Jump to content

About to purchase new Nikon gear, looking for feedback/opinions...


photojen

Recommended Posts

<p>I would re-consider your choice of lens lineup. The 17-35 2.8 Nikkor, though an older model, would serve you well in the wide angle zoom range, to start.<br>

A couple of tilt/shift lenses, namely, the 24mm and the 85mm Nikkors.<br>

The Zeiss 100m Makro Planar and the 50mm Markro Planar, bot F2.0 ZF, or if you must have the AF, the Nikkor 105 VR Micro Nikkor.<br>

I would drop the 70-200 zoom and get the 200mm Macro Nikkor instead.<br>

This range would do you well for most of the type of shots you seem to gravitate towards and would be as sharp or sharper than any zooms out there. Plus, the added benefit of lighter weight, a consideration when working out in the field. These single focal length lenses will spur your image making once you've spent time and effort in mastering their strengths. Look into B&W and Singh Ray filters for your lenses and consider adding a couple more SB900 flash units in addition to your list. With the exception of the Tilt/Shift lenses, the lens lineup I've suggested can be used on the older film cameras. You can use an older manual body for when you're miles from nowhere and your battery dependent cameras wont work anymore.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 51
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

<p>Jennifer --</p>

<p>I'm going to join the crowd and say that you have a great eye, knowledge enough of your current equipment to get great results, and a resulting great portfolio.</p>

<p>That being said, I have a tendency, like Shun, to question your need to purchase all of this equipment at once.</p>

<p>I'd practice shooting the styles you want to get into with what you have now and upgrade as you NEED to.</p>

<p>I'll break down how I decided to upgrade my D90 to a D300s...it's a great system that has saved me lots of money over the years.</p>

<p><strong>~ Do I NEED or WANT?</strong><br /> <em>NEED</em><br /> <em> </em><strong>~ WHY do I NEED to upgrade my D90 to a D300s?</strong><br /> <em>Because I'm shooting more sports and I find myself shooting into the evening more often. The D90's focus system is limiting what I can shoot when the sun goes down and the lights come on.</em><br /> <strong>~ Is there anything I can do to keep my D90 and not spend $XXXX on a new D300s?</strong><br /> <em>I went out and shot a high school lacrosse game, 2 semi-pro football games, and a AAA baseball game. I went back to the basics of shooting sports and got some great shots...while the sun was shining. As the sun went down, my shots got progressively worse and worse. ISO was not an issue as I was shooting up to ISO 1600 to keep my shutter speed above 1/500 sec. What I found was that as the sun went down and the contrast became more muted, the D90's focusing system "hunted" for the right focus more and more. On top of that I couldn't track focus once the hunting began. </em><br /> <em>I RENTED a D300 and shot under similar conditions...got spectacular results and had a lot fewer issues getting the camera to focus where intended.</em></p>

<p><strong>~Are there any other benefits that a D300s has that justifies upgrading my D90?</strong><br /> <em>7 fps, 51 AF points, certain switches/buttons (AF, Metering, AF-ON) that make my life easier, dual memory card slots, bigger, brighter viewfinder, etc, etc...</em></p>

<p><em><strong>~ </strong></em><strong>Can I afford it?</strong><br /> <em>YES! I'll BUY IT!!</em></p>

<p>OK, now that you know how I go about purchasing equipment, you have to understand that I do this every time I buy a new piece or upgrade what I already have. In doing so, I generally save myself a lot of money by not purchasing something that will sit in the bottom of my bag most of the time.</p>

<p>*Know what you intend to shoot and know your tendencies when shooting.<br /> *Know what you want to do in the future...whether or not it happens is largely up to you, not your equipment.<br /> *Accumulate the equipment you need as you find that your equipment, rather than lack of skill, is holding you back. 75% of the time, equipment is not the issue... ... ...<br /> *Try to learn one new piece of equipment at a time. Master that one piece before purchasing something new.<br /> *Focus on learning one type of shooting at a time. I've spent over a year getting good at sports photography. I think I'm pretty good, but I'm not sure I'll ever make a living off it...there's just not a market for it where I live. Don't get stuck in one style, but understand that macro photography of bugs and flowers rarely pays the bills. <br /> *I've learned, (and spent), a lot in the years that I've purchased equipment... I will suggest that when purchasing lenses, consider buying refurbished or lightly used copies from reputable retailers (Adorama, B&H, KEH) Lenses don't break often if cared for and used the way they are intended. <strong>You'll save yourself a ton of money by purchasing what someone bought, rarely used, and let sit in the bottom of their bag until they were sick of lugging it around.</strong><br /> *Consider every purchase carefully...you don't want to be the person selling their lightly used lenses to KEH at a $700 loss because you don't use it very often and need a different lens to suit your shooting style.</p>

