[POLL] Which Lens for a D70 out of these three.

[Monoman]

Is it worth it for the ED glass or should I stick with the sigma?

Nikon G lens = $129
Nikon ED lens = $299 - $50 MIR = $249
Sigma = $209

Anibus said the Nikon ED lens has 1 ED element., but is it $100 better?

Opinions please.

Thanks

 

[Ornery]

What are ya saving, $50-$100? Get the brighter lens!

 

[Monoman]

updated OP

 

[Ornery]

Well, I guess it's unanimous

(Here's a bump for ya.)

 

[Sid59]

Nikon ED .. can you get me one too? please?!

 

[Sketcher]

I'd check the Photodo ratings on the lenses you're interested in along with FM reviews. That Nikkor AF 70-300/4-5,6D ED gets a 2.4 on Photodo. You pay for image quality and performance so if it's the better lens in the range you're considering then by all means stick w/Nikkor. There are quite a few exceptional 3rd party lenses but though image quality can be compared, build and performance are often suspect in the long haul.

I buy Canon "L" for my bag. Unless it's especially spectacular 3rd party gear I really don't consider it.

 

[Monoman]

thanks for the comments, I am still looking for more input


btw, I almost went with the DReb bacause of the 70-200 F/4L but decided nikon better fit my shooting style.

 

[Koing]

Originally posted by: Monoman
thanks for the comments, I am still looking for more input


btw, I almost went with the DReb bacause of the 70-200 F/4L but decided nikon better fit my shooting style.

Is that spray and pray then?

Koing

 

[Monoman]

Originally posted by: Koing

Originally posted by: Monoman
thanks for the comments, I am still looking for more input


btw, I almost went with the DReb bacause of the 70-200 F/4L but decided nikon better fit my shooting style.

Is that spray and pray then?

Koing

nah... I liked how it felt and had more advanced features. (I know about the hack) plus, spray and pray IS nice

 

[Sketcher]

Originally posted by: Monoman
thanks for the comments, I am still looking for more input


btw, I almost went with the DReb bacause of the 70-200 F/4L but decided nikon better fit my shooting style.

Comparing the 300D and D70 only, I'd definitely choose the D70. However, camera bodies come and go. The more important decision IMO is the lens system you're investing into. If you buy good glass, it'll last your lifetime. Five years from now, the $1,000.00 DSLR may well be into 15+ Megapixels and definitely more FPS. Anyone serious about photography will w/out a doubt spend more in glass than on a single body. That tells you what your underlying focus should be on; lenses and how much they cost.

For those of you just getting into DSLR whether you're considering Canon, Nikon, Olympus, Kodak etc. it is important that you DON"T get infatuated with a camera alone. Do your homework on what kind of photography you want to do, the kind of range and reach, zooms and primes. Once you really know what you want to shoot, then figure out how much it will cost in lenses to have the capability you want. If you line up Canon and Nikkor lenses side by side for a given range or focal length you can break the bank or live to tell about it based on what it'll cost you to do the same thing or better with either brand.

Your lenses are the investment. Your camera body is what enables you to enjoy that investment. Unfortunately, most inexperienced photographers learn this only after their money is spent and lament more lens choices than they are pleased with.

ATOT has some members with excellent experience in photography, but those of you looking to spend a bundle on good photography equipment really should be taking notes from the photographers and reviews in FM, Pekka's, DP, Photodo, dphoto and the like. They eat and breathe this stuff and quite a few of them are camp converts and or have shot both brands. In the least, look at their incredible images and base your photography interests on the gear they use to get their captures. Then come back here and share your new found photographic knowledge .

*Cliff's Notes: Don't buy into a brand based on the camera alone. There's always a newer bigger better faster camera on the market. Base your buy on what the lens and an overall system do for you because you'll spend more money on glass than you ever will on a single body.

 

[Monoman]

Originally posted by: Sketcher
*Cliff's Notes: Don't buy into a brand based on the camera alone. There's always a newer bigger better
faster camera on the market. Base your buy on what the lens and an overall system do for you because you'll spend more money on glass than you ever will on a single body.

just when I thought I was happy.....

