Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Best Nikon Lens  
User currently offlineDeltaJet757 From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 243 posts, RR: 0
Posted (7 years 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 4809 times:

I'm going to Maui for Christmas again and I want to get some good shots while at the airport, on the plane and some general sightseeing stuff as well.

I'm thinking about getting a telephoto lens for my Nikon D40. Right now I have the standard 18-55mm lens which I don't like because it doesn't zoom in far enough (no duh).

I want to be able to take shots like these...... I find that I'm always limited to the perimeter fence like most of us are. I'm almost always too far from what ever I want to take a good picture of whether I'm actually on the plane r on the ground.

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0900842/L/

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1282626/L/

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1136345/L/

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1304163/L/


Any suggestions?


FLY DELTA JETS
28 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineAKE0404AR From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2535 posts, RR: 45
Reply 1, posted (7 years 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 4794 times:

If I were you, I would contact the photographers and ask them for the EXIF data. Voila and you have all the infos you need.

A typical "aviation lens" is the 100-400 (Canon) and 80-400 Nikon or 170-500 Sigma

Vasco


User currently offlineCalgaryBill From Canada, joined May 2006, 686 posts, RR: 5
Reply 2, posted (7 years 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 4765 times:

Depending on your budget (prices in CDN dollars since I don't really know US prices):

70-300 VR just released this year has great optics for the price (about $700 CDN). Super light and very compact considering its reach.

80-400 is an older lens, has VR but doesn't have AFS focusing (about $1,500 cdn). I wasn't thrilled with the quality when I looked at it, ended up getting the 70-300 for my low-cost travel lens.

70-200 AFS VR is a fantastic lens, super sharp, good VR, big f2.8 aperature ($1,900 CDN). Works well with the 1.4 and 1.7 teleconverters.

200-400 AFS VR is one of Nikkor's flagship lenses, and you pay by the pound, about $5,200 CDN. Fast f4 considering it's a long, 2x zoom range. Works well with the 1.4 and 1.7 TC's.

If you're willing to go used, check around for an 80-200 f2.8 AF lens. Won't focus super-fast, but almost as good of optics as the 70-200 AFS VR.

B


User currently offlineDiezel From Netherlands, joined Oct 2002, 646 posts, RR: 11
Reply 3, posted (7 years 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 4754 times:



Quoting CalgaryBill (Reply 2):
If you're willing to go used, check around for an 80-200 f2.8 AF lens

That one won't have auto focus on the D40 as it is not an AFS lens. but otherwise CalgaryBill is spot on.

Roel.



Never be afraid of what you like. (Miles Davis)
User currently offlineCpd From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 4881 posts, RR: 37
Reply 4, posted (7 years 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 4749 times:

http://www.moosepeterson.com/gear/200-400vr.html

This is a pretty good lens, but it is very expensive. It's also very heavy, but that can be a good thing too.


User currently offlineCalgaryBill From Canada, joined May 2006, 686 posts, RR: 5
Reply 5, posted (7 years 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 4735 times:



Quoting Diezel (Reply 3):
That one won't have auto focus on the D40 as it is not an AFS lens. but otherwise CalgaryBill is spot on.

Oops, forgot about that. Then I think the same is true of the 80-400...

B


User currently offlineDeltajet757 From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 243 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (7 years 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 4732 times:

I'll check out how much that 200-400 AFS VR is. Has to be real good if it's one of the flahship lenses.

-DeltaJet757



FLY DELTA JETS
User currently offlineJawed From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 482 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (7 years 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 4726 times:

Careful, the 170-500 Sigma has terrible reviews regarding its sharpness:

http://www.photographyreview.com/cat...-zoom/sigma/PRD_83590_3128crx.aspx

Quoting AKE0404AR (Reply 1):


A typical "aviation lens" is the 100-400 (Canon) and 80-400 Nikon or 170-500 Sigma



User currently offlineDeltaJet757 From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 243 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (7 years 6 days ago) and read 4721 times:



Quoting CalgaryBill (Reply 2):
200-400 AFS VR is one of Nikkor's flagship lenses, and you pay by the pound, about $5,200 CDN. Fast f4 considering it's a long, 2x zoom range. Works well with the 1.4 and 1.7 TC's.

http://www.nikonusa.com/template.php?cat=1&grp=5&productNr=2146

Is this the one you're talking about? It's a bit large for taking on the plane but it must be good. Looks expensive though.
I'm looking for something that has good quality, relatively compact and has good zoom.

-DeltaJet757



FLY DELTA JETS
User currently offlineUnattendedBag From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2342 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (7 years 6 days ago) and read 4717 times:



Quoting Deltajet757 (Reply 6):
I'll check out how much that 200-400 AFS VR is.

I would highly suggest upgrading your camera before getting this lens. You have the least expensive Nikon DSLR and you want to get the most expensive zoom lens Nikon makes.

I would suggest the 70-300mm vr lens for your camera.



