D300 body with 55-200 lens or D80 body with 1.8 50mm and 55-200 lens

[t_c16]

I'm trying to decide if I should buy the d300 body with 1 lens (55-200 lens) - I

might be able to squeeze in a 1.8 lens or buy the d80 with a 1.8 lens and a

70-200mm & an 50mm 1.8 combo instead.

 

Basically here's a tentative plan it's:

 

better body lesser lens - buy better lenses when more $$ comes available

or

lesser body - better lens.

 

My budget is at least $2000 to $2200

 

I'll be using it to shot weddings & portraits. I have all the other accessories

brackets, cards etc.

 

Is the 55-200 lens that comes with this kit any good?

http://www.ritzcamera.com/product/SLR1181.htm

 

Thanks!

[Matt Laur]

You're <i>really</i> going to miss having a wider lens. Right now, budget-wise, you might consider getting only the 17-55/2.8, and perhaps the Sigma 30/1.4, or that 50/1.8 you've already mentioned. A longer lens might be very helpful, and the 70-200 is as good as it gets for versatility... but if you're going to shoot weddings, you really should have TWO bodies. If you can only have one, then the D300 is going to be physically more robust, faster on its feet, and good enough at higher ISOs that perhaps you can get away with the less expensive 70-300 to help out on the long end.

[michael s.]

<< ... <i>Is the 55-200 lens that comes with this kit any good? ... </i> >><p>

 

Quantaray is a store brand for Ritz/Wolf/etc., made for the retailers by a third party manufacturer. If I'm not mistaken, that is often Sigma.<p>

 

Nothing against Sigma -- Sigma also manufacturers considerably higher quality lenses that are optically better, far more solidly built, and much more expensive.<p>

 

That lens carries a $100 retail price. It ought to be capable of taking decent photos in ample light outdoors. But pro-level photos -- photos you'll charge money for -- in challenging light such as is often found at weddings, well ... ?<p>

 

As Matt noted, it would be hard to imagine covering an entire affair with just one lens that *starts* at 55mm -- effectively offering you close to the perspective of an 82.5mm lens when mounted on either of the dslr's you're considering.<p>

 

While the old saying that "you get what you pay for" often does apply to lenses, I'd say Nikon offers one possible exception: the 50mm f/1.8 Nikkor. For just over $100 new in the box, you get a very sharp, fast lens which, while not ruggedly built, is in my view capable of superb photos. At an 'effective' 75mm f/1.8 when mounted on the dslr, you have "the poor man's portrait lens." That's one I'd consider if you have use for the f/1.8 speed and that focal length.<p>

[wpahnelas]

with the D80 selling now for between $800-900 new (body only), with your budget you should be able to put together a suitable assortment of capable lenses. the D300, on the other hand, will leave you barely scraping by. one of the photo.net reviewers opined that the D80 is "too slow" for undoor use, in recommending the D300. i use it indoors with quite satisfactory results (perhaps i'm not shooting fast enough). i'm sure i'll love the D300 whenever i buy one, but i'd much rather have my D80 and a half-dozen lenses than a D300 with just one or two. i can't imagine trying to work without them, either.

[lisette_arencibia]

I don't think you got an answer from someone who is actually shooting weddings here, so I'll reply. I am shooting weddings (for business, not for family/friends), and I am using a D80 for the moment, which I've owned for a couple of years. You can go to my site, www.lisettea.com to see samples of what the D80 can do for you, and for weddings.

 

The lenses I use most are the 50mm 1.8 and the 18-200 VR, which you will hear are very popular for weddings. Another must have is the 70-200 2.8 and the rest is up to your personal preference. Personally, I will soon give up the 18-200, and use the 50mm, 70-200, and a 12-24 exclusively. I also find myself using my 60mm 2.8 macro lens (micro- according to Nikon) for details. You need fast lenses, don't scrimp on these or you will regret it later, you can not fake light (realistically) where there is none in the shot (I've tried it!). Once that shot is gone, and it comes out dark, its never coming back. Don't learn this the hard way by missing the "first kiss" or "first dance" because it was indoors under low light.

 

Do not go cheap and get off brand equpiment. You won't have time during a wedding to check each shot, and if the original shot is not good, no amount of editing will make it good. The thing I have learned about weddings is that if you invest in the best equipment, you will get the best shots (assuming you already know how to take a nice picture), and both you, and your clients will be happy (and therfore they will reccommend you to their friends, which is crucial in wedding photography).

 

I have used my D80 for my last 5 weddings, and have decided to upgrade to the D300 both for the flexibility of having 2 cameras on me (you DON'T have time to play around switching lenses), and for the quality of the D300.

 

Its worth it to make the investment and get the D300, so long as you have a backup body (the D80 would be a good choice when you have enough cash), but you will hear from other wedding photographers (and I agree) that you need backups of EVERYTHING. When you least expect something to fail it will, and you don't want it to be the one time you do a wedding alone.

 

My final suggestion, buy a body only. You'll never use the kit lens at a wedding, because the quality is not good enough, unless you get the 18-200 VR in your "kit". In which case, spend the extra $100 and get the 50mm 1.8, and go to town.

 

Best of luck, feel free to email me if you wanna chat some more about some wedding experiences.

 

Lisette

 

One more thing... keep in mind the 2 cameras use different memory cards... Whichever you choose, you will want to invest in good (big, fast) ones.