I'm buying one of these! But which???

[buzz_meade]

To recap, I do Model / Portrait work mainly, but wanna break into Weddings and

Outdoor shots. Everyone gave some awesome opinions in my last thread, but it

looks like I will only be able to buy one of these to add to my gear. Again I

have a D80, with the lenses 18-55mm, 28-80mm, 50mm and 55-200mm. I primarily

use the 18-55mm and 50mm for my current work.

 

I'm looking at either

-Upgrading to a D300 or buying a 17-55, 24-70 or 70-200mm lens.

 

I'm not afraid to make a solid investment as far as the D300. I just don't

wanna upgrade to a D300 if my lenses are the issue and not the camera body.

 

Thanks ahead of time!

[dcraton]

You received a lot of good info on your last post.

 

Now to the nut: is this your profession or is this part time work?

 

That should answer your buying purchase. Glass rules, cam bods come and go. Again, 200mm will not suffice for nature, outside, etc. And in all reality, it really is nice to shoot modeling with a 300mm or longer lens to achieve a nice DOF and bokeh.

 

I suggest you study a bit more, experiment and decide what you really want to do.

 

As to weddings: good luck there.

[niccoury]

if you're shooting DX, get the 17-55. It's way cheaper and just as good and wider.

 

Maybe get an old, trusty 35-70 f/2.8 for the gap.

[eric_arnold]

ideally, you want both the 17-55 and the 70-200 for the type of work you mention. a d300 would be nice, but you may as well be using a d40 if you want to do pro work with a kit lens. since you cant afford both the 17-55 and 70-200, much less either/or and a d300, you may want to rethink your options. it doesnt seem like you will be able to accomplish your goal in one fell swoop.

 

in any event i would totally invest in glass.

 

if you're planning in stages, i'd get the 70-200 first since its good for outdoors, portraits and weddings, also because there are other wide alternatives to the 17-55 (like the tamron 17-50, tokina 16-50, tokina 11-16, sigma 18-50, etc.) which could hold you over until you can upgrade to the 17-55 (or not).

[ronald_moravec1]

You need a good lens for the camera to do its job. By 5.6 or 8 even the kit lens should approach the pro glass.

 

The D300 is of some value if you need 400+ iso.

 

Lenses are the issue? What problem are you trying to solve? Are you sharpening properly? If not, you need to learn. Even the best pro glass files need to be sharpened.

 

I normally use a D200, but borrowed a D80 for a try. I could not see much difference in final results, just that the better models have better controls and you need not search thru menues so much.

[buzz_meade]

Thanks guys! Like someone mentioned before, right now the lens and camera I have are pretty solid for the work I do.

 

But as I get more established in my small little area, I have more opportunities for other types of Photography (Sports, Weddings, Outdoor) which is why I wanna be prepared and have the correct equipment for the job. That's mainly where all this comes from.

[ShunCheung]

<I>right now the lens and camera I have are pretty solid for the work I do</I>

<P>

If you indeed feel that way, I suggest you buy nothing right now.

Stick with what you already have until your photography skills improve to a point that you find your current equipment limiting;

most likely you will, and hopefully it will be soon.

<P>

By then, determine what the biggest limitation is and buy the piece of equipment which removes that limitation. It could be a lens, it could be a camera body, it could be a flash, or it could be a tripod ....

<P>

Personally, I think your D80 body is pretty good but your lenses are on the weak side, but again, don't go out and buy anything until you reach a conclusion (hopefully similar to mine). DSLR bodies improve very quickly and prices are dropping quickly. There is no point to buy something for the future.

[tim_knight]

Buzz, Pick which zoom lense you feel you are the weakest at or which zoom lense do you use the most. By studying your past shoots you should be able to come up with the answer for what to replace first. Do this a second time when money is available and my guess you will have 2 professional zoom lenses that cover 18-200mm. After this take a look at your camera replacement. Might be the future D80 replacement for less money?

[buzz_meade]

Tim, that makes the most sense yet.

 

I'd like the D300, but I don't think that's the answer. I've already went from a D50 to D80. 18-200mm would be cool too, but I don't know if it get a ton of use from me at this point.

 

The 17-55mm seems to be the closest to my favorite lens and the one I use all the time (18-55mm), but just a little sharper, so that might be the best move at this point. And it is a good "wedding" lens from everything I've been reading. Thanks!

[tim_knight]

Buzz, Quick question, I have the D50 and wonder if you saw an improvement in ISO noise with the D80. This is the main fix I am looking for in my next camera. I shoot a lot of indoor pictures at ISO 800 at sporting events(no flash) with my 50/1.8. I am lucky in that a lot of the places I go to are small gyms with fare to good lighting. My future dreams as of now is a Nikon 300/f4 prime, and the D80 replacement if it has the same sensor the D300 has??