Slower traffic, keep right
User currently offlineNIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (7 years 6 days ago) and read 4712 times:



Quoting Diezel (Reply 3):
That one won't have auto focus on the D40 as it is not an AFS lens. but otherwise CalgaryBill is spot on.



Great lens. Also the 80-200 2.8 non VR is awesome too. Gives you great results in a lot of different situations. But he is right. Hey you can always buy a D80.


User currently offlineCpd From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 4881 posts, RR: 37
Reply 11, posted (7 years 6 days ago) and read 4712 times:



Quoting DeltaJet757 (Reply 8):
Is this the one you're talking about? It's a bit large for taking on the plane but it must be good. Looks expensive though.
I'm looking for something that has good quality, relatively compact and has good zoom.

This lens is absolutely NOT suitable for travelling - it is very large and very heavy.


Maybe the Sigma 50-500 f4-6.3 EX DG HSM might be better. I've got one that I use with a D80. It could almost be called portable, but not really compact.


User currently offlineDeltaJet757 From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 243 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (7 years 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 4706 times:



Quoting UnattendedBag (Reply 9):
I would suggest the 70-300mm vr lens for your camera.

http://www.nikonusa.com/template.php?cat=1&grp=5&productNr=2161

This one looks like the one I'm after. I'll just have to get slightly bigger camera bag. But that one looks suitable for me.
Thanks for the recommendation. That's #1 on my top lens' list so far.



FLY DELTA JETS
User currently offlineCalgaryBill From Canada, joined May 2006, 686 posts, RR: 5
Reply 13, posted (7 years 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 4702 times:



Quoting Cpd (Reply 11):
This lens is absolutely NOT suitable for travelling - it is very large and very heavy.

It is a PITA for travel, but is doable. It fit in my LowePro CompuTrekker along with a D2x, D200, 70-200, laptop and other stuff. Unfortunately, I was three pounds over the 22 pound limit so I had to stow the lens in my suitcase (I had a protective case in there for just such a circumstance!). Without the laptop I would have had no problem. It fit nicely in the CompuTrekker for the hike from Axalp to Ebenfluh too, but it's a pain to hand-hold for several hours of shooting fast movers. My rationale though was, if I'm going halfway around the world and hiking up a mountain to shoot airplanes, I want to shoot them through the best glass I can afford to buy/carry.

B


User currently offlineJawed From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 482 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (7 years 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 4701 times:

are you sure you don't want the Nikon 80-400?

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00005LEOO

Quoting DeltaJet757 (Reply 12):
http://www.nikonusa.com/template.php?cat=1&grp=5&productNr=2161

This one looks like the one I'm after. I'll just have to get slightly bigger camera bag. But that one looks suitable for me.
Thanks for the recommendation. That's #1 on my top lens' list so far.



User currently offlineCalgaryBill From Canada, joined May 2006, 686 posts, RR: 5
Reply 15, posted (7 years 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 4693 times:



Quoting Jawed (Reply 14):
are you sure you don't want the Nikon 80-400?

As Diezel mentioned above, screw-focus lenses won't work on a D40.

B


User currently offlineChrisair From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 2182 posts, RR: 3
Reply 16, posted (7 years 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 4678 times:



Quoting DeltaJet757 (Reply 8):
It's a bit large for taking on the plane but it must be good. Looks expensive though.



Quoting Cpd (Reply 11):
This lens is absolutely NOT suitable for travelling - it is very large and very heavy.

Wimps.  Wink

I routinely travel with 3 Mark IIns, a 400 2.8 (or 300 2.8), 70-200, 16-35, 50 1.4, laptop and all the associated junk that goes with it. That's why I got a rolling case. I could barely move after cramming all that into a backpack.

If you're looking for a decent used Nikon lens, check out the 80-200 AF-S. It's no VR, but I used it before switching to Canon. It was a good lens. Fast focus and pretty tough.


User currently offlineDbudd From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 228 posts, RR: 21
Reply 17, posted (7 years 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 4630 times:

DeltaJet..

Look at this..

http://www.visitinglas.com/junk/12-2-2_035.jpg

A shot I took recently with the 70-300 VR on a D50 body. I shoot raw and this was edited with the ACR on default settings. I applied no extra sharpening. ACR does it's own sharpening but you can see how crisp the image is almost straight out the camera..

For a $480 ..you can't beat this lens.

VR.html" target=_blank>http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...161_70_300mm_f_4_5_6G_AF_S_VR.html

I go everywhere with it!!!

Dave


User currently offlineAKE0404AR From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2535 posts, RR: 45
Reply 18, posted (7 years 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 4600 times:



Quoting Chrisair (Reply 16):
I routinely travel with 3 Mark IIns, a 400 2.8 (or 300 2.8), 70-200, 16-35, 50 1.4, laptop and all the associated junk that goes with it. That's why I got a rolling case. I could barely move after cramming all that into a backpack.

been there, done it.

