The ones I have considered are
1) Bigma (50-500) - reach upto 500, HSM faster focus
2) Nikon 80-400 VR - VR
3) Sigma 80-400 OS - OS, better speed of focus than 80-400 VR
4) Tamron 200-500 - reach upto 500, lighter than bigma
What do you experts consider the best choice ?
As far as I see the two with stabilization lacks very much in focus speed
and vice versa.
Hi
I would liuke to use it for birds and wild life and some sunset shots too.
Also plan to use it for the next air force show.
I am in quite a confusion.
birds require faster focusing as I understood till now
and Bigma is the only one with an HSM
But I doubt if it could be hand holdable.
Hi Nikiolai
Thank you for the reply
I already have a 80-200 f/2.8 with me and love it.
to get 400mm I will have to use a 2X converter
And some say this gives too much distortion
Also I find the 300mm (200mm x 1.5) very limted for birds and planes
I am leaning towards Bigma and tamron as both have 500 mm reach.
So far I'm leaning towards 70-200 because I can get a TC and have 140-400 at the same f stop as 80-400 (almost).Nick
I tried the TC17e teleconverter with the Nikon 70-200VR and HATED IT!!!
I tried the different VR modes, with and without tripod, various aperture and zoom settings, and all combinations. 90% of my shots were soft and disappointing. I ended up returning the teleconverter and now am considering either the Nikon 80-400 VR or the Sigma 80-400 OS.
The Nikon 70-200 VR is a great lens, it sounds like you are looking for a little more reach than it will give you. I started with and will certainly keep it, but I also want more reach.
a good friend of mine is selling his 80-400 F4 VR. He mostly shoots wildlife etc, and finds it way too slow. My opinion is that once you go over 200mm, you're better off shooting with Prime glass. I had the good fortune of shooting a 600mm F4 yesterday, and it was night and day compared to any zooms over 200mm i've used. Teleconverters over about 1.4x seem to get poor reviews, but I've enver tested them. I know they give the VR some problems at times.
as for the third party glass thing - I only have Nikkor lenses at the moment, but I wouldn't hesitate to buy certain 3rd party lenses. I tested the Sigma 70-200 F2.8 and it was every bit as sharp as the nikkor. I only opted for the nikkor because i wanted the VR. I hear Tokina's 12-24mm is as good as Nikkor's too, but i haven't tested it.
Thanks very much Pedro for the reply.
I have not considered the primes as it is way too expensive for me.
That is one of the reasons I have considered only the four available zooms.
Yes and certain 3rd party lenses seem to be very good as the sigma 80-400 OS.
I am torn between stabilization and reach/HSM. :)
I have the Tamron 200-500. It's a pretty darn good lens for the price. I have taken some very nice wildlife shots with mine. I think it's plenty sharp and has nice bokeh.
But focusing speed and low light situations are not it's strong points. It's at it's best with lots of light and stopped down some from the wide end of it's aperture range.
If you really need fast focusing get the Bigma. It's extra weight is tolerable because of the added versatility of that very wide zoom range. VR or OS should help you get low light shots if that's what you're after.
For the money; I like the Sigma 50-500 Ex. Reaches to 750 equivalent on a D70. That is good reach for the dollars paid. A good tripod is essential in my opinion.
Thanks Flash and coolhar for the reply.
Great photos !!
I see that both bigma and tamron are real good in good hands :)
So i will forget about VR and OS and concentrate on these two.
Thanks again.
Shutterpug's another who's just recently gotten the Bigma and is in love with it. It's a very nice lens for the price and remarkably sharp considering that it's a 10x zoom factor.
