What's a good zoom lens for wildlife???

Jerry_Mayo · #1 05-10-2003, 07:51 PM

I'm looking for a good zoom lens new or used. I'm using a D-100 camera and have a 2x teleconverter also. I'm shooting mostly wildlife with a rather poor lens and would like to move up.
The question is Money balance, I have at most $700 U.S and want the best bang for the buck. I did look at a Sigm 50-500mm f4-6.3 lens but it's at the very top of the price i can afford. Most of the f2.8 lens I've seen are too much money or not as large as I'd like.
The lens I currently have is a 70-300mm nikkor g lens. I need more zoom sometimes and try to use my teleconverter but then it's just way too slow.
Ideas????

loubuscher · #2 08-29-2003, 12:14 PM

Loops, I do wildlife here in NY for our DEC Endangered Species Unit on Eagles and have just added a Sigma 120 to 300 F2.8 to my bag. I also use their 800mm. I have several F2.8 Nikor lens also and I can tell you that the Sigma zoom is one of the sharpest lenses I am useing. With the 2X I can carry 600mm around and a very light tripod or monopod with no trouble and I am 72. Weight is about 5.7 Lbs. and cost is about $1850.00. I see this is a little more than you want to spend but you won't be sorry. It is also very fast. Go for it. Norman Camera will let you try it, not happy send it back.
www.loubuscher.com

J_David_Levy · #3 08-31-2003, 12:26 PM

Loops,

I have the Sigma 50-500 and I have used it a lot for wildlife. It is very versitle.

With the exception of my zoo pictures (Canon 100-400 IS) the wildlife pix on my site were taken with that lens.

My web page

David

loubuscher · #4 08-31-2003, 07:10 PM

Hi Dave, Say if you think that 50 to 500 is good wait till you try the 120 to 300 F2.8. I traded the 50 to 500 in as I found it way to slow for Eagles. I also did not like the zoom as if you held it stright up the lens would zoom down. Same thing the other way if pointed down. I also found the speeds were not useable on an overcast day in the cover of white pines. My shutter speeds would go down to like 1/40 and thats not good for moveing wildlife. I can add a 2X and still have AF at 5.6 and I now have 600mm. with this new lens. I'm telling you guys this is a nice lens for the money. I have found that it is best to have the F2.8 lenes for wildlife so now thats what I have except my 800. Thats a 5.6.
www.loubuscher.com

Robert_Bonow · #5 09-01-2003, 04:17 PM

Though I have no experience with it, the Sigma 100-300/4 has a good reputation. It goes for about $800 at many online retailers; it's a little more than you wanted to spend, but it's much less than the 120-300/2.8.

Brian_Cook · #6 10-27-2003, 09:44 PM

David,

Very nice Zoo photos. However the animal you have labeled as a Cheetah, actually looks more like a Jaquar.

Brian

LeeRothman · #7 10-27-2003, 10:27 PM

I've now had my 100-300 F4 EX HSM for over a week now and I have been very surprised at what it can do. I also had a 120-300 2.8 EX HSM to evaluate. The main thing is that for the price difference the 100-300F4 has just as good sharpness and contrast. Sure, you do lose that stop of light, but for less than half the price it is a very workable solution for many. Myself included. I also have done test shooting with the 1.4x Sigma TC on it and frankly it doesn't lose a thing (except a stop of light of course). Delta International has it for well under that $800 USD price and they ship all over the world. The zoom has the same precise feel of the larger EX and it is eminantly easier to handhold in the event you need to. Nicely balanced also. This is a lens I think I will likely keep for a very long time. It's very versatile.........