Advice on Nikon / Nikkor lenses wanted!

[Pippa]

Hello,

I am quite new to photography and just wanted to pick people's brains on which telephoto lens to buy.

I have a Nikon D60 and currently have the standard lens it came with and a lovely 105mm VR Nikkor lens that was a Christmas present. I am having great fun with the macro lens for spring butterfly photography but I know I will need something with a bit more range to snap those elusive purple / white letter hairstreaks and perhaps, if I'm lucky, the Purple Emporor later in the summer. I have looked at the Nikon website and there seem to be quite a few telephoto lenses so if anyone can offer any advice it would be greatly appreciated!

I found the BC photography workshop really useful but it did highlight to me that most present seemed to be Canon users!

Pippa

[NickB]

Hi Pippa
"Canons to the left of us, Canons to the right"....you are right Pippa, many do use Canon on this forum.
But not me, and a few others, who are Nikon users.
The 105mm macro you have is a great lens and easily on a par with the Canon L series 100mm macro.
Examples using Nikkor lenses such as the 200mm macro (which I have) and the 300mm prime (often with tubes or tele-converter) are seen on this forum; if you can afford Nikkor, then they are generally the best to go for. (Someone I met had spent £5K (!) on a Nikkor 200-400, which he swears by for butterfly work too! But I guess I would if I spent £5K )
Edit: Sigma EX lenses are also worth looking at for slightly cheaper alternatives....

It really depends on what sort of shots you are after as to which lens you may choose; covering all eventualities can become a rather expensive exercise....
Nick

[Pete Eeles]

I know I will need something with a bit more range to snap those elusive purple / white letter hairstreaks and perhaps, if I'm lucky, the Purple Emporor

Not sure why you think that, Pippa. Most photographers I know use their field skills and knowledge to find these butterflies feeding and snap them then.

Cheers,

- Pete

[Gruditch]

Yeah, you won't be needing a long lens for a Purple Emperor, just stand near a dog poo. But a longer lens can be handy at places like Bentley Wood, where White Admirals, and Valesina Silver-washed often stay just tantalisingly out of reach.

Even if your not going to use it for butterfly work, every natural history photographer should have a longer lens in their collection. I don't know a lot about the merits of each individual Nikon lens, but there are several to choose from.

Nikon AF VR 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6 for just over a grand
Nikon AF-S 300mm f/4 ED-IF just under a grand

There are a few others but these start to run into several thousand £s
Sigma offer some great wildlife lenses, that come in a Nikon fit.

Sigma 150-500mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM can be had for around £800 just check out Zonda's bird work to see the results.

Sigma 120-400mm f/4.5-5.6 DG OS HSM about £700 ish.

Sigma 50-500mm f4.5-6.3 DG OS HSM replaced the legendary Bigma £1200 ish

Its always worth having a hands on trial with a larger lens, as the lens weight can be an issue for some people.

Kind Regards Gruditch

[Pippa]

Thanks Nick, Pete & Gary,

I should have added to my post that I don't just want a lens for butterflies but also for the Goldfinches / Woodpeckers etc. I get in the garden (and for general wildlife photography).

I don't want something too heavy and I don't have thousands to spend but I was wondering how big the difference in quality is between for example the £400 70-300mm as oppose to the £1000+ lenses? Is there a really big difference?

Pete, what you say about field skills and knowledge is true, and I probably don't have enough of either! Last year we spent a long time trying to see a Purple Hairstreak coming down to nectar but all we saw was tantalising glimpses up in the trees!

Pippa

[Gruditch]

Some penny pincher's will tell you there isn't, but of course there is, otherwise they wouldn't make £1000 lenses.

Canon has L lenses, which have a high quality build, and come with their best glass. They also have consumer lenses, which can vary greatly in image quality and build. No doubt Nikon have the same.

With wildlife lenses there is a trade off between speed, to stop the subject and get a nice sharp image, and focal length, to get a large image. A lens that is F4 is a medium fast lens, but in order to be that fast, it has to let in a lot of light, which = lots of glass, which = lots of weight, and lots of £s. Obviously the longer you go in focal length, the bigger the lens.

