Well done as usual, I'm stuck with the 55 - 300mm kit lens and will never be able to afford good glass, but every once in awhile I get a gem of a shot and it makes me happy. Sometimes you just gotta love bein outside and if I get that one good shot, it's a bonus. Never loose the effort you put into these, it's what sets you apart from so many other you tubers. Probably tired of me saying over and over again, but effort shows!!!
Hi Scott. Don't know how I missed this video when it came out. I've been shooting the Nikon 200 500 f5.6 lens for a while on a D500 body. I shoot a lot in my yard, which is wooded and shady and have been frustrated with the high ISO I get at 5.6. I looked at the 300 f4 but opted for the 70-200 FL 2.8 from Nikon (I got a killer deal on it used from MPB). That's a focal equivalent of 300 mm on my crop frame body which is plenty for my yard as I use a blind and feeder/birdbath set up. When I do go on location, I think it will still be useful for low light environmental shots. So thanks for the encouragement and making me feel a little less crazy for trying shorter focal lengths.
Thanks for the great video. Just researched/bought/unpacked my (new-to-me & first-ever) D300 Nikon with a 75-300 Nikkor ! Even though I'm learning, I'm confident that I can capture some great images. I appreciate your sequence and detail in this video!
Excellent video Scott, the Nikon d500 with a 300mm PF is and excellent combination and the lens takes both the 1.4 and 1.7 X teleconverters and makes a vary light combination for hiking. Thanks for showing what can be done with shorter lenses.
Hi Scott, not sure if you will see this comment since your video went out some time ago. Excellent content, presented in a clear and understandable manor. The comparisons made between full frame and crop sensor at similar focal length were very useful. I was just curious to know since I don’t think you mentioned it. Whether any of the images you showed us were cropped in post or if they were all left uncropped.? As a birder/photographer who was financially limited to 300mm primes for many years I fell into the temptation to crop everything in an effort to “compete with the big boys”. Thanks. I shall certainly check out more of your content. Martin. UK.
@@WildlifeInspired Thanks for the response. Yes it does help to know. Thank you. Knowing how small some birds will appear using a 300mm I can better appriciate how close (in some cases) you must have been to your subject. Or rather how close they came to you. I too am a sit and wait photographer. I gave up running around a long time ago. A phrase I often hear from my birding friends is "Are you still here ! ". :-)
Wow great video. I don't have the budget for auto focus telephoto primes. I decided on older manual focus primes and they work great. I miss some captures but it gets me out doing something I enjoy. 180mm and 300mm.
This was a very informative video. Right now I am doing bird photography with a 75-300mm EF 5. 6 and getting great images. I shoot both backyard birds and go into the field to shoot. Like you said running down a bird to get a picture is not the way to get great images of birds. My biggest problem is motion glare when not using a tripod. I have improved, but it still happens from time to time. Thank you for taking time to make this video.
Thanks for this video. Even though I've got a Sigma 150-600, you've inspired me to try going out with the older 300mm f4 I bought on my Z7ii and see what I can get. Migration is going to start soon here in Kazakhstan and videos like this get me excited:-)
Really interesting and informative Scott. A 300mm lens would be more practical and easier to carry around than some of the other heavier lenses. Especially on those longer hikes. I’ll definitely be taking it into consideration after watching your video. Thanks for sharing your experiences and beautiful images as always. Cheers
These pictures are just inspiring to me, a really great video. I think that just beeing patient enough is a lesson everyone has to learn the hard way. Just the other day i was able to photograph a kingfisher, which is like the gold standard for (small) Bird photography here in Germany, as they are a tough subjects, yet so colorfull. I had to visit the location 12 times to get a picture of them, but even for these tiny birds 300mm on a 1.5x Crop is enough, if you are patient and willing to come again and again and again. Sadly i had exposure compensation dialed in and my D500 completely clipped the sky and the water.
Hey Scott, I like this video because it helps me better understand the limits and what I can do with my kit lenses. Super explanation on the concept of focal equivalency. Never understood until now. I also have some good glass and I will definitely watch out for older lenses. I have all Pentax gear - I know not the best of choices but I used Pentax about 40 years ago when I tried out the hobby for first time. Life, kids, work, etc., got in the way and now that I'm retired went back to what I knew. No regrets - love my equipment.
Awesome video as always Scott! I'm 1 of your biggest fans as you know! I also think it's great because with some of the shorter lenses you can put in more light and that's very helpful to me.
Great inspiring video! I just purchased the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS II USM lens and I was thinking of getting the 1.4 extender, but it looks like there’s quite a bit of image softening from the 1.4x. The choice of getting that lens and the Sigma zoom 600 mm lens was pretty easy because I’m mostly biking around New York City and Central Park and there’s also the Jamaica Wildlife Refuge. (The Sigma lens being quite a bit larger.) Your video convinced me birding can be accomplished with patience with the 1.6 crop factor and I should try to learn the camera, the craft and have patience and that way I can travel light. Many thanks!
