Can the D5000 handle it?

[Aayria]

I know, I know.. I've been debating my next upgrade for months now and still have not 100% decided Originally I thought I'd get the D700 to start shooting with a full frame camera (which I still intend to do, but can only afford one thing at a time). Then I thought I'd try the 70-200mm 2.8 lens out, but the thing was SO heavy!

Now, I'm thinking that lenses may be a better investment in the long run, and make a more dramatic impact on my pictures than an immediate camera upgrade. I'd also sort of like to wait a bit longer anyway, just to see what awesomeness Nikon may replace the D700 with, though I'm sure the current model is MORE than I need.

Anyway.. to my question!

Despite its weight, and with a bit of peer pressure from the massive amount of people posting with this lens:mrgreen:... I'm thinking I could do a lot with something like the 70-200mm 2.8. Would it be too heavy for my little D5000? I'm worried about the camera, because it's not a metal build, and I seem to remember hearing horror stories about lenses possibly ripping off the front of entry level camera bodies...

Or would it be alright? Originally I didn't think they had one that could autofocus on my camera, but I'm looking at B&H where it's listed as "AF-S" which (to my knowledge) means the motor is in the lens, woot!

So, would it work? Or would you still recommend the camera upgrade before lenses?

 

[SrBiscuit]

youll want to support that lens on any body.
so i would imagine that if youre careful it should be ok.

aside from FF, what would be your main reason to upgrade bodies?

 

[Aayria]

youll want to support that lens on any body.
so i would imagine that if youre careful it should be ok.

aside from FF, what would be your main reason to upgrade bodies?

I had a thread a couple weeks back discussing an upgrade to full frame. The high ISO capabilities, shorter focal length for my 50mm, less distance distortion as in the crop sensor, greater dynamic range and other issues were all things that came up.

I realize, though.. that in the scheme of things, it's the lens that will make the most difference in an image, and lenses are generally a longer lasting investment.

 

[ababysean]

I am watching this thread too.
I'm debating between the two myself.

 

[SrBiscuit]

oh ok, so when you say upgrade boodies you mean to FF....there would be no other crop body in the mean time.
ok cool.

personally...man. tough call. that 70-200 2.8 is something id love to have, and im still on a d1x...so i think i would still go for the glass.

 

[supraman215]

You do very good work from what i've seen you post here and you're constantly improving. The D5000 is a more than capable body. I think your kit lenses are holding you back a lot more than your D5000.

I had the 80-200 (similar size, dunno about weight) on my D90 and it wasn't a problem. At one point I did some tripod shooting and I used the mount that's on the lens though I'm sure the mount on the body would have held it. I don't think you're gonna rip that lens off of your body unless you hold the lens like a baseball bad and start smashing the body on the ground, like your assaulting a TPF troll. I have no experience with the D5000 but that would be my guess. Take it for what it's worth.

 

[Aayria]

You do very good work from what i've seen you post here and you're constantly improving. The D5000 is a more than capable body. I think your kit lenses are holding you back a lot more than your D5000.

I had the 80-200 (similar size, dunno about weight) on my D90 and it wasn't a problem. At one point I did some tripod shooting and I used the mount that's on the lens though I'm sure the mount on the body would have held it. I don't think you're gonna rip that lens off of your body unless you hold the lens like a baseball bad and start smashing the body on the ground, like your assaulting a TPF troll. I have no experience with the D5000 but that would be my guess. Take it for what it's worth.

Must.. stop.. laughing....:lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:

 

[Bram]

Tough choice i'm stuck int he same situation i've looked at buying a used D90 or a D7000 maybe but I just can't decide I want the 70-200 2.8 for my brothers football games and stuff like that for low light. I'll mount the lens to my tripod though.

 

[Blake.Oney]

If I would have bought the D5000 when I got a DSLR I wouldn't be upgrading as soon as I am. I actually like crop frames for the extra reach for different situations. I'm not saying I wouldn't go FF, but anyway that's off subject. You shouldn't have any problems with that lens on the body. I think having that lens with your current camera would benefit you much more than having a new camera with your current lenses. Look at it this way. If you don't get new glass when you get the D700 then you've got a huge jump in camera with glass that doesn't let it reach it's full potential. If you get the lens and keep your current camera you've still got a fine camera with glass that will take it to it's maximum potential. Either way I'm sure with time you'll have both, but for the immediate upgrade in quality/performance I'd go with the lens first.

 

[sly677]

I shoot a D60 and I chose to go the "lense upgrade" route before upgrading the body, and I have no complaints (also I have NO issue with D60 + AF-S 70-200 f2.8, as mentionned earlier don't swing it like a baseball bat). I think the image starts with good lenses, plus if you get good lenses now you should be good for many years before you want/need to invest more money into them. Where as if you get a super awesome state of the art body today, tomorrow that body will most likely be surpassed by something "better" and your still stuck with the same dilema. Thats what I think...but I could be wrong.

 

[Blake.Oney]

I agree. I almost feel stupid for upgrading, but in the portrait game, I need at least the capabilities of a D90. I'm getting the D7000 because the time line of it's release is right with when I'll have the money so I plan to get it and keep with for as long as I possibly can while I build my lens collection. I'm also keeping the D3000 as a backup/second body for events where I'll want two set ups.

 

[kwek2]

I have D5000 and paired it with 70-200 VRII.
It works just great.
D5000 small body is not a problem, you just need to support the lens when you're doing it hand held.
When you put it on tripod/monopod, mount it on the lens.

 

[kwek2]

here's a good review on D5000 use with 24-70 and 70-200.

Using the Nikon D5000 as a professional corporate event photographer / Eventfotograf Berlin Frank Nürnberger

 

[Aayria]

here's a good review on D5000 use with 24-70 and 70-200.

Using the Nikon D5000 as a professional corporate event photographer / Eventfotograf Berlin Frank Nürnberger

Wow, that really was a great article, thanks =)

 

[Dao]

Remember, although they are entry level camera, but they are not made with Tofu. The plastic that the camera made of is pretty strong.

Overread had a thread that link to this video before.



As mentioned by others, when you are using a heavy lens, the lens needs support and that why they usually has a tripod support collar/mount for the lens. The camera that mount on the lens just need to support it's own weight.