|
|
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
#1 (permalink) |
|
Been spending a lot of time on here!
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Dover/Washington DC
Posts: 109
My Photos Are NOT OK to Edit
|
lens choice
I have about $1500 to spend for new lenses, I'm considering either the 70-200 f/2.8, or getting the 80-200 f/2.8 and something like the 60 f/2.8, which one would you go with...or any other suggestions for similar lenses.
__________________
__________________________________________________ www.scottchamberland.com Flickr Nikon D80 | D300 Nikon MB-D80 | MB-D10 Nikon 18-135 f/3.5-5.6 ED-IF AF-S DX Nikon 50mm f/1.8D Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8 ED AF-D Nikon SB-600 | SB-800 |
|
|
|
|
Advertisement
|
Sponsored links
|
|
|
#2 (permalink) |
|
TPF Junkie!
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 5,218
My Photos Are NOT OK to Edit
|
One excellent lens? Or two excellent lenses that you can get more out of...
Remember if you need VR or a monopod, chances are your subject may be moving too fast to get a sharp photo anyway. I'd pick the latter option. |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 (permalink) |
|
TPF Junkie!
**TPF Subscriber**
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Missouri
Posts: 2,013
My Photos Are OK to Edit
|
+1
__________________
I take pictures of critters, mostly. I like them. You can see some of my stuff here: http://www.zoopictures.net |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 (permalink) |
|
I spend too much of my life on TPF!
**TPF Subscriber**
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Dayton, OH
Posts: 516
My Photos Are NOT OK to Edit
|
I have never owned the 60mm f/2.8, but I have owned the 80-200 f/2.8 AF-D, and currently own the 70-200 f/2.8 VR. At less than half the price, the AF-D is a fantastic lens, and it holds a pretty good resale value if you want to upgrade to the VR at a later time, which is what I did. Honestly, it comes down to whether you need, or want, the benefits of the VR, and the little bit of extra sharpness.
Owning the VR, I would recommend it to anyone, but I won't downplay the AF-D either. I am not going to outright tell you which way to go, but I can pretty much say that you will not be dissappointed either way. |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 (permalink) |
|
TPF Junkie!
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Shepherdsturd, WV / Almost, MD
Posts: 1,989
My Photos Are NOT OK to Edit
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 (permalink) |
|
No longer a newbie, moving up!
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: socal
Posts: 29
My Photos Are NOT OK to Edit
|
what do you find yourself shooting mostly?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 (permalink) |
|
Been spending a lot of time on here!
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Dover/Washington DC
Posts: 109
My Photos Are NOT OK to Edit
|
everything really...
__________________
__________________________________________________ www.scottchamberland.com Flickr Nikon D80 | D300 Nikon MB-D80 | MB-D10 Nikon 18-135 f/3.5-5.6 ED-IF AF-S DX Nikon 50mm f/1.8D Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8 ED AF-D Nikon SB-600 | SB-800 |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 (permalink) |
|
TPF Junkie!
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,453
My Photos Are OK to Edit
|
I'd get the 80-200 f/2.8 AF-D and the 60/2.8. As good as the 70-200VR is, the only thing I really need from it is the AF-S, and there's no way I'm paying nearly double the price over the AF-D version just for AF-S. If I need some stability, monopods are cheap.
__________________
Mav Nikon DSLRs & Lenses |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 (permalink) |
|
Been spending a lot of time on here!
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Dover/Washington DC
Posts: 109
My Photos Are NOT OK to Edit
|
Since everyone has said the second choice...do any of you see a big difference in the new 60 f/2.8 and the old one? I know ED glass, but is that worth the $200?
__________________
__________________________________________________ www.scottchamberland.com Flickr Nikon D80 | D300 Nikon MB-D80 | MB-D10 Nikon 18-135 f/3.5-5.6 ED-IF AF-S DX Nikon 50mm f/1.8D Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8 ED AF-D Nikon SB-600 | SB-800 |
|
|
|
| Sponsored links | |
|
Advertisement
|
|
![]() |
|
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | ||
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|