Whats a great telephoto lens for wildlife for nikon d80?
You will never find a lens anywhere around 500mm for $500. Sorry to be so blunt, but it's the truth and you should know. Below is a link to B&H, for a sigma 800mm, a third party manufacturer for $6000+. There are ways to get around this, you could buy a nikkor 70-300mm VR for around $500 and get a 2x teleconverter to go with it for a mere $250 [at its cheapest] and that will net you about 900mm with the D80's image sensor focal multiplier of 1.5x, and that doesn't include the 2 stops from f/5.6, making your largest aperture f/8 so you should take that into consideration. By itself, the 70-300mm VR is an excellent lens that will get you going, I have one and aside from it being a bit soft wide open at 300mm, if you shoot in the f/8-f/11 range it is tack sharp all day long and with a steady hand and a shutter speed of at least 1/25 the VR kicks in and will save you from having to use a tripod, but in sunny conditions shooting at ISO100, you'll do great without it. That's my recommendation, and as far as lenses go, the 70-300mm VR is not cheap by any standard, it's quality glass despite it's aperture speed, and it does feature ED glass and has an AF-S silent wave focusing motor which focuses faster than standard AF. 300mm translates to 450mm with your image sensor crop, so that'll get you close enough. So just know that good glass does not neccessarily mean f/2.8, and you need to a little more research into lens technology and terminology before you settle on even the lens I suggested because to me, it doesn't seem like you know anything about lenses. A rule of thumb where lenses are concerned, either extreme end of the focal range whether super-wide, or super-telephoto are the most expensive lenses made by any manufacturer, and you wont be bailed out by a cheapy lens, they're all expensive.
I want to buy a telephoto lens for my nikon d40, I found this, is this a junk?
First off read the link below. There are compatibility issues with the D40. Not all AF lenses work with the D40. Know before you buy. I don't have a Nikon so I don't know everything about this. Next, is my advice to you. Do not try to go cheap. The camera you have bought is much like mine, a quality lens for it will cost more than what I paid for the camera. But the best "professional" camera will take crappy pictures if you put cheap glass (lens) on it. Research and get a good quality lens, you will be happier in the long run. And the price jumps drastically when you go from a good lens to a really good lens. Mostly when you get a "faster" lens say a 2.8 vice a 4.0 (means you can take pictures with less light). But in the long run it really is worth it to spend the money on the lens. Cheap lenses tend to not focus properly so you never get a clear image or the image is distorted. The tend to put purple around bright lights (chromatic aberration) and vignette (dark curves at the corners of the image. But do stay away from things like this. If you want filters, get a CPL (circular polarizer), full and gradutated ND (neutral density) and things like that.
It is rather difficult to recommend any lens, much less FX lens, without knowing the photography interests. But here are my generic recommendations - all these are great lenses and serve multi-purpose:a) Nikon AF-S FX NIKKOR 50mm f/1.8G: A great lens at a super price; last time checked this retails less than $180.b) Nikon AF FX NIKKOR 85mm f/1.8G: The best for portraits. Priced around $480.c) Nikon AF-S FX NIKKOR 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G ED VR-II: A great general purpose lens and a must for general photography. About $500.d) Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED IF AF-S VR: Very good for long range and wildlife photography. About $630.e) Nikon AF-S FX NIKKOR 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR: An all-purpose one-in-all lens. The lens is soft after 250 mm or so but you can get rid of all other lenses and the hassle of changing them every now and then. So a great buy. About $950.
I currently shoot with Nikon D810 and D800 (full frame) bodies. I shoot mostly landscapes, but occasionally am in a location with good wildlife viewing, and wanted something to take advantage of those situations.I wanted a long telephoto lens that would fill my requirements but wouldn't break the bank. I previously carried a Sigma 150–500. It was OK, but sharpness fell off dramatically over 350mm. The Sigma met its end after launching itself from a Jeep after a safety strap broke.After quite a bit of research, I wound up with the Tamron 150–600. It's slightly faster than the Nikon 200–500 at lower zoom (f5 vs f5.6 fixed), but slower when zoomed in. However, as good as the newer Nikons are getting with low light capability, this should not be an issue either way.I find it to be a very well constructed, durable lens. With your crop frame body, it would give you an effective zoom range of 225–900mm, which is fantastic for wildlife shooting. The lens appears to be crisp, only falling off slightly at extreme zoom. It has Tamron’s vibration reduction system. I have only tested that with birds in flight, but it seems to work well.I have been shooting exclusively with Nikons since 1968, when I acquired a used Nikon F, Photomic T. I have yet to come across a bad Nikon lens and, with the exception of the Tamron, and a cheap Chinese 8,5mm fisheye, I shoot exclusively with Nikon glass. Just based on Nikon’s good lens design and build quality. I would never try to dissuade anyone from buying Nikon glass, but I do think the Tamron is worth a good look.Happy shooting!
