Buying New Digital SLR - keep old lenses or buy new?

[keith_dick]

<p>Unhappily, a family member died recently, but he left me his old Nikon film body and two lenses, as follows:<br>

Nikon F100 Body</p>

<p >Nikon ED AF-S Nikkor 80-200mm 1:2.8D "Silent Wave Motor"</p>

<p >Telephoto lens</p>

<p >Nikon ED AF-S Nikkor 17-35mm 1:2.8D "Silent Wave Motor"</p>

<p >Ultra-Wide lens</p>

<p >I am a "newbie" to photography, and am considering getting the Nikon D3100.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >My question is - should I keep these lenses (I understand they are pretty good and almost professional grade) or buy less expensive/consumer quality VR lenses.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Any advice would be greatly appreciated!</p>

[howard_m]

<p>can't fathom why you'd want to sell them only to repurchase lesser quality</p>

[robert_hooper1]

<p>Very nice lenses. I would keep them. However, with those prosumer lenses I would consider getting a higher end Nikon digital body.</p>

<p>Please accept my condolences for your loss.</p>

[Matt Laur]

<p>Keep them!</p>

[jerry_curtis]

<p>If the lenses fit the new Nikons, you'd be better off keeping them. I'm sure the experts on this forum can tell you if they will fit the digital Nikons.</p>

[tom_mann1]

<p>Definitely keep 'em. They are both great lenses. You have 2/3rd of the kit that many pros used to (and still) shoot weddings with.</p>

<p>Tom M</p>

 

[wpahnelas]

<p>those lenses will work fine on a D3100, and as long as you're just starting out, you won't miss the features it doesn't have. if you decide you like photo and want to get more deeply invested, you can spend more then. meanwhile, since the D3100 comes with a basic kit lens, you'll be well equipped to start enjoying the hobby. i think most people recognize the limitations of their lenses before they feel let down by the body they're using.</p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>If you are going to be <em>serious</em> I'd consider selling the 17-35 and the F100 to finance perhaps (with other cash thrown in) a D7000 and a 17-55 f2.8 if you are only going to use the digital rig.</p>

<p>A D7000 with a 17-55/80-200 combo would be extraordinary for almost anything. It would be a very long long time before you "needed" to upgrade.</p>

[tony_defilippo1]

<p>Those are both great lenses, and the F100 is also a spectacular camera. I wouldn't consider selling them unless it was the proceeds from the sale that would fund your introduction into digital photography. They are both pretty big and heavy lenses and the handling on a D3100 might be akward for someone just starting out. It also depends on what you want to shoot but you may not really know that yet...</p>

<p>If you could swing it there are some good used deals to be had on camera's like the D90 or D300... both pretty advanced but better matches for those lenses.</p>

<p>IF you do decide to sell off the lenses, definitely educate yourself on the used value of those lenses in your market, www.keh.com is a leading used gear site, B&H Photovideo and Adorama have used departments and of course the big auction site checking completed sales is a good spot. In Washington DC private used sales via c-list are usually 10-20% less than the KEH values.</p>

<p>Sorry about your lost, I hope photography ends up being a great pursuit for you!</p>

[keith_dick]

<p>Thanks very much indeed for your responses!<br>

BTW - my thoughts about selling the current lenses results from:</p>

<ul>

<li>If the existing lenses are too "powerful" for me, I would like to finance my new equipment from the sale of the old stuff (hence the D3100 rather than a D5100)<br /><br /></li>

<li>But my main concern is that the current "prosumer" lenses would be overkill for me, and that I just wouldn't be able to use them effectively - hence selling and buying lower quality to meet the above budget goal</li>

</ul>

<p>According to my research, the mentioned lenses <em>are</em> indeed compatible with the D31 and up.<br>

Could somebody please comment, addressing the last point about being "overkill" for a newbie.<br>

Based on this, if I do keep them, as all of you have very kindly suggested - and I will gladly take your advice, then what "stock" lens should I buy for regular use (the prosumer lenses are big suckers and I assume you wouldn't use them for all shots).</p>

