dcraton

<p><strong>I guess I have to ask...what is your budget? </strong> And what do you shoot? All the other points have been made very well. Like Shun, I have a lot of lenses and use all of them. Thus, all of my cam bods have motors in them so I can use some old faithfuls. The point on the flash is immense. The current technology is amazing. If ya have the bucks a you might want to look "higher". If not, you may just have to sell off some of your AFD lenses unless you don't mind manual focus. John Crowe is right on the D90, however we have a good copy that is on our shelf and used regularly by our interns. That is a coin toss. You can pick up a "Like New" D300 for around 800.00 at Amazon...just one of many options (echoing Jim's thoughts and direction I would take and there are warranty options--check the number of actuations from the seller). <br>

It's the old balancing act of lens technology, cam bod tech, flash tech, lens trading (if you need to), and how thick is your wallet??? Good hunting and Happy Holidays!</p>

<p>For now, getting a Nikon 18-35mm f/3.5-4.5D ED-IF AF I found LN for under 400.00. Thanks for all the input and nice shot, Jim. Thanks for posting that. Eventually, may pick up a Nikon 20mm/2.8 and possibly a Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8G ED AF-S. We do like wide here.<br>

For now, this will get us started and my accountant will leave me alone... :). <br>

I dearly appreciate your time and may I hope you have a great 2012. </p>

<p>True on the 10-24. My apologies. How did I miss that?<br>

Our pro shop here has a 16-35 and 18-35 they will "loan" me for a day. I may take them up on it. I really would like to stay within budget. It would be hard to walk away though from the 20-35 because it is a proven lens and I don't mind older technology and I shoot stopped down on all wides anyway per application and style. Still, would love the Nikon 14-24, but I really don't think it will pay for itself soon enough to be justifiable. If this were not a career, I would be looking at this differently.<br /><br />Thanks again! </p>

<p>Agreed on the 17-35mm. It's not about saving money, but in this case saving money. :) On a serious note, company budget and other business needs as well as percentage of overall use per annum. <br>

I have looked at the Tokina, but can't find a copy locally. I did read this review here on p.net: http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00Zkei?start=0. Too new and too soon for me to drop since Tokina already has some nice mid priced wide zooms at f/2.8. My concern is, according to the p.net review is it tends to shoot soft (17-35). <br>

I may just have to break out the wallet and get the Nikon 14-24/2.8 (my first choice) or the 17-35/2.8. My account thinks he is the owner of the business...heh... ;). Thanks for helping me to think this through. I need to do this before the end of the year.<br>

I did find several 17-35s price at 1400.00 for a good used copy and a Nikon refurb with a one year warranty for 1500.00...I actually have 1100.00 to spend, so that would only be 4 more Benjamins.<br>

Thanks!</p>

<p>Nice thought Lily...at times I have to shoot pretty fast in limited space...so yes a zoom is the ticket for this application or I would probably get a 20mm 2.8 and make my feet be the zoom. The other issue, and this actually is the lens I want, is budget. I have around 1000.00 to spend for various reasons. Per shooting style on wides and clientele, I stop down most often rarely shooting wide open..on wides. Reach is not an issue as I have also looked at the Nikon 14-24/2.8. <br /><br /><br />Grrrr....I'd rather just buy once right than cheap twice!</p>

<p>Cool! I forgot to mention that lens. Yes and thank you. I like many of the older lenses and new ones as well. I forgot to mention, the only PJ work I do now is college and HS sports and that is contract. Doesn't pay well, but a lot of fun. </p>

<p>I agree with Elliot. I had better response from the 24-120 on film than digital. I do have a Nikon F100 still shoot BW only on it and keep the 50mm/1.4 and it may not seem like much, but the 50mm/1.8 is a great lens and razor sharp and AF fast. That would be my choice per your budget.<br /> <br /> <em><strong>"Don't worry about what pros use."</strong></em> As a working pro...there is a lot of validity to that statement as when I get time to shoot for me, for fun, with my wife, I take out a whole "nuther" batch of lenses or maybe two. And we who are working pros appreciate those where who probably know more about gear than we do. A lot of good advice on the 50mm. I started out with a Nikon F with two lenses: 50mm/1.2 and a 70-210 zoom. I still love the 50mm on a FF body. <br>

Another option, since you have quite a focal range covered is to get a bit of a wide lens, AFD used for those moments you described above. There are several options available and with the price point of the 50mm/1.8...you could have two nice primes giving yourself options...if you like wide, you can pick up a Nikon 20mm/2.8 for around 300.0 in great condition...so for 400.00 (if that is your budget) you could have the 50 and 20 and keep your 24-120. A nice bag with two great primes. Just a thought.<br>

