Buy lens Or complete new Camera bundle?

[bkqk]

Hi! I am sort of a beginner.

I have had Nikon D60 for over 5 years, but I only use it for sports events, outdoor landscapes (just for fun) and family events. I have the default 18-55mm VR lens, and I was hoping to get a longer lens so that I can get better zoom, closer shots even from far away.

I am debating rather or not I should buy a separate used lens or new lens OR completely get a new camera bundle. The camera bundle at various stores and even on Amazon, offer great bundle deals that would cost me almost the same as getting a new lens. I also like the idea of getting more megapixels. So which option would you prefer? And why? How reliable are the old lenses you have purchased and or where's the best place to do a trade in (in Canada Ontario).

Thanks in advance

Options
1. Brand new camera with lens bundle
2. Just buy old lens
3. Buy new lens

 

[waday]

 

[Derrel]

I voted for new camera bundle. Something like the new Nikon D5300.

 

[floatingby]

I'd get good glass, which you won't get in a bundle. For shooting sport, I'd invest in the Nikkor 70-200 f2.8 VR; or, just as good if not better except with a slightly slower AF response time, and cheaper, the Tamron 70-200 f2.8. Both would give you a lifetime of use, they would follow if you ever decide to go full frame, and, on DX, give you 300mm of reach which is perfect for hockey, football and baseball.

 

[Derrel]

He is correct about a truly fine, fine lens like the 70-200 VR-II from Nikon being a "lifetime" lens. For the casual shooter or even serious hobby shooter, a high-grade professional lens like that will last, well, a lifetime of use. The 70-200 f/2.8 lenses from Nikon focus exceptionally rapidly; according to Rob Galbraith.com's testing of many lenses, he feels that both Canon and Nikon optimize their professional cameras for the fastest, best AF using each company's 70-200 and 24-70 f/2.8 lenses--not their super-teles, but the day-to-day "workhorse" lenses hundreds of thousands of pro shooters rely on across the world.

The earlier, version one 70-200 VR is still a decent lens when shot on APS-C, and is available much more affordably than the newer "Mark II" model with the VR-II technology.

 

[floatingby]

For sport I'd get the Tamron over the old VR-I, it just is optically better in just about every aspect except focus breathing(in which the new Nikkor VR-II also suffer atrociously). The tamron is built like a tank and weather sealed, just like the Nikkor, and about 900 buck cheaper.
If I was doing mainly portrait then yes, I'd get the old VR-I without a second thought.

 

[Ido]

If you don't really have any complaints about the camera you already have, I'd say keep it and get a longer lens. If you're on a very tight budget, get a Nikon 55-200mm VR. If you can afford something more expensive, get a Tamron 70-300mm VC. If you can go even higher, a 70-200mm f/2.8 is pretty much the best option.

 

[goodguy]

In Ontario best place to get a trade for your current gear will be Henrys.

 

[jaomul]

Lenses obviously get the best out of whatever camera you have. I do though slightly disagree with the "it's all about the lens, not the camera" saying that's often used. I imagine that made more sense before digital.

A d5300 (as mentioned above) for example should give you better autofocus, faster fps, much higher resolution, much better iso performance, better dynamic range and a nicer screen with live view and video.

How much of this translates into better photos is up to you, but a newer camera gives the potential for better image quality. You should in theory get more keepers due more accurate af as well.Couple a new camera with a fairly good lens and I'd doubt you'd be sorry you upgraded

 

[dennybeall]

In many cases you can get the package and for a little more money upgrade to a better lens. For instance the D5300 kit originally was the 18-130 lens But for a little more money you could upgrade to the 18-140 which is a significantly better lens.
The D60 was an OK camera in it's time but there are newer cameras with a lot better features.
Consider the lenses - The D5300 requires the -S lenses while the D7200 does not. Not sure which the D60 needs.

 

[raventepes]

I voted for new camera for reasons mentioned above.

Simply put, even buying a new D5300 (or even D3300) will get you a much more advanced camera than what you already have. If you're able to get a D7100, that would be even better, especially if it comes with an 18-105 or 18-140 kit lens (both lenses are pretty good. Not "Pro-grade" by any means, but they'll get you by).