Upgrading my gear; help required.

[Stephen R]

Hi guys,
I am looking to update the equipment I use for my photography because the equipment I use now is quite basic and I would like to see my results with some better gear.
Currently I use a Nikon D50 and telephoto Sigma 400mm which is a manual everything 'classic' my dad brought in 1993 second hand, so we think it was made around the mid 1980's!
My question is what should I upgrade, I don't mind the manual focus, but i dont like the manual exposure of the lens, or is the camera more important then the lens? My price range is anything around £500-600 although i could stretch to more.
I havent thought much about a new camera body but my lens thought's include the Sigma 170-500mm F5.6-6.3 DG APO (86mm) (retailling at around £500) although i have heard this is a fairly mediocre lens, the Bigma? 50-500mm F4-6.3 EX DG (86mm) (stretching the budget a bit at £700) and the Tamron AF 200-500 (86mm) at about £600.
Does anyone have any experience with these lenses and can reccomend either or any experience with a camera body that is likely to help produce better images then the D50?

Some images with my current gear can be seen at my blog, http://on-firecrestsbirdingblockbuster.blogspot.com/
Any help gratefully recieved...

[Stephen R]

Does that make sense? I am aware that when i write things can come across rather confusing.
cheers

[Colin Key]

Stephen,

Do you need to stay with Nikon, or would you consider jumping to Canon? (I can feel John R just about to jump on me any minute!). If you were thinking of going "Canon" I could give you more specific advice.

Colin

P.S. Whatever you decide, lens is MUCH more important then body.

[john robinson]

Stephen
I can only talk about Nikon ( nothing else - is there Colin ! ) It 's what you get used to.
My advice to you in a nutshell is-
Keep the D50 for now( I and my son both had one and we did some great stuff .!)
Don't go for the 170- 500 Sigma - get the other one -the 50-500 and a good tripod.. The Tamrons ok though.
Thats all I can say. ( I have the Sigma 100-300 )for close hide work though.
Nothing wrong with Canon. They are all pretty much the same in my opinion
Cheers
JohnR

[Joe stockwell]

well i can lend a hand with the sigma 170-500 f/5-6.3 getting some good results but you do need some light and a sturdy tripod, it works very well until you use the auto-fucus it hunts way to much, it does look a little wierd at full extention but thats a compramise if you are on a budget that doesnt really matter, some images do take a lot of sharpening but i think thats probably more down to the user than the lens!

[midlandbirder]

Hi John just wondered about the sigma 50-500 lens is it a much better lens then the 170-500? And if so what are its advantages? Just asking as i am thinking of switching to this lens. Thanks in advance

[Firstlight]

Hi,
Keep the camera (assuming all is well with it), and put your money towards a "better" lens.
Without appearing rude, if you put this lens on a Nikon D3, I doubt you would get any better results than you are getting now.
The lens John R has suggested ie 50-500 Sigma is a very fine lens and popular with birders, have a look at some of the other bird sites and you will see many fine images taken by people of differing ability with this lens.
Another option, s/h, preowned could be the nikkor 80-400/5.6 VR. This lens has a very good image quality, auto metering/focus and has Vib. Reduction. It will also take a kenko 1.4 TC (giving 560/f6.3) and still function in "good" light.
The downside to this lens is that it is slow to focus, because of the "old fashioned" screw drive focusing mechanism, but if you can cope with a 400 sigma which is all manual, then this should not be a problem for you.
Hope this is of some small use to you, remember, prorata lenses keep their value better than cameras.
regards
Firstlight

[Colin Key]

Thank goodness this is a discussion about Nikon otherwise we might have someone with the initials "KR" going on ad-infinitum about the advantages of the Canon 100-400 zoom over the 400 5.6 prime.

Most of you might not see the humour here, but I am sure that John R does! :laugh:

Colin

(And, after throwing his rattle out of the BF pram and trouncing off in a huff, "he" is still at it on FM forum :SLEEP:)

[Stephen R]

Stephen,

Do you need to stay with Nikon, or would you consider jumping to Canon? (I can feel John R just about to jump on me any minute!). If you were thinking of going "Canon" I could give you more specific advice.

Colin

P.S. Whatever you decide, lens is MUCH more important then body.

Sorry, all my gear is nikon specific and i dont have enough money to jump ship just yet!


