For a couple of days I did consider trading my 18-300 for a Sigma 100-400, which has a decent price at cameraworld at the moment, but have now arranged for Nikon to take a look at my lens. Apparently it could be a 4 or 5 week turnaround.
I have been off ZooChat for most of this year and in that time I changed my long lens setup. I still have two Nikon D850 bodies that I use with my three shorter lenses: Tamron 15-30 f2.8 G2, Nikon 24-70 f2.8 E, Nikon 70-200 f2.8 E (plus 1.4 iii teleconverter). My long lens setup was a Nikon D500 with 500 f5.6 PF lens. I found the lack of zoom constraining and sold it (also sold my 300 f4 PF). I replaced it with Sony A74 (with battery grip) and Sony 200-600 f5.6-6.3 G. I love the lens - tack sharp even at 600mm (I rented the setup first to be sure), but the camera I only like but don't love. I am not keen on the look of mirrorless and the small squared-off body design of Sony. If you get really into photography as I did you can spend all your time obsessing over camera gear. I had two opportunities to try out a Canon R5 whose viewfinder is hideous and I would never consider owning one. The Nikon Z9 ($$$) is reportedly the most SLR-like viewfinder of any mirrorless system and I am waiting for the rumored (but so far mythical) Z8 to be announced. Many presume this will be a smaller Z9, inheriting many of its features and becoming the mirrorless replacement for a D850. In the meantime I can't afford to change setups again so I am kind of glad they haven't announced anything yet.
I really enjoy the 200-600 too and it’s worth the weight particularly for birds (and I take it to the bigger zoos so it’s often out and about). Really good lens for the money.
I'm not a photographer. Skim reading these pages is worse than reading a foreign language for the first time. I understand the words, but have absolutely no idea what anyone is talking about. Quite humours really .
If someone could help me shed some light on this, because I know some of you are very experienced in when it comes to camera's and lenses. I have a Nikon D5200 with a 18-55 + 55-300 lens. I've now finally had the money to start looking into a new one, preferably 18-300, so I wouldn't have to switch "all the time". Going to zoo's, I can't take any scenery pictures, or at least not to my liking with the 55-300, and I can't be bothered to switch lenses constantly, or I don't want the hassle to bring the small lens with me (it's only a tiny thing, but still, the less I need to carry around, the better). I found the Tamron 18-400 (yay, a little bigger then what I'm used to). And then I also found a Nikon 18-300. I've attached 3 pictures. All taken from the same spot, and pointed onto the same plush. All 3 pictures are fully zoomed (the Tamron one is blurry, I know, sorry). I'm failing to understand, why the Tamron 18-400 isn't zooming in much more then the 55-300. And I'm failing to understand, why the Nikon 18-300 isn't zooming in just as far as the 55-300. (I'm really sorry if it's something quite simple, but I am the first to admit that I'm not that tech-savvy when it comes to photography and DSLR camera's, I wanted something more then my bridge P100 and I bought my whole set-up in a kit, which was much cheaper then body/lens separate so it was a no-brainer to get the D5200 at the time). Thanks
The D5200 is a pretty good camera for all round photography. With a 200mm lens I captured many flying birds, scenery, close-ups of insects and plants etc.. I was not pleased with the results I got from my 300mm lens, so stopped using it. I bought a D7100, expecting to get even better shots, but have since regretted not keeping the D5200.
@Moorhunhe I think the size differences are because you are focusing on a subject that is close to the camera. The lens focal length rating - for example 300mm - is the rating when the lens is focused at infinity. When you focus very close, the focal length actually increases, so that a 300mm lens might work more like a 315mm or 330mm or something else. This will vary from lens to lens which is why I think you are seeing such dramatic differences. If you went outside and shot at a distant subject with the lens zoomed to its longest setting, my guess is the 55-300 and 18-300 images would look the same while the 18-400 would have the subject closer up. As a general rule, the longer a lens zoom range is, the less sharp it is. So in theory your 55-300 should be sharper than the other two. Of course the convenience of the longer zoom range and not needing two lenses or needing to switch might be more important than any slight sharpness advantage. The general rule is also subject to exceptions, so it is possible that either the 18-300 or 18-400 are so well designed they may be as good or better than the 55-300 (especially if they are newer designs). If you still have access to all three your best bet is to shoot all three at maximum zoom at a distant subject outside in good light (where motion blur is not an issue) and then enlarge and compare all shots.
