[Tuarreg]

Check this out!!


Nikon 24 mm f/3.5 PC-E Nikkor ED

Tuarreg

 

[Arainach]

Quote:

Originally Posted by stuartr /img/forum/go_quote.gif You realize that VR works on the F5 and F6 as well, don't you? I have an F6 and the VR seems to work the same on it as it does on digital.

Correct. VR is lens-based, not camera-based, so on any camera with coupling capable of powering it (F5 or F6, any digital) it'll work perfectly. And as far as I know the only reason it can't work on the F2 through F4 is that they can't take G lenses and all of the VR lenses are G (i.e. no aperture ring).

 

[perplex]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kevin gilmore /img/forum/go_quote.gif ...

So you finally got your Nikon full frame

 

[M0T0XGUY]

I just picked up an 80-200 f/2.8 (2 ring) and a 35 f/2 from eBay - both of which should be here quite soon. Did I overspend at 750 for the former and 265 for the latter? (Regardless, I've seen the capabilities of both these lenses, and at this point I don't really care about the prices).

 

[Towert7]

Quote:

Originally Posted by M0T0XGUY /img/forum/go_quote.gif I just picked up an 80-200 f/2.8 (2 ring) and a 35 f/2 from eBay - both of which should be here quite soon. Did I overspend at 750 for the former and 265 for the latter? (Regardless, I've seen the capabilities of both these lenses, and at this point I don't really care about the prices).

265$us for a used 35mm F/2 seems like not such a good deal when the new one can be had for 320$ which insures it is brand new, working flawlessly, and comes with a full 5 year warranty. That's just me though.

You are right though, they are 2 very nice lenses. I wish I had a pro 70-200mm type lens.

 

[stuartr]

The 70-200 and 80-200 are big and heavy, but nice image makers. That said, I never really found the longer focal lengths all that interesting. They can be very useful, but I would say that 90% of my photography is 105mm or shorter. Rather than a 70-200, I went with a 105/2. Don't get me wrong, the long zooms can be very useful for events, sports and so on, but they are not worth the bulk for me. I would rather one good prime.

 

[M0T0XGUY]

Quote:

Originally Posted by stuartr /img/forum/go_quote.gif The 70-200 and 80-200 are big and heavy, but nice image makers. That said, I never really found the longer focal lengths all that interesting. They can be very useful, but I would say that 90% of my photography is 105mm or shorter. Rather than a 70-200, I went with a 105/2. Don't get me wrong, the long zooms can be very useful for events, sports and so on, but they are not worth the bulk for me. I would rather one good prime.

To each his own I guess. I started taking an unofficial "low key" photo class around a month ago, and I've found that for portraits, nothing beats the 80-200 range for isolating a subject or adding drama to an otherwise uninteresting scene. For whatever reason, my composition at longer focal lengths is much better than at wide angle; perhaps that shows my weakness as a photographer, but in general I just think it's a personal preference.

 

[M0T0XGUY]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Towert7 /img/forum/go_quote.gif 265$us for a used 35mm F/2 seems like not such a good deal when the new one can be had for 320$ which insures it is brand new, working flawlessly, and comes with a full 5 year warranty. That's just me though. You are right though, they are 2 very nice lenses. I wish I had a pro 70-200mm type lens.

Oh well, it is what it is at this point.

 

[Iron_Dreamer]

Hmmm, my proposed trade for a Tamron 90mm macro didn't go through. But I did manage to sell my 18-200 at a nice rate anyway.

I was innocently strolling through Best Buy on Monday, and mozied on over to play with some of the P&S cameras (really like that Canon G9). I happened to notice some Tamron lens boxes in the lockup. Sure enough they have the 17-50 2.8, for Nikon, and at a competitive price. The 12% off coupon in my wallet pushed me over the edge, and I took one home.