I shoot crows with a 50mm on a full frame and im gonna try 24 or 20mm. I get that it's hard to get close to most birds but if you can, a change from the compressed blurred background look would stand out. The photos in this video do nothing for me visually, i can see how they can be used in bird books. I think theres a guy who shoots kingsfishers with an ultrawide on youtube, cant remember the name.
am amazing lens and very adaptable with teleconverters. ALSO minimum focus is 6 feet which can create interesting looks (and adaptable for macro type work)
@@WildlifeInspired I'm curious what your thought is about using it with a 1.4 vs a 1.7x teleconverter. Do think you lose too much detail and light by going up to 1.7 from 1.4?
I'm shooting today with the R6 and the Canon EF 300mm F4 IS L lens. I'm getting some great detailed shots of ospreys on their nest with much lower iso than my RF100-400mm. 300 mm is plenty long for my needs today.
This guy knows his stuff. You cant just walk teh forest and expect to get good shots. You have to sit for hours....and be low. 300 good for less timid birds.........very hard with really timid birds like wild ducks that can be very timid. 400 needed on them most times (or more). this guys knows his tuff bigtime.
Great points. I use both 300 f2.8 and the f4 D lens ( a great sharp hand-hold-able) with both 1.4 and 1.7 converters. With the 1.7 they are 500mm and on my D500 or 7500 they’re 750 equivalent. Not so shabby. Thanks for your perspective.
This is so timely. My travel lens for birds is a 300 f4 on a crop body. I also have a 1.4x and 2x teleconverter. But I may be getting a mirrorless full frame camera for travel (more compact and better for wide angle street/travel photography) and now wondering do I get the 400 f5.6 or the 100-400 that overlaps with the 70-200 I will also carry!!!???? Decisions, decisions, decisions!!!! lol. Oh and the camera gear is all Canon.
mostly what you will see is example of what is possible. With wildlife technique in the field is often the key to success. Great locaitons and lots of patience
Hi Scott, great video, thanks for sharing your experience with shorter focal length for birds. As I am trying to have a one prime lens setup only for wildlife, I wanted to ask for your opinion on what would be the best compromise on focal length: would you say a 400mm lens (I am talking about the older 400 2.8 by Nikon) or a 500mm (in this case 500 f4)? I have a D4S and planning to get a second hand D500 too (to use interchangeably depending on light conditions and the reach I need). Thanks!
Yes, you inspired me to get a 400mm F 2.8! 😂 Lol! But really you have shown it’s not really the gear you have but what how you use your gear in being creative with composition and lighting that makes the image! Not many people think about how to use a wide angle lens for bird photography and maybe controlling your camera remotely to achieve unique and stunning images. I’ve learned a lot! Thank you! 😊
Just found your videos. Beautiful photos. I shoot with various older Nikon bodies and used lenses but I'm having a great time and that's what it's about right?
good video ... very informative with good examples. Thank you for sharing your experience. Got my R7 with RF 100-400mm. The setup is light and great for wildlife.
45 megapixel FF sensor Nikon Z7 II and a 70-300mm lens is what I chose. That makes an effective 20 megapixel crop camera with a 450mm lens. And in FF mode I can do some great portraits with a shorter lens. Love the versatility!
Agree. Those high megapixel full frame bodies are like a crop sensor and super versatile. If you can fill the frame you get to a of details and if you need to crop, you can effectively get the benefit of the "crop factor"
I'm impressed with how quickly you implemented the idea, even though technology focused videos get a lot more clicks, as you mentioned. I'm really looking forward to this video as a chance to step up my game even with my "cheap equipment", because improving on my gear (old AF-S 70-300 VR) as a Student is just not possible, but if i ask for ways to improve my pictures on other plattforms my "cheap" gear is the most given reason for my stagnsation as a photographer.
you can abosolutely shoot 300mm on a crop sensotr! BUT i will not lie, I have a big advantage with light (mine is f2.8) and the focus is fast and sharp. I show some example of 55-300 where the images were really soft, BUT the 70-300 is a better lens.
@@WildlifeInspired I totally agree. As long as there is enough light and moderate distance between my subject and the background, i am surprised how sharp a 120€ lens can be, especially when stopping down to 6.3. To be quite honest, its way sharper than necessary for social media. However I am struggling to create more interesting shots in the golden hour as I can practically only shoot not moving subjects from a tripod, which forces me to only go for flight shots in bright, harsh daylight
@@WildlifeInspired very true, I meant in particular that you respect the feelings of the birds and disturb them as little as possible. You possess bodhicitta.
Hi Scott, this is a great video. Thanks so much! I have a question: I’m shooting on a Nikon zfc sometimes with the kit lens 50-250 and sometimes with my 300mm f4. Is there a downside to using a F lens with the adapter on the Z body? It never seems as crisp with the F lens, and really, it should be a better picture as it’s a better lens. (I think)
I would test it. There should not be any significant change in image quality with the f=mount and adapter. The differences is simply the distance to sensor. I did not notice any difference with my f-mount and old lenses before I converted to Z lenses.
Great video and awesome photos mate! Just wondering if your 300mm lens is the same I have the Nikon 300mm f/2.8 VR2? I use it on Nikon D4 and D850. Apart from that I have the Nikon D500 with the Nikon 200-500mm f/5.6 lens that it’s welded to the camera😀
Any focal length from 300mm on up can work for wildlife photography on a crop sensor body and at times a 200 mk can work, at times you can never have a long enough lens it all depends upon the location your photographing wildlife in, for me i try to shoot in National wildlife refuges and local bodies of water from my 14 foot kayak.
