500mm - 1000mm lens

[Biscuit761]

Wondered if anyone has any experiance of something like this

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/TELEPHOTO-LENS...QQcmdZViewItem

Am looking for a long lens, I know this will not be brilliant but just wondered how good or bad it would be.

Bill

[jenufa]

Save your money Bill

[jonnypb]

you get what you pay for and I think this will be pretty poor

[Biscuit761]

I am sure that is goood advice. What are the alternatives then ?

If I had gone down the Canon road there seem to be quite a few choices of quality lenses including the L range. I am unsure what the equivilant Nikon lenses are or do they not do one ?

Last week was talking to a chap who was using a 500mm Canon L Lens - £400 for the sun visor thingy !!!

Bill

[Holowlegs]

Hi ya Biscuit.

I was thinking about getting a longer zoom as well. I know you have the same lens as me the Sigma 70-300 APO. Just wondering has anyone ever tried an extender with this lens and what length would this bring it up to?

Cheers Holo

[RobDickinson]

F8 = pile of poo.

I think you'll find the long L glass is f2.8/f4/f5.6 Faster glass = more glass (larger diameter) and usualy harder (exponentialy) to make good.

1000mm f4 would need an apature of 25cm ...

[Biscuit761]

Yes but what do us Nikon users go for ?

Bill

[bibamus]

Originally Posted by Holowlegs

Hi ya Biscuit.

I was thinking about getting a longer zoom as well. I know you have the same lens as me the Sigma 70-300 APO. Just wondering has anyone ever tried an extender with this lens and what length would this bring it up to?

Cheers Holo

I have the same lens ( Nikon D50, D70s) At 300mm, the images can be a bit soft. Using an extender will just compound the softness and I would think most shots would be just too dark and lacking in detail.

A good quality 400mm zoom lens would be about £900 from Nikon and probably only be F4. The smaller the F number, the more light it will let in and the better and more detailed shots you will get.

Look for a long ( 400mm +) lens with F2.8, then start saving, ....hard.

Allan

[Brammers]

Actually... Someone reviewed one of those things once and it was... ok. Definately not up to even a Sigma 70-300 at widest aparture, but much better than shooting the Sigma at 300mm and cropping to get 1200mm equivalent. If you really want a 1000+mm lens, for £140 it'll represent some value.

As to Nikon lenses, they've got everything Canon's got, give or take. What do nikon people go for? How long and fast do you want it, and how much have you got to spend?

They've got the same 400mm 2.8 that Canon have available for a mere £6,000. If you want more flexibility then you can get a 200-400 f4 zoom for £4,500. That looks really good value. If you only need 300 then you can get a 300 f2.8 for £3,300, bit cheaper but of course you loose length. If you can stand 3rd party options, you can get Sigma's 800mm 5.6 for £4,200. There's also an 80-400 zoom for just over £1,200.

Budget stuff - if you're talking more sensible money you can get Nikon's own 70-300 in 2 flavours, with VR for £400ish or without for £200ish. And Sigma's 70-300 also comes in 2 flavours, non APO for under £100 and APO (better quality at 300mm) for £120ish.

And a couple of mid-range options - these are what I'd be looking at. A Sigma 50-500 is £800ish, Sigma 100-300 f4 also £800ish, Sigma 170-500 £600ish and Nikon 300 f4 for £900.

Out of those my picks would be the Sigma 100-300 f4 or Nikon 300 f4.