User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  0
Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: d90 telephoto lens choice

  1. #1
    Member OZAmateur's Avatar
    Join Date
    25 Oct 2010
    Location
    South East Melb
    Posts
    197
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    d90 telephoto lens choice

    i have a D90 with the 18-200mmVR2 lens.
    im looking for something with bigger reach, primarily for sporting events, airshows and nature photography.
    i understand that i should probably be asking for 3 lenses for the best for each but i can really only justify 1 lens.

    my question is 2 fold...first should i consider a teleconverter...which one, why and what are the benefits/negatives when attached to my camera and lens.
    i understand that they give extra reach, are cheaper than a lens (generally) and in the negative increase aperture, thus slowing down the camera.

    as for lens im looking at a number of options and would like your feedback from your experiences.
    first up nikon 70-300vr, ($500)
    sigma 50-500 os, ($1700)
    sigma 150-500 os, ($850-900)
    sigma 120-400 os. ($750-800)

    all have stabilization and sit at about f4-6, so they're not super quick, but i cant afford the super quick f2.8 lens.

    from what ive read within the forum, members with each of the above lens all swear by them, but my confusion lies in which one would be best for me, or do i go with a teleconverter?

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    13 Sep 2010
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    490
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Don't go with the tele, it just won't work on your lens
    I have the nikon 70-300 vr and it's great on my d90. Any longer than 300 on a crop sensor and you will probably need a monopod at least so your stabilization isn't as needed. I can happily crop the middle portion of a good image at 300 to make it look like a longer lens. Is the sigma 120-400 constant f4? I would consider that one as well

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    12 Feb 2008
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    7,831
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    300 f/4 with 1.4 or 1.7 TC ?
    Darren
    Gear : Nikon Goodness
    Website : http://www.peakactionimages.com
    Please support Precious Hearts
    Constructive Critique of my images always appreciated

  4. #4
    Member
    Threadstarter
    OZAmateur's Avatar
    Join Date
    25 Oct 2010
    Location
    South East Melb
    Posts
    197
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    with the prime lens is it fixed at 300, meaning i have to move towards or away from the subject? does adding a teleconverter give me zoom, or just extend the zoom by 1.4x or 1.7 etc?

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    12 Feb 2008
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    7,831
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    300 is fixed focal length. You can't zoom using the lens. You have to move your feet to change the view. Adding a 1.4 effectively goives you another 40% magnification.

  6. #6
    Member
    Threadstarter
    OZAmateur's Avatar
    Join Date
    25 Oct 2010
    Location
    South East Melb
    Posts
    197
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    ok, cheers.
    i think that i would prefer a lens that offers the flexibility of zoom.
    also looking into the price a bit more i would almost contemplate the nikkor 80-400mm in place of the sigma 50-500...prices are comparable.

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    12 Feb 2008
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    7,831
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Zooms are handy.

    Is your nickname short for Oz Amateur ? It's spelt wrong, Rick can change that if that's the case

  8. #8
    Amor fati! ving's Avatar
    Join Date
    28 Jun 2007
    Location
    St Helens Park
    Posts
    7,275
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    i have the sigma 150-500. works really well for what i use it for. i have only used it once for sport tho and that was baseball. heres a link to the thread of the shots. they turned out ok for a non-sports shooter

    http://www.ausphotography.net.au/for...712#post658712

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    17 Dec 2008
    Location
    charters towers qld
    Posts
    191
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    i also have the 150-500 and love the lens and can hand hold as well which is a bonus

  10. #10
    Member
    Threadstarter
    OZAmateur's Avatar
    Join Date
    25 Oct 2010
    Location
    South East Melb
    Posts
    197
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by kiwi View Post
    Zooms are handy.

    Is your nickname short for Oz Amateur ? It's spelt wrong, Rick can change that if that's the case
    hahaha yeah it is......rick can you please fix...i didnt even notice.

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    12 Feb 2008
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    7,831
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    youll need to PM him.

  12. #12
    Member
    Threadstarter
    OZAmateur's Avatar
    Join Date
    25 Oct 2010
    Location
    South East Melb
    Posts
    197
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    ive got a bit of an update and i guess a further question.
    im not keen on getting the 50-500, would be looking at either the 150-500 or 120-400.
    i have also noticed in the sigma range in the f4.5ish range they offer about 3 or 4 varieties of lens that go out to 400 and 500..ie the 135-500.
    the specs all look the same...has anyone had any experience with any of these lenses and what are the major differences?
    all i can see for now is if i want to go to 400mm or 500mm, the lens are pretty much the same as far as i can tell other than that?!

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    12 Nov 2009
    Location
    Monterey Bay, California
    Posts
    172
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I found the Sigma 150-500 to be a very excellent lens but needing a monopod to keep it steady enough at the long end.
    We shoot with a D3 (stronger focus motor) and Nikkor 80-400 at MotorSports Events.
    It is fast enough and easy to hand hold.
    For my D90, I used the AF-S Nikkor 70-200.

  14. #14
    Member
    Threadstarter
    OZAmateur's Avatar
    Join Date
    25 Oct 2010
    Location
    South East Melb
    Posts
    197
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    further update...ive decided that i will go for the 150 - 500mm.
    it gives me more options and if the majority of my shots are say 200 - 400ish they are inside the best performing ranges for this lens and i think i will be very happy. even shooting out to 500 sample pics look good, and with some practice i think will be more than good enough for me.

    now just gotta wait for a quality second hand one to come up online, or a great deal on a new lens

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    30 May 2010
    Location
    sydney
    Posts
    3
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I have the nikkor 70-300mm vr with my D90. it's a great lens. i satisfy with the result . its very sharp and give a good bokeh.

  16. #16
    I am older than I look. peterb666's Avatar
    Join Date
    31 Oct 2009
    Location
    Tura Beach, NSW
    Posts
    3,600
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    As you already have the 18-200 VR, I cannot see the point in getting the nikon 70-300vr as there is too much overlap.

    Any of the Sigma lenses you have listed should do fine.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •