New complete set up Question

plum · 19 May 2011 at 22:45

After having to sell my old D40 & D80 kit when times got very hard a few years ago i am now in a position where i am able to treat myself to a complete new DSLR outfit, i have set myself a reasonable budget of £3k now the choices i have whittled it down to are either

Nikon set up -- having used a D40 & D80 seems the logical step

Nikon D7000 Body -- read excellent reviews in numerous magazines
Nikon AF-S 50mm f/1.4 G
Nikon AF-S DX VR 18-200mm 3.5-5.6G ED II
Nikon AF VR 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6

Or go over to the grey side with this canon option:

Canon EOS 60D Body -- again seems a very competent camera
Canon EF 50mm f1.4 USM
Canon EF-S 18-200mm f3.5-5.6 IS
Canon EF 100-400mm f4.5-5.6L IS USM

I have chosen similar lens set up because I’m looking for a nice quick 50mm a walkabout lens and a large lens for any motorsport and air show days out

has anyone of you got experience with similar set ups and can shed a bit of light on this subject which could help me to choose, at the moment I’m heading towards the D7000 as i am familiar with Nikon and have never been disappointed with previous results

Cheers for any feedback or advice

D.P. · 20 May 2011 at 08:09

The Nikon D7000 is a great body, the best of the 2. For Canon you might want to consider the 7D.

For the 18-200 lenses i believe the Nikon has the best IQ but not massively so. However, for either Canon or Nikon I strongly recommend you to forgo the superzoom. These super-zooms do not work well on these high resolution bodies.

For a Walkabout lens on the Nikon look at the 16-85 VRII. Don't be fooled by the fact that 85 is a much smaller number than 200. The 18-200 actually is more like a 19-180mm, and the 180mm focal length is only apparent at infinity focus. As with all super zooms, there is a lot of focus breathing and at closer distances the effective focal length is down to 135mm or so. The 16-85mm lens maintains its focal length much better., and 16mm is really very noticeably wider than the actual 19mm of the super zoom. Read what Thom Hogan has to say:
http://www.bythom.com/Nikkor16-85lensreview.htm

Many Nikon DX users had already picked the 18-200mm VR as their walkaround lens, partly because they were seduced by numbers. Quick question, which gives you more range: the 18-200mm or the 16-85mm? The answer might surprise you a bit. The 16-85mm has a horizontal angle of view range of 16 to 73 degrees, the 18-200mm has an angle of view range of 7 to 66 degrees. However, because the 18-200mm changes focal length so much at the long end when focused close, for many situations its angle of view is only 10 to 66 degrees, which is not looking a lot better than the 16-85mm. I personally value those extra 7 degrees at the wide end much more than the extra 6 to 9 degrees at the telephoto end--they make a more dramatic impact on my photography.

Both Nikon and Canon 50mm lenses are very good.

Between the Canon 100-400 and Nikon 80-400, optically they are close but the Canon is slightly sharper at 400mm. the main thing is the Canon focuses much faster than the Nikon. Personally, I would skip the Nikon 80-400 because a replacement lens may well appear this summer/autumn. For Nikon the 70-300 VRII lens is cracking value for money. However, for both Canon and Nikon you might want to consider a 300mm f/4.0 with 1.4tC to maximise IQ.

Andy90 · 20 May 2011 at 17:09

Don't know what your budget is, but reference the Canon system, have you considered the 24-105mm L f/4.0 IS USM lens. Excellent bit of kit and although it wouldn't give you a wide end of 18mm, it would overlap nicely with the 100-400mm.

plum · 21 May 2011 at 01:58

Thanks D.P. thats a lot of info for me to digest, i am also one of the ones who got seduced by the numbers as well, i wrongly assumed the 18-200mm would suit me for most days out except the air shows.

any idea what the 80-400 replacement will be? a newer vrII perhaps

Andy90 about £3,000 all in

D.P. · 21 May 2011 at 07:36

The main thing the newer 80-400 will bring is fast AF-S auto focus, the optical performance should also increase significantly, and the tripod mounting improved. Otherwise it will be bought up to moderns standards, the VR 1 replaced with VRII, Nano coating, etc. There has been numerous patents released in the last 2 years for replacement lenses so it is just a matter of time. The earthquake may delay things until next year.

