DSLRUsers.com

If I were to get one of these lenses what sort of time frame from order to delivery would one be looking at. I was looking at purchasing one late Feb/early March for the F1GP and the Avalon Airshow. However I'm not sure if Nikon make a lot of these and if they take a while to get in.

If you get it from Mr Poon, odds are it'll be there next day.

I find myself in the unenviable position of having the funds for this lens but knowing that at least two of the females in my life would absolutely murder me if I bought this lens right now...

I will however own this lens before March 2005. I'm going to South Africa for a few weeks and damn I think this lens would be nice to use on a safari..

Why am I telling you this? I'm bored... sorry...

PlatinumWeaver,
Just want to know: what glasses are you going to bring with you on the safari trip?

What lenses you mean? Or actual sit-on-your-face-and-help-you-read glasses?

PlatinumWeaver wrote:What lenses you mean? Or actual sit-on-your-face-and-help-you-read glasses?

we call: lenses are glasses as well

Yeah, contact lenses..errm

At the moment all I have is the kit lens and tamron 70-300 that I paid lot more than the $150 I saw you mention in another thread...

I took the Tamron to the cricket on sunday and was moderately happy with it, though I felt the shots were not nearly as clear as I would have liked..

PlatinumWeaver wrote:At the moment all I have is the kit lens and tamron 70-300 that I paid lot more than the $150 I saw you mention in another thread...

I took the Tamron to the cricket on sunday and was moderately happy with it, though I felt the shots were not nearly as clear as I would have liked..

You won't be happy with it (Tamron 70-300) on the safari trip! what type of safari trip are you going? and normally wildlife animals are in distance, once you're on the ute or truck there's so difficult. Especially in overcast day, the Tamron just hunts the subject never stop.
Go to safari trip, you need the fast glasses, VR recommended and as much longer zoom as you can (70-200VR/ 80-400VR/ 300AFS/2.8/ 200-400VR)

PlatinumWeaver wrote:I took the Tamron to the cricket on sunday and was moderately happy with it, though I felt the shots were not nearly as clear as I would have liked..

By shots, are you referring to the players, or your images?

PlatinumWeaver wrote:I find myself in the unenviable position of having the funds for this lens but knowing that at least two of the females in my life would absolutely murder me if I bought this lens right now.../quote]

PlatinumWeaver,
You only die once

P Weaver, count up the total cost of the trip including spending money, then do it again with a 70-200 + tc. Is there much percentage difference? Maybe 10%. You cant buy memories. You would also hate to be showing a shot of a lion 3 metres away to somebody and have to explain it looked better in real life and if you used the lens you bought 4 months after the trip it would be perfect.

Good luck

Glen,

I'm loving your logic there.

Perhaps we need a thread on how we justify the lens lust to ourselves (easy*) and our significant others (much more difficult).

* In an interview with The New York Times, the British mountaineer George Leigh Mallory was asked why he wanted to climb Mount Everest, and replied, 'Because it's there'.

In an interview with D70Users.com, patron, lens collector and allround-good-guy Birddog was asked why he has ordered the 300mm f/1.2 VR at a cost of $20k, and he replied, "Because it's there (in the Nikkor Catalogue)."

Cheers
Dean

Deano,
well said and thanks

PlatinumWeaver wrote:I find myself in the unenviable position of having the funds for this lens but knowing that at least two of the females in my life would absolutely murder me if I bought this lens right now...

PlatinumWeaver,
Don't you remember: legend never dies

PlatinumWeaver,

We've been to Africa twice now (one of the times we visited Sth Africa) and I would say you will get away with the 70-200Vr with the tc. When you're in private game reserves you can get pretty close to the animals. Kruger is a different story though as you are not allowed off the roads. Still you should be ok. Might be worth considering the 80-400vr though...

I haven't even looked at an 80-400.. what'll that set me back?

PlatinumWeaver wrote:I haven't even looked at an 80-400.. what'll that set me back?

Mine was a shade over Au$1500 grey.

Sigma, yeah?

How does it compare image wise to nikon glass? I assume there'd be some issues at it's narrowest..

Don't waste your money on VR lenses. I saw an ad on TV where a guy on safari had this moblie phone/camera, and it pulled the lion up real close. Get one of those and you can take photos and talk to the 2 women in your life at the same time.
And it fits in your pocket.

*laughs*

Yeah Matt, I saw the same ad.. incredible!

To set the record straight.. at the moment I don't know when I'll be overseas or how long i'll be there or what exactly I'll be doing. The trip is mainly to see my grandmother who is fading fast mentally. I won't actually be paying much if anything as far as normal travel costs go, but thats good because I dont have the funds to go anyway...

As far as the glass situation.. I was/am looking at the 70-200 2.8 because I want a nice sharp lens that handles lower light situations better. The 80-400 has a much longer reach, but 4.5-5.6 sounds a little too dim for my needs, I do live in Melbourne remember

So there you go

PlatinumWeaver wrote:
I do live in Melbourne remember

And what? always overcast? Rain? Storm?

PW,
Just settle yourself a bit, save your buck and get the 70-200VR later, forget the camera that Matt mentioned, your phone bill will be high with it

PlatinumWeaver
Yes. Birddog is right. Get the 70-200 VR and you will never regret it. A damned fine lens and useful most of the time.

Imho, always get the fastest glass you possibly can. I've got the kit lense, 70-300G and a Sigma 70-300 APO I, plus the 50mm 1.4D. I love the low light capabilities of the 50mm. That's why I'll be going the 70-200VR just for the extra 2 stops. It might really make the difference on Safari, especially if you go out bordering on dusk to see the nightlife.

Platinum - I was in South Africa and Namibia last year and believe me, you'll need as much reach as possible! I'm getting an 80-400 VR for my next visit, because the majority of animals you'll see in daytime (esp in summer when they congregrate around waterholes), and this aperture will be fine. 70/80-200 will be great for those dusk shots but deffo not at night when it's inadvisable to use flash (though a lot of dickheads do). Flash will temp blind the animal and expose them to predators.

Try and get to Etosha in Namibia, you will be amazed at the density of wildlife on show. Best holiday I've ever had. Simply amazing and a stunning part of the world.

Reach reach reach... that's likely to be your most important need.
Here's another option to consider... tamron 300/2.8 + tamron tcx2 giving you 600 reach at f5.6. Read some very good reviews of this combo and should be obtainable at a lower price than nikon glass.

Michael.