Thanks for the video. It would have been interesting for you to manually set the aperture to say 5.6 or 6.3 to make it typical of the beginner range. I am guessing the main difference would be the background with more depth of field but also higher ISO. I enjoyed your ISO Invariance video recently. I need Sony to bring out an equivalent to the Nikon PF 300mm or maybe the PF 500mm even. Thanks again.
Great video. Thanks. The Nikkor 300mm PF f4 rocks. I have the Series III x1.4 teleconverter too, both on a D7200. Just a great lens if you have the patience to get really close but still good if you end up having to crop a bit more. I would be bereft without it. 😊
Thank you... You've inspired me to use a 300mm... i take a lot of nature shots, not usually birds but that's going to change... My budget is small, i use an old Fuji X-T1... Thank you.
Good show Scott, you made your point perfectly understandable. Your images are quite beautiful! Also, I Love my 70-200 2.8 on my d500…500 5.6 is even better!
I used my 300 f/4 pf lens, with and without the 1.4x teleconverter, successfully with my D500. Now that I am shooting Nikon mirrorless, I have been waiting forever for Nikon to come out with the mirrorless successor to the D500. None of the Nikon DX mirrorless cameras have IBIS. I need to use my Z7II in crop mode.
@@WildlifeInspired there’s certainly still demand, but yeah, the nearish future is looking a little dim for a lot of voiceover work, especially on youtube. Still, most viewers and producers prefer real voices-even high quality AI tts like elevenlabs are a bit unnerving or awkward as is. VO for commercial applications (expressive entertainment like games/animation & documentary narration, elearning, IVRs, and corporate training; ACX (Amazon/Audible) even went so far as to ban the use of AI, including RVC, not just TTS) is likely to remain mostly human for a long while though. It’s definitely not the best all-in career path nowadays, but not a bad side gig, especially with a great voice and good articulation
This is why i love my nikon afs 300mm f2.8 with nikon zfc, small enough to put in my backpack with my a7iv and 200-600mm. Hit my need for my usecase. I love 400mm, but it just too big for long hike and more expensive as well. This year gonna be a big year for most of brand. Let see what new bodies can coming out.
Shoot! I'd like to do wildlife photography. I will at least start macro photography with my reverse mount and some extension tubes when I'll decide to buy them. One day, I'll go for a more advanced than my 18-55 mm lens. I'm on a budget for photography in general. I have the perfect place to do bird photography as I have a bird reserve 5 minutes away from my house. I just got a Canon Eos Rebel T7 and I'll be using this for macro, taking my art work in photo and wildlife photography the day I'll be able to afford one lens for wildlife photography. I'll definitely get a tripod as I'm a little shaky when holding the camera.
@@WildlifeInspired I do hope that as well. Though I might gonna grab another lens a bit before my photography class. Do you think 55-250 mm would be a great beginner option or the 75 to 300 mm? I'm doing macro with a reverse mount for now and I might try extension tubes this summer.
I have the older manual f4 version of this lens. The image quality is excellent. Once I nail the focus, I will be really happy. Oh, I just bought a 1.4 teleconverter. I can't wait to see the results of the combination.
I've got a 200-500, but every time I see an image from a 300 2.8 (or even with a 1.4x TC) the bokeh is just something else. I find the bokeh on the 200-500 can become quite harsh and odd, if the subject is not far enough from the background. With the D500, I think my wildlife setup is fairly complete with 200-500 and the 300 2.8 + 1.4TC. I've yet to buy the 300 2.8 but all the images I keep saying are telling me to get a used VR1 :D
Thats what I use. Built like a little tank. With zooms I always feel like that they arent great in bad conditions, I dont have that fear with the 300 2.8
every camera and lens has its own power to get good pics provided you plan for such scenes or subjects. for example, kit lens for even a landscape works fine but cannot be a best thing for fashion photography.
Just curious Scott, when photographing warblers, are you walking through the woods to find them or do you post up a location and wait/call them in to you ?
300mm even on a crop sensor is still a little short, sure you can get great photos but it's a little limiting. add a 1.4tc and it starts to become quite useful At 630mm
The 300mm is the smallest Tele I would recommend for serious beginning wildlife photography. But if your just the weekend average Joe a 200mm would be sufficient. Canon 200mm f2.8 II is still a big part of my pro gear. But I shoot everything from portraits to architecture and everything in between.
@@WildlifeInspired large sandhill cranes and white egrets in Florida all day long with a 200mm. Or song birds in my backyard bird sanctuary yes. Otherwise forget about it. Lol.
That lens is a little slower to focus and wont let in a lot of light. Its a good lens to start with, but you might find a big improvement using the 200-500. It's a bigger financial commitment.
Excellent, I have a old version of 300mm f4 ( af if ed) and I use on a d7200 , but I have question , what about to use it with a 1.4x tc attached? It’s equivalence will be 630mm about f5.6 .. any experience on this one?
ducks yes. songbirds not in the "wild" but i have water feature at my house and i sit in a blind there. Almost all of my close looks come during fall migration and its based on location that I shoot.