If your paying £400 you should expect a reasonably good quality, light weight lens. But I expect it would be, F5.6 at 300mm, not that impressive, or useful for bird photography. If you had the £800 Sigma 150-500 mm lens, at F6.3 it would be even slower, but its taking you all the way out too 500mm. Obviously for any Nikon user into bird photography, the £7000, Nikon 600mm f/4G ED VR would be the ultimate. But in photography is all about compromises. Impatient buying, ( not saving up ) or penny pinching on lenses, usually cost more in the long run, far better to save up and get a good quality lens once, rather than repeatedly buying poor lenses.

Regards Gruditch

[Lee Hurrell]

Last year we spent a long time trying to see a Purple Hairstreak coming down to nectar but all we saw was tantalising glimpses up in the trees!

What time of day was this Pippa?

If you wait until early evening (6ish onwards) and wait under near where the PH are seen during the day time, you may get lucky on the ground or perhaps on bramble or other flowers near by. I have a colony near me and I saw some last year on a patch of Rose Bay Willowherb at ground level on the way home from work! They weren't nectaring but just flying in and around it. But do try it at evening time. This also works for White Letter Hairstreak in my (limited) experience. Also, the further in to the flight period, the more they come down to nectar it seems.

Cheers

Lee

[Willrow]

Lot's of sound advice already given Pippa. I'm a long time Nikon user but I've also owned several Sigma and Tamron lenses too. In the right hands they can produce superb results, take a look around the members gallery to see what you can achieve with the Sigma 105mm Macro as an example. You already possess one of the finest Nikon macro (or micro as Nikon refer's to it) lenses for butterflies in the 105mm VR, and don't forget you can use tele-converters with it for a little extra reach if needed, so I should think your butterflying needs are catered for. Fieldcraft for any type of natural history photography only comes with experience, but also research your subject and its habitat requirements thoroughly, be it bugs or birds, because buying the wrong lens for the job can be a costly mistake.

If it was strictly for garden bird image capture you would probably be quite satisfied with the Nikon 70-300 f4.5-5.6 VR (£365) or even the cheaper Nikon 55-300 f4.5-5.6 VR (£280), however, you also mention 'general wildlife photography' so you may have to 'bite the bullet' and save up for the Nikon 80-400 f4.5-5.6 VR at around £1035, this lens will most probably do all that you need. As mentioned Sigma EX lenses are great value for money and the 150-500 f5.0-6.3 has OS (Optical Stabilisation) and can be bought for around £800, I use this lens for bird photography and can recommend it. So the choice is bewildering and every photographer has their personal favourite for their personal needs, do your homework and pay what you can for the best you can afford, you won't regret buying quality glass. Finally, you may consider mint quality second hand, but only if it comes with a sensible warranty too.

Bill

PS. The lens prices are currently the lowest available according to Camera Price Buster.

[NickB]

Yes; sound advice. Camera bodies will come and go, but an investment in glass should fit any body Nikon produces.
I was tempted into some wide-ranging zooms (28mm-300mm) early-on - but to be frank I sold them pretty quickly as the image-quality was poor, especially compared to a Nikkor macro!
I have bought some nice second-hand Nikkor and Sigma EX lenses; often non-OS/VR versions of newer lenses come up, and the image quality is no different, just the VR component - and I can live with that!
Good luck,
N

[MikeOxon]

I use a Nikon 70- 300VR and find it very good for longer-range butterfly shots. Remember that on a D60 you will get 1.5x magnification compared to a full-frame 35mm camera. I often use the zoom lens first and then, if the butterfly is obliging, move in with the macro. The f/5.6 aperture is usually sufficient in the good light that butterflies prefer, and you will probably need to stop down for depth-of-field at the closest focus distance of 1.5 m (better than many primes). There are several examples on my website at http://home.btconnect.com/mike.flemming , to show what can be done with this lens.