Photog Combo Opinion

[Shorey]

Until my cashflow issues improve this little plan is on the back burner, but I'm investigating camera kit.

I'm thinking about getting a Nikon D80 body with a Sigma 28-300 F3.5-6 Macro lense.

The rationale being that this keeps the cost to about £750 and the lense option gives distance and close without the initial chore of lense changing and cost. I thought I could get round the long lense camera shake issues by ramping up the shutter speed?

Purpose: skiing, hiking.. outdoor scenics and sports basically.

Am I totally off track with this?

[ninjabirdman]

that sounds like a decent starter setup. a good rule of thumb that i've heard is that you will need the shutter speed to be similar to the focal length that you're shooting at to avoid noticable lens shake (this of course counts on your hands being of 'average' stability)

mtbakerskier/summer/squirrel99/many others will probably be a good source of more informed information.

[Conundrum]

mtbakerskier/summer/squirrel99/many others will probably be a good source of more informed information.

I would like to add Astropax, Summit, Grizzle6 and Midget to that list. Those guys have been turning out some sick pictures this year and a few on this board have seen their fair share of published stuff!

[Staggerwing]

Excellent body, for the money, but skip the 10x "do it all" zoom lens.

[mtbakerskier]

Excellent body, for the money, but skip the 10x "do it all" zoom lens.

I couldnt agree more!

[Shorey]

Excellent body, for the money, but skip the 10x "do it all" zoom lens.

So what should I look at? (assume that I'm willin to get two lenses at this stage if the one lense does it all approach doesn't suit.)

[birdboatboy]

Not to point out the obvious, but I think there have been a few threads on this lately. The "do it all zooms" lack the optical quality and speed that higher end lenses have. I don't know any specifics of current lenses (I try to avoid looking to keep money in my wallet) but something like a wide angle zoom and then a faster telephoto or zoom might suit you well.

[Staggerwing]

So what should I look at? (assume that I'm willin to get two lenses at this stage if the one lense does it all approach doesn't suit.)

Ok, since I'm a long time Nikon shooter, and nobody else has chipped in, I take a stab at answering. What follows are some lenses that you might want to look for used. I'm only going to mention optics that I've owned, and/or shot extensively.

(1) 20/2.8 AF-D It's not really all that wide on a D80, but makes for a nice 'walking around' lens, and will be corner-to-corner sharp from wide open. Nice and compact too. Figure $250-300 used.

(2) 20-35/2.8 AF-D Nice, early, wide angle zoom. Like the 20mm above, it covers the full 35mm frame image circle. Might eventually mean something if, Nikon ever goes to a full frame sensor. It's been replaced by the 17-35/2.8, which from all reports, is a great lens, but almost twice as expensive, and significantly larger. Its going to take some luck to find a nice, clean example. Many have been abused by press types. Figure $600 used.

(3) 35-70/2.8 AF-D Not much range here, but a sleeper optic with somewhat funky '1-touch' handling. Has been replaced by the 28-70/2.8; again, significantly bigger and at a much higher cost. Buy only if you really need this range, otherwise, the 60/2.8 macro, 50/1.8 (cheap) or 50/1.4 (not as cheap, but excellent) make great alternatives. I shoot portraits all the time with my 60. Figure $250 used for the 35-70 or 60 macro. Less for either of the 50's.

(4) 80-200/2.8 AF-D (not the AF-S) Yeah, the AF-S model focuses way faster, but at almost twice the price on the used market. If you really need the speed, and can afford it, go for it. Both are great optically. You should be able to find a non-AF-S for $500-600, figure on $1000 for the AF-S version, and if you really want to live large, there is the newest 70-200/2.8 AF-S VR for $1600 new. I will upgrade to this model, when my buddy with too much money, and not enought sense, updates to the newest Nikon offering in this range. It really is a superb optic, and has better out-of-focus rendition (bokeh) than the earlier 80-200 models. All of these are built like tanks.

(5) 18-70/3.5-4.5 AF-D This is my everyday beater lens. Not great in any way, but shootable, and cheap enough to be expendable. This is typical of consumer zooms, built to a price point. I have no real love for this lens, but it works.

(6) 17-55/2.8 AF-D I've not shot extensively with this optic, although I used my friends a bit. If I was starting new, from scratch, this is probably the lens that I would put at the top of my wish-to-purchase list. Covers a lot of really useful ground in one shot. Priced like it too. Note, these last two optics will not fully cover the full 35mm film frame at their widest. They work fine with all of Nikons DSLR offerings.

In optics, you pretty much get what you pay for. There are no magic formulas. Most of the super zooms have 15-20 optical elements, some of them of molded plastic, held in precarious alignment within molded plastic barrels, built with casual precision. When everything works as the designer intended, their results may extend beyond their modest price. Then again, they may not. They tend to age like cheap beer in clear bottles.

The more expensive pro-level optics generally consist of glass, and sometimes fluorite, elements, carefully aligned in metal barrels. The tend to be far more consistant in their performance, even when poorly treated. Unlike a fine wine, they don't really get any better with age, but then again, they don't deteriorate either. They should last you through several bodies.

[HitMe]

I'm not familiar with the Nikon system, but regardless of system, I think you should go with the cheap kit lense that is practically delivererd for free with many of these bodys. It might not be high quality, but it will often do the job until you have gotten enough experience to know more what you want in this focal range (zooms, or fixed focal length). Then get a used med range zoom (80-200 or 70-200) and you're set. If you go for a Canon system, the EXCELLENT 70-200/4L goes is EXTREMELY good value used nowadays. It at least as sharp as the 2.8 models and with modern body's high ISO capabilities, f/4 will take you a long way.

