Nikon 200-400 f4 with full frame?

I know that this forum already gets enough posts of people asking about gear, but this has been on my mind a lot and I hav'nt found the answers im looking for. I plan on upgrading to fullframe this year and its inevitable that I eventually invest in a supertelephoto lens, right now we just rent one when going on trips, but Ive been getting out to shoot more and more and renting just isnt the answer. One lens Im really thinking about is the 200-400 f4, Ive heard such great things about this lens, but is it enough focal length to be able to capture wildlife and birds? With a cropped sensor its a no brainer, but im not so sure when you go to a full frame that dosnt have the 1.5 crop factor... Is it smarter to invest in a 500mm instead, despite the much higher price? Thanks so much for your time. Joe

Joe,

Always Always Always put your money into Glass first. The image quality and photos you get are much more dependent on lens quality vs. the camera. You don't explain why you want a Full Frame camera, but if your primary focus is wildlife (which its my understanding that it is) I'm a little curious why you would want to spend the phenomenal amount of money on a FF camera when you could get a D300s or something similar that has good ISO performance and a good burst rates with plenty of megapixels.

As for the 200-400 it's great for birds especially when paired with a teleconverter and Brad Hill has shown that it can be used effectively with a 2X for 800mm of focal length

Joe,

I've shot both with crop cameras (D2Xs/D100) and full frame cameras (D3) and own both a 200-400mm and a 600mm. For birds, I almost always grab the 600mm and I have noticed since moving to the D3 from the D2X, I almost always have a 1.4x TC on the 600mm. For wildlife, longer is almost always better, particularly with birds. However, if your goal is to photograph large mammals, particularly those in our national parks, the 200-400 is great (I hear it is perfect for African Safaris) but if you are after things like small songbirds, I probably would go for a longer 500mm or 600mm lens.

Luke also makes a great point about FF vs Crop. I went with the D3 for ISO performance and the ability to go super wide (with the 14-24). However, I find that I really miss the 1.5x and I plan to pick up the D300s successor for a lot of my wildlife work (and hopefully 1080p video). When you figure you can almost get 3 D300s for the price of a D3, I was really close to going with the D300 (all pre D700 days).

Good luck.

Drew

Thanks Luke, to be honest Im debating between the d700 or the d300s. I deffinitly think that glass is always the priority, but if I decide that I want the better dynamic range, iso capabilities, and durability that a larger fullframe camera offers (which I suspect eventually I will) Im going to want a lens that offers the focal length I need to capture wildlife and birds from a reasonable distance away... but Im starting to think that investing in the 200 to 400 and sticking with the dx sensor for a while longer, migh be the way to go.

Thanks Drew, The wildlife I shoot, and intend on shooing in the coming years tend to try and do everything they can to avoid human contact and Im going to need a lens long enough to capture these animals from a distance. An example is the family of bobcats I was able to photograph in the Badlands last month that I have been posting in the fauna gallery, although the lens I used was rented. My goals for this summer are kingfishers, wolves(hopefully ), as well as the wildlife found in our local praries. So Im torn, but I think doing more asking around, as well as research might hold my answer.

Joe,

I understand your desire for top of the line stuff - but unless you're pro and are making a ton of money from your photos (or have crazy disposable income) you are far better off saving your money and getting the D300s.

Checkout my gallery and look at the male redhead photos that were taken @ ISO 1000. I did no noise reduction on them and they look phenomenal. Also, the D300s is weatherproofed and will hold up just as well as a FF camera.

Your redhead shot really is awesome Luke, the quality is great, and a lot better than shooting at 1000 with the D90. So I think you points make a lot of sense, and the d90 is doing ok for now, the real hurdle is getting the glass.

Oh and one more thing - while cameras don't hold their value as well as lenses do - when (if) you are ready to move to a FF you'll be able to sell your D300s (or whatever you purchase) for a decent price and recover some of the costs to put toward your new camera

I used a D300 for some time and now use the D300s and the D700. The absolute best thing about the D700 is the iso performance. There is a world of difference between the two cameras. I also own the 200-400mm vr and the 500mm vr. The 200-400mm is a good compromise if you travel a lot, and is a very sharp and capable lens. Also works well if you like to handhold for flight shots. You can always find a used D300 body as a spare later on.....If you shoot a lot in low light you won't regret the iso capability of the D700.

Joe,

I own the 200-400mm VR and most often have the 1.4x TC on it for photographing birds. Had I known I would be moving to Utah I probably would have bought the 500mm VR instead. I was living in FL at the time I purchased the 200-400mm VR and very rarely felt I needed more than 400mm. In Utah the extra 100mm would come in handy at times.

One thing I would not do is go with a fullframe body, I'd miss the crop factor.

I get sharp photos with the 200-400mm VR combined with the TC, but to be honest I get sharp images with my 70-300mm VR and the 80-400mm VR. It isn't always the glass that determines IQ, it is the photographers skills too.

You are 13 and you have time to make these decisions carefully. Very wise to think ahead.

Personally, I can't get my FF camera soon enough. Because I shoot landscapes more than anything. If you shoot wildlife more than anything, then a D300s is a no brainer. I own a D300 and it is a great camera, but I wish I had the D700 instead to go with my super sharp 17-35 nikkor.