[Des]

On the other hand they keep the Peregrine falcons well fed.

I forgot to mention spotted turtle doves and rock pigeons. Some people even feed them; on the other hand authorities have sometimes used poison. There was a pair of peregrines nesting in a tall building in the Melbourne CBD a few years ago, but their chick died after being fed poisoned pigeon.

What about the K 300/4? Very sharp and fast enough to work with the 1.7x AF adaptor for a 500/6.9 lense

The OP's question is answered but others reading this might wonder about this (or maybe the SMC or Super Takumar 300/4) as a budget option. Isn't stop-down metering a nuisance for birding? Are preset lenses easier to use?

[GeneV]

Not mentioned yet is the M200/4.

Seb

That is the only quality option mentioned so far which is consistently offered for significantly under $100.

I do see used DAL 55-300 lenses offered for just over $100 on Fleabay, as are a few of the older zooms mentioned. Given the AF capabilities, the 55-300 has to be the favored choice, even if it is just a little more.

[Des]

That is the only quality option mentioned so far which is consistently offered for significantly under $100.

Quality is a good point because images from a sharp prime can take more cropping.

A heavily cropped image from my DFA 100 f2.8 WR macro (a razor-sharp lens) taken with the K-3 can sometimes compare favourably with an image taken with the 55-300, if the subject isn't too far away. Here's one (heavily cropped) from about 3-4m (say 12-16').


And the bonus is that the 100 is good wide open, which allows more use in low light.

(I know we are not talking about a $100 lens here, just illustrating the point that if you can get a good tele prime cheaply it can be a viable option even if it doesn't have the reach of one of the xx-300mm zooms.)

200 f4 is neither long nor fast (the 55-300 is f4.5 at 200mm), but if it is really sharp it could produce images that might be better than those from one of the xx-300 consumer zooms, at least for subjects that are not too far away. This assumes, of course, that you are willing to give up autofocus and auto-aperture control.

A 300 f4, like the K series one Lowell Goudge mentioned, would have the advantage of being as long as the xx-300 zooms but a stop faster, and probably significantly sharper (albeit with potentially more CA). I have seen them for sale in Australia for around $A150. The trade-offs are that you give up the convenience of a zoom, AF and auto-aperture (and, in the case of the 55-300, in-camera distortion-correction of jpgs) and that the prime is bulkier and weighs a lot more.

[GeneV]

Quality is a good point because images from a sharp prime can take more cropping.

A heavily cropped image from my DFA 100 f2.8 WR macro (a razor-sharp lens) taken with the K-3 can sometimes compare favourably with an image taken with the 55-300, if the subject isn't too far away. Here's one (heavily cropped) from about 3-4m (say 12-16').


And the bonus is that the 100 is good wide open, which allows more use in low light.

(I know we are not talking about a $100 lens here, just illustrating the point that if you can get a good tele prime cheaply it can be a viable option even if it doesn't have the reach of one of the xx-300mm zooms.)

200 f4 is neither long nor fast (the 55-300 is f4.5 at 200mm), but if it is really sharp it could produce images that might be better than those from one of the xx-300 consumer zooms, at least for subjects that are not too far away. This assumes, of course, that you are willing to give up autofocus and auto-aperture control.

A 300 f4, like the K series one Lowell Goudge mentioned, would have the advantage of being as long as the xx-300 zooms but a stop faster, and probably significantly sharper (albeit with potentially more CA). I have seen them for sale in Australia for around $A150. The trade-offs are that you give up the convenience of a zoom, AF and auto-aperture (and, in the case of the 55-300, in-camera distortion-correction of jpgs) and that the prime is bulkier and weighs a lot more.

I am an avid birder and have taken some nice shots with the m200 which I could crop to the equivalent of 300mm with no sweat, but honestly, it is much easier easier with the 55-300. Most of my birding shots these days are with the DA*300, which crops effortlessly to 100% and takes a teleconverter in stride, but that is way out of the OP price range. (It is almost as sharp as my DFA100, but with more reach)

[clackers]

. There was a pair of peregrines nesting in a tall building in the Melbourne CBD a few years ago, but their chick died after being fed poisoned pigeon.

Oh, is that what happened to them? Apparently there was a screen in the bank foyer where you could see a stream of the nest.

I got a snap a couple of years ago of one in its nest at the Organ Pipes with the Bigmos.

[Lowell Goudge]

The OP's question is answered but others reading this might wonder about this (or maybe the SMC or Super Takumar 300/4) as a budget option. Isn't stop-down metering a nuisance for birding? Are preset lenses easier to use?

Actually not in my experience with flagship cameras. Green button is close to your thumb and easy to set withiut looking at the camera, you can keep your eye in the viewfinder .Also tree trunks are a good substitute for grey cards

Also when you are shooting , unless you are stalking you can set your exposure check histogram S etc, and wait with perfect exposure for your bird to appear.

---------- Post added 01-22-2016 at 07:02 PM ----------

I am an avid birder and have taken some nice shots with the m200 which I could crop to the equivalent of 300mm with no sweat, but honestly, it is much easier easier with the 55-300. Most of my birding shots these days are with the DA*300, which crops effortlessly to 100% and takes a teleconverter in stride, but that is way out of the OP price range. (It is almost as sharp as my DFA100, but with more reach)

I use the K300/4 with the AF adaptor. It works well autofocuses well and the AF is a selective range around the focus point so you can select out of the focus range those annoying tree branches

Also the AF adaptor has such small elements it is really fast to focus

[Digitalis]

for a 500/6.9 lense

I can't believe you wrote that.

[Lowell Goudge]

I can't believe you wrote that.

Ok fine it is 510mm f6.8 but 6.9 is the commonly used f stop and I rounded 510 down to 500 mm,

[Digitalis]

Ok fine it is 510mm f6.8 but 6.9 is the commonly used f stop and I rounded 510 down to 500 mm,

I wasn't complaining about that: it was your use of "lense" instead of lens.

[Lowell Goudge]

If you look up lense in the dictionary it states lens as a synonym.

Both are correct, and we have had this discussion before on the forum

[Des]

Oh, is that what happened to them? Apparently there was a screen in the bank foyer where you could see a stream of the nest. I got a snap a couple of years ago of one in its nest at the Organ Pipes with the Bigmos.

Apparently there have been five pairs nesting there over the years since the early 1980s. One pair and their chick died in 2004:
One bird off the Melbourne CBD list
But the site was soon recolonised:
Fastest bird on earth enjoys family time high above city street - National
And subsequent pairs have bred successfully:
Falcons - not your average CBD residents
Those at Pt Addis are also well-known, although they don't have the same supply of feral pigeons:
No Cookies | Herald Sun

[Digitalis]

If you look up lense in the dictionary it states lens as a synonym.

Only on online "community" dictionaries with questionable editors. In the standard English: Oxford,Collins, Miriam-Webster,Cambridge,Macmillan and Mcquarie dictionaries in no case was "Lense" a recognized spelling for lens.

Enough said.

[HudsonShooter]

this year I bought a 2x converter for 10 $ and you can get a used k mount 70-200 for under 40. I do own a sigma 70-300 and that would work manual and af and it is cheap. .

[UncleVanya]

I think the 50-200 is a maligned lens.

[pepperberry farm]

I think the 50-200 is a maligned lens.

agreed - I plan on using mine to Single with in the near future...