Kinda Jealous of cannon for once

[bigben6]

So I found out something today that kinda throttled me.... and for the first time ever made me jealous of cannon owners....

Obviously the Nikkor 70-200 f/2.8 is a big $$$ lens. The bargain version is either the sigma or tamron with identical specs, but your giving up some sharpness or AF speed depending on which one you of the 3rd party lens you buy.

Cannon owners also run into this scenario with a high prices Cannon lens or the same tammy or sigma, except.... cannon also makes a very reasonably priced 70-200 F/4... and it roughly 1100 with cannons IS.

I.Am.Jealous

Why does Nikkon not make such an offering. I would gladly chose, a little less aperture (lets be honest 6.2 down to 4.o is a great step) for the AF speed and IQ of a Nikkor.

Grrrrrrrr

[zona5101]

how bout the nikon 80-200 f2.8 its about the same as the canon 70-200f4 and a stop faster ...then theres the 70-300f4.5-5.6 with vr under $600 a bit slower but with VR and more reach.
just save your pennies and get the 70-200f2.8vrII - you'll only cry once.

[sk66]

You could get a used 70-200 f/2.8 VRI for not much more than the canon f/4 version. There's nothing wrong with that lens, especially for a crop body.

[NathanFranke]

Had a business seminar once. The only thing I remember is this:

The taste of good quality lasts longer than the taste of good price.

As was said, you'll only cry once.

[bigben6]

hrmmmmmm for some reason I had it in my head that the 80-200 f/2.8 was an old model and no longer made, so really the "cheap" version of the nikon gives up 10mm zoom rather than 1 f stop like the cannon does....

I am glad i posted this, i am no longer jealous of cannon....

So what am i giving up besides 10mm zoom over the 70-200 f/2.8? Obviously VR which i can live with TBH, anything else i should know? IQ is the same as the 70-200? It just seems like ALOT of money to spend TWICE AS MUCH for 10mm zoom additional...

EDIT: No af-S so thats a no go for me... grrrrrr kinda jealous again...

[graciousness]

I think if you want to stay in the game, you will need to accept the fact that photography is simply an expensive hobby or profession to get into. There's no point digesting over how expensive gears are when simply, that's just the nature of photography. You either save up for the quality that you really want or work with the limitations of the gears that you can only afford.

If you want quality, you either try to find the means to afford it or settle on compromising it if your focus is more on affordability.

[ravncat]

We can expect a 70-200 ish f4 lens in nikon land in the next couple years - they've been working on that f4 lineup, the 16-35 f4 was the first entry

[bigben6]

Originally Posted by graciousness

I think if you want to stay in the game, you will need to accept the fact that photography is simply an expensive hobby or profession to get into. There's no point digesting over how expensive gears are when simply, that's just the nature of photography. You either save up for the quality that you really want or work with the limitations of the gears that you can only afford.

If you want quality, you either try to find the means to afford it or settle on compromising it if your focus is more on affordability.

I understand that, I really do, but as with my car, beer brewing, computer building, gun shooting, and ofc photography, value is always in the forefront of my mind.

So for future reference, i have a few quesitons

1: whats the current cheapest Nikon body with a focus motor?

2: Did the D90 have in body focus? IIRC it did but im not 100% sure.

3: Are there significant benefits to in-body focus vs AF-S other than simply some lenses do not have AF-S.

4: Will my current AF-S lenses be capable of using the in body motor should i get on or will they still default to the AS-S in lens focus system?



The D40 and 18-105 are my first purchases, I like them i really do, and right now i only have a 3 year old, my goal would be to have a decent selection of gear by the time she is 10ish that i can use going forward into high school sports etc.......

oh and i want that new glock 17 for the tactical shooting course i wanna take, oh and a project C5 Z06 so i can hot lap at mid ohio on free weekends, and a Co2 keging system in my basement, and a home theater PC along with my gaming/post processing rig, and the pool table in my basement....

You get my point i think, i want a nice photog set up, if that means used body or settling for less lens then so be it, but if i can find a good compromise, I'll jump on it every time!

Thanks for the continued input guys and gals!!!

[zona5101]

Originally Posted by bigben6

1: whats the current cheapest Nikon body with a focus motor?

D7000

2: Did the D90 have in body focus?

Yes

3: Are there significant benefits to in-body focus vs AF-S other than simply some lenses do not have AF-S.

The non af-s are generally less expensive but the AF-S are generally faster to focus

4: Will my current AF-S lenses be capable of using the in body motor should i get on or will they still default to the AS-S in lens focus system?

They will default to AF-S.

and look at the M&Ps over the gen4 Glocks... most people think the m&p point better - certainly point more like a 1911 if your transitioning from that platform...

[ravncat]

Originally Posted by zona5101

The non af-s are generally less expensive but the AF-S are generally faster to focus

The non af-s are generally smaller as well.
af-s are quieter, and fare better in inclement weather (due to the lack of aperture rings)