# Which lens is best for my Nikon?



## jnichols (Dec 25, 2008)

For a Nikon D80 what is best for photographing wildlife, (deer, water scenes, etc.), a telephoto lense or a macro lens?  I have been writing articles for magizines and newspapers for the last two years, and getting by with a Kodak DX7590.  As a beginning freelance outdoor writer/photographer everything you submit is published for gratis (hence the free in freelance I guess).  
     Now that I have a D80, I am curious which would be better to invest in, a 70-300 mm f/4-5.6 telephoto lens, or a 28-300 mm f/3.5-6.3 DG Macro compact hyper zoom aspherical lens?
     Anyone with any insite would be greatly apreciated,

                                                 Thank you, Jay


----------



## Garbz (Dec 26, 2008)

Depends on the wildlife. Deer definitely a telephoto. An ant definitely the macro 

But try and not depend exclusively on one for the other. Especially Nikons macro lenses perform by far at their best in the macro range. But similarly the Nikkor 80-200 f/2.8 is not very sharp at all at it's greatest reproduction ratio.


----------



## jnichols (Dec 26, 2008)

Thanks for the help. still not sure what lense to get.  I will be shooting at 70 to 200 yds on average.  Any advice on which lense will be good?


----------



## kundalini (Dec 26, 2008)

jnichols said:


> Thanks for the help. still not sure what lense to get. I will be shooting at 70 to 200 yds on average. Any advice on which lense will be good?


 Shooting at 70-200 yards is a far cry from a 70-200mm lens.

You didn't mention your budget.  That can/will have a great influence on lens suggestions.  Also, you should have an idea if reach or IQ is paramount.  Often there are compromises that need to be considered.  You will not likely to have all the best features at an entry level price.  Expect to exploit your credit card.

For lens reviews, I like:
photozone.de
dpreview.com
fredmiranda.com
thomhogan.com


----------



## jnichols (Dec 27, 2008)

O.k. sorry about being lax in the info department.  Remember I have been getting away with a cheap little Kodak 10X, 5 Megapixel camera.  I now have a Nikon D80 with a 18-55 f3.5-5.6g AF-S DX Nikkor VR Lens.  I am used to taking pictures at the previously mentioned distances and enhancing them with my computer using the Kodak.  I would like to stay in the range of $300 to $500 for a telephoto lens.  I find them in this range, just have not ever used one.  I appreciate the info.


----------



## Jaq (Dec 27, 2008)

Shooting animals is a completely different ball game than shooting landscapes. For landscapes you want a decently wide angle lens that has great IQ while for animals you most likely want a fast focus and a telephoto lens. The lens you currently have can probably do landscapes just fine, but for wildlife you want a fixed telephoto with a fast focus. I have that 70-300 and it spends a lot of time searching and is very noisy, and if you don't have great light conditions it is going to be difficult to get the shutter speed you need towards the 300 end. I don't recommend it for wildlife photography. I don't know a specific lens that would be better, but that's my opinion on that lens.

200 yards is quite a distance... I doubt you will find a lens for under $500 with that kind of reach... that's some serious telephoto. I doubt 300mm is long enough for 200 yards. For 100y, probably pretty comfortable.


----------



## Flash Harry (Dec 27, 2008)

300 or 400mm, possibly with a converter for that distance but both are very pricy, Nikon also do a 500 mirror lens which if you can put up with the doughnut effect background would be the cheapest option in the nikon range, have a look at sigma's 100-500 I think it is, I tried one in calumet and it seemed pretty good for the $. H


----------



## djacobox372 (Dec 31, 2008)

wildlife = 80-200mm f2.8 + 1.4x teleconverter

macro = extention tubes and a high quality prime lens (105mm, 85 or 50mm).


----------



## Dubious Drewski (Dec 31, 2008)

Don't automatic extension tubes cost upwards of $400? And if you don't have the prime, that can net another $200 to $800.

Why not just buy the Nikon 60mm f2.8 Macro for around $600 and be done with it?

...unless you go full manual: oldschool barebones extension tubes for $20 and a manual focus used prime for under $100.  But I have that, and I don't like it.


----------