Phew…I ended up buying a full frame Nikon d 850 and 70-200 f/2.8 and 200-500 f/5.6 lenses. 70-200 was ok for sports photography but not enough for small birds unless very close. A Nikon d500 would have been good. Can I buy a 300mm lens with a Teleconverter to give 450 mm reach. Please advice
If you have a 200-500, you probably dont need the 300mm option. that Said that 300 is sharper, faster and gives you an option to be 420mm f4 (with converter) but will cost 2x as much
Of course I can. My EF 300mm f2.8L IS II USM is always paired with a native 2x extender. This composite 600mm is great on all my bodies i.e., FF, APS-H & APS-C. Of course I shoot Canon.
Yes of course you can use a 300mm, or indeed any lens.... a talented photographer can take great images with practically anything, but in general it is limiting because a broader range gives you far more creative control..... Something like a 200-600 zoom gives you the option to choose how to approach each shot...... then its just down to your creative ideas for each image ....why limit creative possibilities deliberately?
I'm not sure you caught the premise.... this wasn't a video endorsing a 300mm lens for birds. The topic was generated by someone asking "is it possible." I covered that in the intro I thought.
@@WildlifeInspired Yes i understand that, and as i said any lens is 'possible'....The point i'm making is why limit yourself in that way..... just buy a lens that offers more creative possibilities from the outset.
I have a dead palm tree. Drill holes into it and insert trimmed branches. Gives different angles for different backgrounds. Move around my yard to shoot various subjects but gives you a staging area for feeding stations. Always a work around.
Hi. I shoot Rugby League in Australia which has a field roughly the same size as USA Gridiron as in 100meters. The lighting at night isn't the best as they are local stadiums so I was looking at either the 300mm 2.8 or 400mm 2.8 Nikon on full frame sensor cameras. Second hand. This is a judgement call I understand but would I lose "Much" image quality if I used the 300mm and cropped vs the 400mm uncropped or any ideas you might have. Tanks again
The price is a big difference. I used to shoot soccer with a 300mm on a full frame and it worked as long as action was on "this side" of the field. 400 was too much sometimes and again, the jump in price is significant. If you need more reach you can sacrifice the stop of light daytime and add the TC.
Well done as usual, I'm stuck with the 55 - 300mm kit lens and will never be able to afford good glass, but every once in awhile I get a gem of a shot and it makes me happy. Sometimes you just gotta love bein outside and if I get that one good shot, it's a bonus.
Never loose the effort you put into these, it's what sets you apart from so many other you tubers. Probably tired of me saying over and over again, but effort shows!!!
Did you calibrate the 55-300. Some camera bodies can fine adjust. Mine was definitely off a little when I took it out.
@@WildlifeInspired Hi Scott, to be honest, I never thought of that till this episode, something for me to check out.
If you can afford a used 200-500, that's pretty good value for money imho!
Yeah, I haven’t been good at actually going out and shooting with my 300mm, so my favorite “wildlife” photo is taken with the kit 18-55mm lol.
If you are a Nikon shooter, take a look at 300mm f4 AF or AF-s version.
they are cheap for what they give
Hi Scott. Don't know how I missed this video when it came out. I've been shooting the Nikon 200 500 f5.6 lens for a while on a D500 body. I shoot a lot in my yard, which is wooded and shady and have been frustrated with the high ISO I get at 5.6. I looked at the 300 f4 but opted for the 70-200 FL 2.8 from Nikon (I got a killer deal on it used from MPB). That's a focal equivalent of 300 mm on my crop frame body which is plenty for my yard as I use a blind and feeder/birdbath set up. When I do go on location, I think it will still be useful for low light environmental shots. So thanks for the encouragement and making me feel a little less crazy for trying shorter focal lengths.
You dont expect a lot of tight portraits, also consider a teleconverter (see my macro-like video)
Thanks for the great video. Just researched/bought/unpacked my (new-to-me & first-ever) D300 Nikon with a 75-300 Nikkor ! Even though I'm learning, I'm confident that I can capture some great images. I appreciate your sequence and detail in this video!
Excellent video Scott, the Nikon d500 with a 300mm PF is and excellent combination and the lens takes both the 1.4 and 1.7 X teleconverters and makes a vary light combination for hiking. Thanks for showing what can be done with shorter lenses.
Thank you!
Hi Scott, not sure if you will see this comment since your video went out some time ago. Excellent content, presented in a clear and understandable manor. The comparisons made between full frame and crop sensor at similar focal length were very useful. I was just curious to know since I don’t think you mentioned it. Whether any of the images you showed us were cropped in post or if they were all left uncropped.? As a birder/photographer who was financially limited to 300mm primes for many years I fell into the temptation to crop everything in an effort to “compete with the big boys”. Thanks. I shall certainly check out more of your content. Martin. UK.