Keep the D50 for now( I and my son both had one and we did some great stuff .!)
Don't go for the 170- 500 Sigma - get the other one -the 50-500 and a good tripod.. The Tamrons ok though .
ok thanks, have you used the 50-500mm with the D50 and if so are the pictures on the internet? i would love to see the results if they are.

Keep the camera (assuming all is well with it), and put your money towards a "better" lens.
Without appearing rude, if you put this lens on a Nikon D3, I doubt you would get any better results than you are getting now.
The lens John R has suggested ie 50-500 Sigma is a very fine lens and popular with birders, have a look at some of the other bird sites and you will see many fine images taken by people of differing ability with this lens.
Another option, s/h, preowned could be the nikkor 80-400/5.6 VR. This lens has a very good image quality, auto metering/focus and has Vib. Reduction. It will also take a kenko 1.4 TC (giving 560/f6.3) and still function in "good" light.
The downside to this lens is that it is slow to focus, because of the "old fashioned" screw drive focusing mechanism, but if you can cope with a 400 sigma which is all manual, then this should not be a problem for you.
Hope this is of some small use to you, remember, prorata lenses keep their value better than cameras.
regards
Firstlight .
Another recommendation for the 50-500mm, so looks like this would be the best option then, unless the nikkor 80-400mm is cheaper 2nd hand and better quality? Is there a reputable second hand dealer for camera lenses on the internet?
Thanks all, this is a lot of help your giving me and i apreciate it all!

[Firstlight]

Stephen,
I should have added that it would be wise to try before you buy!
I am sure there must be bird snappers where you are, and you will have to try the "hey Mister " approach and ask to look at /hold /put on my camera.
Make sure it's not me, on the day an Ultra rare arrives, just as I'm about to take the image I get the "hey Mister" call, or you'll get a clip around the ear.:D:D
regards Firstlight.

[Colin Key]

Stephen,

I would not wish this forum to become overwhelmed with DSLR "gear talk", but I do like to help people where I can (and I know that John does too), especially with purely "bird photography" topics.

I have gleaned a huge amount of information from other more photography-orientated forums such as DPReview, Fed Miranda, etc. DPReview is probably the best, and the forum where you will get the most, and quickest, replies to your queries. BUT beware, it is like a pool of piranhas or throwing Christians to the lions, so you have to be able to take the rough with the smooth.

I would recommend that you sign up - there is a wealth of information there which is very useful (once you learn to navigate through all the "poo").

Colin :smile:

[john robinson]

Stephen
No- I didn't get the 500mm till I had the D200.( an awesome Combination in my opinion !
If you search on the general european common gallery and type in " Wyre Forest " you will find quite a few done with the 50-500 Sigma.

[john robinson]

Asa Joe says the auto focus is a bit Iffy and I just didn't like the balance and the "feel" of it. I didn't use it for a great length of time I have to say.
Cheers
JohnR

[Stephen R]

Ok i understand that you dont want the forum to fill with Dslr gear talk,
-I'll take a look at dpreview and john's photo's tommorow (past my bedtime ;)
-I think i'll save up for the sigma 50-500mm
thanks for all the advice.

but just two more questions...honest, (unless i think of more;))
1- Is there a better website then the warehouse express for just browsing the equipment, because i really dont like the design of their website.
2- When colin mentioned the card reader, on the nikon users thread, was this what you were talking about?
http://www.sandisk.com/Products/Item(1145)-SDDR-89-A15-SanDisk_ImageMate_12in1_ReaderWriter.aspx
because i cant find anything on the jessops website resembling that.
cheers and thanks once again.

[Colin Key]

Stephen,

Please don't take my earlier comment the wrong way - nothing at all wrong with discussing or asking questions about gear here. It was just a suggestion that you will get a much broader spectrum of replies (and a lot of them are from birders) from some of the more photographically orientated forums (and using their "search" facility can reveal a mine of information).

Yes, that is the Sandisk card reader which I use and I find it very reliable. As long as you take great care in removing and re-inserting the card from the camera (i.e. align it properly and do not use any force which might damage the pin connections) then downloading a lot of image files (especially if they are RAW format) to your computer is much faster with a card reader then with a direct camera connection.

I use this firm http://www.picstop.co.uk/ based in Guernsey and Isle of Man for all my "peripherals". They are reliable, fast, cheap and they do not sell fake cards (about 80% of memory cards sold on ebay are fake and are so cheap that they are being bought wholesale and re-sold by "dodgy" retailers).