Have you every gotten the urge to do something but couldn't figure out where you wanted to go with it?

I totally understand the concept of lens vs camera and that's why I from the start wanted to go with canon because the lenses seemed easier on the bank and took wonderful pictures. Everything I have read in reviewing the 70-200 F/4 is great, some like it better than the 70-200 F/2.8 due to it being lighter.

I am a noob in this but I have been doing a LOT of research on this topic, (ask my wife) LOL but I am at a hard spot. Honestly, I decided to buy(I haven't bought anything yet, this is all in prep for my purchase tomorrow) the nikon not based on future use but on the camera alone. I know both canon and nikon make great lenses but that's not what I was focused on. I also realize technology advances and maybe the lens won't continue on the same compatibility path it has been on for so many years due to technology advancements, who knows!

What I want to shoot. Portrait work, landscape and macro shots. Using the 18-70mm and a 70-300mm will get those jobs done. Are they the best for the job? No. But I am on a 2k budget at the moment and I am trying to get everything at once.

LOL, I guess what I need is for someone to TELL me what to buy because I am so nit noid I will never end up choosing.

 

[vshah]

the ED lenses i've used have been noticebly sharper. whether its worth $100 to you is anybody's guess...


btw my D70 is coming tomorrow

-Vivan

 

[richardycc]

I myself will be getting the sigma apo super II, it's really not a bad lens for $200. I will also get the nikon 28-200mm G for a walk around lens. I might sell the kit lens that came with my D70 once I got the 28-200mm lens, any taker?

 

[Monoman]

Originally posted by: richardycc
I myself will be getting the sigma apo super II, it's really not a bad lens for $200. I will also get the nikon 28-200mm G for a walk around lens. I might sell the kit lens that came with my D70 once I got the 28-200mm lens, any taker?

OMO, the kit lens if WAY better than the 28-200 but your general shooting, you should be fine. Thanks for the input!

anyone else?

 

[Sketcher]

Monoman,

My apologies for stomping on your happiness . My intentions were otherwise; really there were! Nikon's good stuff as you know. I really meant my discourse to be directed toward those who haven't yet decided because there have been a rash of people buying DSLR bodies w/out really having a grasp on the bigger picture. I'm a Canon fan but be it Canon or Nikon as long as you know your gear it's all good.

I had the 70-200 f/4L you mentioned. I LOVED that lens. light weight, prime sharp, smooth bokeh and lightning fast AF. Probably the best buy in the Canon "L" series lineup. I sold it and bought the 70-200 f/2.8L IS and though that one is a whole different kind of sweetness I still wish I had the f/4 for when I'd like a lighter setup. A nice thing about buying "L" or Nikkor glass is that the resale is good. If there is one caveat I'd mention about third party lenses it's that you get nowhere near a reasonable selling price compared to the brand lenses. That's one of the reasons I save to afford the better glass; it'll last longer, perform better and doesn't hurt as bad if you end up in a selling position.

I know a lot of people make their initial camera/lens purchase based on a budget (who doesn't?) but I just find it a shame when someone buys into a system because of a camera body's initial price point be it a Drebel or D70, 10D or D100, 1DMKII or D1 without knowing much about the lenses. You've done your homework so I'm preaching to the choir but there are likely others out there stung by the DSLR bug who might find themselves disappointed down the road if they wake up and realize they'd prefer a different lens lineup than what their camera requires. This stuff is worth saving for to get what you want. Most but not every piece of Pro gear is worth the expense and there are some really inexpensive lenses which are sweet performers but it takes some learning and research to know which direction to take it.

My apologies for jumping into the party without a party favor. You must be quite excited about your purchase and I'm sure everyone here looks forward to your picture posts! Save up and spend the extra money for the good glass. It's worth the wait.

 

[Monoman]

Originally posted by: Sketcher
Monoman,

My apologies for stomping on your happiness . My intentions were otherwise; really there were! Nikon's good stuff as you know. I really meant my discourse to be directed toward those who haven't yet decided because there have been a rash of people buying DSLR bodies w/out really having a grasp on the bigger picture. I'm a Canon fan but be it Canon or Nikon as long as you know your gear it's all good.

