Okay guys, help me out?

[Markw]

In about a month, I will be in the position to purchase another lens. I am limiting myself to a 2.8 aperture for quick shutter speed and all the obvious perks that come along with a large aperture. So, here are the choices:

Sigma 70-200 2.8
Nikon 80-200 2.8 (IF I can find one sub $750)
Nikon 180 2.8
Nikon 300 4 (I know, not 2.8, but still pretty okay, I think.)

I will also be purchasing a TC to help with the distance also. But that will be some time after the lens comes.

I shoot many things. I shoot ALOT of Macro, but that has nothing to do with this choice. I already have a dedicated macro lens. Other than that, I (would like to) shoot outdoor sports (once I have this lens, it will be possible.), I shoot alot of things, most things, actually. For landscapes, I have the 10-20mm. For macro, I have the 105mm. For portraits, I have the 105/2.8 and 50/1.8. This lens (if under the 300mm, but possibly that also) would be used for portraits as well. My list of equipment is in my signature.

Well, I think that covers all the fields. Let me know if you have any questions. I would love to hear some perks of getting one over the other if you can think of any. The choice is becoming a little overwhelming and confusing. I really could use any of them, but, in the end, I can only use one..for now.. :sexywink:

Mark

[KMann]

My general thoughts on the subject are this: you can never have too many primes. You can never have too many primes rated at 2.8 and less. You can never have too many primes that are sharp as tacks.

I have been recently moving around my own collection (Canon). I traded out a 4.5-5.6 70-300 zoom for an 85 1.8, and purchased a 300 f4 prime to replace the zoom. The difference in price between the f4 and the f2.8 was approximately 3500$. The f4 was 1500 and the 2.8 comes in around 5000.

I am content with manual zoom, given the quality of the primes.

So I would get the Nikon 300, which is really versatile.

[Markw]

Therein lies my choice, now. I think I have limited it to the 180/2.8 and 300/4. They both are said to be superbly sharp, and on a DX camera would be a 270/2.8 and 450/4 respectively. Adding at least a 1.7x TC on it, and that only goes up. So, I think both lenses would suit my needs, with both having its perks. With the 300, I cant get less than that. With the 180, I cant get up to the 500mm+ equivalent should I need it. So, both have their perks. As stated, I have a 105/2.8 also, so that is pushing me towards the 300 more. Hmmmmm.

Mark

[KMann]

I have to tell you that I am totally delighted with the 300 f/4. It is scary sharp and the 70-300 was always mushy at the high end.

I just revisited your introduction and checked out your lens lineup.
Nikon D90
Sigma 105/2.8 Macro
Sigma 10-20/4-5.6
Nikon 28-80/3.3-5.6
Nikon 50/1.8
Nikon 70-300/4-5.6

Made me smile. This is mine.
Canon 50D
Canon EFS f/4.5-5.6 10-20
Canon EF f/4.5-5.6 17-40 L
Canon EF S 60 f/2.8 macro
Canon EF 70-300 DO (diffractive optics) f/4.5-5.6
Canon EF 300 f/4 L

On Saturday I agree to trade the 70-300 for a Canon EF 85 f1.8

I don't use the 70-300 since getting the big prime.

there's a lot to be said for manual zoom if you ask me. You can probably get away with not having the 180 range by moving yourself but not the 300.

[Markw]

I am actually selling my 70-300g today. If I ever do use the lens, I use it at 300. I shy away from using it because of its poor quality at the long end, Im sure you can understand. Comparing Canon to Nikon is like apples to oranges, but I get what youre saying. Youve made my choice alot easier. (:

Mark

[ann]

let me know if /when your ready for that 80-200 2.8. I have one that i am thinking about selling and it will be in your price range.

[KMann]

The 70-300 is in its box and on the way to the store in about ten minutes. They were out of 85s but it will only be a few days.

If the 10-20 and the 17-40 weren't such great lenses I might look at a fast 50mm prime. But they are, and sharp as tacks too.

With the 85 I think I'm done unless I win the lottery. Have everything useful between 16mm to 480 covered. With Manual Zoom that is. :)

[Antarctican]

Hmmmpf, all this talk of nice lenses is making me jealous. http://www.smileygarden.de/smilie/Schleifchen-Girls/smilie_girl_194.gif


/unsolicited commentary

[KMann]

aww anti.

My deal just got better. I took the 70-300 down to the shop and they said, oh that lens! We owe you. What else do you want? The 1.4 extender? Sure. :)

Great store, great folks. I'm a happy woman.

[Matt Needham]

These days there are several online services that will mail you a lens rental. With anything more than a couple hundred bucks I try before I buy.