DSLRUsers.com

Hey guys,
Some of you may have seen some of my work but I do alot of Automotive Photography (Drag Racing, Photoshoots etc). I am looking for a new lens. Currently I am using a D70 with a 24-120VR on it. Im after something different. A lens I can see a different perspective from. Would anyone have any recomdendations? All lenses will be considered no matter the price.


Thanks In Advance
Mitch

two options, and only two.

1. 70-200VR (MOST HIGHLY RECOMMENDED, would be great for night handheld drags)

2. 12-24 DX For show and shine, engine bays etc.

thats it.

if you do car shows, you might love the versatility of the 17-55 DX

Honestly, if you are thinking of a 70-200 VR, I would consider getting a Sigma 70-200 F/2.8 AND a D2h (for slightly more than a single 70-200 VR).

While you only get 4 megapixels out of the D2h, the 8 shots a second is purpose made for fast action sports, like....drag racing!!!

Just my thoughts......

There is alway another lens you will want, thats life.

I agree with the suggestions.

Raskill wrote:Honestly, if you are thinking of a 70-200 VR, I would consider getting a Sigma 70-200 F/2.8 AND a D2h (for slightly more than a single 70-200 VR).

While you only get 4 megapixels out of the D2h, the 8 shots a second is purpose made for fast action sports, like....drag racing!!!

Just my thoughts......

How much is the D2H going for now? That sounds very cheap D2H

A mate of mine (http://www.HiOctane.com.au) has the 70-200VR and its a top quality lens. I may look into that 12-24 DX though. Thanks guys.

Yi-P wrote:

Raskill wrote:Honestly, if you are thinking of a 70-200 VR, I would consider getting a Sigma 70-200 F/2.8 AND a D2h (for slightly more than a single 70-200 VR).

While you only get 4 megapixels out of the D2h, the 8 shots a second is purpose made for fast action sports, like....drag racing!!!

Just my thoughts......

How much is the D2H going for now? That sounds very cheap D2H

You could pick one up for $1200 - $1400 (from the US, price in AU). $800 - $900 for the sigma 70-200. You'd have a great motor sport combo.

I have been looking at a few lenses. Would like some professional help though . Ive been looking at the 70-300mm VR lens (f/4.5-5.6) and the 80-400mm VR lens (f/4.5-5.6). Has any body had any personal experience with any of these lenses? If so, feel free to share.


Thanks
Mitch

Mitch wrote:I have been looking at a few lenses. Would like some professional help though . Ive been looking at the 70-300mm VR lens (f/4.5-5.6) and the 80-400mm VR lens (f/4.5-5.6). Has any body had any personal experience with any of these lenses? If so, feel free to share.


Thanks
Mitch

The 70-300VR is lighter and is not bad of its quality. Member Onyx here owns one and he has written down a few thoughts of it on the equipment review section. Go and have a look over there.

The 80-400VR is a higher calibre lens. It is heavier and bigger than the 70-300VR. I can't do a comparison between them, but by any chance you need the extra 100mm, it is there for you.

I will say to get the 70-300VR if you really plan to travel with it as it is pretty small and light compared to the 80-400VR.

The 70-300VR is AFS and 80-400VR is not, if that matters you. And of course, you are aware of the price differences right? What is your budget?

Budget isnt really a problem. I want a reliable lens that will take me good photos

Having just picked up the 70-200VR and a 1.7TC I would highly recommend that combination. The 70-200VR is superb, even on my D70. I will be doing my first motorsport event with the combination next weekend so will give some more feedback on it then.

I previously used the 70-300G, which had it's limitations. From what I have heard the 70-300 VR is a capable lens, but you may find it is a let down compared the a 70-200. I am not sure how the optical quality is at it's longest zoom, I know the 70-200 is sharp as a tack all the way out at 200mm (with and without the TC), my old 70-300G was soft from anywhere above 200 - 220mm.

Cheers
Brett

I have both the 70-200VR and the 80-400VR. I am happy with the 80-400, but thrilled with the 70-200. It feels much better in the hand, it does not extend externally, so less dust, much faster focus, sharp. Love it.

Depends on your usage/needs. Both have different bases covered. The reach on the 400 is great, but that comes at a price, called f5.6. At 200mm, I think its still over f4.

The 70-200 is 2.8, or 2.8.

Check out your focal length usage from samples of your pics, refer EXIF. See what you use most. I found 135mm +/- 50mm was used 90% of the time for that usage...

Mitch wrote:...I want a reliable lens that will take me good photos

You might want to upgrade to a D2X as well so the camera will help you take even better photos

Seriously, if you often find yourself shooting in low-light environments where a flash (or external lighting cannot be used) eg. drag races etc... then I'd be highly recommending the 70-200 f2.8 lens over the variable-aperture lenses.
Although all the lenses that have been mentioned will be able to take good photos (if the photographer behind the camera knows & works within the lenses limitations), the variable-aperture lenses may make it more difficult for you should the light levels become insufficient for the camera settings you prefer to use.

With a focal length of 300mm (on a D70 - remembering the crop-factor), you're shutter speeds will need to be quite quick to stop handheld motion blur. The 70-300 in this case can only open as far as f5.6 which is already quite a disadvantage over the 70-200.
Whilst VR may assist to some degree, it is still no replacement to physically being able to use a larger aperture & faster shutter speed (in alot of cases, where the subject is moving - at speed).

Although, you would also need to weigh up how close you can usually get to your subject and if the extra focal length is required. This would help determine what range of lens you are looking at and the options should be easier to choose from.

Unfortunately, photography is all about compromise.

I agree with both Oz_Beachside's recomendations.

The 70-200VR is a no brainer IMHO, maybe with a 1.4 or 1.7 TC for extra reach when required. That would give you 200 - 300 mm which should be ideal for track work.

The 12-24 would be a lot of fun as well especially used in close at static displays. There are many varieties, but Id recommend the Tokina (which I have) or the Nikon (which I don't have).

As noted by some others, you can get much higher frame per second rates with some other bodies: D200, D2Hs, D2X. The D70 is a little slow in that respect IMHO.

Cheers
John