Advertisement
I have a Nikon D50 and was debating whether to upgrade it.......of course sticking with Nikon......
I've seen a used D200 and new D80 and D300......
Just wondering what you all thought would be a good sensible upgrade for someone who considers himself a slight step above a beginner......assuming I had the money for a D300.......
I've seen a used D200 and new D80 and D300......
Just wondering what you all thought would be a good sensible upgrade for someone who considers himself a slight step above a beginner......assuming I had the money for a D300.......
posted by:
|
Portland
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
Re: Upgrade
Thu, May 29, 2008 - 8:50 PMI'm not a Nikon shooter, but here's my general way of thinking about these things.
Why do you want to upgrade? Is it a general "think I might want something better" sort of feeling, or is there a specific reason? Are you feeling limited by your camera, and if so in what way?
I upgraded from a Rebel XT to a 5D about a year ago, and that was after shooting with the Rebel for a couple of years. I'd finally gotten to the point where the less-capable camera was actually getting in my way. There were two things that I really wanted-- a larger viewfinder, and better high-ISO capability-- that made it either impossible or at least very difficult for me to do what I wanted with the XT. (There's a story about me screaming at my camera at 3 a.m. while standing on top of a hill freezing my butt off in Henderson, Nevada. I came very close to throwing the camera down the hill, and the only thing that stopped me was about $1200 worth of lens that was stuck to the front of it.)
Actually, that brings up an interesting point. I don't know much about Nikon sensor sizes, but when I upgraded I went from a cropped-frame sensor body to a full-frame sensor. I'd already been collecting professional-quality lenses for a while, but if I hadn't I would have found myself needing to buy better lenses when I upgraded. That's something to think about as part of the decision. -
-
Re: Upgrade
Sat, May 31, 2008 - 2:00 PMI would like to add to Patti's points:
Most pros get better gear because there is a higher return on investment, having better tools. In other words, get the gear which will make the bucks which can pay off the cost of gear, after a few assignments otherwise it is money spent unnecessarily.
-
-
Re: Upgrade
Thu, May 29, 2008 - 10:05 PMIt might help to know what lenses you own... -
-
Re: Upgrade
Fri, May 30, 2008 - 7:30 PMWhy do I want to upgrade?
I'd like something faster.....something that takes better low light pictures.....I have money burning a hole in my pocket....
I'm just thinking about it, I doubt I'll actually do it. I think a fisheeye lens would be less expensive and more fun....but I'm just posing the questions.
My current lenses are:
50 mm 1:1.4D
18 - 35 mm 1:3.5 - 4.5D
80 - 400mm 1:4.5 - 5.6D
18 - 200mm 1:3.5 - 5.6G -
-
Re: Upgrade
Fri, May 30, 2008 - 10:41 PMHmmm.... none of this glass really screams "buy me a D300." Though, I must admit I'm pretty happy with my 18-200 on my own new D300. You've got enough different lenes here that maybe the built in sensor cleaning of the D300 would be important.
Note, I've got a 17-35 f2.8 which is about a stop faster than my 18-200 at the wide end but the VRII on the 18-200 makes it much better low light shots. So, unless you shoot action shots and want to carry around a beast like the 70-200 f2.8 I think you should consider youself covered for low light. -
-
Re: Upgrade
Sat, May 31, 2008 - 1:42 PM
> Note, I've got a 17-35 f2.8 which is about a stop faster than my 18-200 at the wide
> end but the VRII on the 18-200 makes it much better low light shots.
This is, of course, *the* argument for in-body (vs. in-lens) antishake.
- Steve
-
-
Re: Upgrade
Sat, May 31, 2008 - 5:49 PMThe arguments for in lens are: you see what you get and it does a lot better job (about 1.5 stops better to be exact.) ;-) -
-
Re: Upgrade
Sun, June 1, 2008 - 11:38 AM
> The arguments for in lens are:
> you see what you get
This, to me, is *THE* big in-lens leg up. More than once, I've noted (specially at the end of the day, as I get tired) that my hand is shaky enough that camera-shake is adding to the (at 400mm / 1.5x crop, moving subject) difficulty even of framing the shot... :-(
> and it does a lot better job (about 1.5 stops better to be exact.) ;-)
Well... different versions of in-lens and in-body have different performances. Your 18-200 has VR-II, I believe, and that's reportedly a bit more effective than the older VR. On the other hand the new generation of in-body antishake is also more-effective than the prior generation.