I had the 70-200 f/4L you mentioned. I LOVED that lens. light weight, prime sharp, smooth bokeh and lightning fast AF. Probably the best buy in the Canon "L" series lineup. I sold it and bought the 70-200 f/2.8L IS and though that one is a whole different kind of sweetness I still wish I had the f/4 for when I'd like a lighter setup. A nice thing about buying "L" or Nikkor glass is that the resale is good. If there is one caveat I'd mention about third party lenses it's that you get nowhere near a reasonable selling price compared to the brand lenses. That's one of the reasons I save to afford the better glass; it'll last longer, perform better and doesn't hurt as bad if you end up in a selling position.

I know a lot of people make their initial camera/lens purchase based on a budget (who doesn't?) but I just find it a shame when someone buys into a system because of a camera body's initial price point be it a Drebel or D70, 10D or D100, 1DMKII or D1 without knowing much about the lenses. You've done your homework so I'm preaching to the choir but there are likely others out there stung by the DSLR bug who might find themselves disappointed down the road if they wake up and realize they'd prefer a different lens lineup than what their camera requires. This stuff is worth saving for to get what you want. Most but not every piece of Pro gear is worth the expense and their are some really inexpensive lenses which are sweet performers but it takes some learning and research to know which direction to take it.

My apologies for jumping into the party without a party favor. You must be quite excited about your purchase and I'm sure everyone here looks forward to your picture posts! Save up and spend the extra money for the good glass. It's worth the wait.

lol, Thanks for the honest reply(there isn't much of that around here anymore) and there is NO need to apologize, I have been debating this nikon/canon for 3 months now and just when I decide, I freakin change my mind. At this time, the only turn off for the D70 is it lacking a battery pack/portrait grip addon. It along side the L series lenses are the main canon factor. I really wish they would release a grip for the D70 so it would make my choice easier.

We have a 10D at work with the 28-70 F/2.8 L and it's WAY heavy. It's a great lens, but not my favorite focal range. I also found the D70 to be faster and easier to control. I wish Nikon had a 70-200 F/4 complament lens but all I could find was a 80-200 F/4-5.6 or something or other, not even ED glass

Thanks again for the advice..

Mitch

 

[Sketcher]

Mitch,

Have you considered a new or used D100? It's a "Pro" body that'll take a battery grip giving you the vertical positioning you'd like and it's very close in spec (in some cases better) than the D70. Depending on your critical need/want issues it might be worth considering. The 10D w/24-70 f/2.8L you tested is a semi-Pro Body with a Pro Lens. The single f pro zooms and magnesium alloy body are more weighty than the non-pro gear. Similar with Nikon Pro gear. The better build, better performance items are typically weightier than the consumer grade gear.

You're one up on most people deciding in that you've had an opportunity to work the 10D. I did compare the 10D and D100 and though there were some things I like better about the D100 (startup speed, image preview speed) my experience was more comfortable with the 10D. Well, Canon's lower noise and expanded ISO piqued my interest too. My uncle prefers the D70 over my 10D for the way he thinks a camera should run and for his interests he's on the mark. He's torn over his purchase because he prefers Canon Lenses but likes Nikon's Camera's. He's got more patience than most though because he's waiting to see what Canon's 10D replacement will be like before he commits to a lens system.

My modus operandi:

1. Choose a lens system based on the best lenses for your shooting style.
2. Buy the best body you can afford if buying a new release. Buy a less capable body if counting on a new release w/in the next year or two; allowing you to get into the game and save toward the latest/greatest.

I currently own:

10D w/Battery Grip
17-40 f/4.0L
50 f/1.8 II
28-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS
70-200 f/2.8L IS
100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS
500D: 1.4x II

Here's a pic of the 2004 DNC Photo Journalists' stable. The pic was shot w/a Nikon .

Any time you tire of my typing I'll respectfully trot off to another thread. Just had some time on my hands and thought I'd further the discussion. Lookin' forward to your first posts with your new gear!

