D300 vs 70-200mm f/2.8 VR

[flyinfordson]

OK guys I know it's a very open question, but do I upgrade to a D300 or buy a second hand 70-200 f2.8 VR? Thats the question............They're both just this side of a grand - which is a shed load of cash, but which would I get most benefit from?

At the moment I use, and are very happy with my D50 and 18-200VR. I shoot a mixture of stuff but mainly motorsport.

Today I was at Castle Coombe for example and am less than impressed with my results, I know that big lens would have helped my cause.

I have used the lens and it gives excellent result - but it's a pro lens with a pro weight and price tag. I guess I would use it half a dozen times a year when at a track and for occasional low light work indoors. Worth the outlay?

The D300 would see more use and is undoubtedly a much better machine that the D50, (which I probably ain't getting the best from anyawy!) but would the D300 help me in my quest for better motorsport/low light images?

Any opinions are welcome, cause I change my mind every day and i definitely can't afford both!!

Cheers

Dave

[Radiohead]

D50 and 70-200 or D300 and 18-200. The former for me.

The 18-200 is just no good for motorsport.

Or, a used D2Hs or D2x and used Sigma 70-200

[Biscuit761]

You are still ending up with the same crop factor, personally I would probably go for the D300 and then like me, the 80 - 200 F2.8 non VR, not sure what good VR is on a fast moving sport anyway, thought it was of more use in a dark church, perhaps I am wrong.

Bill

[Radiohead]

Or a used 300/4

Bill is right about te VR - it won't stop motion. Get either the two-touch 80-200 or the 70-200 Sigma if you want to stay at 200mm (and maybe add a 1.4x TC)

[jmbrailsford]

Hi,

my advice would be better glass first and then better camera later, good glass doesn't depreciate the same as a camera body and by the time you've saved again for the D300 they''ll be half the price, but the 70-200VR will still cost the same.

Oh and try Ian Kerr (kerso on many Forums and Flash Camera on eBay) for a quote on that lens as he will be cheaper than most retailers, PM me if you want his email address is.

Mike.

[flyinfordson]

OK so I'd not considered the 80-200 non VR - I assume its optically the same as the VR version?

I turn the VR off at the track too, so dunno why I'd overlooked the lens!

Cheers

Dave

[Spooky]

70-200 vr 2.8 is a great lens and I would have glass over body any time. Dont get me wrong the D300 is great but the lens makes the image IMHO.
Mate has a 80-200 non vr and said it was better than his 70-200, works with powerimages so knows what he is talking about. So thats a (cheaper) option
Thought I would post a recent shot using my 70-200, it was shot through a fence at 1/100 f5.6, aint that great but was an off the cuff shot and I like it.

[dazza74]

If your happy with the D50 I'd stick with that and spend the money on glass.

[SomeVorn]

I've been looking into this exact issue.

One problem with the 80-200 2.8 is that only the extremely rare af-s version will autofocus on the Nikon teleconverters. By rare I mean I've searched google-shopping, adorama, ebay etc. A few companies are selling the AF advertised as the AF-S - which is no good at all.

Still haven't come to a conclusion. I have the D80 (do I really need to upgrade? - I ask myself that every day) but would definitely keep it as a backup.

[Biscuit761]

Mine came of Onestop and works fine with a 2x Kenko Pro300 TC.

Bill

[Dave Bartram]

I bought a SH 70-200 VR a couple of years ago (for a steal) fantastic bit of kit but just too heavy for everyday use. Used it with a Kenko Pro 1.4 TC which worked great. I sold mine on (for a profit, but still cheap) and bought the 70 -300 VR which suits my usage better. Ideally I'd liked to have both and use the 2.8 where necessary.

[johnaalex]

I would also vote for the "glass". The D300 is a great camera, but it won't do what you want with an 18-200.

[Spooky]

Originally Posted by Dave Bartram

I bought a SH 70-200 VR a couple of years ago (for a steal) fantastic bit of kit but just too heavy for everyday use. Used it with a Kenko Pro 1.4 TC which worked great. I sold mine on (for a profit, but still cheap) and bought the 70 -300 VR which suits my usage better. Ideally I'd liked to have both and use the 2.8 where necessary.

Sorry to crash the thread a tad but do you have any example pics of the 70-200 with the TC attatched?

[flyinfordson]

Thanks for the input guys - all valid. Looks like glass gets the vote

Cheers

Dave

[Dave Bartram]

Pretty sure these 2 are both with the TC attached, send me a PM if you want anymore info...