Everthing was cropped to various degrees, never less than 3000 pixels wide with several 5000 pixels wide. Not sure if that helps
@@WildlifeInspired Thanks for the response. Yes it does help to know. Thank you. Knowing how small some birds will appear using a 300mm I can better appriciate how close (in some cases) you must have been to your subject. Or rather how close they came to you. I too am a sit and wait photographer. I gave up running around a long time ago. A phrase I often hear from my birding friends is "Are you still here ! ". :-)
Wow great video. I don't have the budget for auto focus telephoto primes. I decided on older manual focus primes and they work great. I miss some captures but it gets me out doing something I enjoy. 180mm and 300mm.
I'm finding your videos very useful as I look to improve in my photography. Thank you
This was a very informative video. Right now I am doing bird photography with a 75-300mm EF 5. 6 and getting great images. I shoot both backyard birds and go into the field to shoot. Like you said running down a bird to get a picture is not the way to get great images of birds. My biggest problem is motion glare when not using a tripod. I have improved, but it still happens from time to time. Thank you for taking time to make this video.
Thanks for this video. Even though I've got a Sigma 150-600, you've inspired me to try going out with the older 300mm f4 I bought on my Z7ii and see what I can get. Migration is going to start soon here in Kazakhstan and videos like this get me excited:-)
awesome! the 300 f4 should be really sharp and an extra stop of light
Love these ‘environmental portraits’ That you get with the 300 and shorter. Reminds me of the bird and flower compositions by Chinese ink painters.
Excellent a lot of info without talking to much.
Really interesting and informative Scott. A 300mm lens would be more practical and easier to carry around than some of the other heavier lenses. Especially on those longer hikes. I’ll definitely be taking it into consideration after watching your video. Thanks for sharing your experiences and beautiful images as always. Cheers
Thanks L
These pictures are just inspiring to me, a really great video. I think that just beeing patient enough is a lesson everyone has to learn the hard way. Just the other day i was able to photograph a kingfisher, which is like the gold standard for (small) Bird photography here in Germany, as they are a tough subjects, yet so colorfull. I had to visit the location 12 times to get a picture of them, but even for these tiny birds 300mm on a 1.5x Crop is enough, if you are patient and willing to come again and again and again. Sadly i had exposure compensation dialed in and my D500 completely clipped the sky and the water.
sorry you missed that shot!
Hey Scott, I like this video because it helps me better understand the limits and what I can do with my kit lenses. Super explanation on the concept of focal equivalency. Never understood until now. I also have some good glass and I will definitely watch out for older lenses. I have all Pentax gear - I know not the best of choices but I used Pentax about 40 years ago when I tried out the hobby for first time. Life, kids, work, etc., got in the way and now that I'm retired went back to what I knew. No regrets - love my equipment.
Sometimes it just means a little change of mindset. Embrace environment, dont worry as much about hyper detail.
Awesome video as always Scott! I'm 1 of your biggest fans as you know! I also think it's great because with some of the shorter lenses you can put in more light and that's very helpful to me.
Appreciate that Lisa and all of your support (everywhere)
Great inspiring video!
I just purchased the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS II USM lens and I was thinking of getting the 1.4 extender, but it looks like there’s quite a bit of image softening from the 1.4x. The choice of getting that lens and the Sigma zoom 600 mm lens was pretty easy because I’m mostly biking around New York City and Central Park and there’s also the Jamaica Wildlife Refuge. (The Sigma lens being quite a bit larger.)
Your video convinced me birding can be accomplished with patience with the 1.6 crop factor and I should try to learn the camera, the craft and have patience and that way I can travel light. Many thanks!
Don't think you have to over crop and make everything a tight shot. Look at the scene
@@WildlifeInspired Thank you, I got some beautiful scenic bird shots and by not "chasing" them, some nice closeups from 15 to 20 feet!
I shoot crows with a 50mm on a full frame and im gonna try 24 or 20mm. I get that it's hard to get close to most birds but if you can, a change from the compressed blurred background look would stand out. The photos in this video do nothing for me visually, i can see how they can be used in bird books. I think theres a guy who shoots kingsfishers with an ultrawide on youtube, cant remember the name.
This was a vary valuable video, as I am considering a 300 2.8. I appreciate your candor. Great video!
am amazing lens and very adaptable with teleconverters. ALSO minimum focus is 6 feet which can create interesting looks (and adaptable for macro type work)
@@WildlifeInspired I'm curious what your thought is about using it with a 1.4 vs a 1.7x teleconverter. Do think you lose too much detail and light by going up to 1.7 from 1.4?
so you did not DO 300mm on a Full frame
The DO is a 400mm lens and our friend here shoots Nikon anyway!
thanks for the advice, greetings from amazon
I'm shooting today with the R6 and the Canon EF 300mm F4 IS L lens. I'm getting some great detailed shots of ospreys on their nest with much lower iso than my RF100-400mm. 300 mm is plenty long for my needs today.
Good to know. Let me know what you think after you watch
This guy knows his stuff. You cant just walk teh forest and expect to get good shots. You have to sit for hours....and be low. 300 good for less timid birds.........very hard with really timid birds like wild ducks that can be very timid. 400 needed on them most times (or more). this guys knows his tuff bigtime.
