bruce_maddox

<p>ART is a subject that has to be seen and not measured....best information contributed in this thread.</p>

<p>Eric, I come to this particular thread in the spirit of helping. The first, best move the OP could make is upgrade the 2 zooms he has. He's shooting a 24mp camera,not a D40. The files will be distinctly better. If you still want to argue that point, I have some spare cheese you can rub on my neck.</p>

<p>The entire idea about having the 17-50/70-300VR is about flexibility/resolution/contrast/value proposition. These are two highly useful lenses whose abilities far exceed their price. The OP would not have to shoot mid high apertures. The quality of his files would be better with no change in his expertise. Shooting at 1.4/1.8 has it's place, but having a better baseline kit is a far better pursuit. </p>

<p>Eric, A Tamron 17-50 BIM non VC can be had easily for 250 ish...figure 50-75 used value for the 18-55. The 70-300VR is easily had for 250-300. Figure about 75-85 for the 55-200 on the sale. So yes, 400 is a very realistic budget to buy those lenses. All it takes is a little patience, and avoiding the likes of buying used through KEH/Adorama/BH. The savings are worthy. The used market has been in a rather downward arc lately in sync with the new product sales.</p>

<p>Consider purchasing a Tamron 17-50 non VC F/2.8 BIM to replace the 18-55. I believe you perceive the better pictures with the 55-200 because of subject isolation owing to longer focal length depth of field. Your investment will be modest if you purchase on Ebay, and sell the 18-55 there as well. The improvement in picture quality will be quite noticeable. If you want the same step up for the telephoto zoom with a modest investment, consider the move to the Nikkor 70-300 VR next, and use the same tactics with the older lens. You can do both transactions on the used market for 400 or less total, and you will have a much better kit that you will use far more than a 35 or 50 prime. The 35 or 50 1.8 G can be had for 125-150 used easily because many folks discard them after they find that they use them infrequently. No matter what you do, begin to transition away from your current kit if you want to get the best from your 24MP sensor.</p>

<p>Pivot completely and buy a Nikon S1 refurb w/11-27.5 lens for $109.00, stick it in a pocket and enjoy the trip unfettered. Experiences,not things. The images will be grand.</p>

<p>Get the Sigma 17-50 OS. It is optically superior to either Sigma 17-70, and can be had inexpensively used. The 17-50 OS combines the best compromise for most of your shooting needs. There is no perfect solution for all situations. The Nikkor 35 f/1.8 G cannot be easily handheld at low shutter speeds because of your sensor's pixel density. Stay with stabilized lenses as you learn.</p>

<p>Nikon customer service just informed me there are very limited parts available for service. Thanks to Tom for the servicing info, and thanks to all for the very solid advice.</p>

<p>Perhaps I'll try someone else. There's a repair facility in Morton Grove, IL that said they'd give it a look. If Nikon's out of parts, I guess I need more confirmation the facility has what is needed. It's really an incredible lens.</p>

<p>Thanks for the input. A Nikon repair rep told me yesterday the AF-S is not on their list of unrepairable lenses. I'm not sure that's the case. I guess it's going on a journey to see what's askew.</p>

<p>I have a newly purchased Nikkor 80-200 f/2.8 AF-S that struggles to lock focus for a second or more. The stuttering becomes extremely rapid before it locks focus. It's not a normal behavior. The ring motor does not squeal, but stutters in a rapid, quiet manner typical of the near silent operation I have known these lenses to exhibit. My question is, based on any experience you may have, is this a potential electrical contact issue, or perhaps another characteristic of a failing focus motor. I've owned two copies in the past, and had good luck before ultimately selling them. My copy looks as if it were never used. It's sharper than my Nikkor 70-200 f/2.8 version 1. Thanks for your comments.</p>

<p>One of the greater benefits of the D300, beyond excellent ergonomics, is that it's sensor is less demanding on the glass you will be using. It is noticeably weaker in dynamic range, high ISO performance, and auto white balance to the current DX generation. It's still a relevant body for most any photographer contemplating ownership. Holding it/using it is a revelation. Others may disagree, but I would not consider the opinion of anyone who has not used a D300.</p>

<p>what is the glass at hand for said OP??</p>

<p>D5200/400-450 used/refurb,35g f/1.8 dx 150 used. There's your starting point. Don't bother with the screw drive AF Nikkors. Target the 50 g or 85 g f/1.8s for portraiture after you learn how to master the 35. The 18-35mm range of the 18-55 VR is useful as a beginner wide angle DX.</p>

<p> Most of the posters here are more confused than the OP. The solution was simple.</p>