<p>Many thanks again!</p>

<p>Keith</p>

[michael_bradtke]

<p>Keep them<br>

There is no such thing as a lens that is to good. I would keep the ones that you have and then later on down the road if you find that they are not good enough for you replace them.<br>

Also dump the Prosumer label. Those lenses where the top of the line when they where new and unless they have been worked to death are just as good as what is being made today.<br>

I think that as a photographer you will have to go a long ways before you start being limited by those lenses</p>

[Michael R Freeman]

<blockquote>

<p><em>I understand they are pretty good and almost professional grade</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>The are not almost professional grade. They <strong>are</strong> professional grade and a very, very good pair of AF Nikkors at that. :-)</p>

[indraneel]

<p>Sell the F100, save/beg/borrow some more cash and buy a D700.... and never look back...</p>

<p>edit: see this (current) thread before you commit blunders... <a href="../wedding-photography-forum/00Z8nT?unified_p=1">http://www.photo.net/wedding-photography-forum/00Z8nT?unified_p=1</a></p>

[mihai_ciuca]

<p>Keith,</p>

<p>There is no such as good lens to overkill you... A good lens makes your photographic experience nicer while a cheap lens may give you headaches until you'll know how to overcome its weakness.</p>

<p>IMHO selling and buying is an expensive sport. The glass you have is too good to be sold at this point... you may find in six months that you really need what you already sold. My advice is to find resources for an used D90 or D300 and to start to use this glass. In the meantime you will learn if it is limiting you or if you prefer to exchange it for primes or for other zooms. If I'd be in your shoes I'd never sell the 17-35. It is a nice piece of glass - the queen of most PJs bag.</p>

[robert_hooper1]

<p>Consumer zoom lenses invariably have performance issues that you will have to work around in order to get the best possible results from them. Normally, they do not produce consistently good results from the widest end to the longest end. They also have variable maximum apertures which are a negative, especially at the long end in low light shooting situtations. Prosumer lenses offer good or better performance throughout their focal range and have the advantage of a fixed maximum aperture. In my opinion, the lenses you have are not overkill. If you trade these fine lenses for consumer lenses, you will be trading an advantage for a handicap.</p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>The 17-35 is indeed a great lens, but if you were going to go Digital DX, the 17-55 is way way more useful. That's why I suggested what I did. Using a 17-35 on a DX DSLR can be kind of limiting, it's like having a 28 - 50 zoom on Film... </p>

[andylynn]

Keep them, AND the F100. The F100 is one of the best things Nikon ever made, it's quick with a solid feel and a nice

size, excellent viewfinder etc. But if you really only want to shoot digital... I'd sell the 17-35, which might get you

$1000, and go with a bit better DSLR, like a D90, D5100 or D7000, with one of the normal zooms for DX like an 18-

whatever, a Tamron 17-50/2.8 or a Sigma 17-70 OS. I'd keep the 80-200 unless you really hate the weight, because

there are so many uses for a 2.8 tele zoom.

[ty_mickan]

<p>Hi Keith<br>

Commiserations on the loss of a loved one. </p>

<p>You are fortunate to have been left with a quality outfit. The lenses you have there are good quality. They were marketed towards pro shooters, although many pros still prefer prime lenses for obvious reasons (remember, there is no such thing as a pro camera or a pro lens, only a pro photographer). </p>

<p>My suggestion, for anyone who is new to the craft, is to start with prime lenses. Not because they offer better image quality, but they force you to think about your photography, and also help to illustrate to you the importance of focal lengths, and how different focal lengths effect the final image.</p>

<p>This can be done with zoom lenses, but it is too easy to fall into the trap of zooming your lens to frame your subjects. A 50mm lens can fit the same amount of info into a frame as a 24mm lens can at different distances, but the look of the image is very different. You need to understand why you are to choose a particular focal length for a given situation, and then move around to frame that image. This is photography 101. The reason why you hear intermediate level photographers saying "zoom with your feet", is because they never learnt the basics and have fallen into habits that are hard to reverse.</p>

