Ways to get to 600mm (equiv.) FOV

Bruce Crossan · Jan 19, 2016

A second body would also be desirable. I'm sometimes out shooting / walking for 5 to 6 hours at a time - birds and other wildlife mainly. My D750 / 300mm f4 AF-S / 1.4x / SB-600 combination is already hurting my wrists and back after a while although a monopod with tilt head helps. That gets me to 420mm which just isn't enough much of the time. I'm often in the bush, hence a need for flash. Options are:

1) D500 + 300mm PF + 1.4tc (lightest / most expensive)

2) D500 + 200-500mm (gets me to 750mm equiv. / cheapest / heaviest)

3) D500 + 80-400mm (similar cost to option 1/ more flexible)

Please help me to decide!

T O Shooter · Jan 19, 2016

Bruce Crossan said:
A second body would also be desirable. I'm sometimes out shooting / walking for 5 to 6 hours at a time - birds and other wildlife mainly. My D750 / 300mm f4 AF-S / 1.4x / SB-600 combination is already hurting my wrists and back after a while although a monopod with tilt head helps. That gets me to 420mm which just isn't enough much of the time. I'm often in the bush, hence a need for flash. Options are:

1) D500 + 300mm PF + 1.4tc (lightest / most expensive)

2) D500 + 200-500mm (gets me to 750mm equiv. / cheapest / heaviest)

3) D500 + 80-400mm (similar cost to option 1/ more flexible)

Please help me to decide!

nicodimus22 · Jan 19, 2016

Bruce Crossan said:
2) D500 + 200-500mm (gets me to 750mm equiv. / cheapest / heaviest)

This would be my pick. I never find myself saying "I wish I had less reach!" in the field. It's always the opposite. A sturdy monopod with a tilt head works great to support the weight while you just aim and shoot.

--
http://www.naturecratephoto.com

BobWorrell · Jan 19, 2016

Bruce Crossan said:
A second body would also be desirable. I'm sometimes out shooting / walking for 5 to 6 hours at a time - birds and other wildlife mainly. My D750 / 300mm f4 AF-S / 1.4x / SB-600 combination is already hurting my wrists and back after a while although a monopod with tilt head helps. That gets me to 420mm which just isn't enough much of the time. I'm often in the bush, hence a need for flash. Options are:

1) D500 + 300mm PF + 1.4tc (lightest / most expensive)

2) D500 + 200-500mm (gets me to 750mm equiv. / cheapest / heaviest)

3) D500 + 80-400mm (similar cost to option 1/ more flexible)

Please help me to decide!

PHXAZCRAIG · Jan 19, 2016

Nikon V3 with 70-300cx lens

Nikon2011 · Jan 19, 2016

if 'weight' factor is key to you

and you enjoy being out in the wild as much as photography (not only photography)

i'd suggest to go all in on the 300 f4e with tc 1.4

you'll be able to add maybe 2-3 more hours than ever before

stromaroma · Jan 19, 2016

Another option is V body with 200-500, through FT-1. I compared with my D300 and you get better resolution with V1 although poorer handling, focus, viewfinder and high ISO of course. I checked my 1.4 TC on the D300 and the image degradation is such that you are better off using the straight lens and cropping.

Brandon birder · Jan 20, 2016

As weight is an issue. Why not a D7200 and 300 f4 PFE +/_ a 14TC

In 1.3 crop you get about 16 megapixels at 600mm fov.

Jimusny · Jan 20, 2016

I would stay away from the 80-400, its a good lens but mine is a dust magnet, and I just think way over priced compared to other options, the 300PF and TC is cheaper than it is

Bruce Crossan · Apr 14, 2016

Update. . . have hired a 200-500 for the day to try it out. Spending around 6 hours today on Tiritiri Island, a magnificent open bird sanctuary near Auckland, so will post a few images.

Just playing around with it last night to get familiar with it, I have a twinge or two in my back already! Don't really want to renew my acquaintance with my osteopath.

rubank · Apr 14, 2016

Brandon birder said:
As weight is an issue. Why not a D7200 and 300 f4 PFE +/_ a 14TC

In 1.3 crop you get about 16 megapixels at 600mm fov.

graemechapman · Apr 15, 2016

Bruce, if you are into stalking birds and have a dodgy back, there is no question, the 300 PF f/4 either with 1.4x or 1.7x is the way to go.

I've been stalking birds in Australia for just on 60 years and this lens is a dream come true for me, easy to handhold and superb quality, that's why it is expensive. The D500 might make it even better - I only use a D7100 at present. I'm now 78 and 200 - 500 is too heavy to handhold except for a short period. I use it mainly on a light tripod with a fluid head.

See the biggest bird website in Australia www.graemechapman.com.au

Cheers

Graeme

Dodi73 · Apr 15, 2016

Bruce

let me joke about it.. given everything is F/5.6 at most

4. D500 + Tamron 70-300 (450mm) + 1.3x crop (600 mm) = D500 + 350 $/€ or even less

I'm joking but I might have the same idea for something I need here....

