Next purchase - another lens or another body?

[Shacklebolt]

As I've said before, my photography is of the more photojournalistic nature, so I can't really put down my D80 in the midst of, say, a concert to switch from my 50mm f/1.4 to my 70-200mm f/2.8.

That said, should I keep building up my collection of glass, or should I get another body?

 

[ChrisA]

What you do is not set the camera down. just put the lens in a jacket pocket and put the other one on. Takes about as much time as swapping body/lens . I used to shoot with two bodies some times with film so I could use two types of film. What a hassle. You have to watch out for that spare and what it bumps into and keep the two neck straps from tangling.

Just put on the one lens and do all the long shots then swap and do all the wide angle shots. You might see a good wide shot while you have the long lens on. So you miss it, no big deal, it balances out. I'd use no more than two lenses. Buy another lens if you like but leave one in the car or whatever. 3 lenses means you will be swapping all the time even with two bodies.

 

[Clix Pix]

My recommendation? Continue building your lens collection; in the end that will pay off far more than adding more bodies right now. Camera bodies come-and-go, but good lenses last a long time, through many bodies. Once you become comfortable with it, changing lenses in a hurry isn't really that big of a deal. Practice at home, practice out in the field.... It really only takes a moment or so. Learn to anticipate what moments might require a different lens, too, during an event so that you'll be prepared to make a switch in a hurry.. Truly, I can't imagine that in the course of a concert that there wouldn't be time enough at some point when you could comfortably and easily swap out lenses......

Just out of curiosity, if you were to buy a second body, what would it be, and why?

 

[Shacklebolt]

I'm tempted to buy another D80, or perhaps a D40x. But you know, it was just an idea. I see so many photographers at, say, sporting events with one camera slung over their backs, and another one in their hands. I suppose, I'm finding out with my 70-200 that, although I'm a big fan of it so far, and it's going to prove quite useful in the coming weeks/months as I'm a big fan of shooting in that range, it can be somewhat limiting, and I worry about dropping it in a rapid switch, not to mention getting dust in it, and finding a place to put it (suggestions for a camera bag big enough to hold my D80 + 70-200?)

So, right, it would merely be for convenience, but I suppose everyone's right, and it's righteously unnecessary. I'm still in that period of time where I'm going to treat my new acquisition like it's never meant to get so much as a smudge on it, but I'm sure that time will pass soon enough.

My budget, however, is running a bit thin, and I would greatly enjoy zoom in the <70mm range, and I can't comfortably afford the 24-70 f/2.8, although, believe me, I would if I could.

I'm psyched about my 70-200, but not so much with the 18-135 3.5-5.6 that came with the camera. So, yeah - about 1k is the highest I could comfortably go on new glass right now, what with taxes coming up and all.

Do you have any suggestions?

 

[compuwar]

As I've said before, my photography is of the more photojournalistic nature, so I can't really put down my D80 in the midst of, say, a concert to switch from my 50mm f/1.4 to my 70-200mm f/2.8.

That said, should I keep building up my collection of glass, or should I get another body?

1. What shots aren't you getting that a new lens would help with? Will you make enough to ROI it in 3 months?

2. What would a body failure do to you? Can you afford to have it happen during an event?

Either get a cheap body (D40) or look at something like the 35-70 AF-D.

 

[mcarnes]

Get another body. Keep one in front in a low profile waist pack. No camera strap. Keep the other body on a long camera strap that you can swing around to your back. The camera should rest on your butt cheek.

I had my camera strap custom made. This set up is awesome. Oh, and you should use the same model of body for both cameras. Otherwise you'll be fiddling with different controls when you switch between the two.

 

[monkeydo_jb]

For an in-between zoom, I highly recommend the Tamron 28-75mm.

It's an incredible lens for the price, and a good copy can be very sharp.

 

[art gardiner]

Is this a hobby? Do you plan to, or are you making a living as a photographer? The reason I ask, as someone mentioned before - if you are, or plan to make a living from your shoots, not having a backup/second body is asking for trouble. You never know when one may go down, lockup, or just need to go in for a checkup/cleaning.