[grapedrink]

Get a flash if you shoot people indoors, makes a ridiculous difference.

[summit]

Excellent body, for the money, but skip the 10x "do it all" zoom lens.

pretty much

[mtbakerskier]

I'm not familiar with the Nikon system, but regardless of system, I think you should go with the cheap kit lense that is practically delivererd for free with many of these bodys. It might not be high quality, but it will often do the job until you have gotten enough experience to know more what you want in this focal range (zooms, or fixed focal length). Then get a used med range zoom (80-200 or 70-200) and you're set. If you go for a Canon system, the EXCELLENT 70-200/4L goes is EXTREMELY good value used nowadays. It at least as sharp as the 2.8 models and with modern body's high ISO capabilities, f/4 will take you a long way.

Don't waste your time and thew few extra $ on the kit lense. The bottom of aa coke bottle would be sharper.

Seriously there are a lot of really good upper end lenses avaliable used. Spend some time on fredmiranda.com

[HitMe]

Don't waste your time and thew few extra $ on the kit lense. The bottom of aa coke bottle would be sharper.

Seriously there are a lot of really good upper end lenses avaliable used. Spend some time on fredmiranda.com

For a crop body, there are not so many cheap used alternatives that are reasonably wide angle. I don't know about US prizing, but from my European perspective, you pay so little extra for the kit lense when you get a body that you might as well get one. If you get a better quality zoom in the 24-70/28-70 etc range later (and those can be found cheap) you might keep the kit lense as a wide angle solution until you just cant stand it anymore and have to upgrade also this part of the range. But that would be a fair bit down the upgrade path and in the end you will not have lost much money on it anyway.

And, for small prints and smallish web stuff many kit lenses will do pretty OK (until you become a full blown pixel peeper that regardless of what the image is gonna be used for just cant stand to know that his prints are not super sharp at 100% pixel size on screen...but to remedy that desease we're talking thousands of dollars and even that will not be a complete cure).

[CS]

If you are going to shoot a lot of sports like skiing and biking, you might want to look into spending a bit more and get the D200. There is a big difference between being able to get 5 frames per second on the D200 vs the 3 of the D80.

As for glass, I know a lot of the guys that are better than me don't dig on 3rd party glass, but I've been really pleased with my Sigma lenses. They are super sharp and almost a third of the price of the Nikon equivalent.

Just get a good camera pack (I use and like the Dakine Sequence), and scrap the all-in-one lense for 2 or 3 solid lenses. It really isn't hard or that time consuming to change a lens.

[mtbakerskier]

For a crop body, there are not so many cheap used alternatives that are reasonably wide angle. I don't know about US prizing, but from my European perspective, you pay so little extra for the kit lense when you get a body that you might as well get one. If you get a better quality zoom in the 24-70/28-70 etc range later (and those can be found cheap) you might keep the kit lense as a wide angle solution until you just cant stand it anymore and have to upgrade also this part of the range. But that would be a fair bit down the upgrade path and in the end you will not have lost much money on it anyway.

And, for small prints and smallish web stuff many kit lenses will do pretty OK (until you become a full blown pixel peeper that regardless of what the image is gonna be used for just cant stand to know that his prints are not super sharp at 100% pixel size on screen...but to remedy that desease we're talking thousands of dollars and even that will not be a complete cure).

You can pick up a used ultra wide for a crop body for aound $200 so thats only about $100 or so more than the kit lense...... But then again WTF do I know about camera gear.

[DrFlask]

But then again WTF do I know about camera gear.

If the posters on the wall in my office have anything to say about the matter... nothing.

[bklyn]

As said before, you're going to want good glass. Don't waste money on the cheap stuff. Better to buy a good lens used than a brand new inexpensive compromise.

Technology on the camera body (sensor, fps, etc.) is changing rapidly. Good glass will last you though several cameras, that's where you should be focusing your investment. I would say buy the best body you can afford that matches what you want to shoot. Most of my work is portraiture, so fps is not a big factor in my purchasing decisions, but for action it's important as CS said earlier. I've gotten some great action shots with a low fps camera, but it would have been easier without that limitation.

I would also say that it's not as advantageous as it seems to try to cover all focal lengths in one shopping spree. You'll end up buying a bunch of things you might not use. Start with 2 lenses (3 max) so you can practice with them and understand the results you're getting and why.

[grapedrink]

everyone means well by telling you to spend your money on a quality lens right off the bat that will last your for years and years.. but the fact is, unless you're willing to plonk down $4000 on lenses right now, you'll have to make compromises and you'll probably get it wrong. what focal lengths do you absolutely need and what focal lengths can you live without? do you need f2.8 throughout the entire range? or can you live with f4 or more? is weight/size a concern? do you absolutely need image stabilization? do you need something faster than f2.8? do you need weather sealing? do you need a flash? do you need a tripod? do you need a circular polarizer, uv, or graduated neutral density filter? etc..

answer all those questions right now, then answer them again in a couple months, $10 says they won't be the same. i say get that super zoom cheap/used (so you can resell it without losing much/anything) and play with it for a while, learn how to use your camera, figure out what you need, what you can live without and what you're missing.. then go buy a quality lens or two when you have the money. also, take a look at the 30d from canon, there's a rebate going on now that makes it cheaper than the d80, it has 5fps, better high iso performance, easier to use, and canon has more quality lenses at better prices. i don't know if there's a uk rebate offer though.