Moderator: E.J. Peiker

All times are UTC-05:00

  
« Previous topic | Next topic »  
Reply to topic  
 First unread post  | 7 posts | 
by paul weston on Tue Jan 05, 2010 12:13 pm
paul weston
Forum Contributor
Posts: 1517
Joined: 9 Oct 2007
Location: Southern ontario, canada
When i decided i wanted to photograph wildlife the equipment decision was easy, buy a telephoto lense and go.Now that ive decided to take a break from wildlife and concentrate on landscape photography the decision is anything but easy,there are several differant camera/lense options,i need help. :)

My 1st option is to use my D300 and buy a 17-55dx and or 12-24dx and 70-200vr,this is the cheapest option and money is always a consideration.

#2 Buy a D700/24-70 and the new 70-200vr, this is a VERY pricey option.

#3 D300/14-24 and 70-200vr, i no,iam sure i will be told that iam wasting the goodness of the 14-24 on a D300 but 21-36mm would work for me.

Suggestions/opinions would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,

Paul.
 

by E.J. Peiker on Tue Jan 05, 2010 12:16 pm
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86788
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
The D700 is a better landscape camera than the D300, especially if you are going to do any low light work. The files at every ISO look significantly better on a D700 which uses the same sensor as the D3.

I think an excellent option would be the D700, 24-70 and 70-300 VR which is a fantastic lens and it would save you $1400 over your option 2.
 

by paul weston on Tue Jan 05, 2010 1:20 pm
paul weston
Forum Contributor
Posts: 1517
Joined: 9 Oct 2007
Location: Southern ontario, canada
Thanks for that,i forgot about the 70-300vr. That makes the package about $4300 as i plan on buying a used D700,reasonable considering the other options.

Thanks,

paul.
 

by RomanJohnston on Wed Jan 06, 2010 1:21 am
RomanJohnston
Forum Contributor
Posts: 18
Joined: 28 Oct 2009
Location: Troutdale Oregon
At base ISO, your not going to get too much of a diffrence from any of Nikons top offerings at the D300, D700, D3, D3s level of gear. All are 12MP. With that said the D300 make an aweosme landscape camera. I consistantly get 40" x 60" prints from my current setup.

Lens wise if your looking to keep your budget and get almost pro quality I would reccomend the following:
Tokina 11-16
Nikon 16-85 VR
Nikon 70-300 VRII

If your looking to sell your shots or are REALLY finiky about your sharpness and quality ...then the followin should make you happy (but not your wallet)
Nikon 10-24
Nikon 24-70
Nikon 70-200 VRII

Good luck whatever way you want to go....and happy shooting.

Roman
One of dem Nik...Nike.....er....um... Fhoto Boxes...wit dat der flashy things....and a stick to rest it on.
[url]http://www.pbase.com/romansphotos[/url]
 

by Steven Major on Wed Jan 06, 2010 4:59 am
Steven Major
Forum Contributor
Posts: 324
Joined: 5 May 2008
Location: Prescott, AZ
Learn digital stitching. Superior image quality to any zoom with equipment you likely already own.
 

by paul weston on Wed Jan 06, 2010 10:33 am
paul weston
Forum Contributor
Posts: 1517
Joined: 9 Oct 2007
Location: Southern ontario, canada
Thanks roman, i was hoping that you would drop by and share your thoughts. Its appreciated. :)
 

by California4Life on Thu Jan 07, 2010 6:26 pm
User avatar
California4Life
Forum Contributor
Posts: 773
Joined: 21 Apr 2008
Location: West of the Rockies
E.J. Peiker wrote:The D700 is a better landscape camera than the D300, especially if you are going to do any low light work. The files at every ISO look significantly better on a D700 which uses the same sensor as the D3.

I think an excellent option would be the D700, 24-70 and 70-300 VR which is a fantastic lens and it would save you $1400 over your option 2.

I agree.
-Mac

[url]http://macdanzigphotography.wordpress.com[/url]
[url]http://www.macdanzigphotography.com[/url]
[url]http://www.flickr.com/photos/california4life[/url]
 

Display posts from previous:  Sort by:  
7 posts | 
  

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group