MPx body will be a big step up with any lens.

 

[ColSebastianMoran]

The D7200 has the class-leading APS-C sensor according to dpreview.

(... and continues to praise the D7200)

All I can say is I agree. For birds, there's a real advantage to a DX body. And, for those like me on 12MPx, a big advantage to a newer body with 24MPx. (Maybe that newer body also has better AF??)

 

[ColSebastianMoran]

I rented the new Nikkor 200-500 f/5.6 zoom and did comparison shots with the original 300mm f/4 AF (1988 lens, always a consistent winner), simulated bird shot at 50'.

The comparison images are on another thread.

Conclusions:
- The new 200-500 f/5.6 zoom has comparable sharpness at 300mm to my reliable 300 f/4. It's similarly sharp at 500mm, wide open. I release all my concerns about shooting with this long zoom (even wide open, and it will generally be wide open for birds). About the only advantage to the 300 f/4 is one-stop aperture.
- Best would be the 200-500 zoom on a new 24MPx DX body, one with current AF technology. 24MPx will be a big step up from my 12MPx body, the sharpness is as good as what I've been using, and it zooms.
- VR is another potential big plus. I can see it in the informal shooting I've done with the zoom. Even in my testing on tripods I can see it. With the 300 f/4 prime (no VR) about 1/4 of my shots were visibly unsharp from camera movement. With the zoom and VR, also on tripod, none were unsharp. In my bird shooting, I believe camera movement is one of the prime sources of unsharp images.
- Drawbacks of the 200-500: Zoom all the way is a big twist of the zoom ring. This is not the lens to zoom all the way in-out. Hood doesn't look really robust.
- For the prime: one-stop aperture
- For the zoom: comparable sharpness, it zooms, and it has VR

The 200-500 zoom wins, in my book.

 

[ColSebastianMoran]

Friends the 200-500mm lens is a winner. I find it plenty sharp (after using a 300 f/4 for years). The AF is fine, and VR works well. The only complaint I have is the zoom ring has a long twist to go from one end to the other.

As noted above, I bought the lens for shooting birds in Florida at Wakodahatchee and Ding Darling where the birds are relatively close.

Here's sample shot, D7200, ISO200, 1/500th, f/5.6.

 

[splitimageview]

I know that camera. 🙂

Nice.

 

[pvdhaar]

Friends the 200-500mm lens is a winner. I find it plenty sharp (after using a 300 f/4 for years). The AF is fine, and VR works well. The only complaint I have is the zoom ring has a long twist to go from one end to the other.

As noted above, I bought the lens for shooting birds in Florida at Wakodahatchee and Ding Darling where the birds are relatively close.

Here's sample shot, D7200, ISO200, 1/500th, f/5.6.

At 500mm I presume? Very good detail in the feathers from what I can see (and a nice image overall!)..

That aside, you guys got it easier in FL than we over here in W. Europe when it comes to herons.. They've been severely hunted down for centuries (competition for commercial fishing), and even though that's not done anymore today, they're still extremely wary. Their comfort zone is easily 25 meters/yards, unless you're lying in wait in a hide-out.