so i have a SLR, what next?

[7zark7]

hello all,


i am considering my first lens purchase and am torn between a few nice ones

the Nikon AF VR Nikkor 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D which looks pretty nice,
the 18 - 200mm VR also looks great.

there was also a lens with a shallow focal field, no zoom. i forget which one it was, but that's another option.


now as for uses, i am looking to use the camera for

1. sports such as Cycling, Rock climbing, Motor sports
2. portraits and generic other.

assuming i will be expanding the collection, i am lookg for some direction on the first one.

does anybody have some experience with these lenses or what would you suggest for a sports / action lens?

[MHD]

Welcome!

Now the answer to this question depends on one key factor: How much are you prepared to spend...

They are both *good* lenses, mind you the 80-400 is more tried and true..

However have you considered the 70-200VR or the Sigma 70-200 for the more budget orientated...

The extra stops (the are both f/2. will put fast moving action (which seems to be your forte) more within your reach...

[Matt. K]

I would urge you to buy the F2.8 80-200mm as your first long lens. Why? Because it's very sharp and fast enough for poor light photography. It is a very useful lens and if you need a bit of extra reach then a Tamron 2X SP convertor will giveyou that for about an extra $250.00. It is extremely well built and retains it resale value. The 80-400 is a very good lens but is not armour plated like the 80-200.

[7zark7]

thankyou for your thoughts,

i found out i have access to a 80 - 200 non VR lens, so i will be able to grab that when i choose.

so i think my question has changed slightly to what is a strong zoom lens good for action photos,

the 80 - 400 again is tempting however is the f-stop low enough at 4.5?

what other options are out there?

[7zark7]

Matt,

a question for you,

the Tamron 2X SP converter, if that was put onto the 80-200vr

this would effectivly give me a 160-400vr

which works out to be 240-600 once i apply the *1.5 for digital.

is this correct?

if so sounds like a pretty good range of use and we may have a winner.

oh one other thing, does the adapter affect the fstop at all?

[Yi-P]

the Tamron 2X SP converter, if that was put onto the 80-200vr

this would effectivly give me a 160-400vr

which works out to be 240-600 once i apply the *1.5 for digital.

is this correct?

if so sounds like a pretty good range of use and we may have a winner.

oh one other thing, does the adapter affect the fstop at all?

Are you saying the 70-200VR?

With a 2x TC on the 70-200VR, it will become a 140-400VR f/5.6 (as the 2x TC will cut down 2 stops of light)

And yes, with it mounted on a DX it will become 210-600mm equiv field of view with the DX crop factor.

there was also a lens with a shallow focal field, no zoom. i forget which one it was, but that's another option.

This can be plenty of lenses out there. Mostly the fine fast primes.
Which are 50/1.4 , 85/1.4, 105/2 and the supremo 200/2
My best guess is that you are talking either the 85/1.4 or 85/1.8

[Mj]

A couple of things to be aware of...

The crop factor of x1.5 does NOT provide extra zoom... it is a crop factor... so do not be sucked into that marketing BS.

Also if one of your key interests is action shots then look toward the fastest glass you can afford... the 80-400 whilst a nice lens will most likely disappoint for many action photography applications... yes you can work around its limitations and many people do with some (even fair) success but to be honest it simply will not match up to a 70-200/2.8 nikon or sigma or nikon 80-200/2.8 for speed.

cheers.

Matt,

a question for you,

the Tamron 2X SP converter, if that was put onto the 80-200vr

this would effectivly give me a 160-400vr

which works out to be 240-600 once i apply the *1.5 for digital.

is this correct?

if so sounds like a pretty good range of use and we may have a winner.

oh one other thing, does the adapter affect the fstop at all?

[7zark7]

ok cool,

Mj, pardon my ignorance, but what is a crop factor?

i held the impression that it was just a multiplier.

[Alpha_7]

Imagine a photo taken on a film 35mm camera then take your scissors and cut some of the top, bottom and both sides, you now have a cropped version.

[gstark]

ok cool,

Mj, pardon my ignorance, but what is a crop factor?

i held the impression that it was just a multiplier.

That's what the marketing types would love for you to believe. But it's what Craig says, just a smaller section of the full frame.

The marketing types will also have you believe that a 10 MP camera is significantly better than an 8MP which in turn is significantly better than a 6MP camera.

Which would lead you to expect that a Nikon CP8700 will produce better images than a Canon 300D. It doesn't.

[Mj]

Yep... like Craig and Gary have said.

Take a 35mm photograph... cut some of each 4 sides like Craig has said... next... stretch what you have left back to the orginal 35mm photograph size. That gives you pretty much what the x1.5 crop factor does... captures a smaller area and then stretches that area to 35mm equiv. Perhaps a better term that is also used is 'field of view' i.e. you see less with a x1.5 fov. Don't let some sales person tell you otherwise !!!
Once you have a nice fast 80-200 lens and attach it to your d70 it's still an 80-200... it hasn't magically turned into a 350mm lens.

I'd refer you back to Matt K recommendation... the nikon 80-200 is a great lens at a fair price that can be teamed up with an econonic teleconvertor for some extra length. You could also consider the Sigma 70-200 at slightly lower price, also nice glass but possibly not with the same resale value, if that is important to you. Finally if money is no object and you like the idea of VR (and many do) look at the lovely nikon 70-200VR at about twice the price and team it up with the equally nice and expensive x1.7 teleconvertor.

Once final word... never apologise for not knowing something... I certainly don't and there loads I don't know...

Plenty of knowledge floating around here... abuse the search engine with much energy and always feel free to ask !!!

Mj.

[Oz_Beachside]

can you recommend a high grade TC for the 80-200 (the new one).

Say a 1.4? or 1.7?

Any impacts on focus, or fstop?

[Glen]

Oz, which 80-200? Unless it is the AFS version the new TC wont work. The F stop increases by the TC ratio ie a 2X doubles the f stop. Focus usually slows.

Which 80-200 and we can go from there.

[Oz_Beachside]

this is the 80-200 I have

http://www.dslrusers.com/viewtopic.php?t=20455&highlight=

thanks in advance
regards
Oz

[Yi-P]

In that case you have the option to go for a Kenko 1.4x or 2.0x TC.

The Kenko TC is one of very few which has a screw motor drive relay which connects the camera body's "screwdriver" into the lens screw drive for AF.


Bare in mind that with the 1.4x TC you will lose 1 stop of light, that is from f/2.8 to f/4
The 2.0x TC will lose you 2 stops of light, from f/2.8 to f/5.6 which will make focus hunting much more often and slower as well.