I haven't seen a *recent* head-to-head. Last I saw a really good comparison was 2ish years ago, and the in-lens had about 1.3 stops' advantage, +/- about a half-stop depending on several variables.
Finally, I'll note that 1 - 1.5 stops is "somewhat" better... but in ultimate speed, the advantage still goes to the in-body systems, which have anti-shake even on the 1.4's (and faster!)... not to mention that huge stable of old manual-focus glass (including the M42's), via adapters. There are some amazing image-quality bargains in that realm!
- Steve
-
-
-
-
Re: Upgrade
Sat, May 31, 2008 - 9:59 AMI forgot to mention that the 80-400 seems to focus faster and more reliably on the D300 so if you're frustrated by the focus speed of your 80-400 this might be a plus for the D300. By the way, I assume that we're talking Nikkor lenses here.
-
Re: Upgrade
Sat, May 31, 2008 - 1:40 PM
> I'd like something faster
Just to clarify... "faster" in what sense(s)?
Better high-ISO? More FPS? Faster autofocus? Or...?
I mean, sure, these are all "better" things, and we all want "better"
performance (no matter how good what we have now is... ;-)
but what is it you feel is lacking?
What do you most like to shoot (or what *would* you most like
to shoot), that you feel limited or unable to shoot with the current
body?
- Steve
-
-
Re: Upgrade
Sat, May 31, 2008 - 7:49 PMFaster focus.....higher iso....
We have a pond and we get a few feathered visitors....I can't afford a $ 6,000 lens to stand back and get close shots......
If my 400mm could focus faster....
Like I said I'm just pondering the idea...... -
-
Re: Upgrade
Sun, June 1, 2008 - 11:18 AM
> Faster focus.....higher iso....
> We have a pond and we get a few feathered visitors...
> I can't afford a $ 6,000 lens to stand back and get close shots......
> If my 400mm could focus faster....
OK. The D300 body will help you here; faster focus, for sure. Not sure how its high-ISO stacks up: on the one hand, it's (much) newer tech; on the other hand, your old body (D50, I think you said?) uses those big fat photosites, typically giving much lower-noise behavior.
The other thing you might want to seriously try is a fast lens ("fast" both in the bigger-aperture sense, *and* in the built-in-motor sense).
You know what I'd seriously consider, were I in your shoes? Rental. Nikon gear is often available for rent (several places in Portland rent Nikon), and that'd let you test your options (better body, better lens, singly & in combo) for maybe $200ish...
Last but not least, you might think about 3rd-party glass. The Tamron 200-500 is well-loved by birders, as is the "bigma" (Sigma 50-500). Both makers are also beginning to introduce their own in-lens anti-shake systems, IIRC... not sure if they've rolled out antishake in their long-tele lines yet.
- Steve
-
-
Re: Upgrade
Sun, June 1, 2008 - 5:13 PMThanks Steve,
Pro Photo Supply in Portland does rentals...I'll have to check them out for cameras. I did rent a lens before buying it with them...... -
-
Re: Rental Places
Sun, June 1, 2008 - 10:50 PMThere are also several good places to rent online.
Check out:
www.borrowlenses.com
www.lensrentals.com
www.ziplens.com
or
www.prophotorental.com
Full disclosure: I am associated with Pro Photo Rental and just discovered this site. However, I am also a photographer, and am interested in contributing here for the long term.
Please let me know if I can help out in any way. The D300 is an amazing camera, and like others here have said, will probably fulfill your need for speed (High ISO and AF).
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: Upgrade
Wed, June 18, 2008 - 6:31 PMThe Nikon D 700 is due in August so save you money till the end of the summer to see what's what. It should be only a few bucks more than the D 300. -
-
Re: Upgrade
Wed, June 18, 2008 - 9:02 PMI suspect it will cost $2999. With the senor of the D3 and the about the same body, processing power and layout as the D300. The reason is that full frame senors are pretty pricey. Note, your DX lenses (18-35 and 18-200) won't be all that useful on the D700 because they'll only produce 5MP images. Note, with the larger photosites of the FX sensor your 80-400 will be a lot more useful than if you'd bought a D200 or D300.
-