So far you have gotten a lot of suggestions. One important thing was not mentioned so far:

What's your budget?

V.


User currently offlineDeltaJet757 From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 243 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (7 years 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 4580 times:



Quoting AKE0404AR (Reply 18):
So far you have gotten a lot of suggestions. One important thing was not mentioned so far:

What's your budget?

The most I'm willing to spend on a lens is $700 tops as I have to have my computer repaired (cracked screen and won't stay closed) All I need is a lens that's built well, takes good photos, easy to transport. The last thing I need to have is one the size of a civil war cannon.

Remember, the lens must fit a D40.



FLY DELTA JETS
User currently offlineDbudd From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 228 posts, RR: 21
Reply 20, posted (7 years 5 days ago) and read 4561 times:

Took this today with my 70-300 VR

http://www.visitinglas.com/junk/VAdetail.jpg

Remember this is a landing 747 doing roughly 130 knts. This is not at full zoom(300mm) but I cropped out a shot showing the detail around the APU. I think it's one hella good lens for the money!!!

Dave


User currently offlineNIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (7 years 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 4549 times:



Quoting Dbudd (Reply 17):
I shoot raw and this was edited with the ACR on default settings. I applied no extra sharpening. ACR does it's own sharpening but you can see how crisp the image is almost straight out the camera..

Dave lose the defaults and turn all those off in ACR. Do if yourself, the end result is so much better.

Quoting Dbudd (Reply 20):
I think it's one hella good lens for the money!!!

Dave is right, pound for pound if you can use the lens properly the results are amazing for what you pay for it.


User currently offlineDABZF From Germany, joined Mar 2004, 1202 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (7 years 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 4476 times:



Quoting CalgaryBill (Reply 2):
70-200 AFS VR is a fantastic lens, super sharp, good VR, big f2.8 aperature ($1,900 CDN). Works well with the 1.4 and 1.7 teleconverters.

... If you have the money, go for that with a converter. 200-400 is probably bit too much for the D40  Wink
70-200 might be a bit bulky for the D40 frame but I have got some fantastic animal pictures with it on my D40x (I don't own the lens but have been able to borrow one).

If you are looking for a cheaper lens go for the 70-300 mentioned... excellent lens for the money and easy to take along for the compact size. All (3) of my a.net accepeted pictures has been taken with that lens on the D40x.



I like driving backwards in the fog cause it doesn't remind me of anything - Chris Cornell
User currently offlineSkidmarks From UK - England, joined Dec 2004, 7121 posts, RR: 55
Reply 23, posted (7 years 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 4453 times:

No one has mentioned the 18-200VR which is a good all rounder and not as expensive as some of the others. This would also eliminate the need for more than one lens for any closer shots you might get.

Andy  old 



Growing old is compulsory, growing up is optional
User currently offlineScbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12872 posts, RR: 46
Reply 24, posted (7 years 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 4443 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Skidmarks (Reply 23):
No one has mentioned the 18-200VR which is a good all rounder and not as expensive as some of the others.

That lens seems to have as many detractors as it does fans. Personally, I've not used it, and given my current range of excellent lenses, don't need it, but I can certainly see the attractions of it as an "only lens I need when travelling on vacation".



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana! #44cHAMpion
25 Soon7x7 : If your budget won't allow for an image stabilized lens,like the 70-200,70-300, try to find an older 80-200mm . It is a 2.8 fast, extremely sharp len
26 CalgaryBill : The 70-300 VR is almost $200 less at my camera store than the 18-200. The latter gets some pretty bad reviews, is very soft at the 200 end, and has b
27 Post contains links Eirbus06 : I have a D40 and i recently bought the nikkor 70-300 AF-S lens and i find it fantastic.Some pics below. http://www.irishairpics.com/database/photo/102
28 Post contains links Dbudd : One last example from me. I went shooting today and although it wasn't real cold it prove nice early. The day was still hazy but I captured this Bizje
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Nikon Lens Calibration posted Sun Nov 4 2007 15:41:50 by Sluger020889
Nikon Lens Advice posted Mon Jun 19 2006 09:18:31 by Viv
Need Some Nikon Lens Advice posted Wed Mar 8 2006 19:37:34 by UnattendedBag
Nikon Lens Bargains? posted Thu Feb 2 2006 18:01:33 by Malandan
Best Spotting Lens For Maxxum 5 posted Fri Apr 22 2005 23:13:10 by Zone1
Which Nikon Lens? posted Wed Nov 24 2004 16:31:37 by Jakbar
Best Nikon Film SLR? posted Thu Jul 22 2004 06:06:32 by Cancidas
Nikon Lens Advice posted Wed May 26 2004 07:29:56 by N228ua
Good Lens For Nikon posted Tue Apr 18 2006 14:26:47 by LukasMako
Best Zoom For A Nikon D70s? posted Wed Mar 8 2006 11:00:57 by DFW13L