50D or D300. Which lens?

Relayer

Relayer

Messages
185
Name
john stevenson
Edit My Images
Yes
After months of looking and fondling I have decided to purchase one of the above, which would be my first DSLR.

I should purchase the Canon because it feels best in hand, but.....I really want to own the Nikon. Can't explain why other than I prefer the look of it (stupid I know) and I am certain I would get used to the feel, very quickly indeed.

For my approx £1500 I could get the Canon with the 17-85 and the 70-300 or the Nikon with one lens, but which one? What is the very best lens for the Nikon around the £400 to £600 mark suitable for landscape mainly but with a little wildlife thrown in.

Also is there a good review site for lenses as most of the magazines I have purchased, seem to review bodies constantly but not so much the lenses.
 
they're both beasts for your first SLR. I'd suggest that a better choice than investing that amount of money in a body that will be out dated in a year or two anyway, it might be a better options to step back down the range for bodies (to the D90 or Cannon equivilent) and invest a little more in lenses. A len will outlast a bodies by a long time.

You'll struggle to find a good landscape and wildlife lens in one package.

Cheers

Hugh
 
From what you say i would be looking at the Nikon D300 ( 2nd hand aprox £800 ), i would get a Nikon 300f4 for wildlife ( about £300 second hand ) and then a Nikon 12-24 ( about £400 second hand ). This would give you a nice set up and you would only need a 1.4tc for the 300 f4 and your set.
 
markyboy.1967 said:
From what you say i would be looking at the Nikon D300 ( 2nd hand aprox £800 ), i would get a Nikon 300f4 for wildlife ( about £300 second hand ) and then a Nikon 12-24 ( about £400 second hand ). This would give you a nice set up and you would only need a 1.4tc for the 300 f4 and your set.
Click to expand...

except for the big hole in lens ranges between 24 and 300 mm
 
markyboy.1967 said:
i would get a Nikon 300f4 for wildlife ( about £300 second hand )
Click to expand...

Never seen them that cheap unless there's an earlier version than the one I bought (£999 new back in March/April)

Last year I had a similar budget and opted for the D300, 18-70 and 70-300VR. Great combination but I've since sold the 70-300 for a Tamron 70-200, then a Sigma 70-200 and I think the 70-300VR is every bit as good (if not better) than the 3rd party offerings.
 
For mostly landscape and some wildlife you might be looking at the Nikkor 18-200 which would pretty much encompass everything are looking for - but it's not the best lens in the whole wide world. I'd suggest that you look at Tamrons, certainly the 17-50 and possibly their 70-300, both of which are just about as good as if not equal to their Nikon counterparts. I can vouch personally for the 17-50 but haven't personal experience of their telephoto.
 
I had a 24-105mm L on a Canon 40D up until early this year.
Ive just got a Nikon D300s and a 16-85mm VR and im well impressed!
Not sure if its the lens or camera or both but i think its sharper than the Canon.
 
the 16-85 is a great little lens on the D300 and has a nice mix of wide angle and some length for £400 (give or take some)...
 
I had the D300 and swapped to a 50D so i could use a MP-e65 lens, and personally i found the D300 a far superior camera , it has better noise handling, it has built in remote flash control, built in time lapse, the menu / buttons were easier to use, metering appeared to be better, focus appeared to be faster and more accurate when focus tracking and i thought the build quality was better. - And before anyone starts these are my personal options. :)


and as above the 16-85mm is a loverly sharp lens with good colour & contrast reproduction.
 
Agree with you on the Nikon look - I think they look better too - shallow I know!

The 70-300VR is a good lens, then I would say an 18-70 would be good - New thats £700, 2nd hand, maybe £450 for the pair.

Or as someone said, get a D90 which has the 18-105 lens on - New around £800, 2nd hand I would guess around £650 (will be selling mine next week) which would then mean £700-£800 to get a good 70-200 2.8 lens second hand?
 
I'd go for D300 but I'm biased ;)

Seriously though for your budget, I personally would get:
a) used D300 - around 800 pounds
b) used Sigma EX 24-70 f/2.8 (non HSM one) - around 200-220 pounds
c) used Nikon 80-200 f/2.8 AF-D - around 500-600 pounds

This would get you a great setup to start with.

However if this is your first DSLR, then may be D90 and 18-200 is a better option...
 
Unless you are absolutely dead set ont eh D300, I would look at a D90, a Tamron 17-50 and a a 3rd party 70-200 2.8. This would give you a pretty tasty set up with 17-200 covered (bar 51-69mm - a few footsteps back or forward) at f/2.8. Would be a great kit with most things covered. You might even stretch to a 35mm or 50mm 1.8 for anything you can't get with the other 2.

3 lens, 1 great body and £1500 well spent. Unless like I said, you have to have a D300.

Note this is coming from a D300 user. I love my D300 but fast glass is worth the investment.

Just my tuppence.
 
boyfalldown said:
except for the big hole in lens ranges between 24 and 300 mm
Click to expand...

Yip i agree but look at what its bein used for and the options he was looking at in his first post( also has big gaps ). Wildlife really needs 300mm or more and a 1.4tc on the 300f4 is a superb cheap set up.
 
viper_biker said:
Never seen them that cheap unless there's an earlier version than the one I bought (£999 new back in March/April)

Last year I had a similar budget and opted for the D300, 18-70 and 70-300VR. Great combination but I've since sold the 70-300 for a Tamron 70-200, then a Sigma 70-200 and I think the 70-300VR is every bit as good (if not better) than the 3rd party offerings.
Click to expand...

Yip they are that cheap 2nd hand. Im taking about the AFD version and not the AF-S. I bought one and sold it thats how i know.:eek:
 
Nikon D300 (and I am Canon user btw). 50D autofocus tracking is really not that good, and Nikon has much better seals.

For lenses have a look at http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests
Maybe Tokina 12-24 / 11-16mm, Then Tamron 17-50mm (new versions with stabliliser coming out mid-september) or Nikon 17-35mm f/2.8, 24-70mm f/2.8 or 28-70mm f/2.8 and 80-200mm f/2.8 or tamron 70-200mm f/2.8.

Avoid sigma at all costs. Only 1 of their lenses out of maybe 20 that I tried was any good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top