HigashiPete
Well-known member
I'm hoping to buy a Nikon 70-200 2.8 AF-S VR II with a 1.7E TC quite soon. Does anybody have any advice to enhance my 'birdie' shots, especially BIF? Cheers, Pete
-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Nikon 70-200 VR II advice (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter HigashiPete
- Start date
The 70-200 with a 1.7 is way to short for birds/ birds in flight. You will need latest version of the 2 x TC, or rather look at 300mmf4 with 1.4TC if budget is an issue. Both combinations also to slow for birds in flight, ideally you want 300f2.8 with 1.4 and 2 x TC.
Regards
Dave Williams
Well-known member
I have just bought the Nikon 70-200 2.8 AF-S VR II but not really with the intention of using it much for birding,although I'm planning a trip to the Farne Islands were I believe it will be ideal as the birds are so close.
I chose to buy new rather than a used V1 because I was told it takes a TC better with faster focussing but the bokeh isn't as good.
To be honest I haven't taken more than a couple of test shots so far so I can't comment on my experience as yet. I have both a 1.4 and 1.7TC. which along with a borrowed 2.0TC 111 I have tried on the 300f2.8VR. I found the 2.0TC was better than the 1.7 for AF speed, not as good as the 1.4.
Despite it's extra cost I would consider the 2.0TC rather than the 1.7. You then have a 140-400 f5.6 VR which should give you enough reach for some reasonable bird shots. You also have a lens that offers the flexibility for a variety of other uses too which a prime such as the 300f4 won't.
I bought mine as I didn't have a lens that covered the 70-300mm range, and this , along with the 1.4TC fits the bill perfectly. I'm intending using mine to go on a safari holiday and as a lightweight pack back lens for both birds and landscape shots.
I personally don't intend buying a 2.0TC 111 as I don't have the need and the performance, IMO, although OK, is not brilliant.
cheers Dave
stoop
Well-known member
Hmm, I'm very interested in this topic. I was thinking about this two days ago. I have a 300 f4 (and 1.4x TC) which has AF-s but no VR and the 80-400mm which has VR but no AF-s. Both are ok but I always regret the bits I don't have. The new 70-200mm has both VRII and AF-S and I'd love to try it with the new 2X TC. (It has nano coated glass too) Maybe about 400 grams heavier (with TC) than the two pre-mentioned lenses which is worth thinking about for hand-holding. Yet, I reckon it could be a goer. I will watch this space for results.
Last edited:
Dave Williams
Well-known member
I had the 80-400mm which has great sharpness but the slow and noisy AF drove me nuts on occasions ! My D300 is in for repair to the rubber grip so I can't test the 70-200 on that but I will take it on the D200 tomorrow ! cheers Dave
Jason Bugay Reyes
Well-known member
The 80-400mm with my D300s plus battery pack is ok between f7.1 - f11 but not really good for in flight shot. Could do more better with manual focus on scope.
Wachtel
Well-known member
I have the 70-200 VR II with 1,4 II and 2,0 III. I'm very pleased with this setup for general photography. But I also have a 300/2,8 on order for more serious BIF and all-around birding.
The 70-200, with or without TC:s, can be hand held with ease. The 300/3,8, especially with TC, will require support by monopod or tripod.
The 70-200, with or without TC:s, can be hand held with ease. The 300/3,8, especially with TC, will require support by monopod or tripod.
RJM
Don't Worry, Be Happy!
The OP did not mention his camera body but I think that choice plays a more important role than the lens in the ~300mm range. Really needs to be one of the current pro-bodies or the new D7000 with their superior AF systems. On these bodies, even the bargain-priced 70-300 AFS can deliver nice BIF shots. Otherwise, the 300 F4 AFS is probably a smarter choice than the 70-200 UNLESS you can regularly photograph large birds at close distances.
That said, I use the 300mm F2.8 VR1 w/2xTCIII as my primary lens.
That said, I use the 300mm F2.8 VR1 w/2xTCIII as my primary lens.
Well,
hard to come up with advice how to improve without knowing your current level/problems.
Are we talking about general problems or tweaking stuff that is already on a high level?
The lens is great, just not the first choice for 90% of bird photography. For the remaining 10%, if you can get close or for those massive bird flocks, it will work great.
hard to come up with advice how to improve without knowing your current level/problems.
Are we talking about general problems or tweaking stuff that is already on a high level?
The lens is great, just not the first choice for 90% of bird photography. For the remaining 10%, if you can get close or for those massive bird flocks, it will work great.
Dave Williams
Well-known member
I think that sums it up pretty well. It's incredibly light when you are used to going walking with a 300mm f2.8. I walked 11 miles with out noticing mine last Saturday. I have tried both the 1.4 and 1.& TC's on it and it seems to AF very quickly. I just wasn't happy with the IQ using my D200. There again, I'm not happy with the IQ using the 500mm and D200 on static subjects either. It's OK but doesn't compare with my D300s which I can't test until it is returned from repair..
cheers Dave
As others have suggested the 70-200mm & TC20EIII may be a bit short for birds, the 300mm 2.8 / Tc20 being a better combination, even with a crop factor body.
In my experience the AF speed does suffer - I had a lot more out-of-focus picks with converter than without. Image quality is superb, but background bokeh can be affected:
http://pasquierphoto.blogspot.com/2011/04/nikkor-tc-20eiii-converter-1st.html
Keen to hear form others what their experience is.
In my experience the AF speed does suffer - I had a lot more out-of-focus picks with converter than without. Image quality is superb, but background bokeh can be affected:
http://pasquierphoto.blogspot.com/2011/04/nikkor-tc-20eiii-converter-1st.html
Keen to hear form others what their experience is.
Dave Williams
Well-known member
Managed to get out with the 70-200 to try some BIF shots over the weekend.
With the right subjects the results can be extremely good.I struggled to AF even with the 1.4TC where there was background scenery so I waited for the bird to come closer and shot at 200mm. Both shots are 25% crops in NX2.
The first shot, a little over exposed, shows what can be achieved with 200mm, the second is what you are more likely to have to settle for at that length.
The plus points were an extremely light lens which I could hand hold all day combined with very fast focus without the TC.
Stick a 2.0TC on for static subjects and you have a very reasonable reach lens but still costing over £2k. cheers Dave
With the right subjects the results can be extremely good.I struggled to AF even with the 1.4TC where there was background scenery so I waited for the bird to come closer and shot at 200mm. Both shots are 25% crops in NX2.
The first shot, a little over exposed, shows what can be achieved with 200mm, the second is what you are more likely to have to settle for at that length.
The plus points were an extremely light lens which I could hand hold all day combined with very fast focus without the TC.
Stick a 2.0TC on for static subjects and you have a very reasonable reach lens but still costing over £2k. cheers Dave