Great points. I use both 300 f2.8 and the f4 D lens ( a great sharp hand-hold-able) with both 1.4 and 1.7 converters. With the 1.7 they are 500mm and on my D500 or 7500 they’re 750 equivalent. Not so shabby. Thanks for your perspective.
I love the 300 2.8 for Nikon!
This is so timely. My travel lens for birds is a 300 f4 on a crop body. I also have a 1.4x and 2x teleconverter. But I may be getting a mirrorless full frame camera for travel (more compact and better for wide angle street/travel photography) and now wondering do I get the 400 f5.6 or the 100-400 that overlaps with the 70-200 I will also carry!!!???? Decisions, decisions, decisions!!!! lol. Oh and the camera gear is all Canon.
mostly what you will see is example of what is possible. With wildlife technique in the field is often the key to success. Great locaitons and lots of patience
Hi Scott, great video, thanks for sharing your experience with shorter focal length for birds. As I am trying to have a one prime lens setup only for wildlife, I wanted to ask for your opinion on what would be the best compromise on focal length: would you say a 400mm lens (I am talking about the older 400 2.8 by Nikon) or a 500mm (in this case 500 f4)? I have a D4S and planning to get a second hand D500 too (to use interchangeably depending on light conditions and the reach I need). Thanks!
I like the 400 f2.8 in every way especially because its adaptable and focuses closer
@@WildlifeInspired thanks!
Yes, you inspired me to get a 400mm F 2.8! 😂 Lol! But really you have shown it’s not really the gear you have but what how you use your gear in being creative with composition and lighting that makes the image! Not many people think about how to use a wide angle lens for bird photography and maybe controlling your camera remotely to achieve unique and stunning images. I’ve learned a lot! Thank you! 😊
Gear helps! but a racing car in the hands of a novice is just a waste of horsepower
@@WildlifeInspired true that! Lol! 😉
Just found your videos. Beautiful photos. I shoot with various older Nikon bodies and used lenses but I'm having a great time and that's what it's about right?
If it makes you proud thats great, if it makes you happy, that's what really matters
good video ... very informative with good examples. Thank you for sharing your experience. Got my R7 with RF 100-400mm. The setup is light and great for wildlife.
Glad it was helpful!
45 megapixel FF sensor Nikon Z7 II and a 70-300mm lens is what I chose. That makes an effective 20 megapixel crop camera with a 450mm lens. And in FF mode I can do some great portraits with a shorter lens. Love the versatility!
Agree. Those high megapixel full frame bodies are like a crop sensor and super versatile. If you can fill the frame you get to a of details and if you need to crop, you can effectively get the benefit of the "crop factor"
On what principle does it work ?
@@WildlifeInspired However, if you let go of portraits you can get an APS_C camera much more cheaply
This lens works perfect for me, fantastic taking sharp photos almost 100% together with my new X-S20 and the eye focus! I love it
I love the "quack quack" use at least a 150-600 mm lens on an APS-C ... you'll love it!!
I'm impressed with how quickly you implemented the idea, even though technology focused videos get a lot more clicks, as you mentioned. I'm really looking forward to this video as a chance to step up my game even with my "cheap equipment", because improving on my gear (old AF-S 70-300 VR) as a Student is just not possible, but if i ask for ways to improve my pictures on other plattforms my "cheap" gear is the most given reason for my stagnsation as a photographer.
you can abosolutely shoot 300mm on a crop sensotr! BUT i will not lie, I have a big advantage with light (mine is f2.8) and the focus is fast and sharp. I show some example of 55-300 where the images were really soft, BUT the 70-300 is a better lens.
@@WildlifeInspired I totally agree. As long as there is enough light and moderate distance between my subject and the background, i am surprised how sharp a 120€ lens can be, especially when stopping down to 6.3. To be quite honest, its way sharper than necessary for social media. However I am struggling to create more interesting shots in the golden hour as I can practically only shoot not moving subjects from a tripod, which forces me to only go for flight shots in bright, harsh daylight
Scott this was amazing. Your work is absolutely beautiful. I aspire to get there with birds some day.
Thank you!
Thanks for the video!!! Great pictures and I deeply appreciate the fact that you're working ethically.
Ethics is very subjective but I appreciate your compliment
@@WildlifeInspired very true, I meant in particular that you respect the feelings of the birds and disturb them as little as possible. You possess bodhicitta.
Hi Scott, this is a great video. Thanks so much! I have a question: I’m shooting on a Nikon zfc sometimes with the kit lens 50-250 and sometimes with my 300mm f4. Is there a downside to using a F lens with the adapter on the Z body? It never seems as crisp with the F lens, and really, it should be a better picture as it’s a better lens. (I think)
I would test it. There should not be any significant change in image quality with the f=mount and adapter. The differences is simply the distance to sensor. I did not notice any difference with my f-mount and old lenses before I converted to Z lenses.
Great video and awesome photos mate! Just wondering if your 300mm lens is the same I have the Nikon 300mm f/2.8 VR2? I use it on Nikon D4 and D850. Apart from that I have the Nikon D500 with the Nikon 200-500mm f/5.6 lens that it’s welded to the camera😀
Any focal length from 300mm on up can work for wildlife photography on a crop sensor body and at times a 200 mk can work, at times you can never have a long enough lens it all depends upon the location your photographing wildlife in, for me i try to shoot in National wildlife refuges and local bodies of water from my 14 foot kayak.