<p>Remember, it's not a race. You'll often hear people advocating digital because of the instant feedback, allowing you to learn quicker. But I'm not so sure that learning quicker is better. I believe that if there is more at stake for every shot you take, then the more you will think, both before and after the shot is taken. Grab ten rolls of some nice chrome film, like Fuji Provia 100F, and run through your new camera. The F100 is a classic camera, better than anything Nikon currently offers. Chrome film gives little margin for error, and every shot you take will cost you money. You'll also have a the correct frame size for the lenses you have, not a cropped image like most of the digicams on offer. </p>

<p>Couple the F100 to the 17-35mm, set it at 50mm, fix it there with some gaffers tape, throw in your Provia 100F, and you have the perfect kit to start earning the craft of photography over the next six months.</p>

[indraneel]

<blockquote>

<p>Grab ten rolls of some nice chrome film, like Fuji Provia 100F, and run through your new camera.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I entirely fail to see how spending a bunch on provia will lead to a better learning experience...</p>

<p>While the lenses are not perfect for DX and I really hope the OP can scrape some cash for a (used) D700, the best way to learn would be to enroll in PSA and complete the first year beginners' course (or get the book and go through it thoroughly).</p>

[daverhaas]

<p>I'm with the majority here in saying - keep them. Selling lenses to a retail store is never a good idea - they are in business to make a buck - and they will do it by giving you 50-60% of the retail value of your goods. </p>

<p>As for the lenses being overkill - I don't think they are at all. Now if one of them was a highly specialized lens like a 300 mm F4 or 135 mm DC - then maybe - but you've got two really nice lenses there. </p>

<p>I'd suggest a 55-200 kit lens or 18-55 kit lens to get started. </p>

<p>Dave</p>

 

[lornesunley]

<p>+1 on Keep the lenses. Those are good quality professional lenses that will work with all Nikon DSLR cameras. You may be missing out the mid-range (35mm to 80mm) but the solution to that is to buy a kit lens with camera body.</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<blockquote>

<p>Couple the F100 to the 17-35mm, set it at 50mm, fix it there with some gaffers tape,..</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Never knew gaffertape could extend the focal length of a lens ;-)</p>

<p>While those 2 lenses are very seriously good and worth keeping (I sure would keep them, and the F100), I think there are more considerations than the optical qualities. No matter how good they are, they're both large and heavy. If you are getting serious on photography, you'll probably want to take your camera with you a lot - and then having more than 2 kilos of lenses may not always be so great. A second consideration is that the D3100 is small and light, and may not balance all that well with these lenses. That may make shooting harder.<br>

They will fit nicer on a D7000 for sure, but obviously that body is quite a lot more expensive.</p>

<p>So it's a bit a split thought. I would avoid selling these lenses, but I'd also consider getting a normal lighter (consumer) zoom with the D3100 for casual use, like the kitlens or the 18-105VR. It won't be better than the other 2, but it will be very practical - and sometimes practicalities win over optical superiority.<br /> Selling the F100 is a bit more a personal choice - if you do not think you'll ever shoot film, then these bodies still fetch decent prices.<br>

What is the budget you have in mind for the DSLR?</p>

[jun_cordero]

<p>Keep all of it - you got it for free anyway. The F100 is a very nice Nikon film camera. It is better to have something and not need it and need it and not have it.<br>

If you want to jump into the digital bandwagon get yourself a secondhand Nikon DSLR. I still use a 4MP D2Hs and I'm still very happy with it.</p>

[markci]

<p>You'll never regret having higher quality lenses. However, the 17-35mm is not the most flexible range on a small-sensor digital body. And the 80-200 f/2.8 is quite heavy and bulky, so you may not see much use from it unless you have a specialized need for it. I would consider selling them both. The fact that you got them for free, of course, has nothing to do with anything.</p>

[oates]

<p>You won't always be a newbie</p>