<p>One last thing, and this is probably the most important. Understand that being artistic and knowing the "art of photography" will not make you money in this business. Being a good businessperson and getting the right contracts will. Here's a great story about a local photographer:</p>

<p><em>A pro photographer friend of mine sat me down and spoke to me at length about photography as a business. He makes well over $100,000 per year and knows less about making great photos than your average mule...he said so himself. "All I need to know is how to set my aperture to f/8, my shutter speed to 1/100 sec, and where to point my camera...oh yeah...and where to plug in my lights"</em></p>

<p><em>This pro shoots "one shots" for local schools and sports teams. Basically, he's a one-man portable studio that has had great success keeping contracts with his studio and away from the "big boys" like LIFETOUCH.</em></p>

<p><em>"I've got contracts that date back 40 years with some schools...I negotiate my price and keep 10, 15, and even 25 year contracts to shoot school portraits. You'd be surprised how many schools will negotiate a longer contract, just so they don't have to do it again. You've got to know how to present yourself, not make fabulous pictures. These places want consistency and repetition, so you've got to make these schools see that you're reliable and can get the job done year after year. They don't want to re-negotiate with you, (or anyone else for that matter), next year, or the year after, or the year after that. They want a long term commitment, but you may need to make some half-wit administrator see it that way."</em></p>

<p>Just something I thought I'd share...<br /> <em><br /></em><br /> Well, I've rambled on for long enough. Hope it helps, and I hope you think (or have thought) everything through before you make your purchase.<br /> RS</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I'm a Canon shooter so I can't comment on gear. I will say that your portfolio is great. Coming from the same position as you, it's best not to make a large initial investment in gear. Your business model may change as you find clients who enjoy your work. I purchased more business gear as clients have paid for my services. For the things I lacked, I've been able to rent locally. This may not be the case for you on lighting gear but you can rent the lenses on line if necessary. A wide angle lens like the 12-24 is definitely a different world view.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Read what Richard posted very carefully. It is good advice.</p>

<p>I think you have too much money and I fear you are trying to buy a game. Your photography is very nice. You do not need all of that equipment right now. The learning curge will be like trying to sip through a fire hose. </p>

<p>So here is the deal. Your portfolio is very nice and quite colorful. Obviously you are meticulous in your camera work. But out of 200 pictures there are exactly 13 that are people. You are putting together an equipment set that is aimed right at photographing people. The Fair shots are nice but they are not particularly commercial. How about the formal portraits and other studio work that you seem to be equipping for? Perhaps you just chose not to post them. My question is, what have you budgeted for training? Will there be money left over for you to attend seminars and workshops? I have been doing this for oiver 30 years and every seminar I attend teaches and inspires me. </p>

<p>If you are buying Nikon USA lenses they come with a 5 year warranty. I would not spend extra on lens warrantees. It is unlikely that they will break anyway and after 5 years you can decide what to do. It appears that money is no object so why not enjoy all that nice equipment.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Very, very little money to be made in "nature" photography. I have doubts that very many people could make enough money with that to even recoup the cost of the gas they spend going to places to photo. I'll join the crowd saying wait on the camera. If (more like when) Nikon comes out with a new "D800" body with the D3s sensor in it, the D700 value will drop like a rock. Even adding video to the D700 would put big pressure on used D700. As for "protection plans," I know I could find a lot better use for $1,300. Especially considering Nikon already has great warranty. For lighting, I think I'd go with at least 640ws lights, such as B1600, if you have any plans at all to photo outdoors. Lighting is what makes the biggest difference with portraits, IF that's what you are shooting (don't recall that you said.) I agree that the list you came up with doesn't seem to match what's need to photo people, but then again you've never really told us what you want to photo. It's hard to make meaningful recommendations. The idea is to match the gear to the purpose. I've been doing well the past couple of years buying used gear from photography studios that have gone out of business due to the very poor economy. Call me a vulture, but I've bought seven high powered monolights, battery packs, and heavy duty lightstands that way. It's worth looking for these bargains, and they're certainly out there. I paid as little as half price for Paul Buff studio lights that looked virtually unused.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>All great advice...and I appreciate all of your inputs, this is why I asked. I feel ready to take the next step. It's not about the money (and I say that loosely) , it's about pursuing my goals. My current camera is old, my lenses stink (except for the 105mm), really, they do. I am going to hold off for a few months, I suppose, on the D700. But I will purchase the lenses and lighting~ and have made the decision to go with the 24-70mm, thanks to great input from you guys. I know my portfolio here doesn't reflect a great deal of people photos, but I have the desire to want to start shooting them, if they are willing, of course. I know I won't be a big time photographer, but I have found my niche, and I say to myself, go for it...again, I thank you and have read and reread this post a couple of times...and will take all you have to say into consideration...now, off to ponder.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>If the primary objective to improve one's photography, IMO it is unnecessary to buy so much new equipment all of a sudden.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>These are wise words. IMHO it's always better to buy one or two pieces of gear at a time and spend a lot of time learning how to use them.</p>

