eyad_mansour1

<p>I had mine for over 2 years now; for the price, its an excellent lens. I seldom use the hood, and use the lens outdoors, two images show great performance and speed. The little bird picture is taken wide open at f/1.8. The flamingo pic is taken on f/4.5 in pritty sunny conditions, and I am standing out in the sun with no hood attached; this one I took very quickly and did not have the time to attach the 70-200 VR!</p><div></div>

<p>Sam;<br>

On choosing Glass, I too had to learn the hard way and through making a number of Expensive Mistakes. In retrospect, I wish someone would have advised me to go for the 24-70 f/2.8, 70-200 f/2.8. <br>

I Know these seem to be expensive, but think of all the 200s and 300s of dollars you will be spending on cheeper glass on the way to see the perfection of pro grade glass.<br>

You may want to have a prime for walking around, and another for serious portraits, there are the 50mm f/1.4 and the 85mm f/1.8.<br>

And yes, buy lenses that work with FX bodies, since DX lenses will not get you much if you try to sell them later. <br>

As for the body, go for a D90, as its got the same sensor as a D300, although the D300, is a much more solid and versatile camera. Try to minimize your investment on the body for now, so try to buy a ReFurb or Used body, as the rumors out there that Nikon is coming up with the D700?? or even the D800 soon.<br>

Overall, the advice here is to invest in Excellent Glass, bodies will always be changing.<br>

Good Luck<br>

Eyad</p>

<p>Agree with Ron; D90 + 35mm f1.8 would be my personal best bet. Reasoning:<br />1- You will save on a flash due to the fast f1.8 + excellent ISO performance.<br />2- SIZE; a most important aspect is being able to take the camera everywhere. D90 is reasonably small.<br />3- Kit lenses end up being shelveware, and with virtually no resale value. The 35 mm will probably be on your camera most of the time, even after you get more lenses.<br />Please remember, a D90 is really a D300 in a lighter, more feature rich body; without all the weather proofing.<br />Get a nice small carry bag to keep it with you all the time; take lots of pics, share them with us, and be prepared to hear a lot of advice!<br />In my case, I have the D300 + 24-70 f2.8 + 70-200 f2.8 + 24 f2.8 + 50 f1.4 + 85 f1.8 + SB-900 main flash and SB-600 as Back-up Flash. <br />Believe it or not, when I am out and about with my kids on our pass time, the 24 is mounted on the D300, and the 50 f1.4 is always in the bag. The rest of my expensive glass gets deployed only in professional gigs!<br>

In retrospect, I wish I had recieved such sound advice and generous offers like Raymond's; it took me quite a wile and lots of $$$ until I got to know what I really wanted. So, take Raymond up on his offer, I am sure 6 months down the road, you will probably re-donate the same kit to a new comer, when you have had your experience and decided what you really wanted.<br>

Good Luck </p>

What about High ISO Performance at difficult/ low lighting conditions? did anyone try to compare D33 vs D700 image noise in such conditions?

I guess its not a D300 or D700 quations, its more of an FX or DX question. New models will come up all the time, However, what makes FX better than DX, or is it?

 

Many submissions mentioned low/ difficult lighting. Why would an FX handle such conditions better.

 

I.e. if someone owns a D300 today and does low/ difficult lighting conditions photography most of the time, without a flash, would a D700 make their life a lot easier?

To throw another question at this very useful thread - what would you recommend if I were to buy the Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 instead! This will minimize potential apparent loss! Yes?

Diane, I never expected my question would stirr so much good debate.

I am truly happy that I asked, though, as its been a true learning experience. Thanks for all.

Thanks for the advice.

I truly belive that the real investment for photography is in Lenses. One look at eBay proves my point regarding the resale value of on of the good prime classics.

However, given the huge difference in price between the two lenses, even if the 17-55 loses half its value, its less costly than getting the 24-70 now. There is also the fringe benefit of the size.

 

So, I will stick to the 17-55 for now.

Considering to buy either lens. The range that I need is the 17-55, but I am a bit

reluctant to aquire a DX format lens as a long term investment.

 

The question is: will the DX format stay in pro level cameras? with the cost of

technology going down and cometition getting much higher, I am arguing that that

the next camera after D300 would most probably include a FF sensor.

 

This brings me back to my original question: Will the DX format lenses be

redundant for professional grade cameras in a year or two?

I agree with the earlier advise to add the 85mm 1.8; although I own some expensive 2.8 zooms, the 50mm 1.4 and 85mm 1.8 never leave the bag.

Chech this picture out; its with 85mm 1.8; almost un-changed except for a little cropping.

I am an amature going professional myself - slowly.

Personally I went through the pain of buying budget first lenses and then realized that one cannot go wrong investing in the right high quality lens up front. Keep in mind, every trade in you make, costs you money.

 

Since I am fixed on using a DX format, not FF, I have settled on:

1- Nikon 50mm 1.4, after trading in the cheaper 1.8. Main difference is Speed since the 1.4 gets double the light you get from a 1.8, not to mention sharpness. With f/1.4 my SB-600 is spending more time on the shelf!

 

2- Nikon 17-55 f/2.8, after using the Sigma 18-50 f/2.8. Althrough the Sigma is quite impressive; again the Sharpness is quite noticable.

 

3- Nikon 85 f/1.8 for telephoto. Althrough sometimes I have to get closure to subjects during events, and take the occasional two steps forward and backward, this small lens provides a 120mm equivallent on DX cameras and happens to be 2 stops faster than the 2.8. I have to admit that the 70-200 f/2.8 has always been on my mind, but at a fraction of the cost and weight, this small baby is keeping me happy.

 

4- SB-600 flash. Although I would recommend going for the SB-800 from the beginning. But as you might have guessed, I am an ambient light photographer.

 

As for the body I went from the D80 to the D300. Once you experience the color rendering in Raw format on the D300, you will not go back.

 

Hope this helps.