DSLRUsers.com

Okay, forget about my last post when I was talking about small, light, cheap telephoto zooms - I am now going the other way!!

During the week, we tweaked our honeymoon schedule slightly for next July.. Instead of:

Alaskan cruise, Canadian rockies, Seattle

we are dumping Seattle and doing:

Alaskan cruise, Alaska inland tour to Denali National Park, Canadian Rockies

Now, I'm hoping for a bit of wildlife action, both on the cruise and on the inland tour. It's likely to be overcast, the animals are probably going to be a fair distance away (I've read some info online, and they ALL recommend you stay at least 400m away from any grizzly bears. Eep!), and I'll possibly be on a boat. Tough conditions.

I have an AF-D Nikkor 80-200/2.8 zoom, a fine, fine lens. However, I can't seem to find any information on good teleconverters that will reliably autofocus, meter or set the correct aperture. I know that the TC17E II and TC20E II are good bits of gear, but they will only work with AF-S lenses.

Which brings me to my options:

1) Keep the 80-200, and buy a AF-S 300/4 with 1.4x TC

By all accounts, this lens has great quality, and is infinitely more affordable than the 2.8 VR version However, I would want to hang onto the 80-200 because I like the 80-120mm range for portraits, and a prime just isn't as flexible. Doesn't have VR. Approx total cost would be around $1600-1700 (grey), ending up with a 420/5.6

2) Sell the 80-200, and buy a 70-200VR with 1.7x TC

This is a known great combo. Gives me the brilliant 70-200VR for most situations, and an entirely usable 119-340/4.8 when I need the extra reach. However, it has the shortest reach out of all my options here. If I manage to get a decent price for my 80-200/2.8, this should still only cost me $1600-1700.

3) Keep the 80-200, and buy a 80-400VR

Lightweight and pretty sharp, plus the added bonus of VR. Don't need to pack a teleconverter. However, I'm not super-impressed with its focusing speed, and it's slow too, f/5.6 at the long end. Price would be around $1600-1700 grey.

So, as you can see, price would be roughly the same for all 3. Those who have done a bit of wildlife/bird photography, any advice on my 3 options (or indeed, have any other options to suggest?)?

After flying all that way for a trip that I'm unlikely to ever be able to afford again, buggered if I'm going to try take photos of a puffin with a 70-300G

Option 2 would be the better one as it's more long term and flexible. Surely the 80mm reach for the first option isn't going to make that much of a difference.

Also would you use the 300 and teleconverter after your trip? The 70-200VR and tele is a lot more flexible and after your trip, if you're not going to go to the trackside or more animal hunting, then just bring the 70-200 along

80-400 at ISO 400 is very useable and focus speed is acceptable! Your 80-200 is a fine lens and you won't gain much by changing it to a 70-210 VR. If you are using a D200 or better then I can offer you a 300mm F4.5 manual focus for a good price that works like a charm and is as sharp as a tack. I would avound long focal length lenses and teleconvertors unless you are planning to work from a sturdy tripod. Have a great trip!

I've been giving similar consideration to the options you have presented also.

I'm planning to secure a 70-200 VR, with a TC (1.7 I think), and sell off my 80-200.

I had the sigma 80-400 VR ("OS") and it was way too slow focus and f-stop for me.

I love the 80-200, so I know I'll love the VR

Des,

What body are you using this on?

I encounter very few issues with response of the 80-400 on my D70, and I know that it focuses very bloody quickly on the D200. In its sweet spot it's a very usable, and a very sharp, lens.

OF course there is little that is better than the 70-200 VR. Either of those options will be quite satisfactory, unless you absolutely need the reach that the 80-400 gives you, which is why I have mine.

Des,

I've got the 300mm with a 1.7TC and it is a very nice combination. The 300mm on its own is a great lens but once you add a TC, be it the 1.4 or 1.7, you start to need a tripod. Note that when using the 300mm, they recommend you get a new lens collar as the one that comes with it is not great. I've got mine coming from Kirk this week.

The 70-200 is on my list but that won't get purchased for a while as I don't buy lottery tickets.

If I was in your situation, I'd get the 70-200VR with 1.7TC. It will be a great combination, more versatile and you end up having to carry only one lens instead of two as you have in the other options.

They are right about grizzly bears. If you want to get closer, make sure you are in a closed vehicule It doesn't really matter if you are 100m or 1000m away, if the grizzly decides to track you, you better have a vehicule to get in before it gets to you.

cheers,

André

One more thing, on your inland tour, you will likely be on a bus or 4WD. Make sure you take a bean bag to put on the side of the window. It will really help stabilise your photo taking. Take it empty and fill it with sand or rice when you get there. The one I have is from kinesis.

http://kgear.com/

Cheers,

André

Des what ever you do don't forget your wide angle

http://www.dpchallenge.com/image.php?IMAGE_ID=96222

Des,

Just get the 18-200 and a Kenko 2X TC. Light, small, VR and heaps of reach

I have the 70-200, 1.7TC and 300/4. I agree with Matt, there is no difference between the 80-200 optically and the 70-200, but the VR may help on the boat. I also got the 70-200 so I could share a TC with the 300AFS. I think a Kenko may work with your 80-200. I agree with Andre, the 300+1.7 needs a tripod or at the very least a monopod and sunny day. Handholding is for statues or brilliantly bright days. So if you take a 300+1.7 plan on a mono at the least in the kit or dont bother.

That said the AFS300/4 is around s/h, maybe you could pick one up at a good price. You may have under budgeted on the 70-200 + tc combo? You also said (probably a typo) the TC20 is good, most reports and the one I saw aren't rated that highly. Good luck in your choice.

losfp wrote:Now, I'm hoping for a bit of wildlife action, both on the cruise and on the inland tour.