<p>Since there is some debate as to whether the D700 body is due for replacement, why start with the 70-200, the SB900, the Sekonic meter, and one or two filters? That should be more than enough to keep you busy for a few months.</p>

<p>Note: There is no way to mount a polarizer onto the 14-24 mm lens. Polarizers don't work well with very wide angle lenses, anyway - the edges of the frame become very, very dark - so you're not going to miss it on this lens.</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>My thinking is that you need to purchase the equipment you will use mostly. If your wide-angle usage will be limited, then obviously you should go with the 24-70mm lens. In that case, you can cover your wide angle needs with some more cost-effective solutions, like perhaps a Nikon 18-35mm lens, which you can find used for very little.</p>

<p>If on the other hand you plan to use the wide-angle lens for more picture-taking than the standard zoom, you should go with the 14-24mm. Another prime (together with the 50mm one) like a 28mm should cover your mid-range needs.</p>

<p> </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I would go with the 24-70 and instead of some of the other things, I would consider a second body. The D700 is a late production model, but it is a great camera. If you need to go now, get it and save some pennies for the D700 upgrade, if it ever occurs.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>To Jennifer: If you are lucky enough that money is not at all a concern to you, as it is the case to some well off members on this forum, just buy whatever you want. Some people can get a D700 now and then its successor also whenever that becomes available, perhaps a few months later.</p>

<p>However, if your money does not come easy as in the case for most of us, I would suggest to spend it wisely. I would not buy so many lenses at once and I would not buy a new DSLR so late in its production cycle. Hyperthetically, if you had 5 weddings lined up for the next 2 months and therefore you need a D700 now, it would be a good reason to buy a D700 today. Otherwise, I would wait.</p>

<p>If the intend is to hike around, IMO the 70-200mm/f2.8 is a bad choice. I really wish Nikon had a 70-200mm/f4 AF-S VR, and all indications show that they will provide one, but given that Nikon has just announced version 2 of the f2.8, I suppose it will be another few months before any f4 version will appear. A 70-200mm/f4 will be a lot smaller, more suirable for landscape photography. For wedding photography, it is hard to beat the 70-200mm/f2.8.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Note: There is no way to mount a polarizer onto the 14-24 mm lens.<br>

Adorama lists <a rel="nofollow" href="http://adserver.adtechus.com/?adlink|3.0|5215|1127939|1|16|AdId=700404;BnId=7;link=http%3a%2f%2fwww%2eadorama%2ecom%2fCKXP164KNK%2ehtml%3fkbid%3d3925" target="_blank">this one from Cokin</a>.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>For all practical purposes, you cannot use filters on the 14-24mm/f2.8. I know Lee and some other companies provide those super combersome holders to mount a huge filter in front of it. Just clink on the link Kent Shafer provides and take a look at this $600+ attachment, and we know Cokin does not make the best filters. That is simply fighting the design of this lens. If you need to use filters, you are much much better off spending that kind of money on another lens designed to take fitlers.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>One thing that I would suggest NOT skimping on is the tripod. It's crucial for most kinds of photography. Buy a carbon fiber Gitzo 300 series and a first class ballhead such as AcraTech, RRS, Kirk etc. This is something most of had to learn the hard way--just how critical a good tripod and first class ballhead are. I've owned a series of tripods before getting a Gitzo 1325 & AcraTech head. Yes, they are a lot more money but I do notice a difference in the solid performance they consistenly give. I'd rather use a D80 plus Gitzo than a D700 with no tripod, most of the time.<br>

Kent in SD</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I have a nice CF Manfroto with a joystick head...</p>

