Made the plunge

[fsquare]

So i kind of made an executive decision. I decided to sell my 16-35mm and my 80-200 AF-D, put in a few extra hundred and picked up a 70-200mm VR II. My passion is kind of taking on a mind of it's own. I love to do landscape but what I am really focusing on is portraits and people photography. I'm already booked to do 15 weddings as a second shooter this summer and my home studio is also taking shape. I pretty much sold all my lenses and yes, sadly my back up body. Right now it's my 24-70mm 2.8 and my 105mm VR Micro with hopefully the addition of the 70-200mm tomorrow. On a personal level, i think this is all i need. I just hope i am making the right decision.

I know many would of said to have kept the back up body and use the 80-200mm but for me, the VR especially at 150-200mm is a huge help. To add, my backup was a D300s so i would just rather sell that since it would fetch more money and get myself a D1x or a D200.

Let me know what you guys think

 

[Jeremy Z]

I think you had better get another back up body, as a wedding photog, having a camera failure is not an option.

It doesn't have to be a fancy one, but you should have one.

But the lenses sound great!

 

[bhop]

Backup body is a necessity if you're doing paid work IMO. I was shooting some stuff for our work's catalog around a year ago at a location with a limited time frame and my d200 died mid-shoot. Luckily I had my d70 with me, not as good as the d200, but it still got the job done for our needs. If I didn't have a backup, we would've been screwed. I imagine weddings would be even more high pressure as far as that kinda stuff goes.

 

[Derrel]

The 80-200 AF-D is wayyyy out of date now. The new 70-200 Mark II is a vastly better lens, and in many ways, with the focal length "breathing" at longer lengths at shorter ranges, it's actually one of the better zooms available for indoor work, where SPACE is often at a premium--ESPECIALLY if you are shooting a 1.5x FOV Nikon body. Similarly, the 10mm focal length differences between 80mm and 70mm is actually quite useful and noticeable indoors. VR also works quite splendidly.

Check Thom Hogan's Nikon web site for his review of the 70-200 VR-II, and look at the angle of view comparison between the original VR-I model and your new VR-II model;the differences are very real, and very large.

Back-up body? Yeah, you need one.

 

[Overread]

The 70-200mm is also a great landscape lens Granted its not maybe the best for panoramic landscapes (though nothing stops you using a tripod, nodal point and photo stitching) but for being able to pick out select details in the landscape the 70-200mm is a very good lens for this.

 

[fsquare]

Ya well when i went to the D700 I of course sold my 10-24mm DX lens and just decided to pick up a 24-70mm. 24mm is plenty for me for landscapes. I wasn't using the 16-35mm at all. I was using the 10-24mm at 14-16mm anyway so no real difference to me.

My lead photog has 3 bodies so for now I am covered. I do plan to buy a backup in the near future.

Derrel, i read about that before buying. Was it under 5ft or 15ft where there was a loss in magnification? I believe it was 15'.

 

[Balmiesgirl]

If you are doing paid photography work get INSURANCE !!!! Liability insurance is an absolute must! I feel like its irresponsible to be without it!
If your lead photographer has it make sure it covers YOU!