The Warehouse Express website isn't too bad once you get familiar with it. The other option is to go to the original manufacturers websites. I would not recommend (although others might) Jessops - too expensive, mostly unknowledgeable staff, and slowly going down the tubes.


Colin

[john robinson]

Yes - Jessops are not what they were.
There are varying comments about WE but I have to be honest they have always been very good with me, and one of the staff I spoke too really knew his stuff. If you just type Sigma in their search panel as I re call it brings up everything you would want to see.
Concerning the merits of different lenses, there really is some rubbish talked out there on various forums. There are those who seem to take great delight in going on, and on about this that and the other, and ending up where they started. You cannot judge a lens in 5 minutes- there are so many other factors that can cause a blurred or un acceptable image that are nothing to do with the "glass bits ". I used to use a 400mm Cosinon which cost me £200, and you should have heard the comments I got about that ! Some experts even disputed that I had used it. In fact that lens produced some of the best stuff I have ever done. I would buy another tomorow, but they seem to have goe to ground. Don't forget a lot of the big name lenses are made by other people anyway. It's a minefield out there. Lets face it companies aren't going to put stuff out which is rubbish are they ? OK you might get a bit of chromatic aboration or fuzzines or other highly technical faults ( which few of us understand) at extreme settings for example but most of the time we don't use that bit of the shot anyway. I would stick my neck out and suggest that you can get reasonable shots with almost any lens generally available today if you keep at it.
Cheers
John R

[Joe stockwell]

john
i work for jessops and that is very true a they are not what they used to be, not bad mouthing the company in anyway of course.

steven
i think that saving the money for the 50-500mm is a wise move for the varying focal length that the lens carries you cant go far wrong with that

[Stephen R]

Stephen,

DPReview is probably the best, and the forum where you will get the most, and quickest, replies to your queries. BUT beware, it is like a pool of piranhas or throwing Christians to the lions, so you have to be able to take the rough with the smooth.

I would recommend that you sign up - there is a wealth of information there which is very useful (once you learn to navigate through all the "poo").

Colin :smile:
As much as i tried, i had two problems, 1. I'm under 18, 2. All the usernames were taken and because of point 1 i decided not to risk it.
shame because it looks like a good site.

[Stephen R]

Stephen
No- I didn't get the 500mm till I had the D200.( an awesome Combination in my opinion !
If you search on the general european common gallery and type in " Wyre Forest " you will find quite a few done with the 50-500 Sigma.

Well that has just made my mind up beyond all doubt! I especially like the long tailed tit shot, drinking out of a pond. It's craking!

[Colin Key]

As much as i tried, i had two problems, 1. I'm under 18, 2. All the usernames were taken and because of point 1 i decided not to risk it.
shame because it looks like a good site.

Sorry to hear that Stephen; I hadn't realised that you had to be over 18 (but not surprised since a lot of the content could be described as "adult entertainment":laugh:). Can't you get your Dad to sign up on your behalf and then log in with his username and password? I do know that you require a "proper" email address (as opposed to a web-based one like Hotmail or Yahoo) but you can request that it is not shown.

Colin

[greenwithensbirder]

im in the process of choosing a new lens after having the bigma,it may be me but the bigma seems to lack the 'wow' factor.
at 500 it is soft,this is where post processing comes in.which is another thing to learn.
never take a image on face value,as it will have adjusted(imho)
im waying up the pros and cons at the moment of going for either a

100-400
400(5.6)
300 (is)

all are canon 'l' lenses

what a puzzle!!

[Colin Key]

im waying up the pros and cons at the moment of going for either a

100-400
400(5.6)
300 (is)

all are canon 'l' lenses

what a puzzle!!

Darrell,

My main birding lens is a 500 f/4 L IS and I have the 100-400 zoom as my "walkabout" lens. As I use a 1D MkIII I can also use the zoom with a 1.4TCII and still retain autofocus which gives me effectively 560mm. I am quite happy with the lens and it has given me some good results (quite a few of the images in my gallery are taken with this lens) although using the TC degrades I.Q. a little and AF is not as fast. With a non-1D body you would have to tape some of the TC pins or use a non-reporting TC (Kenko) to retain AF which would be even more sluggish.

