An even better suprise than the last

twoblacklines said:
Glass : just using my current lenses, selling the 70-300 to get a nikon 70-200mm VR1. so 18-70 kit lens and 50mm prime. Also waiting for tokina 11-16mm to come into stock.
Click to expand...

Keep the 70-300 and get a better midrange zoom first, tbh, unless you really really need f/2.8 (you don't). There's little difference between the 70-300 and 70-200 over the 70-200 range, and you get some extra reach too.

Not that the 18-70 is bad either, of course, but you seem like you must buy some gear so it might as well be vaguely sensible (even if it's ultimately unnecessary and a waste of money).
 
Last edited:
We ordered it from robertwhite this morning (cheapest at 1050GPB) but wont have the grip yet. Looking into 3rd party grips but somethings telling me to stick with the nikon one ?

I loved the feel of it in jessops i went to to have a looksie yesturday, without the grip its too small. The d70 has no option for a grip at all which is partly why i wanted to upgrade.

I do have a question though - the d300s i played with, when you look through the viewfinder theres a little square in the middle (red one) for aiming but this was offset, i dont understand why ? heres a drawing.
d300sview.jpg
 
robmiller said:
Keep the 70-300 and get a better midrange zoom first, tbh, unless you really really need f/2.8 (you don't). There's little difference between the 70-300 and 70-200 over the 70-200 range, and you get some extra reach too.

Not that the 18-70 is bad either, of course, but you seem like you must buy some gear so it might as well be vaguely sensible (even if it's ultimately unnecessary and a waste of money).
Click to expand...

Its not a "must" but we all know that lens is more critical to photography than the body, so to use a prosumer body with a enthusiast lens seems a bit silly ? Im looking at the 17-50 tokina / tamron, but what really catches the eye is the 16-35mm VR as i have shakey hands (dyspraxic) and i feel the vr could help me there ?

Im just happy now that i know the d300s will always be more capable than i am and wont run out of features. For example when the plane i shot a few weeks ago appeared by chance and flew over me i managed to get 2 shots of it with the d70, with the d300s i could have got 7-9 atleast!
 
If you want a quality zoom consider some old manual lenses. The D300s will meter with non-digital lenses which will be a new feature you may not be aware of.

I picked up a Nikkor 80-200mm f4 Ai-S for £34 and the results are pretty decent if you don't mind a bit of manual focus.
 
twoblacklines said:
We ordered it from robertwhite this morning (cheapest at 1050GPB) but wont have the grip yet. Looking into 3rd party grips but somethings telling me to stick with the nikon one ?

I loved the feel of it in jessops i went to to have a looksie yesturday, without the grip its too small. The d70 has no option for a grip at all which is partly why i wanted to upgrade.

I do have a question though - the d300s i played with, when you look through the viewfinder theres a little square in the middle (red one) for aiming but this was offset, i dont understand why ? heres a drawing.
d300sview.jpg
Click to expand...

You just need to use the back wheel/big round pad to move (the small red square) the focus point around.
 
Last edited:
As troop said it's just the focus point (also the metering point if you're using spot metering) and is sooo much better than the 5 points you get on the D70 :)
 
Troop said:
You just need to use the back wheel/big round pad to move (the small red square) the focus point around.
Click to expand...

PaulStat said:
As troop said it's just the focus point (also the metering point if you're using spot metering) and is sooo much better than the 5 points you get on the D70 :)
Click to expand...

Ah, thanks :)

On the D70 when you do that one of the 5 squares just flashes at you, so now wonder i was confused.
 
Troop said:
You just need to use the back wheel/big round pad to move (the small red square) the focus point around.
Click to expand...

Meh, I'd put it in 3D auto mode unless you've got a specific reason not to, single point and tracking modes are very good but 3D is the best all round option, it's unnervingly good at picking the right focus point.
 
twoblacklines said:
We ordered it from robertwhite this morning (cheapest at 1050GPB) but wont have the grip yet. Looking into 3rd party grips but somethings telling me to stick with the nikon one ?

I loved the feel of it in jessops i went to to have a looksie yesturday, without the grip its too small. The d70 has no option for a grip at all which is partly why i wanted to upgrade.
Click to expand...

The D70 did have a 3rd party grip, as does the D40 etc. And I'm looking at getting a grip for my camera, but i'll probably go 3rd party, a lot cheaper.

twoblacklines said:
Its not a "must" but we all know that lens is more critical to photography than the body, so to use a prosumer body with a enthusiast lens seems a bit silly ? Im looking at the 17-50 tokina / tamron, but what really catches the eye is the 16-35mm VR as i have shakey hands (dyspraxic) and i feel the vr could help me there ?

Im just happy now that i know the d300s will always be more capable than i am and wont run out of features. For example when the plane i shot a few weeks ago appeared by chance and flew over me i managed to get 2 shots of it with the d70, with the d300s i could have got 7-9 atleast!
Click to expand...

Can always test out the 17-50 if you want to make sure.
 
robmiller said:
Keep the 70-300 and get a better midrange zoom first, tbh, unless you really really need f/2.8 (you don't). There's little difference between the 70-300 and 70-200 over the 70-200 range, and you get some extra reach too.

Not that the 18-70 is bad either, of course, but you seem like you must buy some gear so it might as well be vaguely sensible (even if it's ultimately unnecessary and a waste of money).
Click to expand...

While the 70-300 VR AF-S is optically similar to the 70-200 2.8, the older non-Vr is quite poor and very slow - not sue what the OP has.
 
Very nice, and Happy Birthday :)

Any test shots yet?

Edit: I just read that this camera has 51 Auto Focus points!? Could take you awhile to flick through all those to get to the right one.. couldn't it?

My D40 only has 3 :(
 
Last edited:
Nice one mate, let me know what you think of it and get some sample shots up ASAP! Thinking of getting one of these to replace my D70, if not an up and coming D90 replacement if there's one soonish!
 
twoblacklines said:
Its not a "must" but we all know that lens is more critical to photography than the body, so to use a prosumer body with a enthusiast lens seems a bit silly ? Im looking at the 17-50 tokina / tamron, but what really catches the eye is the 16-35mm VR as i have shakey hands (dyspraxic) and i feel the vr could help me there ?
Click to expand...

The 18-70 is optically almost as good as the £1000 17-55 f/2.8 DX, it's only deficiencies are it's slightly less sharp wide open and in the corners and the build quality isn't pro level. There is nothing optically wrong with any of the cheap DX zooms, the 18-55 (and it's VR version) and the 18-70 are excellent optically. The upgrade reason is if you *need* a faster wide zoom (at the long end the 50/1.4 is cheaper and faster) or if you need tank like build quality enough to pay 3x as much for it.

VR might help but I'm not sure how much ( but the 16-35 is big and heavy (and expensive) for a f/4 lens. A lighter non VR might be easier (I don't know the in's and out's of the condition).

Certainly I wouldn't be looking at the 16-35 on a crop body naturally, it's a big expensive beast of a lens as mentioned and it's utility as a wide zoom is a little lost on a crop body as it's only 24mm equiv, it looks designed to partner the D700 and D3s with their high ISO performance meaning f/2.8 is less critical.
 
I have to agree about the 18-55 (non VR) - I don't really use it now, but I was very surprised by its performances when being pretty critical of it. But I still recommend the 17-50mm. You could get another piece of glass with the money saved. 17-50 2.8 and 35 1.8 would be a nice combo, along with the 50 of course.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom