where there’s smoke there’s forum fire
Hi guys. I am a new photographer and this summer I bought Nikon D5000 with 18-55VR.My passion is plane spotting and that's why I need something longer. I read several topics in this forum but I would like you to propose me a lens for my hobby. Thank you very much. :)
Regards
If you are on a budget, the 55-200 VR is good (prices should drop a bit, especially in the used market, with the arrival of the 55-300 VR). If you have a bit more $$$, the new 55-300 VR would give you more reach. If you need something faster, the 70-300 VR would be your pick.
I'm new to DSLR, but went for the 70-300 VR to match my D7000 and extend the reach from the 18-105 VR kit lens.
I'm sure more experienced photographers will be able to elaborate based on your needs.
I'd recommend the Tokina 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6
Or if you can spend, Nikon Nikkor 80-200mm AF-S f/2.8 + TC-E20II
Of course a prime would be better but you need a bigger budget.
Any birding, be they feathered or aluminum, requires long glass. The longest you can afford, and if tight on cash spend what you have on reach not VR, since you should be using a tripod.
tokina is too slow for that, I would go for N70-300vr if You are on budget or if You can spend a little bit :) more get sigma 50-500, if You familiar with manual focusing get Nikon 80-400vr, great IQ but little bit slow AF for fast action (and it uses screwdriver to AF, so it's not compatible with d5000/only in manual mode)
N1DQU said:
I agree with the others on the 70-300mm VR. I use this lens a lot with great results. If you want longer reach you could go with the Sigma 140-500mm or 150-500mm. Those along with the Sigma 2x teleconverter would give a good combo.
sigmas with TC are not usable unless in manual mode, with 2xTC they are too dark = too slow = no AF only manual
Whenever I shoot aircraft I never need more than 300mm so the 70-300mm might be your best option. A forum search might bring up a similar answer for your question...
I wouldn't bash VR "because you have to use a tripod". That's true but not always. For example at airshows, or when sufficiently near the plane so that a tripod is not an option, VR still has it's reason to be there. Moreover, if somebody is not a pro, quite probably will have to use the same lens for several uses, not only "aluminum birding" :-) so VR still comes handy.
I don't own a long lens yet, but I studied the question since long:
1) the 55-200VR is the cheapest option
2) the new 55-300VR looks good, however beware in that these cheap lenses have a rotating front element (when you focus, the front element rotates) so this makes the use of a polarizer a bit tricky.
3) a lot of people agree that the 70-300VR is a very good lens, quite sharp, with non rotating front element.
4) The 80-400 is very near to the end of it's life cycle. The actual model won't focus on your D5000 because it is not AF-S. It's a matter of months for the AF-S version to come out.
5) the fixed 300 f/4 is superbly sharp, but lacks VR and is a fixed focal length.
6) Sigma has a lot of alternatives, however, from what I read around, I would only rely on "EX" series, like the 100-300 f/4. Sigma is currently adding the stabilizer to a lot of its lenses, so I expect the 100-300 to be stabilized soon. OTOH, I read mixed results with the 120-400 and 150-500 non EX: some people claim limited sharpness and slow focusing.
In conclusion: if you are in a hurry and don't want to spend too much, then the 70-300VR is the best choice. If you want to spend a bit more, (but still less than 2000$/€), I'd suggest you to wait a bit because the market is moving right now: I expect both Nikon and Sigma to come out with improved versions of their lenses.
Thank you very much to all of you!
I am also relatively new to D5000 as well as plane spotting. The 55-200 VR is good, so long as you are closer to the planes. I wanted some more range, and later bought a 70-300 VR too and I love both. But, ever since I bought 70-300, I stopped using 55-200 which is also great. As others mentioned, 55-200 costs less while 70-300 gives more range.
I have a D5000 (great camera) and a D90 and I have the 18-105VR, the 70-300VR and the 50 f1.4G. All I want is a Tokina 11-16 (would have to manual focus on the D5000) and I'm set for all I shoot. The 70-300VR is my motorsport lens and it does a good job for the money I think.
Well, if you are shooting moving [flying] aircraft, your shutter speed is going to be high enough that VR will not be a factor. Like shooting race cars. No need to pan with planes, just stop them in mid air, remember to lead and follow through after you pull the trigger.....ah hem I mean trip the shutter. Or get them comming at you, eaiser shot.
for lens, you did not give a budget, however if this is you main intrest, I would go with the Nikon 300mm, and depending on your budget get the F4 or F2,8 which you can have with or without VR. as I said it depends on your budget.
With the crop factor this brings you out to 450mm.
add a TC1.4 or TC1.7 to the 2.8 and you will still have the bet and fastest glass and plenty of reach.
You can pick these up used for good prices, however if this is above your price range, the choices in the post above are good choices.
300mm 2.8 VR with TC is one of those lenses you would most likely keep all your life.
casperwb said:
Well, if you are shooting moving [flying] aircraft, your shutter speed is going to be high enough that VR will not be a factor. Like shooting race cars. No need to pan with planes, just stop them in mid air, remember to lead and follow through after you pull the trigger.....ah hem I mean trip the shutter. Or get them comming at you, eaiser shot.for lens, you did not give a budget, however if this is you main intrest, I would go with the Nikon 300mm, and depending on your budget get the F4 or F2,8 which you can have with or without VR. as I said it depends on your budget.
With the crop factor this brings you out to 450mm.
add a TC1.4 or TC1.7 to the 2.8 and you will still have the bet and fastest glass and plenty of reach.
You can pick these up used for good prices, however if this is above your price range, the choices in the post above are good choices.
300mm 2.8 VR with TC is one of those lenses you would most likely keep all your life.
Too high a shutter speed to freeze action may not be a good thing for propeller planes- you freeze the rotors too, and that looks highly unnatural. For jet planes it would be fine though.
I have no issues with Nikon's 80-400 for birds of all makes.
Try to shoot next to the airport. You can often get excellent plane shots as they land, even with the shortest of lenses (below is an extreme example; and no, that's not Photoshop!):
Nikon D90; Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 DX.
Of course, you'll have to restrict your lens selections to AF-S only lenses, since your body lacks a screw-drive for standard AF lenses. For an affordable telephoto zoom, the AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR is probably your best bet.
I've done a lot of WWII and 1/500th has worked well for prop. 'blur'. At 1/500th I turn VR off usually but there's various theories.
Naturally it depends on how fast the prop. is turning but I like to see a nice feather effect especially if the blades have a stripe.
Just a thought, nothing hard and fast, only my opinion.
studio460 said:
Try to shoot next to the airport. You can often get excellent plane shots as they land, even with the shortest of lenses (below is an extreme example; and no, that's not Photoshop!):
Nikon D90; Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 DX.Of course, you'll have to restrict your lens selections to AF-S only lenses, since your body lacks a screw-drive for standard AF lenses. For an affordable telephoto zoom, the AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR is probably your best bet.
That looks like LAX(eastern side of the field). I'm almost positive.
You must log in to post.