Thank you for explaining! I did take those 3 pictures while also just being about 3 meters away from the object. I did take the Tamron 18-400 to the zoo a few days ago. And then compared it with the Nikon 55-300, and the difference really wasn't that much both fully zoomed in. You could tell the 400 was slightly closer, but not massively. I probably should have mentioned that in my previous post. But I was just confused as to why the 400 kind of looks like only 200 when I tested it on the plush. I was aware of possible quality loss going to just one lens. But I just like taking pictures, and apart from looking at them on my laptop/computer, I don't do anything special with them. So then having that 'luxury' finally to just have 1 lens instead of 2, is just a really nice thing I feel for me.
Do you have a camera on your phone? Would that not be sufficient for the 'scenic' shots, if they are just for yourself?
I do, but as much as I love the phone I have, the pictures aren't great, and I would just like this to be from the same device rather then getting out my phone all the time too.
I recently upgraded my kit to my first DSLR, and got the Canon 90D and Sigma 150-600. I've only been able to use the setup twice, but so far so good. I just need to spend my summer making sure I'm able to fully adjust to it. Previously I shot on a small point and shoot
I have finally completed my new set ups - 2 X D850 bodies 1 x P950 1 x Nikon 200 - 500mm lens 1 x Sigma 150 - 600mm lens 1 x Sigma 18 - 300mm lens 1 set up for birding and 1 Set up for zoo work. The P950 for reserve work if walking around. Captive collection work D850 with 200 - 500mm lens and 18 - 300mm for indoor work. Birding D850 with Sigma 150 - 600mm & 1,4 convertor
The amount of money I have spent changing camera systems and lenses over the last decade is nothing short of embarrassing. Every time I say I am done, but this time I mean it! I sold my entire setup - two Nikon D850 bodies with four lenses plus teleconverter and flash plus (shortly thereafter) one Sony A74 with 200-600 lens and teleconverter. I now have one Nikon Z8 with 24-70 f4 lens and 70-200 f2.8 lens and (arriving tomorrow) 2x teleconverter.
My Sigma 120-300 focus have unfortunately broke and is now impossible to repair due to a lack of changing parts (more than 10 years old since launching). I usually hold off any change until my cameras and lenses break or have an issue as I am not the most careful owner. I had to replace it and took advantage to also move to full frame with a Nikon z6 that will complement my old D7500. For lenses, I have bought a used Nikon 500mm f5,6 PF and a 70-200 2.8. The 500mm is super light which compensate for the lack of luminosity. It is definitely too big for most situations in zoo but I decided that what matter more to me are wild animal pictures. I hope that the 70-200 will be helpful in those situations. I go to Madagascar in 3 weeks so let's see how all of this work in the field!
The gear chase is part of the fun! I’ve stuck with Sony since I swapped but have traded cameras a few times. Love the glass I have. The second hand market makes it much easier to do without going mad. The quality of second gear from reputable places is super high too. The new Nikons look very nice. Seems you can’t go wrong with any of the big brands at the moment. A 70-200 2.8 is such a nice lens - love mine.
IMO Sony definitely has the best lens lineup for mirrorless and honestly I wanted to go with them for the lenses (I really want the 20-70 f4 for all around). But I just don't like the ergonomics of their bodies so I had to stick with Nikon.
I’ll say this about the 2x Teleconverter: it’s been extremely useful when I need the extra reach in a pinch and it’s worked very well with my Z50. I’ve gotten more shots I love than those that were hampered by reduction in image quality. I attached a couple of samples I captured a few months ago with the 70-200 and 2x Teleconverter
Can’t under estimate the importance of feel in the hand! I have pretty small hands so the size of the Sonys really works for me. But they definitely don’t suit all. I have the 1.4TC very handy for Sony too. When I’m on the way back from photographing horses being able to pop it on for the zoo for a few hours is a great use case for me. I’ve used it quite a lot.
