Back again with another situation.

[mrpink]

A 80-200 2.8 would be the first and foremost suggestion, but since you put that aside I will play along...

D90, grip, and 50mm 1.8 would be my second suggestion. Or, D90 and a second SB-600 if you are more into portraiture.

The D300 has the same sensor as the D90, the main "upgrade" would be the 39 point auto focus, 7-8 fps (with grip) and full metal body. If you are not shooting high action sporting events, which by looking at your available glass I would guess not, there really is no reason to get it.

But look very closely at the first sentence in this post......






p!nK

 

[RalphP13]

Why not take a couple bucks and rent some "good" glass (maybe a 70-200mm f2.8 or 24-70mm f2.8) and see if what people are saying applies to you. If not, use the rest to pick up the D90.

I rented the 24-70mm f2.8 and was shocked. It blows the kit lenses away.

Just my 2 cents.

Good luck with whatever you decide.

Ralph

 

[Bram]

Another thing with the 24-70 2.8 is that it's $1,400.00. Yes ofcourse i'd love to have a D300s with a 70-200 2.8 and 24-70 2.8 but that's not going to happen. @Mrpink, Why would I buy a 80-200 2.8 if it won't auto focus on my body? That's the whole reason I wanted a D90 or better body so I can buy the AF-D lenses and use them. I would rather not spend a grand right now on a lens I can't AF with, sure i'll be able to go ut and use it but not for sports (my intentions).

 

[mrpink]

@Mrpink, Why would I buy a 80-200 2.8 if it won't auto focus on my body? That's the whole reason I wanted a D90 or better body so I can buy the AF-D lenses and use them. I would rather not spend a grand right now on a lens I can't AF with, sure i'll be able to go ut and use it but not for sports (my intentions).

The 80-200 2.8 is an AF-S lens. It will work just fine on your D40x.

Nikon 80-200 2.8 Ed Af-s Lens *77

I think you will find this much more useful than a D300 with sub par glass.






p!nK

 

[Bram]

I have been searching far and wide for the af-S version of this lens indeed and not been able to find it anywhere.

 

[mrpink]

I have been searching far and wide for the af-S version of this lens indeed and not been able to find it anywhere.

THANK YOU! my prayers have been answered.

Two prayers. One thread.






p!nK

 

[Bram]

This is unbelievable I need to rename this thread: "where all your prayers are answered"

Yeah i'd love to just order this bad boy right now, except I don't have a credit card (don't trust myself) nor do I have a Paypal account lol.

 

[mrpink]

This is unbelievable I need to rename this thread: "where all your prayers are answered"

Yeah i'd love to just order this bad boy right now, except I don't have a credit card (don't trust myself) nor do I have a Paypal account lol.

Well that is one prayer that will go unanswered.

Check around, I have seen them go for as little as $650 in the past.





p!nK

 

[Bram]

You're being serious? The af-"S" versions have gone for as little as $650.00 ???? That's nuts, on ebay the cheapest is still $959.00 , I have checked craigslist and the push pull is going for like $650.00 but I need an AF-S version.

 

[KmH]

Nikon didn't make to many of the AF-S version of the 80-200 mm f/2.8. KEH.com has used ones listed from $1370 for 'Like New minus' condition to $850 for 'Bargain' condition (70-79% of new condition, more than normal wear). http://www.keh.com/search?store=cam...de=Class&grade=Grade&sprice=0&eprice=0&r=SE&e

$650 is a common price for the older push-pull zoom, AF 80-200 mm f/2.8.

Nice used examples of the current 2 ring, AF 80-200mm f/2.8 go for about $850.

 

[Bram]

Yeah I think once I have the flexibility of purchasing this lens I wouldn't mind paying $1,000.00 for it. I mean if I get the lens first, and play around with it. Then when I upgrade the body later it will still perform to it's maximum potential so.