Somebody talk me out of this...

[Bram]

Okay Good morning TPF.

Hope we're all having a splendid morning at work, or at home.

The dilemma: Buying the nikkor 70-200mm 2.8 VRII at the CDN cost of $2639.69 (HST included)

Alright so I don't really NEED this lens per say but it would be amazing to have that's for sure. I don't shoot professional sport events (with this lens I might try it) but I shoot my little brothers football games under the lights. Now my little brother is only 16 but he is the true meaning of an athletic kid whose unco-ordinated, with a body the size of a truck. He plays D-line for our local team and he is known throughout the lower mainland as the destroyer. LOL enough about him.

This lens would be used for local sporting events like rugby and football games both at night and during the day. I am going to be studying criminal justice in January and my car isn't really in tip top shape. Ofcourse there are other priorities but I mean who wouldn't want this lens. So if you were the not so responsible me. What would you do?

 

[D-B-J]

Your money would be better spent on getting the 80-200 AF-s, and then spending the rest of the money on a new body. Grab a used d200 or d300, and then get the nikon 80-200. Thats what i would do if i had that much to spend. Makes much more sense.

 

[Ron Evers]

There are wants & needs. If your car is a necessity then it is should be above the lens in your list of priorities.

Never let wants trump needs.

 

[pgriz]

Ron, while I may agree with you in principle,

Never let wants trump needs.

is a refutation of the North American model. If people actually followed that advice, then whole sectors of the economy would collapse. Didn't you get the memo that when the country is in financial trouble, you need to spend your way out of it?:er:

 

[Early]

Ron, while I may agree with you in principle,

Never let wants trump needs.

is a refutation of the North American model. If people actually followed that advice, then whole sectors of the economy would collapse. Didn't you get the memo that when the country is in financial trouble, you need to spend your way out of it?:er:

Well, he'd be helping his country more if he fixes his car, wouldn't he? Just sayin'.

 

[Bram]

haha hey! Let's leave the car out of this okay.

Your money would be better spent on getting the 80-200 AF-s, and then spending the rest of the money on a new body. Grab a used d200 or d300, and then get the nikon 80-200. Thats what i would do if i had that much to spend. Makes much more sense.

Why would I do that? I mean yeah it can make sense but I mean I like my D40x, it hasn't done anythign wrong so far. That lens' retail value is $1,100.00 and then a used or new D300 ontop of that. Hmm I don't know that's kind of tricky. Why the 80-200 and not the 70-200?

 

[D-B-J]

haha hey! Let's leave the car out of this okay.

Your money would be better spent on getting the 80-200 AF-s, and then spending the rest of the money on a new body. Grab a used d200 or d300, and then get the nikon 80-200. Thats what i would do if i had that much to spend. Makes much more sense.

Why would I do that? I mean yeah it can make sense but I mean I like my D40x, it hasn't done anythign wrong so far. That lens' retail value is $1,100.00 and then a used or new D300 ontop of that. Hmm I don't know that's kind of tricky. Why the 80-200 and not the 70-200?

If you arent going to use this lens for anything professional, why bother spending the extra money. I'd rather get a better body and the 80-200. Yeah, i'm sure theres nothing WRONG with your d40x. But why not upgrade when you can? I think the VR is kind of a waste of money if you don't plan on shooting in the dark. Why bother? That money would be better spent on other things in my opinion.

 

[Robin Usagani]

Really.. buying a USED lens is not that bad of investment. The used lens I just bought, I am pretty certain in a year I could resell it for the same amount. Especially if you are trying to make some money out of it.

 

[Bram]

haha hey! Let's leave the car out of this okay.

Your money would be better spent on getting the 80-200 AF-s, and then spending the rest of the money on a new body. Grab a used d200 or d300, and then get the nikon 80-200. Thats what i would do if i had that much to spend. Makes much more sense.

Why would I do that? I mean yeah it can make sense but I mean I like my D40x, it hasn't done anythign wrong so far. That lens' retail value is $1,100.00 and then a used or new D300 ontop of that. Hmm I don't know that's kind of tricky. Why the 80-200 and not the 70-200?

If you arent going to use this lens for anything professional, why bother spending the extra money. I'd rather get a better body and the 80-200. Yeah, i'm sure theres nothing WRONG with your d40x. But why not upgrade when you can? I think the VR is kind of a waste of money if you don't plan on shooting in the dark. Why bother? That money would be better spent on other things in my opinion.

That's the thing I am shooting under the lights, it's a community field I live in a small town. The lighting is bad. That's the reason I was looking for faster glass. So you think I would get the same result with a D300 and the 80-200 2.8 ?

 

[Bram]

if I was to upgrade my body and buy a new lens the 80-200 AF one. What would you do? Get the D7000 body for $1099.00 or the D300 (no S) body fr $1039.00?

 

[Taylor510ce]

If you get a better body and the 80-200 f/2.8 you will probably have better ISO range with less noise which will give you more speed also.

 

[Bram]

Hmmmm alright guess i'll be thinkign about that huh. Even without the VR it'll still be better? I just want the best results you know. So either a used D300 or a D7000 they are both the same price so. Then get the 80-200 2.8.

 

[Overread]

When it comes to sports, VR or not you still have to have a fast shutter speed otherwise you'll get motion blur from the subjects moving. VR can and will help remove your own handshake and also provides a smoother view through the viewfinder to work with- but it does nothing for subject motion.

Thus there is an argument to upgrade your camera body and aim for improved high ISO noise control - thus letting you up your ISO and thus use a faster, motion stopping shutter speed.

I however am a big fan of glass before body so I'd probably go for the 70-200mm VR if I were in your shoes. Consider it a longer investment - youget pro glass now and then later upgrade your body to something better - you then have pro glass you can keep using and a better body. Glass tends to keep its quality for decades rather than years (or months) as it is with bodies.

In the end though its down to your own wants really - big shiny new glass or new shiny glass and new body.

 

[Bram]

Very true very true thanks for the good input so far guys. Yeah I mean i'm just trying to get the best of the best photos here, well the best I can do really. So I mean if the VR 70-200 is going to give me better results it's an easy decision. If the D300 or D7000 and the 80-200 is going to give me better results then there we go.

 

[sobolik]

For that money you can arm yourself with all the equipment to shoot weddings and pay for your school and a new car with the proceeds.