Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Worth Investing in an 200mm lens?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Worth Investing in an 200mm lens?

    Hi all...

    So I have a question...

    I currently have 70-300mm and 18-55mm

    My problem is two of my favorite spots around YYZ, the 70-300 works great on small-medium (up to say A321) size planes for side shots as the come over, but for widebodies I can't frame the entire plane on it. If i know a bunch are coming I'll switch to the shorter lens but this gets tedious obviously, and if something small gets slotted in I get a much less usable pic of that if I'm on the 18-55mm.

    I rarely go to the full 300mm on the long lens, so could getting a AF-S DX 55-200mm which is in my price range be a solution? Or can someone recommend a good alternative 200mm or similar for spotting under 300USD?

    edit:

    seriously considering: https://www.henrys.com/94963-REFURBI...G-ED-VRII.aspx

  • #2
    Oh well... cam questions... way too complicated to get a simple answer.

    But I'd say, no, don't do it. You will not win anything.

    So it's a Nikon System you are using.

    Looks like it is a DX crop sensor body.

    Why do you want to give up the long range zoom and go wider on the short end?

    How many pics do you actually take in the 55-70mm range?

    Why do you go that close to the aircraft? Don't you have any spot which is a few meters back? Looking at your first uploads, if they are NOT cropped in post processing, they could all zoomed in a little more. So IMHO there's no reason to claim you'd need the 15mm more on the wide end.

    What I did when using a DX system in the early days? I had an 18-200 VR-I for closer action and a 70-300 (VR-I and FX) for the farhter objects. I soon realised that there's never enough zoom because you want to do creative stuff, gear up climb outs, spot the small Pipers, get cockpit closeups and so on. Why would you limit yourself to side-on shots of midsize airliners? And guess what, today I'm again using a small lightweight 70-300 on a DX body. It's just convenient if you don't need more (or less).

    Just in case, I repeat the short answer: Don't do it. Stick with the 70-300. Any version with VR is similar if not better than the 55-200. Some very distinctively, some only just.
    .

    Comment


    • #3
      Yes sorry should of said... Nikon D5300 and neither of the current lenses are VR.

      All my current shots are cropped... but... you will also notice no large aircraft uploaded yet except a more artistic nose on MD-11F (done with the 18-55 at a different spot, our infamous FedEx ramp)... I do have one good widebody in the queue now, this one: http://www.simlivery.com/ps/new/B1345_1.jpg

      This shot is about a close as I can get to a side on with the 70-300mm and a widebody, and it's a smaller 767-300:

      http://www.simlivery.com/ps/new/CFIYE_3.jpg

      You will notice for both it's more a front quarter shot. If i try sideline I can't (or at least have a lot of trouble trying to) frame the whole aircraft at 70mm. Even then both those shots are barely cropped just to recenter. I'm not to upset settling for shots like those but was just looking at the alternatives.

      And ok I see what you are saying... I do always carry both lenses, the 18-55 is so small it's not really an issue, it's more of a "Ok there's a 777 or 330 coming on FR24, do I bother switching to the short lens to get the side shot?"

      My other issue is switching lenses frequently I'm inviting dust spots... but I can make that more manageable sure.

      And yes at one spot I could more further away but then I'm trading off with the smaller aircraft some of them I'm maxing out the 300mm at current spots if I move back to be able to get the widebodies and in one case there are problems with powerline and pole obstructions... so I guess I'm stuck with the tradeoff? I'm asking this as much because one of the local photographers with a lot of photos online said he uses a Canon 18-200mm almost exclusively from nearly the same spots and previously used a Tamron lens he said similar length... but he never has used anything but Canon so I thought I might get some other opinions.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by northstardc4m View Post
        Hi all...

        So I have a question...

        I currently have 70-300mm and 18-55mm

        My problem is two of my favorite spots around YYZ, the 70-300 works great on small-medium (up to say A321) size planes for side shots as the come over, but for widebodies I can't frame the entire plane on it. If i know a bunch are coming I'll switch to the shorter lens but this gets tedious obviously, and if something small gets slotted in I get a much less usable pic of that if I'm on the 18-55mm.

        I rarely go to the full 300mm on the long lens, so could getting a AF-S DX 55-200mm which is in my price range be a solution? Or can someone recommend a good alternative 200mm or similar for spotting under 300USD?

        edit:

        seriously considering: https://www.henrys.com/94963-REFURBI...G-ED-VRII.aspx
        Mostly for aviation a 70-200 will get the job done. Nikon do a great F4 70-200mm and their 18-300mm is quite good for the price. I shoot Canon and their 100-400 mk 2 is stunning. That said your thread title says 200mm, heres one hidden gem in Canons line up, the 200mm 2.8mm Mk 2 L
        https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9235256
        T
        Last edited by 777MAN; 2019-08-08, 20:13.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by northstardc4m View Post
          Yes sorry should of said... Nikon D5300 and neither of the current lenses are VR.

          All my current shots are cropped... but... you will also notice no large aircraft uploaded yet except a more artistic nose on MD-11F (done with the 18-55 at a different spot, our infamous FedEx ramp)... I do have one good widebody in the queue now, this one: http://www.simlivery.com/ps/new/B1345_1.jpg

          This shot is about a close as I can get to a side on with the 70-300mm and a widebody, and it's a smaller 767-300:

          http://www.simlivery.com/ps/new/CFIYE_3.jpg

          You will notice for both it's more a front quarter shot. If i try sideline I can't (or at least have a lot of trouble trying to) frame the whole aircraft at 70mm. Even then both those shots are barely cropped just to recenter. I'm not to upset settling for shots like those but was just looking at the alternatives.

          And ok I see what you are saying... I do always carry both lenses, the 18-55 is so small it's not really an issue, it's more of a "Ok there's a 777 or 330 coming on FR24, do I bother switching to the short lens to get the side shot?"

          My other issue is switching lenses frequently I'm inviting dust spots... but I can make that more manageable sure.

          And yes at one spot I could more further away but then I'm trading off with the smaller aircraft some of them I'm maxing out the 300mm at current spots if I move back to be able to get the widebodies and in one case there are problems with powerline and pole obstructions... so I guess I'm stuck with the tradeoff? I'm asking this as much because one of the local photographers with a lot of photos online said he uses a Canon 18-200mm almost exclusively from nearly the same spots and previously used a Tamron lens he said similar length... but he never has used anything but Canon so I thought I might get some other opinions.
          My experience with a 70-300 (on 1.6x crop frame) indicates that Rwy 23 morning arrivals is the only spot where 70mm is truly not wide enough. You need at least 250m between you and the subject to guarantee it will fit (assuming "worst" case scenario of a B777-300 or B747-8 ). That's doable at most other locations... but can be tough not to cut off a bit of the aircraft accidentally when really pushing it.

          Setting up farther away from the centreline has other benefits like a nicer angle (less belly) and easier panning.

          Alex

          Comment


          • #6
            Alex...

            After having a nasty run in with security the next lot up from there I will admit I'm a bit timid about pushing my local now... I guess I'll figure out something or just settle for smaller subjects for now. My current health makes standing for too long difficult so walking up airport isn't really an option for me either.

            I guess my other option is save up for an Nikkor 18-300 but that price point is a bit high for now.

            Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk

            Comment

            Working...
            X