[jkharmer]

Hi guys,

Looking to get myself a DSLR (again!). Used to own a Nikon D70 with standard 18-70 kit lense. I sold it about 15 months ago to fund my home cinema purchase, as I also knew that good photo opportunites were going to be limited due to lack of cash and time setting up a new business. Figured that the camera was better sold instead of losing value in my cupboard.

Anyways, looking to get back into it all again, and as I am expecting my first little one in 6 months, want to get a decent camera for lots of baby shots!

I did attend a photography evening class when I bought the D70, and learnt all the basics of using a DSLR (shutter speed, aperture, correct framing of photos and basic photoshop editing skills). I took a few decent shots as well, if I say so myself, and want that buzz again.

I am going to be using the camera for family shots (nice and arty ones), but I also enjoy landscape photography (sunrise / sunset) and also macro photography of insects / flowers. Always wanted to try fish eye as well, but more of an interesting proposition than anything else - maybe worth a secondhand purchase in the future? It is important that any lense for portraits also works well in low light conditions. My stopgap Fuji compact is absolute rubbish in low light conditions (photos at night, in pubs etc)

I am thinking of pushing the boat out for a D300, as I am one of those people that hates settling for something knowing that spending a few hundred more gets me a much better proposition! (I think I am a Nikonian as I was put off by others on my course having the Canon 350d which I thought was a bit plasticky!). But the choice of lense/s are very important. I am not sure if I want a catch all zoom lense (e.g. 18 -200) as I want the best for the 3 types of shots I like to take. I figure that for baby photos, instead of zooming, I can just take the picture closer! And for landscapes, if I want a certain part of the picture, I can crop it later in photoshop i.e. no need to zoom. Not sure at all about the macro option

Any help in deciding would be great. Looking to put it all on finance, but am not made of money!!

Thanks, James

PS. Below is one of my D70 piccies (Trossachs New Years Day 2006)

[Pirate!!]

Simply stunning! Fan-bleeding-tastic. Good luck with whatever you buy (not that you'll need it). Awesome!

[Yandros]

Stunning pic

I toyed with a D70 a while back, then the D80...and then tried a D200 in a shop and the damage was done

If you liked the D70, you'll LOVE the D300!

As for lenses...

Cheapo low light portrait - Nikon 50mm f1.8
Best standard VR zoom - Nikon 16-85VR
If you're not fussed about VR - Tamron 17-50mm f2.8

For insect macros, you probably want something like a sigma 150mm f2.8, but you should also consider the Nikon 105mm f2.8 VR and Tamron 90mm f2.8, which double up as portrait lenses and are better for flowers too.

For low light shooting, if your subject is moving, go for the f2.8, 1.8 or even 1.4 fast glass. As a walkaround lens, I'd probably suggest a Sigma 30mm f1.4 - it's more practical than the 50mm, but more expensive. If you're talking about static scenes - go for VR.

I'd be tempted to suggest a Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 for landscapes, semi-low light and wider portraits, and either the Tamron 90 or Nikon 105 Macro lenses for flowers, insects and tighter portraits (usually outdoors). The Nikon 105VR has the advantage of good low light performance, and is very hand-holdable for flower work...but it ain't cheap. If you still need better low light performance, get a 30,35 or 50mm prime later.

[SPRINGERS]

Fantastic atmospheric shot there, thanks for sharing it!

[jkharmer]

Thanks for all you comments on that one, I think it is my best landscape one so far.

Cheers for the lens advice as well, need to mull it all over and do a bit of research.

James

[jkharmer]

Hi Yandros,

So what you are saying, for portrait type shots (baby close ups!) the best bet is that nice and cheap fixed Nikon 50mm f1.8? Then as a general useage lens (also use for landscapes), sticking with Nikon as not keen on other manufactures, the Nikon 16-85mm VR.

Looking at the prices, the macro lens would follow in the future.

Have I understood correctly?

James

[jkharmer]

Oh, what do you think of this one? Taken with my D70, Standard Kit Lens in Majorca.

[Yandros]

Originally Posted by jkharmer

Hi Yandros,

So what you are saying, for portrait type shots (baby close ups!) the best bet is that nice and cheap fixed Nikon 50mm f1.8? Then as a general useage lens (also use for landscapes), sticking with Nikon as not keen on other manufactures, the Nikon 16-85mm VR.

Looking at the prices, the macro lens would follow in the future.

Have I understood correctly?

James

Yes the Nikon 50mm f1.8 is good for tight portraits. It's not much use as a general walkaround as the field of view is too tight (and so no good for something like low light group shots). You also need to stop it down a teeny bit to avoid paper thin DOF and wierd bokeh.

Here's a thread regarding the Tamron, and low light lenses in general...

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...8712083&page=1

Note the last comment, suggesting the Sigma 30mm f1.4. If you insist on Nikon, the 35mm f2 is the closest you'll get, which isn't as useful in low light, but has something of a cult following.

For general use, you won't go far wrong with the 16-85VR.