Since I mainly use the zoom at full stretch I rather regret getting this rather than the 400 f/5.6 prime and I am just on the verge of buying this lens. It has no image stabilisation but the IS on the zoom is a very old version of Canon's IS system and I don't think it works very well; a lot of the time I have it turned off if I have good light and high shutter speeds.

There is a wealth of posts on the pros and cons of these two lenses on other forums such as DPReview and FredMiranda. A lot of people say that the 100-400 can be "soft" and that there are good and bad copies out there (especially with early versions). Having read just about everything ever written on these two lenses and seen a lot of the resulting photos I have come to the conclusion that the 400 prime has better IQ, faster AF, works rather better with a 1.4TC, is lighter in weight and is also a bit cheaper. It also has a built in extendable lens hood which is preferable to the removal piece of plastic .... which comes with the zoom.

I do not think the 300mm is a contender for bird photography.

Hope this is helpful.

Colin

[Steve Robinson]

Hiya Stephen, I use the Tamron 200-500 and I am quite happy with it.You can see some pics taken with this lens in my photo album Wyre Forest Wildlife.Theres more range with the bigma being able to go down to 50 mm and having HSM but it is big and heavy,where as the Tamron is light and won't break your shoulder if walking around lots!
I have'nt done any proper comparison tests with dads bigma but I don't think you would notice much diffference in the quality between the two,both being a little soft at 500mm.I was in the same boat as yourself last year having an old rickety hand-me -down Tamron 200-400 and it was nice to have a new lens so that bad pics were my fault and not the lens!! If you have £750 and buy the bigma i'm sure you will be happy but another option is buy a second hand Tamron(mine was mint cond.£400)and use the rest of the money to buy a decent macro if you wonted to take pics of flowers/dragonflys/insects etc
Good luck
Cheers
Steve

[Roy C]

Thank goodness this is a discussion about Nikon otherwise we might have someone with the initials "KR" going on ad-infinitum about the advantages of the Canon 100-400 zoom over the 400 5.6 prime.

Most of you might not see the humour here, but I am sure that John R does! :laugh:

Colin

(And, after throwing his rattle out of the BF pram and trouncing off in a huff, "he" is still at it on FM forum :SLEEP:)
Cannot think who you are talking about Colin :smile:

[Stephen R]

Hiya Stephen, I use the Tamron 200-500 and I am quite happy with it.You can see some pics taken with this lens in my photo album Wyre Forest Wildlife.Theres more range with the bigma being able to go down to 50 mm and having HSM but it is big and heavy,where as the Tamron is light and won't break your shoulder if walking around lots!
I have'nt done any proper comparison tests with dads bigma but I don't think you would notice much diffference in the quality between the two,both being a little soft at 500mm.I was in the same boat as yourself last year having an old rickety hand-me -down Tamron 200-400 and it was nice to have a new lens so that bad pics were my fault and not the lens!! If you have £750 and buy the bigma i'm sure you will be happy but another option is buy a second hand Tamron(mine was mint cond.£400)and use the rest of the money to buy a decent macro if you wonted to take pics of flowers/dragonflys/insects etc
Good luck
Cheers
Steve

Ok, cheers steve thats interesting, i think I would like being able to do landscapes, insects and birds with one lense but it's going to boil down to which one I can get cheaper, due to lack of funds.
btw- Where did you get the second hand tamron from? I have been trying to find a reputable second hand lens dealer as I have no problem with buying second hand.
cheers

[Steve Robinson]

Hiya Steve I got mine from http://www.commercialcameras.co.uk/ .I was just a bit lucky that they are quite local and they had one for sale at the right time.
Cheers
Steve

[Colin Key]

Cannot think who you are talking about Colin :smile:

Careful Roy, you never know who is listening!! :laugh:

[Stephen R]

Cheers for that Steve, while I was looking at that I came across this lens,a Tokina ATX 80-400mm f4-5.6 AF Lens. It looks alright and at £479 is considerably cheaper then the bigma or the tamron. However I have never heard of Tokina, are they a reputable company? i dont generally trust stuff from companies i've never heard of...
http://www.commercialcameras.co.uk/tokina.html

[Steve Robinson]

Steve, I was looking at this one too but felt a bit iffy about it and didn't find many people that were using it.I think there wide angle lenses are highly rated.
Cheers
Steve