A Long Time Coming (D70 Questions)

[deckcadet]

Well, I've been waiting for this day for a long time. With the money I collected this holiday season, I have just purchased a Nikon D70 with kit lens.
It will be here soon.
Well, I've spent a good amount of my money. But I do have another $500 to work with and then, depending on how much I get for my old 5700, probably another $300-400
But now I am faced with a small small problem.
I think my signature says it all...So many Lenses, So little Time!
I was initially going to spend the money for a 70-300 f/4-5.6G AF Nikkor, but its a cheap lens. Plastic plastic plastic, ok optics but its not AF-S, not IF, not ED and the ED doesn't have much of a better review. I don't think I need the 70-300.
So now I need something to reach beyond the 70.
I know exactly what I need to round out my kit. But as a student, I'm rather limited as far as funds.
Now that I have the D70 with kit lens, the items I want to add are:

a 12-24 (pref. f/4 DX)
Telephoto lens, prefer zoom
a VR lens
Speedlight
But I will address only the telephoto here.

I take a LOT of low light pictures. The problem i've had is always no matter what I do, naturally I can't keep the camera steady for a half-second picture in the middle of a crowded living room for a dark natural light shot of my sister and my baby nephew doing natural stuff. I've been looking at the 24-120mm VR. I know some of the pros and cons. But it will give me nearly 200mm equivalent, and I don't know if I really need a 450 equivalent like the 70-300.
The most I'll be able to spend for this tele will probably be around $700. I've looked around a lot, and I like VR, but come on, given the price range, most of them are out of my ballpark for a bit.
I will say one thing.... I Like Fast Lenses. The faster I'm able to get that picture done right, the sooner I can get a picture or two out of the 2000 i take to come out in the first place ;)
Suggestions? When you get out past 100mm I get pretty much lost. I have faith in my fellow photographers here, and I aspire to eventually get the occasional really nice picture, and to at least achieve passable results with as many shots as I can. I have learned the easy way that you can have all the camera in the world and never get a good picture if your glass isn't right. I would prefer to stick with Nikkors, but if there's a really good sigma etc. don't hesitate to let me know.
Thanks a bunch!

[another view]

Welcome. With low light, you really need fast lenses. Even if you don't shoot them wide open, it's still easier to use them so you can see thru the viewfinder and autofocus will be more reliable (or even possible). There is a rule for a good starting point - the reciprocal of the focal length for a minimum handheld shutter speed. That basically means that if you have a 200mm lens, you want to keep your shutter speed at or above 1/200. I'd use the "35mm equivalent" with digital too. With practice (and cutting back on coffee ;) ) you can probably do a little better than that, but it's a good starting point.

I haven't used the 24-120VR but it's not a lens I'm interested in because it's so slow. That lens is f5.6 at the 120mm end of the zoom range. Assuming VR gives you 2-3 stops advantage for handholding, you're only back to f2 or f2.8. Plus with that slow shutter speed you'll pick up a lot more motion from the subject - VR can't stop that.

I'd recommend using fast prime (non-zoom) lenses. Nikon's 50 f1.8 and 85 f1.8 would be good choices and you could get both for the money you've got. I know at least the 85 has a rebate that's only good thru tomorrow 12/31, but it's better to figure out what's best for you than buy the wrong thing even with a good rebate. Usually when rebates expire, they start them up in a couple weeks anyway.

[Spec A!]

First, I want to say congrats! I as well just sold my 5700 ($300) and just purchased the D70 kit as well- should arrive today! I'm pysched!

I'd recommend using fast prime (non-zoom) lenses. Nikon's 50 f1.8 and 85 f1.8 would be good choices and you could get both for the money you've got. I know at least the 85 has a rebate that's only good thru tomorrow 12/31, but it's better to figure out what's best for you than buy the wrong thing even with a good rebate. Usually when rebates expire, they start them up in a couple weeks anyway.

I second this. About three years ago I sold off all my 35mm equipment- Titanium FM2, N80, SB50dx, Nikkors 14mm f2.8, 24mm f2.8, 50mm f1.8, 35-70 f2.8, 70-210 f4. Yes I am kicking myself, but it got me out of debt, and the 5700 has been a decent substitute/and entry camera into digital photography. What I missed the most though is the fast focusing and low light abilities as I shoot alot of natural and low light as well. The 50 f1.8 is a great choice, even better if you can get the f1.4. As nice as the 85mm f1.8 is, I think with the 1.6X focal length difference that puts you at 153mm effective focal length, so I'd opt for the 50 as it puts you pretty much right at 90mm- alot easier to deal with when taking portraits in closer spaces indoors. Not only that, but the 50mm f1.8 is pretty damn sharp, and cheap to get. Don't be afraid of buying used either- check out www.keh.com and www.bhphotovideo.com for their used stuff. Just stick with the higher to highest rated used lenses and you'll be fine. You should be able to pick up a 50mm f1.8 for $80-175, and then use that extra money for things like an extra battery, an SB600, ect.

