What would you do with the money?

K

kevin612

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,008
Name
Kevin
Edit My Images
No
Hi all,

Currently, I have D300 , Nikon 16-85mm and Sigma 30mm F1.4
What would you all do if you have 1000 pounds in hand?

Would you sell everything and upgrade to D700 with 24-85mm zoom and prime lenses?

Or stay the same and get more prime lenses or mayb a ultra wide as well!?

And anyone would consider to change to canon 5D/5D mark II and 17-40mm and some primes as well?

For myself, I like to shoot landscape, some portraits and "food"
Would like to know what you all think of if you have 1000 pounds now?

Thanks
Kevin
 
Where do you feel the current weakness is in your setup?
 
TriggerHappy said:
Where do you feel the current weakness is in your setup?
Click to expand...

I can get an ultra wide to use for my landscape . But can use a telephoto lens for landscape as well.
But I won't get both at the moment.

I really don't know what I am feeling right now.
Mayb my fd is trying to persuade me to buy Canon 5D Mark II as he got it for few months and he said if I get D700, my lenses choice will be very expensive ie. 17-35mm / 14-24mm where as canon I can get 17-40 for cheaper price something like that.

What I use the most currently would be the 30mm F1.4
But I would like to get 50/85mm for better portrait photos.
Then speaking of Depth of Field, D700 would be better than D300 right? if want shallow DOF.

Really struggling right now :bang:
 
rpn said:
With your current kit and shooting landscape, I would go for a Sigma 10-20mm lens, some Lee filters and a tripod for a starter.
Click to expand...

I might want to get 77mm ND filters so that all of my lenses can use when need it to.
But not sure about ultra wide yet. As I just posted my current thinking in above post.

I have got a tripod now, although very seldom use. :)
 
Yes, there are some really bargain Canon lenses (the 17-40mm being one) and yes, I'll admit that buying Nikon does sometimes seem like an expensive way to go about things. However, Canon's widest fast zoom is the 16-35 f/2.8 L at £1150 so it's horses for courses against the NAF 14-24mm.

The DX range of lenses is brilliant so the options are quite varied, plus you can look at Tokina for some fast wide zooms (11-16mm f/2.8 namely). I know Sigma does a f/3.5 version of its 10-20mm but I've heard it's not as patch on the f/3.5-4.5 version. You also have the Nikon 12-24mm f/4, which is excellent.

If you currently use the 30mm f/1.4 a lot then why not look at that as one of your FX options if you go that way.

AS far as fast 50mm and 85mm lenses go then Nikon has a f/1.4 50mm and an f/1.4 85mm, which are top lenses.

It's a hard choice but personally, I'd stay with the D300 if it's producing what you want and spend the £1000 on new glass.
 
For portrait work a secondhand 70-200 VR would be a good idea and should be just in your budget
 
5D mk2 and you can have f/4L zooms (much cheaper and lighter!!!) and lovely USM primes that Nikon still doesn't have!
17-40 + 70-200 f/4L + 50mm or just 24-70/105mm is all you really need to get started.
 
Maybe a battery grip for the d300 if you do a fair amount of portrait work :shrug: A 70-200 VR as said by FITP is an awesome lens. Then maybe a Teleconverter for a few more extra options on the lenses you have.
 
Tough one. The 30 is a superb portrait lens, I used mine a hell of a lot more than the 50. However, now I have a D700 and the 50 is simply amazing so the 30 can be sold to put towards a 24-70.

Personally, I'm looking to have a 24-70, 70-200, 50 & 85 1.4 as my lenses. In time I can then get a wide angle at a later date.
 
Thanks for all the comments.
I thought for a long time, I personally really want to buy 35mm F2, 50mm F1.4 and 85mm F1.8 to use for portrait and "food" photography.
But I don't know if canon/nikon would be better.
And if I get nikon I probably would get a 24-85mm F2.8/4 or 3.5/4.5 for normal use.
If canon then 17-40 mayb?!
I don't think I would get 70-200VR yet but might consider 70-300VR if have extra budget :)

Anyone has compared those 3 lenses of canon and nikon before?
 
Hey Kevin,

have you considered other options? Like is this a money maker for you or just a hobby? If you earn through it, what is the business/advertising end of this up to? Could you split the funds and part spend on glass and part on advertising/marketing/business development?

