What Nikon Lens upgrade?
Discussion
Sorry to take the same thread title as similar post, but I have a very similar question . .
I currently have a D5000 which normally has the 35mm lens on (which I am very happy with). I have a Nikkor 55-200mm 1:4-5.6 and an Nikkor 18-55mm 1:3.5-5.6 lens too which tend yo get used for motorsport and taking photos of my daughter in gymnastics competitions (artificial lit sports halls). Cashing in some shares next year will give me around £1200-£1500 to invest in some new glass, but I'd like to advice as to what to splash it on! Of course ideally I'd like something fast that would allow me to get some better gym shots . . .
I currently have a D5000 which normally has the 35mm lens on (which I am very happy with). I have a Nikkor 55-200mm 1:4-5.6 and an Nikkor 18-55mm 1:3.5-5.6 lens too which tend yo get used for motorsport and taking photos of my daughter in gymnastics competitions (artificial lit sports halls). Cashing in some shares next year will give me around £1200-£1500 to invest in some new glass, but I'd like to advice as to what to splash it on! Of course ideally I'd like something fast that would allow me to get some better gym shots . . .
I'd second the above or suggest you also consider the older Nikkor 80-200mm AF-S F2.8. I have that one and it is superb.
A question though - do you find 200mm gives you enough reach? I'd have thought you might need more zoom for the uses you mention. If so you could take a look at the Nikon 70-300mm lenses (the newer ones with VR). They are not as fast as the 70-200 or 80-200 and not quite as good a lens. But infinitely better in the 200-300mm range!! My GF has one and I have to admit it is pretty impressive.
A question though - do you find 200mm gives you enough reach? I'd have thought you might need more zoom for the uses you mention. If so you could take a look at the Nikon 70-300mm lenses (the newer ones with VR). They are not as fast as the 70-200 or 80-200 and not quite as good a lens. But infinitely better in the 200-300mm range!! My GF has one and I have to admit it is pretty impressive.
si barone said:
70-200mm AF-S Nikkor f2.8G ED VR II Lens shop around and you should be able to get it within your budget.
Is the best lens I've ever used... but be warned, it is massive and HEAVY.ETA... just took a snap of it on a D3 with my S95 for scale
Edited by GetCarter on Saturday 31st December 09:58
If the 70-200 mentioned above is out of your budget you might consider the previous version which can be had for around a grand on eBay but would be concerned whether you'd have enough reach. You could try renting a lens for a competition and see how you get on? These guys always seems pretty decent http://www.lensesforhire.co.uk/
A secondhand 70-200mm AF-S f/2.8 VR, first model from Grays is the only sensible answer. You need a good back up and service if you spend this much money - unless, like me, you're really prepared to take a punt on a Fleabay option (worked for me - and I had a bargain - but there's a few things to go wrong so a warranty would be nice).
Additional tip - not a lot of people know this - if you sign up to the NIkon Owners Magazine you will also get extended warranties on Grays goods and you can usually negotiate on the prices (as well as other benefits)..... don't tell everyone!
Look out for a TC14E, or 17E, whichever series for the future too. Astonishingly good results!
Additional tip - not a lot of people know this - if you sign up to the NIkon Owners Magazine you will also get extended warranties on Grays goods and you can usually negotiate on the prices (as well as other benefits)..... don't tell everyone!
Look out for a TC14E, or 17E, whichever series for the future too. Astonishingly good results!
Nikon "didn't think they were necessary", so left them off
http://www.photocrati.com/nikon-70-200mm-f2-8g-af-...
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/70-200mm-ii.htm
To the OP... I think the 70-300 ED VR might be a better choice for you... it's a lot cheaper and will give you more reach.
http://www.photocrati.com/nikon-70-200mm-f2-8g-af-...
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/70-200mm-ii.htm
To the OP... I think the 70-300 ED VR might be a better choice for you... it's a lot cheaper and will give you more reach.
Edited by GetCarter on Saturday 31st December 12:21
chopper602 said:
Thanks for all the advice, TBH the 200mm normally gives me enough reach, but up to 300 would be 'nice'. The shots I want to get are fast action shots, but with the poor light in a sports hall are pretty average TBH and often quite blurry.
Then you should consider using the money to go full frame Nikon... this will let you bump up the ISO to 4000 or even higher with little noise. (That's SEVEN stops over ISO 640 which is where your camera starts to get noisy). It will enable you to use a MUCH faster shutter speed in low light. (Making this move has completely revolutionised my indoor photography).http://hdewcameras.rtrk.co.uk/?scid=22824&kw=5...
review
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond700/
Edited by GetCarter on Saturday 31st December 16:32
GetCarter said:
chopper602 said:
Thanks for all the advice, TBH the 200mm normally gives me enough reach, but up to 300 would be 'nice'. The shots I want to get are fast action shots, but with the poor light in a sports hall are pretty average TBH and often quite blurry.
Then you should consider using the money to go full frame Nikon... this will let you bump up the ISO to 4000 or even higher with little noise. (That's SEVEN stops over ISO 640 which is where your camera starts to get noisy). It will enable you to use a MUCH faster shutter speed in low light. (Making this move has completely revolutionised my indoor photography).Have just recently switched to full frame (5D mk2), this has made a huge difference to the ISO I can push it up to and still have acceptable noise levels.
It was a big jump, but worth every penny IMO
I didn't clock the bit about fast moving subjects in dim sports halls. Yep, sounds like a job for a D700 - but 200mm will suddenly seem much shorter. So to get the same field of view as 200mm on a DX, you'd need 300mm on a DX - and bang goes your f2.8. Damn these laws of physics!
chopper602 said:
Would I still be able to use my existing lens (AF-S) ?
Yes but if it's a DX lens it will autocrop to 5Mp or vignette. So you will either have to keep your current camera as well, or upgrade to FX lenses. Or stay with the current camera, get a fast lens and put up with a little noise.Edited by Simpo Two on Saturday 31st December 16:55
chopper602 said:
Would I still be able to use my existing lens (AF-S) ?
If going full frame bear in mind you'll need a 300mm lens to get the same reach which, unless spending silly money, will be at least a stop slower. I'm not familiar with the high iso performance of the 5000 but the D7000 is excellent and still a DX camera. Personally I'd stick with what you've got a see if your daughters gym will allow you to shoot your own shots using flash when there isn't a competition on.chopper602 said:
It's competitions I want it for - flash is NOT allowed
Well there are no free lunches, with FX you'll either need to get closer or invest in some serious lenses. With DX you'll get noise, where the noise becomes an issue will depend on the camera. Here's a comparison of 3 Nikons (if the link works)DXO
What kind of shutter speeds are you getting and at what ISO? It's entirely possible you'll not be able to freeze action from the public seating area no matter what you do.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff