1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Budget friendly Nikon D7100 300+ MM Lens

Discussion in 'Lens Matters' started by DaveG40, Feb 7, 2021.

  1. DaveG40

    DaveG40 Well-Known Member

    Hi everyone, hope all well, it’s been a long time since my last post, to say a lots happened Is an understatement so I’ll keep it short.

    I ditched my Sony Alpha gear and bought myself a Nikon D7100 with the 70-300 af-p, 35mm F1.8 and the 18-55 afp and I was happy with this until I needed a bit more reach, I also now have a rx100 mk4 and a go pro 8, I’m currently looking at lenses going up from 400mm to 500mm and was about to order the sigma 100-400 os hsm c (£700), when I came across several others; tamron 18-400, 50-500, 120-400 etc, I won’t be using tele that much (these days just for birds and wildlife), I like the af-PE’s size and weight not forgetting how brilliant it is, but I’d like a little more length, I did consider a teleconverter and know the D7100 can use them to f8 but also read a tc and the af-p have an issue.

    Anyone also know of a good Nikon lens database like Dyxum for Sony users please.
  2. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    Nikon do a 200-500 F5.6 which I think is well thought of and not too expensive.

    Unfortunately you didn’t choose Canon because the 400 F5.6 L is a good birding lens on APS-C. Nikon don’t do an equivalent.

    Whatever you get check the reviews for performance wide open at the maximum focal length, this is where you will use it. Teleconverters can slow AF down but are widely used with 500 and 600 F4 primes. You have to check for compatibility as not all converters work with all lenses. However, I think the issue is more with short telephotos than with long ones.
  3. DaveG40

    DaveG40 Well-Known Member

    I always look at reviews and you tube clips when looking for something, sadly this can help and hinder (too much choice), which has changed my perspective, it’s the tiny little golden nuggets that swing it , I’ll look at the 200-500 thanks, I think the sigma 100-400 is the yard stick (price, size and capability), I’m not a fan of long primes due to the price, weight and bulk, I like the light and mobile approach (borne from my SSS and bridge camera days). I have pods but prefer hand held.
  4. cliveva

    cliveva Well-Known Member

    Nikon has a lens compatibility list on the web site, for teleconverters, mostly f2.8 lens.
  5. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    If DaveG40 plans to use teleconverters then forget most of the lenses on the list. The 200-500 might work with a TC14e III as the camera can focus at f8 but I wouldn't use a Nikon converter with another make of lens (the TC14e III isn't very budget friendly). I also wouldn't use any other converter with Nikon lenses.
    Learning likes this.
  6. DaveG40

    DaveG40 Well-Known Member

    Although I only have Nikon Glass I have mentioned that the AF-p 70-300 does apparently have issues with TC’s.

    the Sigma 100-400 is still looking favourite I’m just amazed that there isn’t another cheaper alternative given the D7100’s lens flexibility and Nikon’s back catalogue, I used to receive a lot of banter as an alpha owner “how many lenses can you get”, I’m also struck by the lack of a really good Nikon lens database, Dyxum is amazing.
  7. ChrisNewman

    ChrisNewman Well-Known Member

    A teleconverter magnifies the central part of the image from a lens, to spread it over more pixels on the sensor. But the addition of extra lens elements will inevitably add to the optical imperfections of lens itself, degrading that image slightly more than the lens alone. If you have a high-quality telephoto prime on a large sensor body with a low pixel count, the teleconverter would still add lots of detail that the sensor would otherwise be unable to detect. But a body with a higher pixel count would bring the same gain without introducing additional optical imperfections. However, the D7100 has a high pixel density. The 70-300 AF-P is a modestly priced telephoto, and telephotos almost inevitably have inferior resolution at the long end than wide. So I doubt whether a teleconverter would add significant detail to your images compared to just cropping them.

    I started digital photography with a Nikon D90 (APS-C, 12 MPx), and my telephoto was the then current “kit” 55-200mm. I soon wanted more reach, and bought the Sigma 150-500mm. This was, of course, a huge improvement, although disappointingly soft at the long end. But being very big and heavy, I only carry it on a few occasions when I expect to need it. My telephoto selection stayed the same, despite having replaced the D90 with the FX D800, until this spring. I decided one of the VR Nikkor 70-300 AF-P lenses would be light enough to carry regularly, and good enough to make the upgrade worthwhile. I was tempted by the light weight of the DX version (when I use a telephoto, the subject is usually too small and distant to fill the frame anyway), but finally chose the FX. I’m delighted with the lens, but, unsurprisingly, on my D800 it’s noticeably sharper at 70mm than 300mm. And in turn, my excellent and particularly well regarded Sigma 50mm art prime is noticeably sharper than the similarly priced AF-P 70-300mm at 70 mm. So I doubt whether I’d gain much from the AF-P 70-300mm at 300 mm with a teleconverter. But my D800 has only 15MPx in the APS-C area, compared to 24MPx for your D7100, so without a teleconverter the D7100 would be able to record more of any available detail than my D800, and thus be even less likely to benefit from adding one.

    Incidentally, I found that my AF-P 70-300mm is able to resolve virtually the same detail at 300 mm as my Sigma 150-500mm can at 500 mm, unless I stop the Sigma down below f/8, which is rarely practical for a long telephoto. This makes my 150-500mm largely redundant now I have the compact, lightweight AF-P 70-300mm. So I wondered about a replacement. In addition to the Nikkor 200-500mm mentioned above, Sigma and Tamron both offer two 150-600mm lenses. Unsurprisingly, the one considered best at 600 mm, the Sigma Sport version, is the most expensive, and much the heaviest. Anyway, I think it likely that I’ll replace my D800, probably with a Nikon Z7 II, before too long, and Nikon have a 200-600mm Z mount lens in their roadmap, so I decided to wait and see how that develops.

  8. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    I’m using my iPad at the moment but when I get the computer out I’ll paste some links.
    The AF-P 70-300 is f4.5-6.3 so even with a TC14 it would be beyond f8 at the long end so no surprise that it doesn’t like teleconverters. The TC14 is more expensive than the AF-P 70-300 VR so wouldn’t make sense financially even if you could attach them.

    Be very careful matching Sigma lenses, ideally the lens would be a more recent model than the camera you want to use it with.
  9. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

  10. Learning

    Learning Ethelred the Ill-Named

    I can vouch for the 200-500 f5.6. This is a very good lens for the price. The handling is difficult because a very long rotation is needed to zoom from minimum to maximum and the zoom ring is far forward. Current Nikon teleconverters will fit. You can expect AF with a 1.4x converter using centre focus points. I have found that AF works on a D500 with a 1.7x converter in good conditions. Nikon make no such claim.
    Nikon teleconverters will not fit any Nikon 70-300 lenses. There are subtle variations in the the converter socket design and corresponding changes in compatible lenses to prevent engagement of non-compatible lenses. Also the front element of the converter would crash with the rear element of some lenses even if the mount was compatible.
    The Kenko Teleplus HDPro 1.4x converter does fit the AF-P Nikkor 70-300 f4.5-5.6 E lens and AF works well with the central focussing point on a D500. Note that the lens to which I am referring is the newest of the FX 70-300. I would not expect that the DX lenses which are f4.5-6.3 to focus well with converters. The pundits reckon that the DX lens is not as sharp as the FX lens and it may be the case that you would do just as well cropping the unconverted image rather than use a converter.

Share This Page