A number of options?

[chriscorbin]

I have really gotten into photography over teh last two years and i have been paid for several dozen jobs. I think it is time for an upgrade!
here are some options and some questions:

Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8
Sigma 70-200mm F/2.8
Used Nikon D200

I was going to buy the D200 because a client hired another photographer because his camera was "more professional" even though her photos where dreadfully over-exposed. Would buy a vertical grip and an extra battery with the camera. Would love to buy a D300 or D3, but don't have that much money right now. I can get a used D200 from B&H for as little as $1099, any huge problem with a used camera from B&H?

or

I know it makes more sense to upgrade lenses, but nikon glass is so much $$$, Sigma makes great glass at about half the price and i dont mind buying third party lenses. the main question is, when i do one day buy a full frame camera(a nikon) will these lenses still work with it? I apologize i still dont understand the whole: will DX lenses work with FX sensors thing. and i am sorry i am like the millionth person to ask.

 

[Kamera RAWr]

Hmmm... What are you shooting with? What are the limitations of your current body? Why do you feel the need to upgrade? The D200 is indeed a great camera though

As far as lenses go, if I'm shooting Nikon, I'd much rather shoot with their lenses. They are great as far as quality goes. Thats not to say you can't get quality elsewhere, but from reading here and talking with others, its really hit or miss with other vendors. Some still love love Sigma, Tamron and Tokina though.

For another option, how about looking at Nikon's 80-200mm f/2.8 lens. It will be just fine if you upgrade to FX and it can be had for just a little more than the Sigma 70-200mm.

One last thought that maybe some of the more experienced "buyers" or photographers might be able to answer is whether the D200's price will drop in a few months after the D300 is out for a little while. Or perhaps will they just pull the D200s off the shelves? Just seems to me you could wait to get a "new in box" D200 for a bit less in the coming months. If you can wait and don't plan to buy the D300.

 

[ChrisA]

You can buy a used Nikon 80-200 f/2.8 for $200 less than the price of the Sigma.

You have noticed that clients impressions matter a lot. maybe even more than the final result. I'm sure many pros buy equipment with an eye to impressing clients. What's interesting is the decline in what it takes to impress a client. Years ago one had to have some really nice gear (Hasselblad or Rolli) a 35mm SLRs did not quite cut it. Now, like you say, a mid level SRL like a D300 would impress a client.

If you a worried about what potential clients might think of you based on your equipment "Sigma" says "I can't afford Nikon" very loudly.

With small format DSLRs I don't think the bodies matter much. The results are all very close. But with pro video, the results vary a LOT and people are hired based on the gear they own.

 

[chriscorbin]

Hmmm... What are you shooting with? What are the limitations of your current body? Why do you feel the need to upgrade? The D200 is indeed a great camera though

As far as lenses go, if I'm shooting Nikon, I'd much rather shoot with their lenses. They are great as far as quality goes. Thats not to say you can't get quality elsewhere, but from reading here and talking with others, its really hit or miss with other vendors. Some still love love Sigma, Tamron and Tokina though.

For another option, how about looking at Nikon's 80-200mm f/2.8 lens. It will be just fine if you upgrade to FX and it can be had for just a little more than the Sigma 70-200mm.

One last thought that maybe some of the more experienced "buyers" or photographers might be able to answer is whether the D200's price will drop in a few months after the D300 is out for a little while. Or perhaps will they just pull the D200s off the shelves? Just seems to me you could wait to get a "new in box" D200 for a bit less in the coming months. If you can wait and don't plan to buy the D300.

I currently shoot with a D50 and i am beginning to feel it, i shoot sports and events so more FPS is good, and i have been asked to make some larger prints, 6MP is not suitable for anything over 11X14. ON my D50 AF is slow to work if ever. most of the time i use manual focus and sometimes that can hurt me.

I will consider the nikon 70-200 in place of the sigma, but if i buy lenses i will buy the 17-70 first as i am still using the kit lens on the wide angle end of the spectrum and it is having some real issues as of late.

