Guy trying to help his wife

i_like_cereal · Oct 19, 2011

My wife is using a D70 with a 17-35 wide angle Nikon Lens.

She has been, off and on, taking on small jobs. Her business is now picking up. I would like to get her a new lens so that she does not have to shoot in wide angle all the time.

She is happy with the D70, but I would not shy away from a body upgrade if a lens kit was included at a reasonable cost.

Her business is family portraits, weddings, and sports photography. She shoots in natural light about 90% of the time.

I know nothing about digital. I am a K1000 guy so I assume it is all the same just no film.

TIA - Cereal.

Big Mike · Oct 19, 2011

Welcome aboard.

I know nothing about digital. I am a K1000 guy so I assume it is all the same just no film.

Pretty much, yes. But you/she should be aware of the 'crop factor'. Like most Digital SLR cameras, her D70 has a sensor that is slightly smaller than a frame of 35mm film. So while 17mm to 35mm would be really wide angle on a 35mm film camera, it's only a little wide on her camera. The conversion factor is 1.5 for Nikon cameras. So to put things into perspective, her 17-35mm would be like a 26-53mm lens on your camera.

A common range for many photographers is 70-200mm. It's a good telephoto range, but the lenses don't have to give up much quality. There are plenty of 70-300mm lenses, but their quality is not as good as most 70-200mm lenses.

The ideal 70-200mm lens for her, would be the Nikon 70-200mm F2.8 VR. It's a fantastic lens and it costs about $2400. (you didn't mention a budget).

There are cheaper alternatives from Sigma or Tamron. These lenses are good, not quite as good as the Nikon version...but their lower price means you get a lot of value for you money.

The D70 is a fairly old camera by today's standards. There have been plenty of really good improvements in the last 5 years. In particular, noise levels at higher ISO settings. Which is something that would be very important to a natural light shooter. For example, her D70 might get start to get a lot of digital noise (grain) at ISO 800, a modern DSLR camera is will probably give cleaner shots at 1600 or 3200. I'm not sure which models to recommend...I'll let a Nikon user chime in on that topic.

Robin Usagani · Oct 19, 2011

she can do portraits, weddings, sports with only 17-35? Wow.

The most popular lens is always 50mm prime.

Trever1t · Oct 19, 2011

Yeah surprising she's able to get by with such a wide angle, even on a crop body.

What's your budget?

D700
70-200 VRII

i_like_cereal · Oct 19, 2011

Not really sure of a budget. Perhaps in the $500 - $800.

i_like_cereal · Oct 19, 2011

The Sigma 70-200 appears to fit the high end of the price range. If I compare the Sigma to the Nikon what are the major differences? Are the Nikon lenses going to impart that much more detail and sharpness etc... to the pic?

Could someone also explain how close and far away she can get. For example does she need to be a minimum of 24" from the target out to 10'? Does that make sense?

Big Mike · Oct 19, 2011

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G Autofocus Lens 2180 B&H Photo
Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D Lens 1931 B&H Photo Video
Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 II EX DG APO Macro HSM AF Lens 579-306 B&H
Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 Di LD (IF) Macro AF Lens AF001NII-700 B&H

tirediron · Oct 19, 2011

Nikon 80-200mm f2.8

i_like_cereal · Oct 19, 2011

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G Autofocus Lens 2180 B&H Photo
Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D Lens 1931 B&H Photo Video
Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 II EX DG APO Macro HSM AF Lens 579-306 B&H

Thanks for the links. I checked them out and I have a couple of questions that will probably cement this in my head.

If I buy a 70-200 I lose the ability to get the 50, but it overlaps the 85. So is losing the 50 a big deal? Can the 70-200 make up for the 50 given the first response to my OP re the chip making things bigger?

Thanks

pen · Oct 19, 2011

I'm going to chime in here as I would love a faster lens and the 80-200 looks like a good option without having to spend 2k. So which would be better, the Tamron, Sigma 70-200 or the 80-200 Nikon?

Hard to tell with the reviews.

pen · Oct 19, 2011

Should also note there are two Sigma 70-200, one with stabilization. I think that is the only difference other then about $300.

shootermcgavin · Oct 19, 2011

The sigma is a nice lens, but that's a huge difference in lenses. Maybe a 50mm 1.8 and a 100mm macro lens would be something more in her comfort zone. You can't go wrong with the 50mm it's a great lens and you could get the 1.4 if it's offered in a Nikon. The 70-200 is a very heavy beast, I'm a pretty fit guy and when I tried it out I was like damn my arms will be rubber after shooting with this thing for an hour. Although great with a monopod for sports I don't know that I'd use it a lot more than for that.

CCericola · Oct 19, 2011

First check with your wife if she wants to switch brands. It is not just quality it is how buttons are arranged, feel in your hands, etc... I would start off getting her the 50mm 1.4 first. She is really going to like the versatility. Later, get a 70-200 2.8 to cover her bases. Then as she upgrades in bodies she can keep using quality lenses. Don't discount used lenses too. BHPhoto has a used section and they have some great stuff.

Also, can I have you to talk my husband into buying lenses for me