<p>Shun, it really isn't about the money, it's about improving myself and making my goals. I have an opportunity to purchase equipment that will help to set my future. It's an investment...and a risk...a successful person wouldn't get very far with out taking a risk. I am looking at the big picture. Yes, I will be paying on this for years (like every other business investment), but like I said, it's a worthy personal investment, imo. I didn't mean to make it sound like money wasn't a factor/issue...because, of course it is...just looking for suggestions on what I have on my list.</p>

<p>I thank those who offered an opinion and suggestion~ </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>That Bogen "joystick" head was the worst ballhead I ever owned. I ended up returning it within two weeks. With a light load like D80 + 18-55mm on it, it's adequate. Barely. When you start putting heavier loads on it you quickly come to hate it enough to shoot it (with a rifle.) What put me over the edge in just a few hours was trying to use a Nikon 80-400mm VR on the "joystick." For the kinds of loads you are talking about, you are WAY short on tripod support. If you were to try a <strong>real</strong> ballhead such as AcraTech, Kirk, RRS etc. for just ten minutes you'd immediately know what I was talking about. Bogen QR plates are the very worst too, as they twist and turn when you turn camera sideways for verticals. Highly recommend spending at least $800 on tripod/head. Don't see the point in spending that kind of money on heavy, pro caliber camera gear and then using cheap stuff and expect it to hold steady. The Bogen QR plates alone are worth dumping the head over. </p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>You might consider a used D700 at this time, and buy its successor when it comes out; the D700 will be an excellent second body.<br>

I also agree that a 17-35mm f/2.8 is a great alternative to the 14-24, and coupled with a 28-70mm f/2.8 can save you a lot of money.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>A used D700 would be a good option right now.....I have a D700 and it's a fantastic camera...<br>

The D700 replacement no doubt will be announced sometime around July and of course going by previous experience it will be in very high demand ......it probably won't start shipping until late November and you will be very lucky to get your hands on one before christmas......</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p> All the gear is high quality stuff for sure. I suppose the 24-70 zoom would fit in with your other focal length choices as you would cover 24mm to 200mm. One thing about the super wides is the polarizer effect comes out with patchy skys, however it still is very nice for reflection reduction such as with waterfall pictures. I think the wide angle you picked out does not accept screw on filters. You are going to have one heavy camera bag so make sure you buy a box of Wheaties. Not sure about waiting for the what's the next greatest thing in camera's but that is the world of computer photography. The upgrade thing affects people in different ways. Some could give a hoot about it and others are in a frenzy waiting to spend their kids college money. Good luck with your gear, I am sure you will do wonderful things with it.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>The D700 replacement no doubt will be announced sometime around July and of course going by previous experience it will be in very high demand ......it probably won't start shipping until late November and you will be very lucky to get your hands on one before christmas......</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I have no idea precisely when Nikon will announce a new DSLR to replace the D700 and exactly what the new features are, although it seems clear that it will have video just like any other new DSLR since 2009 (except for the bottom of the line D3000).</p>

<p>The D700 itself was announced on 1st July, 2008, which is almost to the date 23 months ago. Nikon started shipping later on that same month, namely July 2008 and by September, various discounts started showing up when I bought mine. By November that same year it pretty much dropped to $2600 and it has been there for a year and half.</p>

<p>The background situation was that the global recession also started in the fall of 2008 and the value for the yen went way up. Nikon and other lenses also went way up in price during 2009 but camera prices have been stable.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Arthur, as I pointed out earlier, as far as I am concerned, video capture is a must have feature if I buy a DSLR today, in 2010. Some people don't care for video; that is their choice. It opens up a lot of information capture opportunities for me and I don't want to carry a separate video camera. Therefore, the D700 is already out of date, so is the D3X. Not to mantion that the D700's high-ISO capability is also a step behind the D3S now.</p>

<p>That is why I have been saying for a few months that unless you have a compelling reason to get a new D700 immediately (e.g. you have some important shoots within the next few week that you need a D700 now), it is not a wise purchase in 2010.</p>

<p>When I tested the D300S for photo.net, I captured a bunch of videos in the Antarctic. Certain things are much better represented with video than still images (and for some other subjects, still images do a better job). I prefer to have both available. E.g.: <a href="http://vimeo.com/8022055">http://vimeo.com/8022055</a></p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Shun,</p>

<p>I fully realise that the D700 does not have video functionality nor the high iso capabilities of the D3s. However, that does not make it out of date, nor technically obsolete. It is a different camera, that caters for a different public with a different need.</p>

<p>Maybe some of you disagree with me on this, but in my opinion adding the latest function, or sometimes gimmick, does not deteriorate a good peace of equipment. Even though I will probably never use film again, I would not say that film is out of date. Different ball game, different league.</p>

