D90/300 or New Lens?

LFC856

LFC856

Messages
303
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi Everyone,

I'm sure you've heard it many times before, but I thought I'd ask anyway :)

I've had my Nikon D40 for about a year now, and use it most weekends for motorsports photography around the country (mainly Castle Combe & Brands, with the occasional trip to Oulton and Silverstone). However I feel like I am growing out of it and need a larger and more advanced camera (such as a D300 or D90), as they have better AF systems and the settings are more easily adjusted.

Around Christmas time I went out and got myself a Nikkor 70-300mm VR, which I am pretty happy with. Compared to other (i.e. professional) lenses, however, I feel that is fairly soft, especially at the longer reaches. I had some thoughts around trying the Sigma 100-300 f4, Nikon 70-200 2.8 etc etc...

Given that I am trying to get trackside, would I be better off going for the new body or a new lens?

Thanks in advance,
Mark
http://mbaxterjones.smugmug.com/Racing
 
Hahaha :) Trackside :D have a search and find out what is required for that.

Well, really comes down to budget... a faster better camera would obviously help and a decent prime lens, like a 300mm will do well. However the cheaper primes will not AF on your current body.

I have a D300 and Nikon 300mm F4, and I really like the combo, a tad heavy though :)
 
Agreed. In general, you are better to upgrade lenses than bodies. A cheap bit of glass stuck on an expensive body can look rubbish, but a good bit of glass on a cheap body will look far better.

The only problem is that with non AF-S lenses, you will lose the ability to autofocus on a D40. It's a great camera, but not one I normally see with professional-grade lenses attached like the 70-200mm f/2.8 VR.
 
grahamc said:
Hahaha :) Trackside :D have a search and find out what is required for that.

Well, really comes down to budget... a faster better camera would obviously help and a decent prime lens, like a 300mm will do well. However the cheaper primes will not AF on your current body.

I have a D300 and Nikon 300mm F4, and I really like the combo, a tad heavy though :)
Click to expand...

I've done plenty of research of what it takes to get trackside so I know how tough it is, but I'm taking the steps to get there :)

Thanks for the advice, guys.
 
Photo Plod said:
Agreed. In general, you are better to upgrade lenses than bodies. A cheap bit of glass stuck on an expensive body can look rubbish, but a good bit of glass on a cheap body will look far better.
Click to expand...

Well, maybe "in general" but with motorsport as your main subject you need a combo of a fast focusing body and fast focusing glass.

"Looks" are nothing, you are measured by your photos!

Lfc... your best path I suggest is to get a faster focusing body and use it with your 70-300. That lens is far from poor or slow and you will see a bigger improvement with a D90 (or even more with a D300) than you would swapping to the next most able lens on the market (which would probably be the Sigma 100-300 f4).
 
desantnik said:
Well, maybe "in general" but with motorsport as your main subject you need a combo of a fast focusing body and fast focusing glass.

"Looks" are nothing, you are measured by your photos!

Lfc... your best path I suggest is to get a faster focusing body and use it with your 70-300. That lens is far from poor or slow and you will see a bigger improvement with a D90 (or even more with a D300) than you would swapping to the next most able lens on the market (which would probably be the Sigma 100-300 f4).
Click to expand...

Thanks, desantnik, that was my thought as well. How do you rate your D300 compared to what you have had previously?
 
Well, I had a Canon 30D before and the D300 is just simply stellar by comparison!

More flexibility than a young Thai female "adult entertainer" :D
 
desantnik said:
Well, maybe "in general" but with motorsport as your main subject you need a combo of a fast focusing body and fast focusing glass.

"Looks" are nothing, you are measured by your photos!

Lfc... your best path I suggest is to get a faster focusing body and use it with your 70-300. That lens is far from poor or slow and you will see a bigger improvement with a D90 (or even more with a D300) than you would swapping to the next most able lens on the market (which would probably be the Sigma 100-300 f4).
Click to expand...

I didn't make my post clear - I meant that the images you get from those combinations, not the "look" of the camera as a fashion accessory! :bonk:
 
hehe I was thinking "handbag and matching shoes" :D

No, the #1 importance is nailing the focused shot and thats down largely to AF speed and lack of shutter lag. The softness in the corners, contrastyness (made up word, but you know what i mean... and which is something things like the Nikkor 70-300VR and Canon 70-300IS suffer from) and maybe a little CA is not quite so important initially.
 
Using the same lens, is there a massive difference between the AF speed & accuracy on a D40 and D90 or D300?

At the moment I feel like I'm losing a lot of photo's due to the time it takes my camera to lock on (although after changing to the 70-300 it's been slightly quicker).

Is there a noticeable AF difference between, say a D300 and Canon 40d?

Cheers,
Mark
 
D300s has been announced now, prices of the D300 might start to come down a bit.
 
Mark - yes, the AF system makes a LOT of difference but also shutter lag is the other shot killer with fast moving subjects.

Having a faster focusing lens will also make it better still, but I maintain you 70-300 on a D300 will show an improvement like you couldn't imagine. Once you start on better, faster, sharper glass then you really crank the volume up to 11!

40D vs D300 focusing... yes, masses of difference. The D300 system is more akin to the Canon 1D system (arguably a little better - and I tested both last year back to back).

The 40D/50D suffers from Canon's marketing decision to give you only one cross point focusing sensor - the middle one. Which means you can't really reliably nail off centre focusing, which is where you can start to make some much more creative shots (without a crop tool!). Canon keep their ninja AF system for the 1D range only...

Remember readers - I am talking about motorsport here, not taking landscape photos or other static stuff!
 
desantnik said:
Mark - yes, the AF system makes a LOT of difference but also shutter lag is the other shot killer with fast moving subjects.

Having a faster focusing lens will also make it better still, but I maintain you 70-300 on a D300 will show an improvement like you couldn't imagine. Once you start on better, faster, sharper glass then you really crank the volume up to 11!

40D vs D300 focusing... yes, masses of difference. The D300 system is more akin to the Canon 1D system (arguably a little better - and I tested both last year back to back).

The 40D/50D suffers from Canon's marketing decision to give you only one cross point focusing sensor - the middle one. Which means you can't really reliably nail off centre focusing, which is where you can start to make some much more creative shots (without a crop tool!). Canon keep their ninja AF system for the 1D range only...

Remember readers - I am talking about motorsport here, not taking landscape photos or other static stuff!
Click to expand...


Definitive enough I think! I'll have to keep my eyes (and wallet) open for a good deal.
 
I recently upgraded from the d40 to the d300 in a fit of madness:D and the difference is immense.

My understanding of how a camera works has came on in leaps and bounds.
In my opinion the d40 held my hand whereas the d300 forces you to try different settings.

Magic
 
Then again, why not buy a new D300s - you'll be able to take VIDEO of all those wonderful machines at Brands, Silverstone, etc :lol: :lol: :lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top