Sorry, couldn't resist It is your honeymoon afterall

Thanks for all your feedback guys. I am actually leaning towards the 70-200VR + 1.7TC combo for a few reasons:

- It will give me one lens that I can use all the time, as opposed to two lenses that I will use sometimes.

- It will give me a brilliant med-tele lens, and a good super-tele option, which is exactly the way around that I would prefer it.

- It's the 70-200VR, dammit.

PiroStitch wrote:Also would you use the 300 and teleconverter after your trip? The 70-200VR and tele is a lot more flexible and after your trip, if you're not going to go to the trackside or more animal hunting, then just bring the 70-200 along

Yep - that was my feeling too, as above.

gstark wrote:What body are you using this on?

A D200, Gary. However, due to The Boss's entirely unreasonable demand that we swap cameras around every day, I will be forced to use a D70s every second day.

radar wrote:If I was in your situation, I'd get the 70-200VR with 1.7TC. It will be a great combination, more versatile and you end up having to carry only one lens instead of two as you have in the other options.

Yep, as above! Also, great suggestion for the bean-bag supports, I'll definitely look into those.

firsty wrote:Des what ever you do don't forget your wide angle

Keith, you know the Tokina 12-24 NEVER gets left behind Sensational shot there, although apparently you are only a 25% chance of having weather clear enough to see Mt McKinley at any given time

glen wrote:You may have under budgeted on the 70-200 + tc combo? You also said (probably a typo) the TC20 is good, most reports and the one I saw aren't rated that highly. Good luck in your choice.

Ah, I meant the 1.7 and the 1.4 are good. If I can sell the 80-200 for a reasonable amount, then $1600-1800 isn't unreasonable for the 70-200/1.7TC!

sheepie wrote:It is your honeymoon afterall

Gotta watch what you say around here, apparently.

Thanks Leon, I knew someone would rise to the occasion!!

Of course, since our trip is still over 6 months away, no doubt I will chop and change my opinion right up until we leave!

Des, you will love the combo and very useable post trip. I don't think there has been anyone who didn't love the 70-200

A D200, Gary. However, due to The Boss's entirely unreasonable demand that we swap cameras around every day, I will be forced to use a D70s every second day.

Hehehe, how did you agree to that ? Was it on the grounds you allow this next lens option ?

Alpha_7 wrote:

A D200, Gary. However, due to The Boss's entirely unreasonable demand that we swap cameras around every day, I will be forced to use a D70s every second day.

Hehehe, how did you agree to that ? Was it on the grounds you allow this next lens option ?

No, sadly she has moral rights to the camera.. I er... borrowed the money out of the honeymoon fund, technically without asking first specifically.

Nothing escapes the eagle-vision and uncanny 6th sense of The Boss...

losfp wrote:No, sadly she has moral rights to the camera.. I er... borrowed the money out of the honeymoon fund, technically without asking first specifically.

Nothing escapes the eagle-vision and uncanny 6th sense of The Boss...

Your and brave, brave man. I guess a rotating system isn't too bad, it will keep you on your toes and sharp swapping every second day, so you won't get complacenent behind the controls. (Remember to check the ISO - Everytime!)

losfp wrote:

Alpha_7 wrote:

A D200, Gary. However, due to The Boss's entirely unreasonable demand that we swap cameras around every day, I will be forced to use a D70s every second day.

Hehehe, how did you agree to that ? Was it on the grounds you allow this next lens option ?

No, sadly she has moral rights to the camera.. I er... borrowed the money out of the honeymoon fund, technically without asking first specifically.

Forgiveness is easier to obtain than permission.

Damn you all

Right, I have now decided that I am definitely going to save up for a 70-200VR.

You'll know I've been successful when you see me advertising a 80-200/2.8 for sale on this forum

I have discovered the shortest unit of time known to man, which is defined as the period of time between buying the last lens, and wanting the next lens (ie: Tamron 28-75 barely 3 weeks ago!!)

Des,

I got the 70-200VR + TC-20EII earlier this year.

While I'm totally in love with the 70-200, I'm not sure if I got what I wanted with the 2xTC. The 1.7xTC is probably the way to go unless you desperately want the 400mm like I did.

70-200vr with a 2x TC may degrade optics by too much to be acceptable as the 70-200vr...

Maybe a 300 f/4 with a 1.4x TC can do the 400mm+ reach as you desired. But no VR in play with this.

Yi-P wrote:70-200vr with a 2x TC may degrade optics by too much to be acceptable as the 70-200vr...

It does degrade the optics a bit more than I had hoped.

That doesn't mean acceptable shots at 400mm aren't possible. I've had plently that I'm happy with.

And I don't know how much worse the combination is than the 70-200 + 1.7xTC.

I would get the 80-400

shutterbug wrote:I would get the 80-400

Nah, that's fallen right off the radar I think. If I get teh 80-400, I will want to hang on to the 80-200 as well, as I don't like the 80-400 for action or portraits (not fast or fast focusing enough for me).

That's two lenses, when I could be packing just one

losfp wrote:Damn you all
I have discovered the shortest unit of time known to man, which is defined as the period of time between buying the last lens, and wanting the next lens (ie: Tamron 28-75 barely 3 weeks ago!!)

Not true, the shortest unit of time is the time taken by the guy in the car behind you to blow his car horn when the lights change to green!

losfp wrote:Damn you all
I have discovered the shortest unit of time known to man, which is defined as the period of time between buying the last lens, and wanting the next lens (ie: Tamron 28-75 barely 3 weeks ago!!)

As opposed to the longest unit if time which is the period between the time when you pay for the lens and when you receive it in the mail.