<p>Back on topic, Jennifer, considering the serious investment you are about to make, I would follow the advice to wait and see what's in store in the coming months. Bear in mind though that you will pay top dollar for the latest and the greatest.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Excellent portfolio Jennifer - now to your question I use a D700+ MB-D10 and a D3, also a D100 converted for IR. I have the 14-24 and 24-70 f2.8 Nikkors and I USE both, The R1C1 Speedlights - I have three heads for mine, - and the 70-200 f2.8 Nikkor plus other stuff. You will find that both Lee and Cokin now do holders and filters for the 14-24, they are not cheap however. Because of this I use the older 17-35 mm f2.8 Nikkor. I buy only 77 mm filters and use step down rings to attach them when needed. With the MB-D10 I use en-el4a batteries - they last for ages. For the type of work you do, have you considered the 70-180 mm Micro Nikkor? You might find it worth looking at. As for timing - we can all put it off, but if a D700 suits you then why not go for it? Sure it will be outdated in months or years one way or the other, I might just wait to see the July offering but..... Also look at the SB800 rather than the 900 - one - its cheaper, and two, one of the criticisms of the SB900 is that it is so loaded with things you could do but never will, that the menu is a nightmare. I tend to use two bodies at all times and have a different lens on each - depending upon what I'm shooting - so I am very happy with both the 14-24 and the 24-70. The 14-24 is very good for landscape and architecture - but both are neck breakers if carried all day. Whatever you decide - keep up the good work.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>That is why I have been saying for a few months that unless you have a compelling reason to get a new D700 immediately (e.g. you have some important shoots within the next few week that you need a D700 now), it is not a wise purchase in 2010.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>More or less like Arthur above, I think this reasoning is flawed. Which makes sense since I bought a D700 in February. Of course, things move so buying a D700 in February is not like buying in June, and the more time passes the more the replacement gets close, the more you have a point. Let's resume how I see it:<br>

- The D700 is about 1900-2000 euro in Germany now. in kit with MP-10 is around 2100. At launch it was 2600-2800 if I remember correctly, body only. If one wants to go full frame Nikon now, and wants to spend less than 2500 euros, it is the only option and it WILL be still the only option, most likely, a year from now. The new camera will be put on the market at least at the same release price as the D700 had, possibly more, especially of it has a high resolution sensor. At the very least, between D700 and D700x at release there will be 600 to 800 euros...<br>

- As you well know, it is an amazing camera with the best AF on the market, the second best high ISO noise on the market and a excellent build quality, ergonomics and speed.<br>

- The D700 is a perfectly tested cameras, with mature hardware and firmware. Be an early adopter is not always a nice experience, there are many examples around, in and out the Nikon camp.<br>

- The OP has a D80. The difference in build quality, speed and image quality between D80 and D700 is massive, to understate. She can either have that now and relatively cheap, or have that plus something else, for more money, in something like 6 months.The point is: what value is that "something else" for the OP?</p>

<p>Take my case: if I was on the market now, I could either buy a D700, or wait at least until summer (most likely July announcement according to the last rumors), but more likely September / October to get my hands on a camera which is at least 6-700 euros more (AKA overpriced since early adopters pay anyway), has some likelihood of showing some initial firmware (if not hardware) glitch, and gives me one feature I don't care about (video) one which is nice-ish but not necessary (double card slot) and either one nice-but-not-vital (one more stop high ISO a la D3s) or one I don't need nor want (higher resolution). Frankly, to put off buying a D700 for a person with my needs would be plain dumb.</p>

<p>My point is, everybody should buy a camera of this price by knowing VERY well his/her needs. Capabilities and limit of the D700 are well known, and it is inconceivable for me that a person thinking about spending that amount of money in professional gear does not know exactly whether they are or not compatible with his/her needs. If they ARE, as in my case, waiting AND spending more to improve in areas I don't care about makes no sense. And feeling bad or upset because your camera is "outdated" is just ridiculous. I would feel more upset because I have waited and paid more for a camera that <strong>for me</strong> does the same job the D700 did already.</p>

<p>I could just reverse your reasoning: unless one has a compelling reason NOT TO buy a D700 now (e.g. he wants video or he wants higher pixel count), the D700, at its price and with its features is a steal right now, and a VERY wise purchase. This not to say I'm right and you are wrong. Just that perspective is everything. And I'm a bit skeptical about this catastrophic perspective change that suddenly made poor quality videos a compelling creative need.</p>

<p>L.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...