Of course, if it's a hobby, forget the above paragraph... unless you want it to someday grow beyond a hobby and start earning for you. In that case, a website may be an economical kick start down that couse and still leave you with funds to play with.

Just a few thoughts....

John
 
£1,000 in my hands?

Canon 35/1.4, it's amazing on FF and Nikon don't make one unfortunately.
 
Sell it all and upgrade to D700 with the 24-70 2.8. 24 is as wide as 16 on the D300.
This set up will do all you could possibly ask of it. You'll probably find you don't really NEED anything else for what you shoot.
 
Blow it on good booze and cheap hookers - you only live once...
 
Three bottles of 15-yr malt should do it, the rest goes on the naughty nymphette sisters from North Shields...
 
I'd stick with Nikon rather than switching to Canon.

Switching systems is a gamble as if Canon is better today Nikon may be better tomorrow. However, looking at examples and reviews on the net I'd say that Nikon is the more attractive manufacturer of the two at the moment for bodies and lenses so personally I'd stick with Nikon especially as one option is the D700.

The 17-40mm is Canon's cheapest L and many aspire to L ownership and this is the cheapest route but on the occasion I tried it on a crop body I was less than impressed and I've read FF reviews that mention distortion and vignetting so I don't think I'd be tempted to change systems to own that particular lens.

I'd either buy more lenses for the D300 or go for the D700, either way I'd stay with the existing Nikon system.
 
trevorbray said:
Sell it all and upgrade to D700 with the 24-70 2.8. 24 is as wide as 16 on the D300.
This set up will do all you could possibly ask of it. You'll probably find you don't really NEED anything else for what you shoot.
Click to expand...

Winner, 2 days in you'll wish you'd done it months ago
 
trevorbray said:
Sell it all and upgrade to D700 with the 24-70 2.8. 24 is as wide as 16 on the D300.
This set up will do all you could possibly ask of it. You'll probably find you don't really NEED anything else for what you shoot.
Click to expand...

Yes that might do.
But Personally like to use primes to shoot portrait and "food"
and zooms for normal stuff..
 
John Middleton said:
Hey Kevin,

have you considered other options? Like is this a money maker for you or just a hobby? If you earn through it, what is the business/advertising end of this up to? Could you split the funds and part spend on glass and part on advertising/marketing/business development?

Of course, if it's a hobby, forget the above paragraph... unless you want it to someday grow beyond a hobby and start earning for you. In that case, a website may be an economical kick start down that couse and still leave you with funds to play with.

Just a few thoughts....

John
Click to expand...

Currently it is just a hobby, but I would love to be making money with it.
But that would need a lot of time as I am not a professional and I don't take that much good pictures yet.
I did have an album but then cancel it after 1-2 years.
Now I only put them up on facebook....:lol:
 
woof woof said:
I'd stick with Nikon rather than switching to Canon.

Switching systems is a gamble as if Canon is better today Nikon may be better tomorrow. However, looking at examples and reviews on the net I'd say that Nikon is the more attractive manufacturer of the two at the moment for bodies and lenses so personally I'd stick with Nikon especially as one option is the D700.

The 17-40mm is Canon's cheapest L and many aspire to L ownership and this is the cheapest route but on the occasion I tried it on a crop body I was less than impressed and I've read FF reviews that mention distortion and vignetting so I don't think I'd be tempted to change systems to own that particular lens.

I'd either buy more lenses for the D300 or go for the D700, either way I'd stay with the existing Nikon system.
Click to expand...

So for ultra wide then probably best to get 16-35mm F2.8 Canon then?!
In nikon, there is 17-35mm and 16-35mm but both are too expensive to get atm.
And only Tamrom/Sigma the alternatives.
Or I probably wont get an ultra wide if using nikon D700.
But my fd has Canon 17-40mm, this pictures seems alright to me though.
Quite sharp and nice colour too.
Still very hard to decide... :bang:
 
I'd go down the D700 route myself!
 
cowasaki said:
I'd go down the D700 route myself!
Click to expand...

D700 has the advantage with more AF points and built in flash.
Although I might not use that flash as would get an external flash as well
But it can be use as a remote flash.

Canon 5D Mark II has the advantage of video and higher resolution for landscape shootings.
But it has no flash so have to buy an external flash.

If both can combine together then would be great :P

How about just getting 5D mark I and buy better lens?
Would then still be 16-35mm version I second hand somewhere?

Cause now I would like to get a FF camera so I can use it for long.
Although the D300 can also..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top