Thanks for the video. It would have been interesting for you to manually set the aperture to say 5.6 or 6.3 to make it typical of the beginner range. I am guessing the main difference would be the background with more depth of field but also higher ISO. I enjoyed your ISO Invariance video recently. I need Sony to bring out an equivalent to the Nikon PF 300mm or maybe the PF 500mm even. Thanks again.
Great video. Thanks. The Nikkor 300mm PF f4 rocks. I have the Series III x1.4 teleconverter too, both on a D7200. Just a great lens if you have the patience to get really close but still good if you end up having to crop a bit more. I would be bereft without it. 😊
Practical information and beautiful images as always. Great images can be created at any focal length.
Thanks Aaron!
Yes I do bird-photography with 300 mm lens.
Thank you... You've inspired me to use a 300mm... i take a lot of nature shots, not usually birds but that's going to change... My budget is small, i use an old Fuji X-T1... Thank you.
Have fun!
Good show Scott, you made your point perfectly understandable. Your images are quite beautiful! Also, I Love my 70-200 2.8 on my d500…500 5.6 is even better!
Thanks! 👍
I used my 300 f/4 pf lens, with and without the 1.4x teleconverter, successfully with my D500. Now that I am shooting Nikon mirrorless, I have been waiting forever for Nikon to come out with the mirrorless successor to the D500. None of the Nikon DX mirrorless cameras have IBIS. I need to use my Z7II in crop mode.
I think that one is coming, has to be. The D500 was a real legendary body.
Your voice is incredible. The tone and the way you speak remind me a bit of Mike Delgaudio (BoothJunkie)-should get into audiobooks haha
I had a thought to do voice overs (but with AI not sure there will be much demand for this)
@@WildlifeInspired there’s certainly still demand, but yeah, the nearish future is looking a little dim for a lot of voiceover work, especially on youtube. Still, most viewers and producers prefer real voices-even high quality AI tts like elevenlabs are a bit unnerving or awkward as is. VO for commercial applications (expressive entertainment like games/animation & documentary narration, elearning, IVRs, and corporate training; ACX (Amazon/Audible) even went so far as to ban the use of AI, including RVC, not just TTS) is likely to remain mostly human for a long while though. It’s definitely not the best all-in career path nowadays, but not a bad side gig, especially with a great voice and good articulation
This is why i love my nikon afs 300mm f2.8 with nikon zfc, small enough to put in my backpack with my a7iv and 200-600mm. Hit my need for my usecase. I love 400mm, but it just too big for long hike and more expensive as well. This year gonna be a big year for most of brand. Let see what new bodies can coming out.
Love the 300!
Shoot! I'd like to do wildlife photography. I will at least start macro photography with my reverse mount and some extension tubes when I'll decide to buy them. One day, I'll go for a more advanced than my 18-55 mm lens. I'm on a budget for photography in general. I have the perfect place to do bird photography as I have a bird reserve 5 minutes away from my house. I just got a Canon Eos Rebel T7 and I'll be using this for macro, taking my art work in photo and wildlife photography the day I'll be able to afford one lens for wildlife photography. I'll definitely get a tripod as I'm a little shaky when holding the camera.
Hopefully, til then get out and enjoy
@@WildlifeInspired I do hope that as well. Though I might gonna grab another lens a bit before my photography class. Do you think 55-250 mm would be a great beginner option or the 75 to 300 mm? I'm doing macro with a reverse mount for now and I might try extension tubes this summer.
Amazing work! Never subscribed so easily :)
Thanks so much!
Hi i have a nikon f 750 full frame , im thinking of getting a 70 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 G IF-ED VR
Or should i go for at least a 400
400 is a better option overall if you can get something you can afford. 300 works okay of a full frame or with a teleconverter.
@@WildlifeInspired can you recommend me lenses for let's say 400 euro ?
I have the older manual f4 version of this lens. The image quality is excellent. Once I nail the focus, I will be really happy. Oh, I just bought a 1.4 teleconverter. I can't wait to see the results of the combination.
Great to hear!
I've got a 200-500, but every time I see an image from a 300 2.8 (or even with a 1.4x TC) the bokeh is just something else.
I find the bokeh on the 200-500 can become quite harsh and odd, if the subject is not far enough from the background.
With the D500, I think my wildlife setup is fairly complete with 200-500 and the 300 2.8 + 1.4TC. I've yet to buy the 300 2.8 but all the images I keep saying are telling me to get a used VR1 :D
Thats what I use. Built like a little tank. With zooms I always feel like that they arent great in bad conditions, I dont have that fear with the 300 2.8
Will the older model 300mm f/2.8 AF-D lens be good enough ?
optically YES
every camera and lens has its own power to get good pics provided you plan for such scenes or subjects. for example, kit lens for even a landscape works fine but cannot be a best thing for fashion photography.
Just curious Scott, when photographing warblers, are you walking through the woods to find them or do you post up a location and wait/call them in to you ?
I basically have "spots" Depends on time of years and took lots of time to find the best areas. Sometimes I even shoot from a car
More great information...thanks.