D.P. · 21 May 2011 at 07:38

Andy90 said:
Don't know what your budget is, but reference the Canon system, have you considered the 24-105mm L f/4.0 IS USM lens. Excellent bit of kit and although it wouldn't give you a wide end of 18mm, it would overlap nicely with the 100-400mm.

But why on earth you you want 24mm on the wide for a moderate aperture lens? Adding a 10-20/24mm lens will cover the bases but you will be forever swapping between 2 lenses, therefore not a walkabout setup.

Andy90 · 21 May 2011 at 12:21

D.P. said:
But why on earth you you want 24mm on the wide for a moderate aperture lens? Adding a 10-20/24mm lens will cover the bases but you will be forever swapping between 2 lenses, therefore not a walkabout setup.

Who said anything about adding a 10-22mm.

The 24 to 105 is a far superior lens to a 18-200mm optically. It also has a constant aperture throughout its range rather than altering from 3.5 to 5.6 on the 18-200mm. It might be a 'moderate' aperture lens but what would you call a 3.5 to 5.6 variable aperture? It certainly isn't excellent by any means.

It may not be as wide or have the reach of a 200mm, but the OP wanted a lens to stick on his camera just for 'walking about'

I suspect if you look at the vast majority of your photographs that were taken 'walking about' they've been taken within the 24 to 105 range.

It is an excellent lens. It may not be 'wide angle' on a crop sensor but if the OP decides to go full frame it will move with him unlike the EF-S 18-200. The 24 end would then be wide angle.

As with all things photographic - its a matter of opinion.

Andy90 · 21 May 2011 at 12:24

double post pls delete

plum · 26 May 2011 at 17:56

Has anyone got an opinion on buying the the AF-S 70-200mm f2.8 ED VR II and a Nikon TC-20E AF-S Teleconverter III and from what i have read its a cracking lens instead of the 80 - 400mm..

i was thinking about buying second hand and adding a Nikon TC-20E AF-S Teleconverter III, should be about similar price to the 80-400mm give or take a £100/£200 and have the benefit of a nice fast 70-200mm to boot

cheers

Biggus · 28 May 2011 at 02:51

My opinions here are based on the fact that I now own a Canon setup, but it could've easily been Nikon, except vfm swung it Canons' way.

I was in a similar position a little over a month ago, with a £3k budget following an insurance claim. I was primarily looking at the Nikon D7000 and the Canon 7D, but having looked into it a bit further, I decided to get the Canon 60D and good glass, rather than a "better" body with lesser glass. One can upgrade the camera body more easily later on, without sacrificing IQ (which is more important)

I was looking at getting the Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM & Canon EF 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 L IS USM lenses.

After reading some posts (inc images) on the DPReview forums, I went for the Sigma 17-70mm f2.8-4.0 DC Macro OS HSM for the wider end, saving around £200 on the Canon 15-85, but not losing out on IQ. Also got myself a "mint" 2nd hand Canon EF 70-200mm f4 L IS USM + Canon EF 1.4x TC, battery grip (from teh jungle for £32), decent carbon-fibre tripod and a little-used Canon 550EX to "finish off" my basic kit.

A friend of mine has the 100-400 and has said I can use it whenever, so that let my buy the 70-200 f4 L IS which is extremely sharp.

An alternative to the 70-200 or 100-400, is the Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 L IS USM which a number of user on DPR are showing to produce excellent results from.

The Sigma is on my camera almost all the time, and does all I want for most of my everyday needs, it being quick, sharp and flare resistant (plus it comes with a lens hood, something that non "L" Canon lenses don't).

Here's a quick 100% crop straight from camera + Sigma 17-70, taken the other day...

plum · 28 May 2011 at 11:13

cheers for the reply Biggus.

more food for thought, lol

that sigma looks really nice and sharp

plum · 28 Jun 2011 at 21:08

Just to update my choice,

ive gone with nikon and had the D7000 with the 18-105mm kit lense with the grip and added a 70-300mm vr to it, i will be adding a 16-85mm soon and then a nifty fifty when funds allow.

first impressions, the D7000 is a great bit of kit

looking forward to giving it a good look at over the next week or two.

cheers for the input one and all