Some test shots couldn't reveal any focus problems, TTL-BL overexposure, or decentering. so I took the lens out with me to the top of Half Dome. It seems to perform its' best at 50mm, with a few pics I took at that setting coming out very sharp, edge to edge. It certainly doesn't stack up to my Sigma 10-20 at the low end though. I'm not blown away by this lens so far, but I've got another few weeks before I need to decide whether or not to return it.

BTW this is the "new" version with focus motor in the lens. It makes a rather odd, but not overly loud sound when focusing, and is not overwhelmingly quick to focus either.

 

[milkpowder]

I'm on the brink of purchasing a camera, but can't quite decide what to go for. I went to the camera store today and had a go with a few cameras. In the end, I was rather impressed by the D80, preferring its ease-of-use versus the Canon 40D.

My currently dilemma is what to get.

I can either get D80 w/ 18-70 kit + another lens or two

OR

a D300 but with just a 50 1.8 (for the time being)

Can't decide...

 

[Arainach]

Now, normally, I would without exception say 'put your money into glass'. The D80 is an excellent camera and won't limit you unless you spend a few years and develop godlike skills or decide to go into professional sports photography. However, the D300 is an entire generation ahead of the D80 (which is essentially a watered-down D200), and its High-ISO performance and cleaning and live preview abilities would make me at least think about it. In the end, I'd probably go for the D80 + lenses, but it's admittedly a tough choice.

 

[RYCeT]

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkpowder /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm on the brink of purchasing a camera, but can't quite decide what to go for. I went to the camera store today and had a go with a few cameras. In the end, I was rather impressed by the D80, preferring its ease-of-use versus the Canon 40D. My currently dilemma is what to get. I can either get D80 w/ 18-70 kit + another lens or two OR a D300 but with just a 50 1.8 (for the time being) Can't decide...

Well, it's a clear cut choice for me, I'll take D300 w/ 50 1.8
50 1.8 is a very good lens, very sharp, (at least that's what I got for my canon) you'll be spoilt. When I start this hobby, I got a rebel xt and 50 1.8 for the first 3 months. Then I add canon 17-55 2.8 is, eventhough the range is perfect however, I've been too spoilt w/ 50 1.8 sharpness and bokeh. Everytime I look at 17-55 result, I can't justify the price and a bit disappointed. Nevertheless, 50 1.8 stayed on that body most of the time. Now, with a bit more experience, I can appreciate that 17-55 a little bit, the pic and color rendition is very good, but my 50 1.8 is a touch better.

 

[M0T0XGUY]

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkpowder /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm on the brink of purchasing a camera, but can't quite decide what to go for. I went to the camera store today and had a go with a few cameras. In the end, I was rather impressed by the D80, preferring its ease-of-use versus the Canon 40D. My currently dilemma is what to get. I can either get D80 w/ 18-70 kit + another lens or two OR a D300 but with just a 50 1.8 (for the time being) Can't decide...

It's really a tough call, as you can imagine. Personally, I think Arainach is completely right; the D300 is essentially a generation ahead of the D80, and niceties such as live view and exceptional high-ISO performance do make the former a more attractive camera in general. However, even in its old(er) age, the D80 will likely never be a limiting factor for you as a photographer, whereas a single, 50mm lens has the possibility of leaving you wanting a bit more range in both telephoto and wide angle directions. In the end, then, I'd evaluate your most used focal-lengths, purchase a D80, and sink your leftover cash into a lens or two that best covers those focal lengths; I doubt you'll regret it.

 

[bigshot]

Spend it on lenses. The D80 is a great camera.

See ya
Steve

 

[milkpowder]

Thanks for the suggestions. My photography piggy-bank will be totally empty for a very long time to come (maybe at least half a year or so) so it really boils down to whether I can live with just a 50/1.8 for that period of time. Maybe it will make me a better photographer, relying less on zoom to compose my shots. On the contrary, the type of shots I can take will be rather limited too... High ISO performance would be very nice though. I'll report back when I have my 'precious'

EDIT: I was wondering whether the D80 has the AF-ON button? I'm planning on getting used to separating focus from the shutter if the facility is present.