leigh_mazion

<p>Thanks for all of the great input so far. As far as sports, shooting mtn bike race is a little more flexible on focal lengths, but 35-150 is the most common I use on a DX camera. Good points on going wide for indoor shooting. She doesn't do much of this, but you never know. I wanted to stay with FX lenses incase her next camera is FX (her 50mm is FX).</p>

<p>My daughter has been getting more serious about photography and I would like to get her a nice mid-range zoom for Christmas. She has used my Nikon 18-135mm in the past, but I would like to get her something a little faster at the long end with very good image quality. She has a Nikon D90 and is currently using my Nikon 17-55mm f2.8 to supplement her 50mm f1.8. She mostly shoots mtn bike racing, but also likes shooting friends and family, along with some travel photography. I would like to keep the cost under $1000. This is what I'm considering so far:</p>

<p>Nikon 24-120mm f4, I can get one used for $600, Refurb. for $700<br>

Sigma 24-105 f4, $899 but hard to find in stock<br>

Tamron 24-70mm f2.8, used or grey market for about $900<br>

Nikon 24-70mm f2.8, would be hard to find used in my budget, but I recently picked one up used for $1100</p>

<p>Any thoughts on these options or should I be considering something else?</p>

<p>Thanks for all of the input so far. A little additional information, I gave my daughter my old D90, so she will use any DX lenses I don't. I'm planning to pick up a 24-70 2.8, just waiting to see if the price drops with the rumored vr. I'm not sure what I gain with FX, since I haven't owned one yet. I do like the control layout of the D300s, but I didn't have any issues with the D90 when I was shooting with it</p>

<p>My budget is a little open. I'm just looking for a set-up that I can work with for the next several years. Any money saved will go to a new computer!</p>

I'm looking to upgrade one of my two cameras (D200). Currently I have a D300s and a D200. I mainly shoot mountain bike racing, but

occasionally will shoot an indoor concert or portraits of the family. My main lenses are a 70-200vr, 17-55 2.8, 50 1.8, and 35 1.8 (mix of

FX and DX).

 

Shooting mountain biking the lighting goes from full sun to heavy shade in the woods. AF performance is important to increase the keeper

rate. It looks like the cost of the D700 and D7100 would be close ($600 vs $800). Neither are "new" bodies, but the D700 is definitely the

older of the two. My biggest issue with the D200 is noise at higher ISO.

 

Any thoughts on these options or other suggestions?

<p>Ok, I just pulled the trigger on a mint condition 70-200 VR1 from my local camera store. The lens didn't have a mark on it and was a good price. I've clicked off a few test shots and lens performs great. I'll give it a full test this weekend at a race! Thanks for all of the help!</p>

<p>Ok, it’s been a busy week and I’m just getting back to this thread. Thanks for all of the responses so far! Let me see if I can provide a little more information. 1.) Budget: I’m flexible, but ideally I would like to stay under $2k. If I keep it lower, there’s more room to upgrade the computer for post processing!  2.) Yes, I still have the 70-300VR. I shot this one last weekend at a race. This was the first time shooting this since my girls were in soccer years ago. I got good results, but it was sunny and in open terrain. I would like to be able to isolate the subject a little better with an open aperture. 3.) The 70-210 is the AF version, and it was my go to last year. I mostly shot it in the 70-120ish range. In mtn. biking you have some flexibility in where you shoot from. 4.) I can pick-up a 80-200 f2.8 AFS for about $700. Not sure how much I would gain over my 70-210 vs dropping a little more for the 70-200 VR or other option. 5.) I was carrying two bodies last year, but the D90 was given to my daughter. She likes to shoot after her race is done. I will likely carry one extra lens. Thanks for all the help so far!</p>

My daughter has started racing high school mountain biking, so I've dusted off the equipment and started shooting again. I currently own

a D300s with my primary lenses being an old 70-210 f4 and a 35 f1.8. The 70-210 is nice, but a little slow to focus. The 35 is primarily

used for shots around camp. What lens or lenses would you suggest for this type or shooting. To add a little challenge, I may occasionally

shoot a High School band or musical. Thanks in advance for any input!

<p>What about the Tokina 12-24mm or 11-16mm? I think both of these would work very well for landscape and are incredibly sharp.</p>

<p>I have both a D90 and a D300s. Both are great cameras, but I hands down prefer the D300s. The controls are easy to access and I find myself adjusting to the shot rather than taking a chance with current settings. I do find the AF is much better on the D300s for kids and sports. I often use AF-C and the D300s will AF lock before firing giving me a higher keeper rate.<br>

<br />Is the D300s worth the extra money? I guess that depends. I'm glad a bought one, but I got the D90 refurbished at less than half the cost. Good luck, you really can't go wrong with either!</p>

<p>Thanks everyone for the great input ... just pulled the trigger on a D300s!</p>

<p>Ok, I just sold my D70s and I'm ready to upgrade. The D70s was a great camera, but I'm looking for better high ISO performance and better focusing. What I like about the D300s is viewfinder, 51 focus points, dual card slot. The D90 feels like my D70s with better ISO and focusing.</p>

<p>I like to shoot portraits, my girls soccer and swimming, piano recitals, bike racing, neighbors kids playing hockey, and general nature including macro. If I get the D90, I could also add a lens to my kit. If I go with the D300s, a news lens would wait a while. This is what I currently have:</p>