What are good DSLR cameras for around $500 dollars or less?
I would recommend Nikon D3100, it's a best entry-level DSLR that can record full 1080p HD videos, it is built around 14.2-megapixel and a 3 inch LCD with One-Touch Live View shooting and movie capture. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B003ZYF3LO?ie=UTF8&tag=cra45-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B003ZYF3LO The reason for this is that the D3100 has a lot more appealing features then the Canon T3. Here is a comparison of the 2: - Much larger screen 3,0" vs 2,7" - Higher resolution movies 1080p @ 24fps vs 720p @ 30fps - Lower noise at high ISO 919 ISO vs 755 ISO - Better color depth 22,5 bits vs 21,9 bits - Better image quality 67.0 vs 62.0 - Supports 24p Yes vs No - Has a self cleaning sensor Yes vs No
Which teleconverter will work on my Nikon D3200?
Ryan... You should invest in a decent photography guide book...this type of book guides you through equipment and techniques and helps you understand how to improve your photography... You should also spend some time reading your instruction manual...just because your camera has 'auto-focus' doesn't mean that it is capable of 'auto-focussing' every time you put your finger on the shutter-release...certain conditions have to be met...for example if you stick a tele-converter between your camera and lens then you are probably going to have to use the manual focus option...tele-converters multiply the focal range and also affect the maximum aperture of your lens...because it affects the aperture...this in turn affects the cameras ability to auto-focus and the auto-focus won't perform as well as you might like... When you shoot with focal lengths over 300mm camera shake is also more of an issue...and you might find that although a tele-converter will give you the reach...you might not have the 'speed'...a decent enough aperture to get your shot...tele-converters are a compromise...not a substitute...that's why you need to invest some time learning about the options out there...you might make better decisions with more understanding....if you invest in a tele-converter and then realise it isn't going to work the way you thought...then you would have been better putting your tele-converter money towards a new lens.
Best walk-around lens for a Nikon DX camera?
Changing lens take only a few second, for $800 I would consider these set-up, you will cover the same ground if not more than a 18-200mm do it all lens and you will be able to get yourself one or more fast lens for indoor or for when the ambient light is low or simply to get shallow depth of field for portrait or anything else. Nikon 55-200mm vr. ($250) Sliding aperture lens good for outdoor use. This is not a great lens, optically the same if not better than the 18-200mm and it cost definitely less money. Nikon 35mm f/1,8 ($200) Fast lens good for indoor/outdoor use. Nikon 50mm f/1,8D ($125) Fast lens good for indoor/outdoor use. Leave you room to buy yourself a decent tripod and a remote control. --------------------------------- Nikon 55-200mm vr ($250) Nikon 35mm f/1,8G ($200) Nikon 50mm f/1,8G ($220) ---------------------------------- Nikon 55-200mm vr ($250) Nikon 50mm f/1,4G ($470) Fast lens good for indoor/outdoor use. ---------------------------------- Nikon 70-300mm vr ($600) Sliding aperture lens good for outdoor use. This is probably the best zoom lens between the 55-200 and the 80-200mm f/2,8D. Nikon 50mm f/1,8D ($125) http://www.bhphotovideo.com
What is a good SLR digital camera for around $500?
You can consider Nikon D3000 10.2MP Digital SLR Camera *10.2-megapixel DX-format imaging sensor for prints up to 20 x 30 inches *Includes 3x 18-55mm Zoom-Nikkor VR Image Stabilization lens *Nikon EXPEED image processing; in-camera image editing and Active D-Lighting *3.0-inch color LCD screen; 170-degree wide-angle viewing
You could invest in a very high end telephoto lens, but that will probably cost 5–6 times that of the camera itself!If you have the budget, go ahead. Buy any of those.However, if you’re tight on budget, start with something smaller.It will not have the levels of optical zoom that a high end lens would, but you should probably be ok with the levels you get.Canon 55–250mm is a good option. It comes with IS, and 250mm is pretty good.Images all clicked with a 55–250 on a Canon 600D. Not my finest work, but should give you a general idea.