NatureScapes.net Forums

We haven't had any polls in a while so just for fun...

That 800 f2.8 looks like the ticket

Mike in O wrote:That 800 f2.8 looks like the ticket

A 800/2.8 would have to have a front element that is almost 300mm wide   Would weigh in the 50lb range

E.J. Peiker wrote:

Mike in O wrote:That 800 f2.8 looks like the ticket

A 800/2.8 would have to have a front element that is almost 300mm wide   Would weigh in the 50lb range

I knew it would be big but wow...I just was pointing out that length needed to be separated with aperture values 

Since we're posting wish lenses, I voted 600mm, but only if Nikon or Sigma would make a 600 f5.6 prime.

For full frame I selected 600mm but would really go for a zoom instead like the 200-400 or better, the Nikon 200-500 if shooting Nikon. Long primes are so restrictive if you could only carry one lens.

E.J.,

I'd guess that if you broke this down into two different categories.................one for birds and one for wildlife you'd get different results.

I consider "wildlife" and "bird Photography" to be to different things. That usually means to different lenses. And location dictates the lens too.

Although I chose the 500mm prime because it could be handheld fairly easily (I had the 600mm VR - too heavy to handhold for any length of time) and at 500mm it still is a super tele. Add a 1.4x and you're in business. But in reality I purchased a Sigma 150-600mm zoom as I need many focal lengths in the course of the day for my particular style of photography (especially from a kayak). Many times my subject might be too close for a 600mm, so I zoom down to 150mm if needed. But I didn't see a zoom lens in the survey! 

After looking at the quality of Cindy Crawford's recent black-capped chickadee image taken with the Tamron 150-600 I'd have to think that was a prime contender, esp. if weight is an issue.

500mm

Brian E. Small wrote:E.J.,

I'd guess that if you broke this down into two different categories.................one for birds and one for wildlife you'd get different results.

Possibly for some or many but I have never found the requirements to be that different as you are generally much farther from large mammals so in the end, similar focal lengths seem to work, namely usually either a 100-400 class zoom or a 300 and a 500/600/800.  i purposely didn't include zooms on either poll as I was trying to get down to actual focal lengths - basically if you could only have a single focal length, what would it be.  Unfortunately i am limited to 100 characters in the poll question so I couldn't write all of that

In my naiveté as a beginning wildlife photographer, this was my dream lens, especially for small birds. I learned quickly about the reality of long lenses, tripods, practicality of using an extreme telephoto lens, etc. This lens was new at that time:

http://www.popphoto.com/gear/2012/07/in ... 200-1700mm

http://www.cameraegg.org/?attachment_id=1140

Although I currently use a 500mm, I think a 600 with TC is more practical.

Joe

E.J. Peiker wrote:
... I have never found the requirements to be that different as you are generally much farther from large mammals so in the end, similar focal lengths seem to work...

Again, that gets down to location and what you are trying to produce. Locations that limit your ability to move (a stick to the road policy, etc) and type of terrain is a bigger factor in how much focal length you need to larger animals.

I just voted for the 600mm lens. Typically, I shoot most of my wildlife with that lens. Usually I have it on the seat of my car along with the 80-400. Usually between the two I have most situations covered above was well as can be expected. I guess one of the 150-600 lenses might do as well with only one body.
RP

Tough to narrow it down to just one lense given the long list of subject specific variables but I'd go with the 500mm and a 1.4x when needed if I could only take one into the field. If I had a Sherpa to carry the gear I'd also take a 300/2.8 and a 100-400 MII

I chose 500 due to compromise of reach and weight along with maneuverability.  With today's high MP sensors cropping makes this lens more versatile so going to the heavier 600 isn't as necessary as it used to be.

I'd pick a 600/4 for FF.
In reality I use a 500/4 on APS-C body for my avian photography.
Weight is the prime consideration here for me.

KK Hui wrote:Weight is the prime consideration here for me.

Same here, which is why I really want a 600 f5.6 I suspect a 600 5.6 would be smaller and lighter than a 500 f/4. Anyone know?

Love my Nikkor 600 f4 but voted for the 500 due to the weight and size difference. My lens performs for me and the cost to replace it with the newer/lighter version does not make sense for me. The Sigma 500 f4 is the new game changer.