Best wildlife lens options for a Nikon D5200: 55-300mm, 70-300mm, or a prime with teleconverter?
Asked 2/7/2013
4 views
2 answers
0
I’m choosing a Nikon D5200 for wildlife photography, mainly mammals and reptiles. I’m on a limited budget and want a lens that I won’t outgrow too quickly. Because the D5200 does not have an in-body focus motor, I need a lens that will autofocus on this camera.
I’d like vibration reduction, and I’m trying to decide between the Nikon 55-300mm, 55-200mm, or possibly a prime around 200mm with a teleconverter. For wildlife on a DX body, is 300mm about the minimum practical focal length? Also, in general, which tends to hurt image quality more: using a zoom lens, or using a teleconverter on a shorter prime?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
13y ago
2 Answers
2
Although @Itai is right that 300mm is somehow short for usual wildlife photography, but IMO it really depends on how close you could get to the subject and how large you wish to print.
Nikon 55-300mm is about $400, if that's around your budget, I'm afraid it's the best thing you could get. if you could pay more, I recommend the Nikon AF-S VR Zoom-NIKKOR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED, it has better quality, just look it up in Flickr and read its review on photozone.de. see this list, choose what you can afford, look them up in Flickr and check their reviews in photozone.de.
Remember that you have a 24MP camera, that's pretty big and very useful if you need to crop your images. also I would rent/borrow a lens before buying it, it helps to understand the lens better.
Because D5200 doesn't have an AF motor, you should choose a lens with internal focus motor to have auto-focus, for Nikon line, that means all AF-S and AF-I.
Originally by user11549. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user11549
13y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
For a Nikon D5200, 300mm is generally a practical minimum for wildlife, and it can still feel short depending on the animal and how close you can get. On DX, your 24MP sensor does give you some useful cropping room.
Between your options, the 55-300mm is the more suitable budget wildlife choice than the 55-200mm. If you can spend more, the AF-S 70-300mm VR is generally the better-quality option.
A 200mm prime plus teleconverter is usually not ideal here. Teleconverters reduce effective aperture, and on this camera that can cost you autofocus performance or autofocus entirely. That matters a lot for wildlife.
In general, primes still have a quality edge, but zooms are often more practical for wildlife because your distance to the subject changes and you may not be able to move freely. A zoom is especially useful in situations like shooting from a vehicle.
Also, the slower apertures of consumer telezooms can be limiting at the long end. Brighter long lenses perform better, but they cost more. If your budget is limited, start with a 55-300mm or, better, a 70-300mm AF-S VR, and consider renting or borrowing before buying if possible.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI13y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
Which 300mm lens is a good choice for wildlife on a Nikon D60 in Kruger National Park?
How does the Nikon 55-300mm VR compare with the 55-200mm VR on a D5100?
Choosing a telephoto zoom for a Canon 60D: 70-300mm vs 70-200mm f/2.8 for wildlife
Should I choose a Nikon DSLR with an in-body AF motor, or rely on AF-S lenses?
Should I keep a Sigma 150-600mm for wildlife, or switch to a 300mm prime with a teleconverter?