One can never, never, never, never, never have enough lenses. I think Winston Churchill said that (stolen from "The Martian Child..great flick). <br>

Happy Holidays and Happy Hunting. BTW, I am looking for a nice wide zoom now for my F100....</p>

<p>Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays! Hello...been awhile. I have resurrected my Nikon F100 and am using it primarily to shoot BW for portraits, landscape, and other contrasty architecture, odd shots for print sales and of course converted digital use. I have a bevy of great lenses for the D300s we use for event and portrait photography. I am looking for a nice wide zoom for the F100. I am a bit out of touch with current lenses via Nikon, Sigma, Tokina, and Tamron. <br>

Here is a list of my FF lenses: 35mm/2 AFD, 50mm/1.4 AFD, 85mm/1.8 AFD, 80-200/2.8 AFD, 300mm/4 AFD, all Nikon. <br>

I do enjoy shooting wide often in a variety of situations, hence the desire for a wide zoom. I have about 10 "Benjamins" to spend.<br>

Lenses I am currently viewing:<br>

Nikon 18-35mm; Nikon 16-35/4 VR; Nikon 10-24; Tokina 16-28/2.8; Sigma 12-24...have I missed any?? :).<br>

Since I live in an area with a small pro shop, trying lenses out is a challenge. I have read much of the posts here, but, I haven't yet come to a solid conclusion. We do a lot of work with the arts and music industry as well--quite a variety. So, maybe a wide zoom with a bit of reach???<br>

I have every thing I need for the DX world and am quite happy. Why film???...oh, there is something personal and special about BW film for me...and yes, I do have the infamous Nik Silver Pro blah, blah software...love it. However, I would like to be able to market the film side again as there is a return to "old school" per marketing in my area for work. This is my job and has been for 20+ years, which means I spend more time running a business than keeping up with you fine peeps. Thanks for the help and it is nice to "see" some of you again.<br>

Currently leaning toward the Nikon 16-35...but concerned about the negs in the reviews. I do have the wide end covered nicely for the DX world. <em><strong>WWEBS</strong></em>? I look forward to your thoughts. </p>

<div></div>

Thanks to all who participated in my last "Theater" post. Great work. Another

opportunity for all.<div></div>

Please post your favorite shots from theater such as musicals, plays,

dance, ballet, etc.<div></div>

<p>Thanks in advance.<br>

I have a home theater room in my home and am getting reading to rip it out to make room for a small portrait studio.<br>

Gear: D300s, SB-800s, a bevy of lenses, tripods, adjustable and changeable lighting above on a dimmer (movable and changeable lighting in center of room on ceiling).<br>

Small work space: 13' 15' workable area after gear, props, drops, etc.<br>

I am asking what lighting package to put together for this room. 90% of our portrait business is onsite at the clients' home or other location. No we are needing to have a place for couples, seniors, product shots, models, corp promos, etc. <br>

I am light poor as to knowledge. We do have an artist on staff who can do miracles wtih mulsin etc. for backs. Just need some suggestions as to how to conquer a static lightin in a small environment.<br>

Open minded and I welcome your input.<br>

Thanks!</p>

Mark, this may sound a bit on the odd side, but having come up in the PJ world initially with Nikon film cameras then to sport and event photography in the 80's and now doing all of the above. . .besides being a great camera, I love how the D300 feels. It's almost like I have a Nikon F in my hands.

 

As to the NEF Compression, it works great if you need CF space or want to conserve HD space. I use it often.

 

The overall IQ and noise levels are superior straight out of cam on the D300. However, with good post a D200 can also be an excellent choice.

 

If you have the money, and certainly love a great image, the D300 will not only produce great images, but is built like a tank and is environmentally sealed (not waterproof) and works with virtually all Nikon glass which for me over years of collection, is a must.

 

And it just "feels" good in my hands.

 

Question for you, can you rent cam bods in your area for a day to try whatever you like? I am fortunate in that our local pro shop lets me take a lens or cam bod out on Sunday's as they are closed for trial and for testing for the store. It's a nice trade off. Just would be nice for you to get one of the many good suggestions in your hands.

 

Good luck.

Shun, you were very clear you are "against shooting JPEG only". Hence my comments of why not shoot JPG and do some in cam processing? Saves time and for snapshot photography, works well for certain applications--like "general use not portraits".

