I posted this in the Nikon camera equipment board and was wondering if I could get some help from you guys as well.

Hey guys, Im looking to possibly buy a new lens for my Nikon D80. I only have the one lens that came with the kit which is an 18-135mm. I would definitely like a zoom lens. I would be willing to spend upwards of 500 bucks. I mostly shoot wildlife/nature scenes. Plus I'll be going to Australia in May and would love to have a new lens to take over there. Thanks in advance!

I really would appreciate any help. You guys all take stunning pictures and I can imagine half of them are from a good distance. So I'd figure you all would have some knowledge to share. Thanks!

Do you have a focal length range you're looking for? If you're looking for a long telephoto lens for shooting wildlife, you're budget is going to limit your selection, but there are some options. Depending on you travel arrangements, you may want to keep the overall size of the lens in mind as well.

If it's up to $500 that you want to pay, then for a new lens you may want to consider 70-300 f4-5.6 VR. Very good image quality especially at the short end. For 300 you probably need to stop down to f8 to get better quality. But, overall, it's a bargain. Really. Not sure if you can use TC with it though. Other than that, you may have to look for used 80-400 or a 300 f4. I think you have to pay more to get 70-200 f2.8 VR even for a used one. Anything longer, I don't think you can get them with $500.

Oh, have you thought about get some old lens, those without VR or may be even older? I don't know much about them personally but may worth checking them out.

ive been looking at 80-400 on ebay and they all go for over a grand. 70-200 is even more.

70-300 is probbably your best bet, but its a pretty slow lense (same as 80-400 though), it does have vr though

Don't forget to look at 3rd party lenses like Tamron, Tokina and Sigma. I'm not real familiar with what they offer, but you may find something similar to the Nikon lens, for less.

Hey, slayer, for wildlife I feel that you need to be at around 400mm and higher. Since you're looking for zooms, there isn't too much within your budget.

I know nothing about Nikon and 3rd party lenses, but I did a quick search through B&H's site and found the following:

Sigma 135-400mm f/4.5 - 5.6 APO ($589)
Tokina 80-400mm f/4.5 - 5.6 ($650)
Sigma 170-500mm f/5 - 6.3 APO ($769)

Again, I'm not endorsing those - just stating that they seem to be the closest to your budget. I know there are a few people on this site that have the 170-500mm. Perhaps you can strike up a deal with them?

Good luck.

I have the Sigma 170-500mm lens in a Canon EOS mount, and it's my main wildlife lens. I purchases is several years ago, before I knew anything about photography. I did post a review of this lens on this site a while back if you're interested.

The bottom line on the lens, it's pretty good for the money, but painfully slow. It needs to be stopped down to at least f/9, and the focus is slow and noisy. That may have changed on the newer version.

Check out www.keh.com for some used gear.

Thank you guys for all the responses! Ive noticed the 70-300mm name has been tossed around on this forum a lot. I'll have to look into it and the 3rd party ones as well.I only have up to 135mm so i guess anything would be better. I wasnt really looking for a telephoto lens, I dont need anything to powerful, not yet at least. I just want a lens to add and to make my kit a little better. The budget I mentioned is what I can put down on a lens now. I can save up or put more money aside for it if i have to. I'm only an amature so, lol. But thank you guys once again.

Tokina 80-400mm f/4.5 - 5.6 ($650)

Had this one; the newer one with the tripod mounting foot. Very sharp in the lower range and even up to 300 but not perfect after that. I have shot Tokina's 400 f5.6 prime with really great results so I think my technique was OK (which is very important with longer focal lengths). It's as sharp in the 80-200 range as my Nikon 80-200 f2.8, and as a matter of fact I have two 16x24's hanging in my house taken with this Tokina on a 6mp camera.

But, it doesn't have VR. Being that I'm not much of a wildlife shooter, I suppose that's my cue...

Now, when a lens says 80-400mm f/4.5 - 5.6, the f-stops it gives are the biggest you can get while using that lens? If thats the case does that mean your shutter speed is slower or faster depending on how big the f-stop number is?

Like the lens I used as an example. F/4.5 would give you slower shutter speeds than a lens with f/2.8?

the smaller the f number the larger the apeture hole, and thus lets in more light, so you can have faster shutter speeds. f2.8 also has a shallower dof than 4.5 would to... which can be a concern if your tryign to isolate an animal from the back ground.

a 4.5 -5.6 lense would have f range of 4.5-22 (or so) at the wide end and 5.6-22 at the tele end.

OK Slayer heres my take for your $500 you have a few good options if you don't mind buying used and doing the Ebay thing , there are Sigma 400mm Apo f4.5-5.6 that can be had for about $200.to $300 or a 135-400mm Sigma f4.5-5.6 Apo and if you want more range yet you can get the 170-500mm for about $450 used and $675 new but you have to forget about VR at those prices .Now if you really want VR Nikon has the poor mans lens for you in the 70-300mm which i have for about $500 and if you still want more range you can add the Kenko 1.4X DG TCON that will auto focus with the 70-300 VR on a D50 but im not sure it will with your D80. As i write this theres a 170-500mm on Ebay that is going for $ 300 with a hour left in bidding , i expect it will close at $450 or less. Now if your not in a hurry Sigma is coming out with a VR 150-500mm in a few months and from what i read its going to be a awesome lens but for what price i don't know. I had the 400mm Sigma but it would not auto focus with a Tcon so i traded it in on the 70-300mm and the kenko Tcon and im very happy with it . Later next summer i plan on getting a Sigma 170-500mm or maybe the 50-500mm. Hope this helps ou out .If there is something you would like to know about the 70-300 VR don't hesitate to ask.

PS: it may be a day or so before i answer, things have been hectic at work and i hit the sac early these days and haven't used my camera in 4 weeks or more lol.

Ha, thank you Knight! Is sigma a good 3rd party lens? Ive read both good and bad reviews about their products, but i guess that would go with any brand. You sure did lay out a lot of options for me. Now with the VR, that just helps you get crisper shots while zoomed in, correct? What is the Kenko 1.4x DG TCON you are tlaking about? Sounds like an add-on to your camera and lens. I know I have some research to do and I have a few months to do so. Thank you once again Knight, and dont worry, I'll be asking questions to keep you even more busy, haha.

Now with the VR, that just helps you get crisper shots while zoomed in, correct?

Just like anything else in Photography, "it depends". VR is vibration reduction, and basically the same thing as Canon's IS or image stabilization. It helps to counteract camera shake at slower shutter speeds, which will generally get you sharper hand-held shots.

Realize that it won't do anything to stop a moving subject, so just because you can get a sharp image at 1/20 sec (just an example), a person walking thru the frame will still be blurred.

The longer the focal length, the more that VR will be helpful if handheld. There's a "rule" about hand holding a camera, the shutter speed should be the inverse of the focal length or faster. In other words, a 300mm lens should be at 1/300 or faster (1/500, etc). With VR, you can probably get by with a stop or two (or more) slower - maybe even 1/60. This "rule" is really a guideline, and experiment to see what works for you. I haven't tried it for awhile, but at least used to be able to do a pretty good job with a 50mm at 1/20, no VR.

I think VR/IS has been the best thing since sliced bread. Really makes life easier.

Sure in the "old" days, there were no such things and we used tripods religiously. Not saying that we should stop using tripods, but I truly feel that one can get more successful shots by not using tripods while the VR/IS compensates for that lack.

I've been able to shoot in the weirdest positions where no tripod (or monopod for that matter) could go.


If you have the choice, get the VR version. Better to have it and not use it very much rather than not having it and wishing you did.