Nikon Lens advice

[Raven66]

Hey all!

I'm thinking of renting a lens for our trip to Animal Kingdom. I have a question and I sure hope it isn't a dumb one.

I'm thinking of renting a 70-300mm and I already have a 55-200. Now if I'm looking at this right the 70-300mm is better but how much better? Do you think it's worth it? I'm by no means a photographer, I just like to take pictures. Any help would be much appreciated.

Thank you!!

 

[ddbowdoin]

Hey all!

I'm thinking of renting a lens for our trip to Animal Kingdom. I have a question and I sure hope it isn't a dumb one.

I'm thinking of renting a 70-300mm and I already have a 55-200. Now if I'm looking at this right the 70-300mm is better but how much better? Do you think it's worth it? I'm by no means a photographer, I just like to take pictures. Any help would be much appreciated.

Thank you!!

Nope.

I am assuming you're shooting on a cropped body, so you're already at 82MM with your 55-200. If you're familiar with KS most of the trip is pretty tight. I don't see many opportunities to get at the 300mm focal length (450 on your body) and be able to make a strong composition.

My personal two cents, not worth it.

 

[Raven66]

Nope.

I am assuming you're shooting on a cropped body, so you're already at 82MM with your 55-200. If you're familiar with KS most of the trip is pretty tight. I don't see many opportunities to get at the 300mm focal length (450 on your body) and be able to make a strong composition.

My personal two cents, not worth it.

Thank you!

I guess I should have put that I have a Nikon D40.

 

[ddbowdoin]

Thank you!

I guess I should have put that I have a Nikon D40.

if you were doing a private tour, that's one thing...

but to rely on an opportunity while on the general ride, it's a crap shoot.

 

[thomas998]

Not sure what you are hoping to get with the 300. I've used a 200mm and it did allow me to get what looks like a closeup portrait of a gorilla... Not sure is I could find any place to actually use a 300mm (which on your camera is 450mm).... If you want to rent something different have you considered something wide and fast? It might give you more use than the 300.

 

[CP_alum08]

I have a 70-300 and rarely use it in the parks anymore. It's nice to have on the safari in AK and to take close up shots of the parade performers but other than that there isn't much use for 300mm at WDW that I've found...unless you're doing it for artsy stuff then that's completely different.

Like mentioned above, I'd suggest renting something different than what you already have. You already have telephoto so maybe rent a wide lens or a fast prime.

And in terms of quality, the 70-300 isn't going to be much better than your 55-200. Getting a 70-200 f/2.8 will be a substantial upgrade but it also comes with a substantial price difference and size/weight too.

 

[Raven66]

Thanks for the responses!

 

[WDI 1998]

Maybe you should consider renting a fast wide angle lens. Something like the Nikon 12 -24 f2.8 or Tokina 11-16 f2.8. If you are interested in the zoom go with the 70 - 200 f2.8. You will get great bokeh, have plenty of reach for what ever you want to capture and have much better low light capability. If you plan on shooting after dark for fireworks or ELP bring a tripod and remote shutter release to make sure you get a steady shot on longer exposures.

Good luck and enjoy your trip!

 

[ddbowdoin]

The Nikon 70-200 VRII, which I own, is the BEST lens in the Nikon line up. Period.

It's AF is ridiculously fast and while the bokeh isn't as strong as the cream machine (85 1.4) it's damn smooth.

 

[Zac Skellington]

Come on, people... The man owns a small DX body. Do you really expect him to strap a huge $2,300 lens like the 70-200 f2.8 on it? Yes, it is a crazy awesome lens, but not for this guy.

I used to use a 70-300, and found it too long for shooting anything close on a DX.
I suggest renting Nikon's newer 18-300mm. It's plenty wide on a crop sensor (it's made for them), and has all the reach you'll need!

 

[CP_alum08]

Come on, people... The man owns a small DX body. Do you really expect him to strap a huge $2,300 lens like the 70-200 f2.8 on it? Yes, it is a crazy awesome lens, but not for this guy.

He's wanting to rent a lens...and why not? When I owned a d40x I put a 70-200 on it often and it was a great combo.

 

[Raven66]

We've decided against renting a lens. Thanks for all responses. Appreciate it.

PS....I'm a woman

 

[NowInc]

crop sensor or not...good glass is good glass. Yes a full frame can perform better, but a crop sensor body with a good lens can do amazing things as well. If the rule was "DX bodies shouldn't get good glass"...then they wouldn't make or sell any high performance lenses for crop sensors at all

 

[ddbowdoin]

Come on, people... The man owns a small DX body. Do you really expect him to strap a huge $2,300 lens like the 70-200 f2.8 on it? Yes, it is a crazy awesome lens, but not for this guy.

I used to use a 70-300, and found it too long for shooting anything close on a DX.
I suggest renting Nikon's newer 18-300mm. It's plenty wide on a crop sensor (it's made for them), and has all the reach you'll need!

crop sensor or not...good glass is good glass. Yes a full frame can perform better, but a crop sensor body with a good lens can do amazing things as well. If the rule was "DX bodies shouldn't get good glass"...then they wouldn't make or sell any high performance lenses for crop sensors at all

It all depends on your needs.

I have owned FX and DX bodies, and ultimately I sold my FX (D700) to stick with a DX body (D7000)... why? because the only real difference in the bodies is ISO performance. You can break down other factors like the auto focusing system but that really comes down to what you intend to shoot.

I didn't find myself repeatedly needing high ISO use... so I sold my body and found little to no difference in performance between my 700 and 7000 when it came to shooting in optimal lighting conditions.

 

[CP_alum08]

We've decided against renting a lens. Thanks for all responses. Appreciate it.

PS....I'm a woman

Are you going to buy something instead?

 

[PhotoDave219]

Hey all!

I'm thinking of renting a lens for our trip to Animal Kingdom. I have a question and I sure hope it isn't a dumb one.

I'm thinking of renting a 70-300mm and I already have a 55-200. Now if I'm looking at this right the 70-300mm is better but how much better? Do you think it's worth it? I'm by no means a photographer, I just like to take pictures. Any help would be much appreciated.

Thank you!!

I wouldnt rent but seeing as its a 120 dollar lens, I'd just buy it. Its a good walk around telephoto for stage shows, zoos and anything you want to get upclose and personal with and not bring a high end lens into.

Now we're talking DAK. We're talking the safari. Ive had countless bloody lips from my camera smashing into my face on that ride while using a long lens. I prefer the 70-200 as thats where most of the animals are. The 300 + 1.4 teleconverter was only useful in photographing the cheetahs that are way in the back. Everything else was too close/tight and bounced around too much for decent composition.