Posted by Jim Hackley on August 30, 2010 at 6:08 PM
Over the last year I have become very interested in bird and wildlife photography. I shoot with a Nikon D300s with a Nikkor 300 f4 and use the Nikon TC1.4 and have been fairly happy with that setup. I was checking into what might be my next longer lens choice since I have seen some amazing and wonderful shots here at NPN and the 500 f4 with a TC seems to be a popular option for both Nikon and Canon photographers. I had the Nikon 80-400 VR for a short time and was not happy with this lens at all. So I went over to B&H website to check on options/prices and ..... got the sticker price tag shock. I could not believe the prices! I realized that even saving $6,000 would get a 300 f.28 VRII or the 200-400 f4 VR but would still need several thousand more for a 500 f4.
In reviewing the lens choices I found an interesting gap that I do not understand and maybe others can elaborate on. I was curious as to why the camera companies have never come out with a 400 f4 prime with VR? The price gap from a Nikon 300 f4 to a 500 f4 is $7,000 and this would seem like an affordable option. Am I missing something or would a lens like this take away from potential 500 f4 sales?
Thanks for any feedback.
Jim
I've wondered that myself. Canon makes a 400 f4 DO IS lens (diffractive optics) but the MSRP is $6500. I've never seen one in the field.
I think Nikon big glass tends to be more expensive than Canon.
Posted by Luke Ormand on August 30, 2010 at 9:18 PM
Nikon has to 200-400 VR and I think it fits their clientele well as an option that Canon does not have and you can add a TC to it. They have a 400 f/2.8 as well so to them their bases are covered.
Hi Jim,
You stated, "I was curious as to why the camera companies have never come out with a 400 f4 prime with VR"?
Because what we want is not necessarily in the best interest of the manufacturers. A 400mm might reduce sales of the 300mm f/4, 400mm f/2.8, 200-400 f/4 and possibly the 500mm f/4. If you don't want to spend the $8400 for the 500mm VR, I think the next best lens would be the 300mm f/2.8 and teleconverters. Some would argue the 200-400mm is a better choice but the 300mm f/2.8 will perform better with all three of the Nikon teleconverters.
In my opinion the 500mm f/4 is the best option for weight and portability. You might think the 300mm f/4 is sharp but the 500mm f/4 is a very impressive lens. I know as I shot with the 300mm f/4 and TCs for 6 years.
Basically if you want to play with the big boys you need to spend the big bucks.
Ronnie G.
Posted by Nate Chappell on August 31, 2010 at 12:44 AM
I think you are correct in that they think don't want to offer a mid level type lens in the 3-4,000 range. For Nikon shooters I would strongly consider the Sigma 500mm F4.5 lens. It lists at about $4,700, the af is fast and you can use it with Sigma teleconverters. I have the Sigma 1.4 and use it with Canon gear occasionally and it's a pretty good tc. If you can get one used for $2,500-3,000 all the better. Andrea Marzorati uses this lens (albeit with a Canon body) and gets fantastic results, just take a look in the WP section the past few years to see some of his work. I have a friend Scott Thompson who uses it with a Nikon and produces excellent work with it as well.
Jim you have soe great info here .But one of the best combinations I know and have usd is the 300mm f4 + TC 1.7=510mm .
Or you can do what a friend of mine did.
He bought a Canon 7D (18mp) $1550 + Canon 500 f4 $6140 =$7690
Instead of spending $8499 on a Nikon lens
As he says he got more mega pix than any Nikon(exceptD3) and saved $700.
He uses hisD300 & D700 for all his other work and for nature the Canon
Just to open your eyes and scramble the brain a little more.
GOOD LUCK and enjoy the NATURE with what ever you choose
AVI
Posted by Luke Ormand on August 31, 2010 at 10:35 AM
Nate,
You spelled Andrea's name wrong so it cannot be found through searching. Here is the correct spelling, and a prime example of Andrea's work with the Sigma:
I have to agree with Avi's post. You can get the Canon setup as he described along with a Wimberley head for about $8000. That is a camera body, 500mm lens and the head for less than the Nikon lens alone. The other issue is availability. The Canon 500 F4 is available but not so with the Nikon equivalent. I love my Nikon gear but I am too thinking about going the Canon route for the big glass. I will still shoot my Nikon for everything else.
Discussion
8 repliesIn reviewing the lens choices I found an interesting gap that I do not understand and maybe others can elaborate on. I was curious as to why the camera companies have never come out with a 400 f4 prime with VR? The price gap from a Nikon 300 f4 to a 500 f4 is $7,000 and this would seem like an affordable option. Am I missing something or would a lens like this take away from potential 500 f4 sales?
Thanks for any feedback.
Jim
I think Nikon big glass tends to be more expensive than Canon.
You stated, "I was curious as to why the camera companies have never come out with a 400 f4 prime with VR"?
Because what we want is not necessarily in the best interest of the manufacturers. A 400mm might reduce sales of the 300mm f/4, 400mm f/2.8, 200-400 f/4 and possibly the 500mm f/4. If you don't want to spend the $8400 for the 500mm VR, I think the next best lens would be the 300mm f/2.8 and teleconverters. Some would argue the 200-400mm is a better choice but the 300mm f/2.8 will perform better with all three of the Nikon teleconverters.
In my opinion the 500mm f/4 is the best option for weight and portability. You might think the 300mm f/4 is sharp but the 500mm f/4 is a very impressive lens. I know as I shot with the 300mm f/4 and TCs for 6 years.
Basically if you want to play with the big boys you need to spend the big bucks.
Ronnie G.
Or you can do what a friend of mine did.
He bought a Canon 7D (18mp) $1550 + Canon 500 f4 $6140 =$7690
Instead of spending $8499 on a Nikon lens
As he says he got more mega pix than any Nikon(exceptD3) and saved $700.
He uses hisD300 & D700 for all his other work and for nature the Canon
Just to open your eyes and scramble the brain a little more.
GOOD LUCK and enjoy the NATURE with what ever you choose
AVI
You spelled Andrea's name wrong so it cannot be found through searching. Here is the correct spelling, and a prime example of Andrea's work with the Sigma:
Bee-Eater
Andrea Marzorati