Dealing with Nikon G.A.S

Seattle Skyline from Puget Sound

I was hoping to have my replacement full frame camera by now, but I think I will wait for the first price drop of the D610. It’s been out for almost 4 months now and given the hell I went through with the D600 (which now appears to have a class action lawsuit on its hands), I figured the least I can get is a little savings. Gear Acquisition Syndrome is a mighty beast however.

Instead, I decided to upgrade my 80-200 f/2.8 lens. the 80-200 f/2.8D is a great lens mind you, but it didn’t have VR and I noticed lately I was using a tripod with it for longer exposures and with handheld, I didn’t really need f/2.8 anyway so it negated the benefits of having f/2.8 and I needed more reach. I had also been using a Tamron SP 2x teleconverter with it and while it worked ok, I was tired of swapping it out.

I had the following choices:

The flagship 70-200 f/2.8 VRII and keep my teleconverter.
Benefit: f/2.8 and VRII. Very sharp. Ability to shoot at any given light and only add reach when needed.
Cons: I really felt like I need more reach and still have the 85mm f/1.8 so one of those lenses would not be used much. Also with teleconverter this lens is sort of soft.

Vs.

70-300 f/4.5-5.6 VRII
Benefit:Super cheap and alot of range
Cons: I already had this lens once before and it was soft after 200mm…

Vs.

The new Tamron 150-600 f/5.0-6.3 VC whatever
Benefit: only 1100 for a lot of reach. reasonably sharp.
Cons: At the moment, only Canon mount is out so there were no real world comparisons available. With the Canon mount, I read that 500+ was not that sharp and starting at 150mm, it would only be used for one purpose. A lot of unknowns.

Vs.

New Nikon 80-400 AF-S f/4.5-5.6 VRII
Benefit: It’s Nikon, very sharp, very fast focusing, usable range of 80-400mm, lots of fancy lens coatings and ED elements.
Cons. Cost. Damn thing is $2700 for a variable aperture lens. I could get a 70-200 with that WITH A teleconverter!

I decided to go with the 80-400 and keep my 85mm 1.8G. Best of both worlds. If I need a fast lens for portraits, I’d use the 85mm. For shooting birds and other wild life, landscapes, etc. 80-400. Once I get my FX camera, I can even use it indoors as long as I don’t need a very fast shutter speed.
Oh, the $400 instant rebate didn’t hurt either.

For now, I’m still with the D90 and I’ve been reprocessing older pictures like the one above. I’m going back and adding GPS coordinates to my pictures when I can…or close enough at least.

The Americas

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “Dealing with Nikon G.A.S

    1. Thanks for the link but Nikon actually bought mine back over a month ago or so. It’s been a weird feeling going back to my D90 after using the D600! Even at lower and manageable ISOs I’ve noticed a very big difference in quality. Short of doing what Nikon did, I probably wouldn’t have stayed with them so after a year of gripes, things are settled now.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s