--
All the best from northern Italy, Dino.
I'm on the NIK side of photography.

RoyAmatore · Apr 15, 2016

I just turned my 200-500 into a 1350mm F5.6 lens by attaching it, via a Nikon FT-1 converter (no glass, just lens mount converter), to a Nikon 1 V2 I picked up in used pristine condition with 3 extra batteries and one extra charger for $400. It will turn a Nikon 70-200 F/4 into a 189-540mm F/4 lightweight setup. There is also the CX 70-300, which is made for the Nikon 1 system that will give you a very small lightweight, image stabilized 810mm at F/5.6.

BobWorrell · Apr 15, 2016

RoyAmatore said:
I just turned my 200-500 into a 1350mm F5.6 lens by attaching it, via a Nikon FT-1 converter (no glass, just lens mount converter), to a Nikon 1 V2 I picked up in used pristine condition with 3 extra batteries and one extra charger for $400. It will turn a Nikon 70-200 F/4 into a 189-540mm F/4 lightweight setup. There is also the CX 70-300, which is made for the Nikon 1 system that will give you a very small lightweight, image stabilized 810mm at F/5.6.

Wow that cool, Post some shots for Us.

RoyAmatore · Apr 15, 2016

BobWorrell said:
RoyAmatore said:

I just turned my 200-500 into a 1350mm F5.6 lens by attaching it, via a Nikon FT-1 converter (no glass, just lens mount converter), to a Nikon 1 V2 I picked up in used pristine condition with 3 extra batteries and one extra charger for $400. It will turn a Nikon 70-200 F/4 into a 189-540mm F/4 lightweight setup. There is also the CX 70-300, which is made for the Nikon 1 system that will give you a very small lightweight, image stabilized 810mm at F/5.6.

Click to expand...

Wow that cool, Post some shots for Us.

I will. I just got it. There are numerous youtube photo videos by a fellow named Thomas Stirr. I can tell you the adapter works fully with the AF-S lenses. The camera is very small, but it autofocuses like my D750, provided you have some reasonable light. (The D750 practically focuses in the dark.) I have not bought any of the CX lenses yet. It also shoots at 15 fps with continuous AF, and 60 fps! with only the initial autofocus. That's 60 full resolution images in a second, although you only get about 40-50 because of the buffer. We'll see what kind of image quality I can get, but it puts me out at a distance that's otherwise practically impossible.

breivogel · Apr 15, 2016

Although this will give you a lot of reach, the high noise level of the System 1 sensors is a serious issue, if you use anything much above base iso.

RoyAmatore · Apr 15, 2016

breivogel said:
Although this will give you a lot of reach, the high noise level of the System 1 sensors is a serious issue, if you use anything much above base iso.

Yes, of course. It's a 1 inch sensor (same size as Sony RX100) so there will of course be less image quality than larger sensors, including more noise. They say up to 800 is ok, but I'll bet that's only in very good light. However, with good light, should be able to shoot at low iso especially with a still subject, just fine at f/5.6. Also great for video. It is a long distance option without a lot of the side effects of using teleconverters and spending $23,000 on a 800mm f/5.6 lens. And, of course the weight issue, which is not significant if I'm using the 200-500, which is heavy enough itself, but for a 600mm equivalent, a Nikon 300mm PF f/4 gets you 810mm on the V2 for relatively little weight. Here is Thomas Stirr's video of sample image with the V2 and 70-300 CX lens.

graemechapman · Apr 16, 2016

I agree the N1 system is very light - I had it for some months including the superb little 70-300 CX but to get good quality images from the system I found I had to fill the frame with the image and for action shots, the inability to use higher than 800 ISO was very limiting. All this has been covered very well by other reviewers .

More important to me as a stalker of birds was the very narrow angle of view at 800+ "equivalent" focal length - it took too long to actually find the subject in the viewfinder resulting in missed opportunities. Not such a problem with big birds like herons etc, or fixed situations.

I sold my N1 system for a song to help finance my 300 PF f/4 and I'm so glad I did. The 300 f/4 + a 1.7x extender on a DX camera results in an "effective" focal length of 765 mm with a better viewfinder, better noise levels, easily croppable and still quite light.

Lastly I have big hands. On a V2 they always seemed to be hitting the wrong button. The manual focus ring on the 70-300 CX is right where you have to hold it - I had to tape it up to prevent the accidental alteration of the focusing.

No contest!

Graeme Chapman

Leonard Shepherd · Apr 16, 2016

graemechapman said:
Bruce, if you are into stalking birds and have a dodgy back, there is no question, the 300 PF f/4 either with 1.4x or 1.7x is the way to go.

+1.

The 2x also works.

Ways to get to 600mm (equiv.) FOV

Leading Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Well-known member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Well-known member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Well-known member

Forum Pro

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts