Author Topic: Something Long for Travel?  (Read 14840 times)

Jan Anne

  • Noob
  • Global Moderator
  • **
  • Posts: 2042
  • Holland
    • Me on Flickr
Something Long for Travel?
« on: December 04, 2015, 20:59:12 »
Mes amis, the plan is to buy a "something long" solution again somewhere next year but can't find a set that checks all the boxes so I'm hoping you can offer some help :)

The general idea is to buy a dedicated camera and tele lens combo for travel purposes, using it in the homeland for wildlife or zoolife is a secondary priority as this is a dwindling activity. When not in use it will be slung around a shoulder when fooling around with the Sony a7S and 35/1.4 FE which will be my main camera setup with some other short lenses in the bag for the something wide, something fast and something special lens options.

Though I'm mainly a prime lens user a tele zoom might be more practical for a secondary system which needs to be ready to shoot anything from medium to far away distances without fumbling around with TC's and such to reach the intended 400mm. On multiple occasions I had snakes swimming by with only a wide-angle mounted, by the time I had my 125mm mounted it swam too far away to make anything memorable. Same happened with wildlife, birds, planes, etc where I was too late or had too little reach to capture it properly.

I'm open for any suggestions as long as they fit the bill, bonus points when the camera can be used with my other lenses but being capable for its designated tele job is more important.

As a reference to my type of use, the 200-400/4VR was used a lot at 400mm, f/4 and ISO4000 so a f/5.6 solution should be capable of delivering clean images at ISO6400. Also a big fan of the close focus properties of the 200-400 and it's 1:3.7 maximum magnification (MM) ratio, so minimal focus distance (MFD) of 2 meters or preferably less is preferred as wel as a magnification ratio well below 1:4.

I've looked at lenses like the Minolta 400/4.5 AF and Canon 400/4DO I and II which are very compact, weight around 2 kilos and at f/4 reasonable fast for 400mm lenses but their minimal focus ranges are around 3 meters, the Minolta uses a very slow screw driver AF (like AFD), Canon MKI wasn't very good while the MKII model is a little expensive which would be OK if the specs were all spot on. No such lenses in the Nikon camp that I am aware off but a 400/4 PF would be very cool.

In the tele zoom arena a 200-400/4VR is too big, the 80-400 AFS VR misses too many checkboxes (MM 1:5.7) but the new 200-500/5.6 looks very cool though spec wise a little short on things like a MFD of 2.2m, MM ratio of 1:4.5 and weight is a little on the heavy side for secondary use but the option to go to a cool 500m without TC's makes up for those minor issues.

Sony has an updated 70-400 in A mount with an MFD of 1.5m and MM ratio of 1:3.7 and works pretty good on the A7II and A7RII after the 2.0 firmware updates. But the clear winner is the new Canon 100-400/4.5-5.6 IS USM II which is apparently razor sharp at 400mm, focuses down to an amazing 0.9 meter, has a MM ratio of 1:3.2, is weather sealed, made of metal, uses 77mm threads and weighs a very nice 1.5 kilograms. I read mixed performance reports on the latest Sony mirrorless cameras and I'm not really a big fan of the Canon cameras either, for instance the 7DII looks good on paper with its 10 fps and 1.6 crop factor but I doubt it will be usable at ISO6400 plus it misses basic stuff like spot metering on the selected AF point (just wow....) which I use a lot on wildlife.

In the Nikon camp I can't find a proper action camera for the 200-500 either, doing 8 fps is apparently a thing of the past for all the models besides the D4s and on the FX cameras the AF points are still cluttered in the middle which annoyed me greatly when using the D700, D3s and D800E cameras. The latter also applies to the Sony a7II btw but the a7RII has 399 PDAF focus points nicely spread out over 60% of the frame which is how it should be IMHO but at 5 fps and 42MP its no action camera.

So.....there you have it, I'm going in circles again and again so maybe you guys can shed some light on the matter ;D What am I missing in the Nikon camp camera wise? Are there completely different solutions from other vendors, etc?

In the meantime I'm keeping my hopes up that 2016 will bring me a true action (mirrorless) camera with the speed and ISO performance of a D4s and the AF spread of the a7RII instead of the increasing focus on slow high megapixel offerings.
Cheers,
Jan Anne

PedroS

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 412
  • You ARE NikonGear
Re: Something Long for Travel?
« Reply #1 on: December 04, 2015, 21:39:32 »
Can't find better than a D4s+200-500 in the Nikon camp
But could be also Canon  7D MKII +100-400

Jan Anne

  • Noob
  • Global Moderator
  • **
  • Posts: 2042
  • Holland
    • Me on Flickr
Re: Something Long for Travel?
« Reply #2 on: December 04, 2015, 22:22:26 »
One of the main contenders is a used D4 or D4s, I'll wait though until the D5 is released so the market gets flooded lowering the prices for all of them to a bit to more manageable price levels I'm willing to pay for a secondary camera.

A used D3 or D3s were also on the list but I don't like buying stuff I already had, part of the ride is discovering new gear :) That said the D3s is a very good camera for what I intend to use it for and can be bought for a very doable €2000 outdoing all the cameras now sold new in that price range.
Cheers,
Jan Anne

ColinM

  • NG Supporter
  • **
  • Posts: 1826
  • Herefordshire, UK
    • My Pictures
Re: Something Long for Travel?
« Reply #3 on: December 04, 2015, 22:29:15 »
So ignoring the body, can you expand on what the target or constraints of your shooting are.

Obviously something like the 200-500 sounds attractive.
Does it have to be a zoom, or would the 300mm PF work (lighter, maybe higher quality etc)?

Are you after maximum flexibility (so prepared to accept some compromises) or would you be prepared to lose a few chances in exchange for using a more restricted set of kit that gave you fewer but higher quality images?

Roland Vink

  • NG Supporter
  • **
  • Posts: 1528
  • Nikon Nerd from New Zealand
    • Nikon Database
Re: Something Long for Travel?
« Reply #4 on: December 04, 2015, 22:38:54 »
Can't find better than a D4s+200-500 in the Nikon camp
But could be also Canon  7D MKII +100-400
The new Canon 100-400/4.5-5.6 focuses very close, and is an excellent lens by all accounts.

Akira

  • Homo jezoensis
  • NG Supporter
  • **
  • Posts: 12566
  • Tokyo, Japan
Re: Something Long for Travel?
« Reply #5 on: December 05, 2015, 05:50:56 »
I've heard good impressions about both Canon MkII's 7D and 100-400.  Another candidate for the lens may be EF70-300mm/f4.0-5.6 "L" IS USM if the weight is concern, althogh it is optically a bit inferior to 100-400.

Olympus E-M5 MkII offers superb image stabilization which is a significant help for low light shooting so long as the subject stands still.  But I would doubt if you are satisfied with its high-ISO performance and image quality of the dedicated long zooms currently available.
"The eye is blind if the mind is absent." - Confucius

"Limitation is inspiration." - Akira

Øivind Tøien

  • NG Supporter
  • **
  • Posts: 1761
  • Fairbanks, Alaska
Re: Something Long for Travel?
« Reply #6 on: December 05, 2015, 06:08:52 »
The 300 PF on a DX sensor would take you pretty far even without a TC, and is a very travel-able package. And it does not need a large heavy body to balance well. A 200-500 on a D4  is closer to 3.5 kg... One should not underestimate the value of something as light as the 300PF - during my last solo hiking/skiing+camping trips, I ended up leaving my AF 300/4 because it was just too much on top of a 60 lbs pack with food and gear for 8 days (I usually carry my shoulder tripod with it). The reasoning was that it would have to be carried in the backpack, and thus would not be ready when a spontaneous wildlife occasion shoved up; wildlife would be long gone before I got it out. This showed to be true.
 
Another thought would be a CX 70-300VR  on a Nikon 1 body if quality and low-light capability is good enough for you.
Øivind Tøien

chris dees

  • NG Supporter
  • **
  • Posts: 809
  • Amsterdam
Re: Something Long for Travel?
« Reply #7 on: December 05, 2015, 10:57:01 »
What Øivind says.
The 300PF on a D7200 is a very nice lightweight package.
The 70-300CX on a Nikon 1 Vx is even less. The Nikon 1 needs light though, but DxO Optics Pro can do miracles with Nikon 1 files at higher ISO (up to ISO3200).
I don't have a D7200 anymore, but the other 3 you can always take from me and try them out.
Chris Dees

Tristin

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1083
  • Nothing less, always more.
Re: Something Long for Travel?
« Reply #8 on: December 05, 2015, 12:48:24 »
I'd use a long macro (likely the Sigma 180mm 2.8 macro for the OS) on a 24mp DX body for a 280mm 2.8 that focuses to 1:1, which would provide plenty of resolution to crop for more reach.  Would be more versatile than a non-macro telephoto lens and faster in a much smaller package.
-Tristin

Frank Fremerey

  • engineering art
  • NG Supporter
  • **
  • Posts: 12401
  • Bonn, Germany
Re: Something Long for Travel?
« Reply #9 on: December 05, 2015, 14:26:58 »
I am not sure how important extreme separation is for ýou but my decision for this range fell quite a while ago, although I did not buy yet:

EM1 + 2.8/40-150 Pro

in a bundle with the 12-40 Pro @3000€: http://www.amazon.de/Olympus-Systemkamera-Megapixel-LCD-Display-Bildstabilisator/dp/B00U34K9VI/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1449321477&sr=8-3&keywords=olympus+em1

or without  the 12-40 Pro @2400€

Why? Because I handled this combination at Photokina and I was blown away by AF precision and speed

The TC is available for 300 Euros, but I guess you might find a deal somewhere where the 40-150 and the TC are sold together as an attractive bundle.

Weight & Optical performace of the Oly system are very attractive as a tele solution. The larger DOF due to the smaller format plus the very well designed IBIS can offset all trouble you might have comparing it to a FF solution.

Rent it for a weekend in the wild!
You are out there. You and your camera. You can shoot or not shoot as you please. Discover the world, Your world. Show it to us. Or we might never see it.

Me: https://youpic.com/photographer/frankfremerey/

FredCrowBear

  • NG Supporter
  • **
  • Posts: 142
  • Frederick V. Ramsey
Re: Something Long for Travel?
« Reply #10 on: December 05, 2015, 15:08:02 »
I just got a 300mm PF and a TC 1.4 III, using them on a D7100 and I am very impressed/satisfied. 
A very small package with a lot of reach. 
But, as always, I am once again reminded that I am talent limited and not equipment limited. 
Frederick V. Ramsey

Jørgen Ramskov

  • NG Supporter
  • **
  • Posts: 1103
  • Aarhus, Denmark
Re: Something Long for Travel?
« Reply #11 on: December 05, 2015, 17:21:23 »
The always rumored D400 + 200-500mm :P
Jørgen Ramskov

PeterN

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1125
Re: Something Long for Travel?
« Reply #12 on: December 05, 2015, 19:04:31 »
I was pretty happy about the performce of the D750 with 300mm PF and Tc14-iii.
In fact, if I decide to buy the sony rx1 or leica Q, I will bring that combo on trips where I want to travel as light as possible.
During my last vacation, I used the 35mm for 80%, 300mm for 15% and rest for 5%. More or less.
You can try the combo, if you want. We only live 40-50kms away from each ether
Peter

Jan Anne

  • Noob
  • Global Moderator
  • **
  • Posts: 2042
  • Holland
    • Me on Flickr
Re: Something Long for Travel?
« Reply #13 on: December 07, 2015, 14:17:49 »
Canon is apparently working on another tele option, a 200-600mm F4.5-5.6 L:
http://www.cameraegg.org/new-canon-lens-patent-ef-200-600mm-f4-5-5-6l-usm/
Cheers,
Jan Anne

Gary

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1867
  • Southern California
    • Snaps
Re: Something Long for Travel?
« Reply #14 on: December 07, 2015, 17:39:28 »
How long of a reach do you need/desire? If you can get by with 300mm, I suggest you look at the Fuji 55-200. It is relatively small and light with IS and has super performance across the entire zoom range. Pair it with a Fuji XT1 and you'll have a very small footprint, good high ISO capability, with a slightly different than Bayer IQ. Being mirrorless, there will be adapters for your other lenses. But, mirrorless is different than a dSLR ... not necessarily different good or different bad, just different. Most notably with the focus, which has a steep learning curve for continuous action if you're coming from a dSLR.
"Everywhere you look there are photographs, it is the call of photographers to see and capture them."- Gary Ayala
My snaps are here: www.garyayala.com
Critiquing my snaps are always welcomed and appreciated.