Best Regards,

-Jeff

 

[Monoman]

Hey Jeff. I would like to take you out for a :beer:

I think I may end up going with a used D100 for $1100 from B&H, but it's rated as a 8+ which kinda bothers me, but I will find someone I can talk to and will get it out of them WHY it's beiong sold. I think that along a 50 F/1.8 and the 70-300 F/3.5-5.6 will get me on a good start.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: Sketcher
Monoman,

My apologies for stomping on your happiness . My intentions were otherwise; really there were! Nikon's good stuff as you know. I really meant my discourse to be directed toward those who haven't yet decided because there have been a rash of people buying DSLR bodies w/out really having a grasp on the bigger picture. I'm a Canon fan but be it Canon or Nikon as long as you know your gear it's all good.

I had the 70-200 f/4L you mentioned. I LOVED that lens. light weight, prime sharp, smooth bokeh and lightning fast AF. Probably the best buy in the Canon "L" series lineup. I sold it and bought the 70-200 f/2.8L IS and though that one is a whole different kind of sweetness I still wish I had the f/4 for when I'd like a lighter setup. A nice thing about buying "L" or Nikkor glass is that the resale is good. If there is one caveat I'd mention about third party lenses it's that you get nowhere near a reasonable selling price compared to the brand lenses. That's one of the reasons I save to afford the better glass; it'll last longer, perform better and doesn't hurt as bad if you end up in a selling position.

I know a lot of people make their initial camera/lens purchase based on a budget (who doesn't?) but I just find it a shame when someone buys into a system because of a camera body's initial price point be it a Drebel or D70, 10D or D100, 1DMKII or D1 without knowing much about the lenses. You've done your homework so I'm preaching to the choir but there are likely others out there stung by the DSLR bug who might find themselves disappointed down the road if they wake up and realize they'd prefer a different lens lineup than what their camera requires. This stuff is worth saving for to get what you want. Most but not every piece of Pro gear is worth the expense and there are some really inexpensive lenses which are sweet performers but it takes some learning and research to know which direction to take it.

My apologies for jumping into the party without a party favor. You must be quite excited about your purchase and I'm sure everyone here looks forward to your picture posts! Save up and spend the extra money for the good glass. It's worth the wait.

Yep, it's like buying a $1000 camera body and mounting a $150 lens on it. Oh wait...never mind.

I agree with you, glass is what you should be spending your money on.

BTW-I have the 70-200mm f4 lens. I love it! Now if I could only get myself to part with the scratch to pay for a) Digital rebel and b) 24-70mm f2.8 lens...

 

[Monoman]

now I have myself thinking... I don't really need 6.1 Mega pixel camera, and the D1 looks AWESOME.... I may look into that camera instead. The reason I want/need the portriat/battery grip is because I have big hands and it's WAY more comfortable.

Thanks for the insight

 

[Monoman]

no one else?

 

[Sketcher]

Originally posted by: Monoman
now I have myself thinking... I don't really need 6.1 Mega pixel camera, and the D1 looks AWESOME.... I may look into that camera instead. The reason I want/need the portriat/battery grip is because I have big hands and it's WAY more comfortable.

Thanks for the insight

Heh heh, you mean a D100 right Mitch!? A D1 will almost immediately unimpress you with image quality if you're printing 8x10 or larger or if you're upsizing a crop of the original image. 2.7MP image is just too limiting; especially when you can get 6.1MP in the D100 for the same price. The price in that used D1 goes toward the higher fps and environmentally sealed body and f-mount. It is/was a special purpose camera for PJ's (photojournalists) who needed higher fps more than mp. On that note, high fps mean nothing if you can't put a lens on that facilitates the function [read: fast lens = typically in the f/2.8 range or better]. Megapixels aren't everything but we're talking less than half! Now, half wouldn't be bad if we were talking about half the MP of a 14mp Kodak 14n but we're talking about 2.7 mp here.

You're sold on Nikon, so if you can do w/out the grip get the D70. It's a sweet camera. If the grip is a critical aspect then get the D100. Read up on the specs of that D100, compare the D70 and D100 side by side on dpreview.com feature comparison and then read up on the differences you don't understand. It's a sweet camera with much more functionality than the D70 if you get serious into your photography. But for the love of all that is good about the digital age stay away from that D1! Now, if you're talking about a D1X that's a whole different discussion and a whole different price range.