 

I understand where you are coming from, but there are other options and applications for shooting than yours or mine. Your method is only one way to achieve the desired result that you are seeking. There are others that work just as well and the OP asked about in-cam settings on a D300.

 

I am glad you are happy with how you shoot. This is fun and the variety of info allows a person to make their own decision via reading and experimenting.

Or, buy it from a reputable dealer that allows returns. . .

I have too many lenses. However, I second Travis' suggestion for the 55-200 VR II. I got a refurb'd one at B&H for a great price. With proper technique and a bit of experimenting, she can get very good results as Travis suggested. I paid under 200.00 for mine and it is the least expensive lens on my shelf by far.

 

However, and this may be applicable to your daughter, I use the lens for more than just "close up" photography. It makes a nice companion to her 18-55mm and will allow her some reach and flexibility for a variety of shooting applications.

 

I use this lens quite a bit on a D40x leaving the monsters and bazookas on the shelf for just tooling around and shooting for a day out hiking, fly fishing, or family gatherings.

 

It's a nice little lens and will fit your budget and needs as well as giving her some flexibility.

 

Good luck.

200.00 is a reasonable budget for a lens that will work with a D40 for auto focus and provide you with close up photos.

 

However, as Mark indicated, what lenses do she have now?

"But since you spent money on a higher-end DSLR such as the D300, why shoot JPEG only and therefore throw away a lot of potentially very useful information at the time you capture the image?"

 

A good observation, but only your perspective and a bit rigid. Why not utilize both? I shoot mostly RAW, however, as Elliot suggested, Nikon offers a bit of in-cam processing if I do not want to take the time for post. I use my D300 from everything to making a living with it to shooting my godson's birthday party which hardly needs to shot in RAW.

 

I do use the Standard picture control and up the sharpening and saturation a bit and turn on the ADL. Pics come out fine for snapshots without post. Saves time and energy.

 

I am glad Nikon allows me the flexibility in the real world.

 

Good luck.

Charles' furtherance of my post is excellent. In PS, there are many ways to get to the top of the mountain. Actually, the filters in PS via: "Filter, Artistic, etc." can offer many choices for a simpler way to achieve affect with a variety of tools intended to take an image with art characteristics. There are many options for you. The second image I posted, I only added a paint brush filter and did nothing with the contrast just to clarify. I simply used "Filter", "Brush Strokes", "Angled Strokes" and adjusted the parameters to my liking. It was not meant to mimic the cat images, but rather let you know the many options in PS.

 

However, if you want the full effect working in layers adjusting levels, curves, contrast, saturation, etc. as well as applying filters will get you a far better result.

 

If you are unfamiliar with these techniques, you might look at various tutorials on the web per using PS for advanced imaging editing free on the internet.

 

There are also some great plug-ins here http://www.thepluginsite.com/resources/freeps.htm.

 

Good question.

 

Good luck.

Picasa, DxO, Bibble, all have trial versions. If you are wanting a very simple program, Picasa is free and you can get it from Google. It may be a way to get you started.

 

Which Adobe did you try?

I'd get a lens now that fits your budget and needs because if you wait ten years your kids will be gone.

 

For reasons Matt and Sinh mentioned, I too would probably go with the 70-200/2.8.

 

Or, you could pick up a nice used Nikon 80-200mm/2.8 AFD from KEH or other reputable dealers. It is a tank of a lens, AF is a tad slower, but very sharp and works well with a TC if you want to get some extra reach for wildlife. I use it all the time for event photography to include indoor sporting events, musicals, plays, etc. Great lens.

 

Good luck.

Sunset shot on a pod with the Sigma.<div></div>

With the crop factor on a D300 (I have one), 24 really isn't wide. If you are wanting wide, there are a variety of zooms and primes that will work on a DX format depending upon your budget.

 

So, how fat is the wallet?

 

Nikon 12-24mm/4 is a nice lens. I have the 17-55mm and really don't use it for landscape shots. There are the other Nikon f2.8 lenses both prime and zoom that go wide (down to 14mm), but those will cost you--great lenses.

 

Though slow, but my copy is very sharp, I opted for the Sigma 10-20mm/4-5.6. Does a great job for me.

 

It will boil down to your budget as there are several options for you if you want to go wide in a DX format.

 

Sigma at 10mm of a friend of mine playing in a club in Florida. What a life. . .

 

Good luck<div></div>

I agree with Don. Just a suggestion to send the camera back to Nikon. You should not have to spend time in post "repairing" an in cam defect.

 

Good luck to you.

And, the adjusted image. . .<div></div>