There's nothing nicer than a fast lens- bright viewfinder, faster focusing, lower light ability, and the ability to throw everything but the finest detail out of focus.

[deckcadet]

Thanks for the input, guys. Good points and I think I'll try for a 50 prime. But I'm still at that point stuck with 105mm 35mm-equivalent maximum. After the prime, what should I do for tele? There's so many of them and I'm frankly confused out of my mind about this. Theres VR, Non-VR, 85 different versions of the 80-200, and so on. Will it never end

[Fat Boy]

Hello,
I had the exact same "problem" that you encountered. I like fast lenses and did not know which lens to get to "add" to my D70 kit. Here is my reasoning and what I bought:

I like fast lenses so I got the 70~200VR. Why? Because its fast AND it starts at 105mm (using D70) and the kit lens ends at 100mm. So now I have 2 lenses that range from 28mm - 300mm! ALSO when Nikon goes to a full frame sennsor the 70~200 will be just that! I can combine the 17~35 to what ever that new Nikon Digital full framed sensor camera will be and have a decent good range of lenses for just about any common shot. I believe that the DX lenses will go the way of the old F3 auto focus 80 & 200 lenses. So in the mean time I'll use the combo I just bought me for Christmas.

I also got the 50mm 1.4 to cover any fast low light I may need to take and when that "new" Nikon D slr comes around, the 50mm will fill the gap of the 17~35 and 70~200.

Hows my logic?

Fat Boy

[Spec A!]

Well, I really don't think you will see a difference in glass quality between all 85 versions of the 80-200. ;) If you want more tele or are looking for a tele zoom, you really can't beat that lens for it's quickness. The older versions are heavier and bigger- if that's a factor go for the newer ones. Personally I've used several of the VR lenses, and don't see the big difference I'd expect, especially compared to the Canon IS lenses, and especially for the money- I don't feel it's worth it unless you are really shooting alot of faster motion in low light. I'd stick with a regular 80-200 f2.8 non VR- the ones right before the VR's came out. Compact, lighter, and still as sharp as the old ones.
There's always prime lenses too- the older 105 and 135 f2's are awesome, but big and not very convenient. There's also the option of getting the 105 f2.8 micro- giving you that extra close focusing ability other than being fast.
Best thing to do if you can, is get your hands on several different types. Try them out with the D70, and see what works best for you.

[deckcadet]

Thanks a lot for your help, guys! you have NO idea how helpful you are being.
As far as the 70-200 VR, I want it. You have no idea how much. But, the drawback is it costs $1500, and I don't have that kind of money.
For your suggestion of the 80-200, is the latest version this one
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...#goto_itemInfo
or is it another one (af-s ed-if etc.)
I'm on a budget, but if I can get a lens that is faster focusing and has IF, i'll wait till my birthday in 2 months for it.
Thanks a million!

[Spec A!]

Yeah that's basically it. There are a few versions of that- with and w/o tripod collar, one with IF, one with AF-S, and without both like this one: http://www.keh.com/shop/SHOWPRODUCT....urpic=0&dpsp=0
All have the same glass, so it just depends on what's important to you.
So is it worth it to buy something like that when you really want the 70-200 VR? Wouldn't it be better to wait and get the thing you really want?
If you don't have the telephoto- just get closer! ;) I found after many years of shooting that I really only needed about 135mm max of telephoto focal length.

[deckcadet]

I don't think that I'll be able to afford a VR 70-200 for a while....I can maybe afford up to a grand but a $1500 lens.....not for a while. I can't justify it when I need something on the super wide end of the spectrum as well.
The problem with this multi version thing is I can easily afford (even now I could probably do it soon) the neither version, but I want IF and/or AFS

[davidpweis]

Deckcadet, I feel your pain!
I ended up first getting the 12-24 and I borrowed that 70-300 plastic lens (Which did a good job for what it was).
I had to go for the 80-400 VR over the 200VR. I wanted the extra reach, and oh, man! a 600 with the 1.5 conversion factor awsome! Since I also shoot low light, setting ISO up there and the VR, makes for some great hand held sun sets (that sun gets huge with a 600!)

Gotta try the moon next!

Enjoy!

:-D

[deckcadet]

Yeah, gotta love and hate it, I'll not need my 12-24 till first cruise of 06 which has a bigger ship with large open spaces and also has a more exotic locale