What in the world am I doing talking you into a particular Nikon!? I'm a Canon fanboy and that's just not right!? but what's MORE not right is plunking down that kind of change not knowing the Nikon bodies. I'm just surprised the other Nikonians in here yell a hearty GO NIKON but don't put in a kb of sense when it comes down to the nitty gritty. That settles it Mitch. if you vacillate any more I'm going to have to cut you off and throw Canon specs at you. I'll start by saying; "Notice how many used Nikon bodies compared to Canon bodies there are for sale on B&H?"

 

[Monoman]

I am eyeing canon again. lol. I guess, I will age another year and still have decision to make on which lens to get and what brand to go for. I WAS thinking about the D1 but it's gone now, tho I do like the D1h. I honestly feel like I will need the extra grip to suit my larger hands and remain comfortable. I also want to get a 105 F/2.8 macro lens alons side a 50 f/1.8 to start me out. I can get those for either brand, but then again, I'm not buying for bodies, It's for lenses right? lol, in some way, that backwards for me at this time. I really want a nice body to fit my needs along side my lenses.

I have read the D70, D100 and the Dreb review about 3 times each. no lie, and I read the D1 and the D1x tonight and they are both great. I started to read the 1D but I got interupted by my wife. I am NOT sold on nikon yet.. I just like their bodies more ATM and I didn't fall in love with the 10D, not the same feeling I got when I played with the D70 last weekend or the D100(with a 50 f/1.8 and the SB-800 ) I got to play with today. was cool, tho lacking the portriate grip. IF I bought that used D100, would it be raped? need repairs? not function as new? I don't think they even come with a warrenty.

I think I may just get a 28-200 instead of the 70-300 as on dpreview.com, it's getting rave reviews by users. It's 300 bucks tho, about the same as my macro I want. plus with the macro, I can use it for telephoto shooting as well. I will call B&H tomorrow and ask what comes with the use D100 pack and maybe just buy it on the spot then.

btw, I HATE the Keyboard my wife has, It's driving me up the waLL!!!!!! Keys stick and often don't depress.. GRRRR and t's new too.

anyway, Thanks for the reply. please don't hesitate to tell me WHY I shouldn't buy canon

 

[Sketcher]

Are you on a time table? You might be better served waiting for both Canon and Nikon's Prosumer replacement possibly this fall. In the least, start spending some time at fredmiranda.com. The discussion in their Canon and Nikon forums cover anything DSLR you can come up with and it's handled by people who know their gear, understand their options and are able to quantify their interests. Further, lens discussion is of particular interest to FM'ers so do some searches on the lenses you'd like and see what turns up. Something you'll also find are the common issues/fixes/problems people are having w/their gear so you can get an idea of what to expect when you get yours.

Personally, I buy everything new because I like knowing ALL the issues and history of my gear. To me, it's worth the wait to learn what I need, know what I want and save the money to get it. Save the money for the better Glass! No one, NO ONE laments the long term benefit and performance of a good lens though most everyone regrets buying a less expensive lens only to turn around and try selling it to get the one they should have waited for in the first place. Comparing the wait to afford the good stuff and the wait and expense to sell the lesser to obtain the better; you end up in the same time frame anyway, just more money out.

I could write quite a bit about Canon vs Nikon cameras and lenses from my perspective but I've gotten most of my Nikon knowledge from my own comparisons when buying my equipment and from reading up in FM and similar places. I think at this point you should get into the photography enthusiast forums and gather some knowledge from the variety of perspectives expressed by skilled hobbyists and Pro's there. Don't just rely on published product reviews. It's the daily posts which tell the tale of the fair weather user and the in the trenches pro.

Give you a reason why you shouldn't choose Canon? Currently, Nikon does WA (wide angle) better. But there are a lot of caveats that go along with that statement. I'll leave it for you to find out what they are.

More people sell their Nikon gear and buy Canon than sell Canon to buy Nikon.

 

[Monoman]

okay, last questions..

I've read hear and there but to you, would you chose the 10D or the D100 based on camera alone.

I am not on a huge crunch for time in buying my gear, just the more time I waste on debating which is better for me, the less time I could be shooting