Someone also mentioned that if you decide to get a second body, to make sure that you buy the same camera model. (This is very good advice, as the controls/layout very slightly from one model to another.) In the dark, heat of the event, etc... the last thing you want to have to do is try and remember/look for the various control/layout differences, not too mention their strengths and weakness' between the two makes. (This problem will diminish over time as you become more familiar with the subtleties between the two.)

As far as purchasing more glass? One of the most common pitfalls photographers make is to purchase additional lenses before they really need to. (Yes, I'm speaking from experience here.) Utilize the glass you have until you know everything that the lens can, and can't do. Everything from what an acceptable image will be when taken at 50mm/1.4 with a subject 5' - 12' away in both ambient low light, or 12 noon on a sunny summer day utilizing fill-flash; to an acceptable image from 50mm/8 at the same range. (Basically, until you know the strengths and weakness' of the lens characteristics.) Then, when you find that you just can't get the shot do to the limitations of the lens and not the limitations of your skill set, are you ready to move on to another. (Again, I speak from my own personal experience, both in my own photography as well as other's in the industry that have confided in me with theirs.)

That said, if you find that you're ready to move on - the next lens I would buy if I were you, would be the 17-35mm/2.8. While this lens will set you back about $1500, it's well worth every penny. As mentioned before by others, camera bodies will usually need to be replaced every couple of years (or sooner - depending on your needs); however, good glass can last a lifetime if properly cared for. That said, don't skimp on glass.

HTH's,

Art

 

[Shacklebolt]

I was kind of looking for a lens with an internal zoom, which is why I'm leaning away from the Tameron. The 17-35 2.8 is also getting some dicey reviews. Someone suggested the 28-70 2.8, so I'm leaning in that direction, if I can get it for <900

 

[art gardiner]

I was kind of looking for a lens with an internal zoom, which is why I'm leaning away from the Tameron. The 17-35 2.8 is also getting some dicey reviews. Someone suggested the 28-70 2.8, so I'm leaning in that direction, if I can get it for <900

Just to clarify which 17-35mm we're talking about, that would be the Nikon 17-35mm 2.8 AF-S which has internal focusing. (Not sure anyone has ever given this lens anything less than five stars.)

Nikon's 28-70/2.8 AF-S is a stellar lens, but not sure about the $900.

 

[Shacklebolt]

http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-17-35mm-Nikkor-Digital-Cameras/dp/B00005LEOS

And the 28-70 f/2.8 would be used. Also, can anyone suggest a camera bad that's big enough to hold a camera body + a 70-200 et al? I like the case it came with, but carrying 2 around is really unwieldy, and I'd rather 1 big bag t han 2 separate ones.

 

[art gardiner]

Can't make a horse drink! Every once in awhile, a problem child will slip through. Of the five copies we have, not one has had a problem in the three years we've had them. Another stellar lens (but lacks IF) is Nikon's 17-55/2.8.

As for a camera bag - check out http://www.newswear.com. They have vests, and belt systems that work great in crowded/tight locations.

 

[Clix Pix]

Nikon's 28-70mm (AKA "the Beast") is an excellent lens and covers a wonderful mid-range area. I loved mine dearly and never thought that I'd discover that I love the new 24-70mm even more. You really cannot go wrong with either of these lenses.

As for a second body: yes, it is handy to have one, especially if one is shooting at events or in situations where swapping-out lenses is problematic for whatever reason, and certainly it is good to have a backup available when shooting for someone else and for money. I wholeheartedly agree with the concept of having an identical backup or at least one which is more similar than different from the primary camera, for just the reasons mentioned. When I first got my D200 a couple of years ago I thought I'd hang on to my D70 as the backup. After only a couple of attempts at trying to use both very different cameras at events, I sold the D70 and bought a second D200. It really does make a difference having two identical or very similar camera bodies!

 

[djbahdow01]

For an in-between zoom, I highly recommend the Tamron 28-75mm.

It's an incredible lens for the price, and a good copy can be very sharp.

Great lens, really good to great for studio and portrait work although the the 85 1.4 is sweet. Ok for sports as it has no AF-S but still well worth the money. I have used mine for over a year and it has treated me well.