D300 or 70-200 2.8 VR?

Fate · Feb 9, 2008

WELL,

my 18th bday is coming up, and my parents have offered me a sort of interest free loan to get something i would like (i have to pay it back, but no interest AND its pretty flexable obviously lol.) So thats ace, BUT i have a problem.

I would love a 70-200 2.8.... i currently dont have anything above a 125mm and even then its like f/5.6 at that length. So that would be brill, but then i gaze over at the D300 and think....sweeeet. Its mainly the ISO performance that makes me want it.. im currently using a Fuji S3 Pro, which is a nice camera, but you dont really want to push it past iso 800.

They both cost about the same, but i guess the question im asking is. Do i upgrade glass wise or body wise. My thinking was the 70-200 will be in my bag for many, many years, whereas the d300 will most likley become outdated.

Any advice or what you would do would be grand.

Thanks

Dave

adolan20 · Feb 9, 2008

I would just get the glass! But the D300 does sound tempting.

Saint-Brown · Feb 9, 2008

Man Dave, I wish I had those choices to make. My delema is now refinance or home or upgrade from d70 to d300. Never the less, although I want to say go d300, it is best if you upgrade the lenss. since it's also 2.8 then i say go lenes. I hope you get both.

Trenton Romulox · Feb 9, 2008

I'd go with the glass.

adolan20 · Feb 9, 2008

Saint-Brown said:
My delema is now refinance or home or upgrade from d70 to d300.

Hahaa I love that big struggle between life and passion.

Trenton Romulox · Feb 9, 2008

All right, I feel bad 'cause I didn't really go in-depth as to why I say glass.

I upgraded from a D80 to a D300 in the beginning of December, and then got a 70-200mm VR just this week. And I'd say, the body, is amazing (see kundalini's thread below, or above, it's in this section at least, and I posted a review about the D300) but the glass is something I know will far outlive the body. A body, my friend, is only as good as what you put in front of it.

PushingTin · Feb 9, 2008

If the only reason you want to upgrade the body is ISO, then I would say rather go with the lens. Its an awesome lens, especially if you are looking for a lens in that focal range.

Once u have that paid off, by all means upgrade the body - I am sure the D300 plus that lens is superb!

Either way, good luck with the decision.

Mike_E · Feb 9, 2008

Hold up folks, that is a nice (maybe great) lens but it is just one lens.

If in fact the D300 is as good as claimed then this upgrade will also upgrade all the lenses in his/her ("Which is fate anyway?", he asked rhetorically.) bag.

You can get great IQ from a 70-210mm f/4-5.6 AF-D (or the non D as it has the same glass in it) which for most applications will be as good as needed for the prints (not so good if you put a lot of stock in being able to say that you have an $1800 lens).

The ability to up the ISO and still get clear photos will negate the advantage of having an f/2.8 down to almost no light. I own one of the non-D versions and it is as sharp as my 50mm f/1.8. I also see them regularly on e-bay for under $80.

$.02

(to test different focal length lenses -as in the 70-210mm to the 50mm- just step back until the larger one shows the same image size. May not be scientific but plenty good enough for 'Kentucky windage'.

)

mike

Sw1tchFX · Feb 9, 2008

IMO 80-200 f/2.8 and a D200.

Fate · Feb 9, 2008

Thanks for the advice guys, i'll take it all into consideration when i make my descision

soylentgreen · Feb 9, 2008

Unless your current body is incapable of taking the images you want, get the lens. Bodies come and go, so you will always be wanting the newer model with this and that. Good glass will stay with you a lot longer. I seen me a Rebel XT (silver body) with a EF 400 f/2.8 L IS, talk about an odd coupling, but it had spectacular results. More in the glass than the body I presume. :wink:

Patrice · Feb 9, 2008

Trenton Romulox said:
I'd go with the glass.

I second that, you already have a decent camera.

kundalini · Feb 9, 2008

I've already got the glass, now I'm going for the body.

Get the glass, my son.

sabbath999 · Feb 15, 2008

Glass.

Antithesis · Feb 15, 2008

Mike_E said:
Hold up folks, that is a nice (maybe great) lens but it is just one lens.

If in fact the D300 is as good as claimed then this upgrade will also upgrade all the lenses in his/her ("Which is fate anyway?", he asked rhetorically.) bag.

You can get great IQ from a 70-210mm f/4-5.6 AF-D (or the non D as it has the same glass in it) which for most applications will be as good as needed for the prints (not so good if you put a lot of stock in being able to say that you have an $1800 lens).

The ability to up the ISO and still get clear photos will negate the advantage of having an f/2.8 down to almost no light. I own one of the non-D versions and it is as sharp as my 50mm f/1.8. I also see them regularly on e-bay for under $80.

$.02

(to test different focal length lenses -as in the 70-210mm to the 50mm- just step back until the larger one shows the same image size. May not be scientific but plenty good enough for 'Kentucky windage'. )

mike

I think trenton and some other folks where saying that the smaller photosites of the d300's sensor tend to show any imperfections in the lens. This is especially problematic with cheaper glass, so you have to use higher end glass.

I'd say go with the lens. I'm not sure which body you said you were using (I read fuji, but I imagine you own a Nikon if your looking at a VR lens), but if your using a d70 or better I'd get the lens. High ISO performance is cool and all, but if your images are ugly because your shooting through bad glass, then it's a waste of money. Especially because it'll be dated technology in 24-36 months anyways, whereas the lens will be sharp and capable for a whole lot longer.

Edit: I was just looking at the S3 pro, and it says it's compatible with Nikon lenses, now I see. Now I'm asking myself why I didn't get that rather than the d80, lol. I'd get the lens for sure.