<p>D60 (travel camera and stays in the car)<br>

SB600 flash<br>

Nikon 18-70mm<br>

Nikon 28-105 f3.5-4.5 (love this lens!)<br>

Nikon 70-210 f4 (poor man's 80-200)<br>

Nikon 70-300 VR<br>

Sold my 50mm f1.8 with the D70s</p>

<p>Wants:<br>

Sigma 150mm f2.8 macro<br>

fast prime to repalce the 50mm f1.8<br>

Tokina 12-24 for landscapes</p>

<p>So what do you think, D90 + lens now, or D300s and wait on the lens?</p>

 

<p>Thanks for all the responses so far. Today I was shooting with a nikon 70-210 fixed F4 lens. Last week I was shooting with a Nikon 70-300 vr (4.5-5.6). I'm considering picking up a Sigma 150mm 2.8 lens for macro, but it would also help in low light.<br>

My daughters are into indoor sports/activities that often must be shot without flash (dance, swimming, piano). I really like my D70s, but I'm wondering if it would make sense to upgrade to the D90 for better low light performance. The D90 seems to be going for about $780 these days.<br>

I've never used a program to reduce noise. How do they work if you are shooting RAW?</p>

<p>I have been attempting to shoot pictures at my daughter's swim lessons without flash. Today I shot with my D70s at ISO 800 and ISO 1000. The shots at 800 looked ok, but at 1000 there was a lot of noise. A week earlier I shot with my D60 at 1600 (slower lens) and again there was a lot of noise. Would any of the newer models handle the higher ISO without as much noise?</p>

<p>I own the D70s and just purchased a D60 as a travel camera. I wouldn't consider it an upgrade from the D70s, but it is a nice camera. I will keep both since the D70s gives me more options with lenses. In the future, I may do a true upgrade by selling the D70s and buying a D90 or D300s.</p>

<p>Ok, this has not been my experience. I really wanted to purchased Capture NX. I downloaded a trial version and gave it a test ride. I love the results, but it was painfully slow doing anything, editing or just navigating around. My computer is similar a Macbook Pro 2GHz with 2GB running OS X 10.4.11. Would the OS version or 1 MB of memory make that much of a difference?</p>

<p>Thanks for the responses. I typically do not use AUTO, but I'm trying to give the camera a full once over to make sure everything works. I did a couple test shots using AUTO and P (with ISO set to 200). Both shots were correctly exposed, but AUTO selected 400-800 for ISO.<br>

My wife shot a series using the built in flash and AUTO and all were at ISO 280 ... which seems ok. I am just surprised / disappointed because my D70s seems to handle exposure with bounce better than the D60.</p>

<p>I just picked up a refurbished D60 and I'm experiencing some strange things with ISO in Auto mode. I just shot pictures of my daughter's birthday with the camera in AUTO and using a SB-600 on camera. I was bouncing the flash off the ceiling. All exposures looked good, however, ISO was all over the place (200-1100). I have no idea why the camera would select 1100 ISO when using flash. Any thoughts?</p>

Thanks for all the input ... the battery had died right after I tried to make the WB change. After charging the battery, I noticed I had left the camera in AUTO when I was doing some "point and shoot" of the kids ... aghhh!! Set it back to A and no problems! I need to get some more sleep!! :-)

Thanks, the problem I'm having is when I press and hold the WB button, nothing happens. For example, when I press and hold the quality button, the only item left on the screen is the quality controls, and they change when I rotate the dial. With WB, I push the button and nothing happens! Does the WB work the same way as the other functions on the back of the camera? Could there be something wrong with mine?

I know, "look in the manual". Problem is I'm on vacation and the manual is at

home. Still getting use to to camera. My guess was to push and hold WB button

then adjust with dial on back of grip. No go! What am I doing wrong?

The first time you mess up an exposure on an otherwise good shot, you will be happy your

shooting RAW. My last shoot, the best picture was underexposed since the flash was not fully

cycled when a took it. It was relatively easy to save the shot since I was using RAW.

Getting back to the original topic ... If you want to save some money, the iMACs are very

nice and will be just fine for most people. I tend to buy refurbished direct from Apple and

save quite a bit. I just picked up a powerbook pro for $1300.

 

Since you do this full time, I would shop the apple site for one of the towers. You should

be able to use them for quite a while before out growing the machine.

 

I did do a trial on aperture. It was very nice, but it required a lot of memory to run well.

 

On a side note, I'm an ex-IT guy. Used windows machines all day, but have MACs at home.

Made the switch when apple went to a Unix based operating system. The only time I ever

reboot my machine is after an install. Got to love unix!

Wow, thanks for all the great input! I guess I'll start hnting for a MBP.

 

One last question, are the older MBP models expandable to 3 MB of memory? Thanks!

Just getting into digital and need to buy a computer. I've decided to go with a notebook because I would

like to take it when I travel. I will be using either lightroom or NX (can't decide, but that is another

subject). I've been watching the Apple store for refurbished deals and I can't decide between a 15"

MacBook Pro or a MacBook. The MacBook Pro I've been looking at is $1399 for 2.0GHz, with 1GB RAM and

100 GB drive. The MacBook has 2.0GHz, with 500MB RAM (2x256), and 60GB drive.

 

Do you think it is worth the extra $400 for the MacBook Pro?

Try your local shops ... that's where I got mine about a month ago. The Ritz camera in my

area also has serveral left at a very good price (Ritz on line has been sold out for a month).