[oxide blu]

Buzz, when doing weddings you have an obligation to get the camera and lens that yield the best possible image with you abilities. Unlike models, school pix and catalog work, weddings are a once in a lifetime event that come with a lot of personal emotion attached. People are depending on you to capture images that can never be recreated. If you mess up or return marginal quality images from a wedding you are shooting you stand the potential of robbing folks of something for years to come...until the end of their lives.

 

I'll be frank; given your questions I would say you do not have the skill set necessary to successfully carry off quality wedding photography. Don't do it.

 

Wedding photography isn't something that comes in a box of cereal or a book or a set of how-to DVDs. When you have the experience to know what lens does what and what camera body is best suited for which scenario, only then consider wedding photography.

 

Still wanna do weddings? Suck up your pride and contact the best wedding photographer you can find. Carry his/her lens for them every weekend, for free. Watch, learn. There is no end to crappy wedding photographers. Don't become one of them.

[shaun ring - lexington, ky]

Shun hit the nail on the head. Your D80 is sufficient, and your lenses will eventually start to limit you. Only replace lenses in your current line-up, though, when you start feeling regularly limited by them. If you think you'll eventually go full-frame, try not to invest too much in DX lenses. Try a third party for that fast zoom. Just my two cents. Good luck! -SR

[brian farn]

The new Nikon AF-S DX 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II seems to getting good reviews, and is seen to be sharper than the 18 - 200. The bit of extra length will be good for portrait shots and closer shots at weddings. Also, the VR will certainly help with indoor natural light shots.

[buzz_meade]

Tim, I did see an improvement in ISO Noise. Like I mentioned, I mainly to model and portrait assignments, so I like things to be super clean and crisp and I was blown away by the D80 when I first got it. I've since learned how to use it better, so now its even better. If you are thinking about upgrading from the 50, I can't think of anything bad about the jump from 50 to 80...tahts the truth.

 

Oxide Blu, I can tell you're very scorned and jaded by hack photographers. I don't intend to take this lightly. I have a good 3 months to study and shadow, as you suggested, and I'm a very good study at that. This isn't about money to me, but a new branch of photography I can be involved in. And just because I'm not technically savy yet, doesn't mean I don't have a good handle on light, composition and the basics.

[tim_knight]

Buzz, Good luck and keep with your goals, notice I didn't say dream because you are past that part.

[don olson]

Buzz, after reading this thread I agree completely with Oxide Blu. Personally I don't think you are ready to get into the Wedding thing. Your questions and comments themselves lead me to think this.

1. "It's not about the money." If you don't have a Professional attitude, leave the Weddings to the pros, those that aren't doing it on a whimsy. There are plenty enough hacks that are giving the good pros a bad name. As Oxide mentioned one screwup and not only have you become toast but you've screwed the pooch for the pros in the area too and it's very easy to do.

2. If you have to ask equipment questions like this technically you aren't at the knowledge level to reach the pro level necessary to do weddings. Even with a limited budget, one that has the experience level base should be able to prioritize their needs and purchase their equipment accordingly.

 

You didn't say what lighting equipment you have. Is this up to the job?

 

So, I'd have to say to attain this goal you have to do two things. One is to get you head screwed on straight. 2. Get your technical knowledge up to par. To go into wedding photography one better have the professional attitude and knowledge because weddings are no place to be playing around or practicing. Way too much hurt and damage can be caused.

 

Be an understudy to the best wedding photographer you can find. Pay them if you have to. Don't just shadow but work with them as the whole wedding business is on a different level and the work and planning starts way before the event.

Get out on the street and do some PJ work and club type of shooting.

Vary lighting and conditions as much as possible because with weddings you run from very dim no strobes allowed to very bright where fill in is necessary.

 

Your comment, "And just because I'm not technically savy yet, doesn't mean I don't have a good handle on light, composition and the basics."

Going into a wedding you better have a "handle" on things more than just the basics. One better go into a wedding with the whole professional package, technical and experience.

There is no such thing as damage control for a poorly shot wedding. Just about any other area of photography one can play and practice but with weddings one better be prepared to go in, do it right the first time with NO excuses as a professional would.

 

If I am blunt about this it's because I have seen in this wonderful digital age far too many rely on the cameras to do their thinking and bollacks up a shoot so badly that the only thing they can do is to make a full refund and get the hell out of town. This puts the hurt on the real professionals that are trying to make a living at it not to mention the very real hurt and damage caused to the family.

 

By your comments and questions I would strenuously suggest you back off a bit and truly study under someone that does know the wedding business and during this time learn you craft to a higher degree.

 

That being said I truly do wish you good fortune.

[buzz_meade]

Thank you all for your opinions and thank you to the people who stayed ON TOPIC, giving me advice on BUYING LENSES. :)