 

[Abstract]

First of all, there is no Sigma 17-70 mm f/2.8. The link you gave us points to a 24-70 mm f/2.8, which I own. I believe there is a Sigma 17-70 mm, but it's a f/2.8-4 (ie: it's not a constant aperture lens). If you need it, get it. The 24-70 mm f/2.8 will work on a full-frame "FX" Nikon.

If you don't understand the "FX" and "DX" thing, don't worry. The FX just has a larger sensor. All DX lenses are made smaller, and to put it simply, the light passing through a DX lens will only cover an area the size of a DX sensor. The FX sensor is larger, and the same size as a 35 mm film. There are no such things as "FX" lenses, really. All lenses are FX lenses unless it specifically says "DX" on it. These lenses were made to expose a 35 mm film with light. They also work with your D50 (a "DX" camera) because the sensor is smaller. Since it's smaller, obviously the light passing through the lens will cover the entire area of your D50's sensor. In fact, the light passing through the lens will cover an area LARGER than your sensor. It'll cover the sensor, and a large area surrounding the sensor.

However, I wouldn't worry about that. Get whichever lens you need now. DX lenses today still work on the D3.


Also, if you don't have one, I'd consider getting an SB-600 flash. Get the D200, flash, and Sigma 24-70 mm f/2.8. If you want to buy used, check out Nikonians, which will definitely have people selling their used D200s and some lenses. Also check out FredMiranda.com forums. They also have a Buy/Sell section in their forum.

I was going to buy the D200 because a client hired another photographer because his camera was "more professional" even though her photos where dreadfully over-exposed.

I currently shoot with a D50 and i am beginning to feel it..... (snip)
.....I will consider the nikon 70-200 in place of the sigma, but if i buy lenses i will buy the 17-70 first as i am still using the kit lens on the wide angle end of the spectrum and it is having some real issues as of late.

I agree that getting a camera body is probably a great idea for you right now. I also understand why you lost that single job to someone with a better camera. Aside from your testament that your D50 is limiting (and trust me, I understand), the other reason you NEED a D200 is because your equipment will be judged by clients. I'm sorry, but if you're using the D50 + your kit lens and charging money for your photos, you will definitely get some looks. I know that the results should speak for themselves, but your clients will wonder why they didn't just go buy a similar camera rather than hire you. It's just perception. It'll look especially bad if the guy who hired you actually has a better camera and flash than you. They probably thought that hiring a pro would mean hiring someone with more advanced equipment.

Your camera + lenses are like your suit, shirt, shoes, and tie. These things don't make you a better employee, but they're not going to give the job to someone who doesn't have these things. If you can take great shots with low level equipment, then fantastic. You should do even better with better equipment.

 

[SLC Flyfishing]

I'm not sure if anyone else answered part of your original post so I will.

With Sigma, as long as it isn't a DC series lens it will work with a FF Nikon if and when you do get one.

I wouldn't worry too much about buying Sigma, just read up on the reviews of each of the lenses you intend to buy and make sure they are what you want/expect. You might be surprised to know that often times Sigma and Tamron have beaten Nikon and Canon as far as optical quality is concerned.

SLC

Oh and check out the new Sigma 10-20 mm f2.8 for some sweet wide angle shots. It's not a fisheye (which most lenses in this range of focal lengths are).

 

[chriscorbin]

I have and LOVE my SB-600 flash

Yes the lens link was a typo. the lens i would buy is the 24-70

Also i would only buy a d200 from B&H i would never buy anything through a forum, just me being paranoid. Does B&H d200 include the warranty and was it restored by nikon? or did B&H just tape up the box and put it on the shelf?

 

[chriscorbin]

I have decided to wait until the D200 drops in price and buy a new one, or wait until i can buy a D300. meanwhile i will buy a sigma 24-70 2.8 and if B&H gets it in stock maybe a nikon 80-200 f2.8, not sure yet