Glad it was helpful!
Your duck logo's wing looks like someone giving the your #1 hand signal or flipping the bird.
It is ...... Its called "Ducks are Assholes" for a reason
300mm even on a crop sensor is still a little short, sure you can get great photos but it's a little limiting. add a 1.4tc and it starts to become quite useful At 630mm
Of course its more reach, but the point was to show actual results of 300mm. Not to say its the best bet.
The 300mm is the smallest Tele I would recommend for serious beginning wildlife photography.
But if your just the weekend average Joe a 200mm would be sufficient. Canon 200mm f2.8 II is still a big part of my pro gear. But I shoot everything from portraits to architecture and everything in between.
agree. If you can shoot birds with a 200, god bless you
@@WildlifeInspired large sandhill cranes and white egrets in Florida all day long with a 200mm. Or song birds in my backyard bird sanctuary yes. Otherwise forget about it. Lol.
Ive seen great photos of kingfishers shot with a 15mm. Probably easier to get that close to a bird than to set yourself apart with a 400/600mm lens...
Canon crop factor is x1.6 = 480mm full-frame equivalent.
Nikon 70 300 dx lens suitable for bird photography your openion sir
That lens is a little slower to focus and wont let in a lot of light. Its a good lens to start with, but you might find a big improvement using the 200-500. It's a bigger financial commitment.
@@WildlifeInspired thank you mr.scott for your valuable information
Did you use a Nikon 300mm f/4 PF lens ?
300 2.8 , I do not own the PF lens
Excellent, I have a old version of 300mm f4 ( af if ed) and I use on a d7200 , but I have question , what about to use it with a 1.4x tc attached? It’s equivalence will be 630mm about f5.6 .. any experience on this one?
the 1.4 doesnt lose much in terms of quality, will likely focus a little slower
@@WildlifeInspired thanks for the replying 👍🏽👍🏽
hey scott you talk about being comfortable at 7ft etc, do you use a blind most of the time?
ducks yes. songbirds not in the "wild" but i have water feature at my house and i sit in a blind there. Almost all of my close looks come during fall migration and its based on location that I shoot.
Phew…I ended up buying a full frame Nikon d 850 and 70-200 f/2.8 and 200-500 f/5.6 lenses. 70-200 was ok for sports photography but not enough for small birds unless very close. A Nikon d500 would have been good.
Can I buy a 300mm lens with a Teleconverter to give 450 mm reach. Please advice
If you have a 200-500, you probably dont need the 300mm option. that Said that 300 is sharper, faster and gives you an option to be 420mm f4 (with converter) but will cost 2x as much
Makes sense …Thankyou
Good video.
Thanks!
The Olympus 300/f4 Pro in micro 4/3rds is insane. (600 mm 35 mm equivalent)
I have heard a lot of good things about that ultra light set up
Sony a6400+ sony 70-350 = ❤?
would you like to be a guest on my live stream panel ? I use the mk2 and rf 100-500
its 480mm on canon
I forget canon has a smaller sensor sometimes
Of course I can. My EF 300mm f2.8L IS II USM is always paired with a native 2x extender. This composite 600mm is great on all my bodies i.e., FF, APS-H & APS-C. Of course I shoot Canon.
The cannon 2x is much better than the Nikon 2x but really wanted to try to show the scale that can be achieved at 300 on a crop
Yes of course you can use a 300mm, or indeed any lens.... a talented photographer can take great images with practically anything, but in general it is limiting because a broader range gives you far more creative control..... Something like a 200-600 zoom gives you the option to choose how to approach each shot...... then its just down to your creative ideas for each image ....why limit creative possibilities deliberately?
I'm not sure you caught the premise.... this wasn't a video endorsing a 300mm lens for birds. The topic was generated by someone asking "is it possible." I covered that in the intro I thought.
@@WildlifeInspired Yes i understand that, and as i said any lens is 'possible'....The point i'm making is why limit yourself in that way..... just buy a lens that offers more creative possibilities from the outset.
great !!!!
Thanks
I have a dead palm tree. Drill holes into it and insert trimmed branches. Gives different angles for different backgrounds. Move around my yard to shoot various subjects but gives you a staging area for feeding stations. Always a work around.
doing a video on back yard photography soon. Sounds like you have a great set up
I use a 400mm.
Hi. I shoot Rugby League in Australia which has a field roughly the same size as USA Gridiron as in 100meters. The lighting at night isn't the best as they are local stadiums so I was looking at either the 300mm 2.8 or 400mm 2.8 Nikon on full frame sensor cameras. Second hand. This is a judgement call I understand but would I lose "Much" image quality if I used the 300mm and cropped vs the 400mm uncropped or any ideas you might have. Tanks again
The price is a big difference. I used to shoot soccer with a 300mm on a full frame and it worked as long as action was on "this side" of the field. 400 was too much sometimes and again, the jump in price is significant. If you need more reach you can sacrifice the stop of light daytime and add the TC.
The Tokina 400mm 2.8 at about $175.00 used in excellent condiion is an affordable option.
300?? Not 400??
I found tokina 400mm FL f5.6 vintage Lens for Nikon