Another Help Me Spend My Money Thread

ZBlack · December 30, 2011

Obviously new poster to these forums, and also a fairly new lurker! What a great place for practically everything.

TLDR version at the end.

I am very much new to photography. Earlier this year (March 2011) I picked up a Nikon D3100. Been really enjoying it, but find myself wanting a little better performance, wouldn't mind some exposure bracketing, and a few other features I can find on the D7000. I have been leaning towards the D7000 for quite some time, and now that it's about to come, I am debating maybe just upgrading some glass, or even a Macbook. Currently have a high end desktop pc, and midrange laptop that works fine.

I do not make any money doing this, it's just a hobby, and I shoot a lot of family photo's, so far my own family, but thinking of getting out there and trying some shoots for other people. I also shoot a lot of landscapes and sunsets as I live on the coast of Oregon.

I have about $1500 to spend in the next month or so and looking for what people would recommend.

Current gear:
D3100 with kit 18-55
35mm 1.8
55-200
SB700 flash
(Had a sigma 10-20 but had to return it, loved it though)

Wants:
D7000 w/ kit 18-105
Maybe a good zoom style portrait lens (like a budget 24-70?)
Longer reach zoom, maybe a 70-300
Anything else people think would be a good addition
Good Wide Angle
13" Macbook Pro

I know that isn't a ton to go on as far as what I'm looking for, since I'm considering all options now, but I'm hoping some of you may have some fun making recommendations on what you personally would get and why etc...

Thanks in advance for any replies!

TLDR = Have $1500 to spend, new camera, new lens(s), new laptop?

Pupator · December 30, 2011

I'd buy a refurb Macbook from the Apple store. Then I'll sell the 55-200 and get the 70-300 VR. If I had a bit left I'd sell the 18-55 and get the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8.

That would give you a new laptop and a nice upgrade for your main lenses. You'd have a nice little kit with those two plus the 35 f/1.8.

I haven't priced it out, but my guess is you'd need another $200 or so to follow my recommendations.

Adding prices:

Macbook Pro 13" - $929 + Tax
70-300 VR - $400 (used)
Tamron 17-50 - $400 (used)

ziggy53 · December 30, 2011

I too would recommend the Tamron SP AF 17-50mm, f2.8 XR Di-II LD SP Aspherical (IF) with Built In Motor for Nikon as your standard zoom, but I would add a second flash and flash modifier before anything else. That will get you a fast aperture zoom, capable of decent portraiture and general purpose photography as well. You could also choose a couple of fast aperture prime lenses for portraiture, but I would still recommend at least an additional flash and flash modifiers.

Lighting will make the greatest difference in portraiture, followed by lens quality followed by camera body.

ZBlack · December 30, 2011

Oddly enough, I never even thought about a refurbished Macbook, that's a great idea! Thanks for the lens recommendations as well, the 17-50 looks perfect for what I'm after. I have considered an additional flash, from the infamous cheap
Yongnuo YN-560 to another SB700, but I have not done shoots beyond just the "oh lets get a family photo, how about the park?" type of stuff yet.

I have a simple 5 in 1 reflector but no other modifiers beyond that. Couple lightstands and shoot through umbrella and a softbox be a good start?

Pupator · December 30, 2011

You'll be quite happy with Apple refurbs. I hardly ever buy anything new from them anymore. They do such a good job on the refurbs it's almost impossible to tell them from new.

You'll also be happy with the Tamron 17-50. It's a really great lens and if you look around the buy-sell forums (here, Nikon Cafe, and Fred Miranda) you'll find good deals.

ZBlack · December 30, 2011

Quick question about the Tamron 17-50, reading some reviews on Amazon to get a rough idea, would you go for the newer VC version or the older one without? Seems general consensus is the older one is a bit sharper, so that definitely peaks my interest that direction. Also, if I were to ditch the laptop and just go for a good standard zoom lens for portraiture, would you change the recommendation to something different?

ThatCanonGuy · December 31, 2011

It depends on what kind of portraiture you do - for head/shoulders, the 70-300 would probably be fine (I use my 70-200 for portraits). For large groups or full-body portraits, you can use the Tamron 17-50.

Ditch the laptop and go for the D7000

Pupator · December 31, 2011

I put the laptop at the top of the list because it has uses other than photography. If you don't really need it....

In this order -
I'd get a used D7000 (body only)
Then I'd get a Nikon used 16-85. That'll be your all-around lens and you can use the tele end for portraits.
I'd sell the 18-55 and 35 f/1.8 to get a 50mm f/1.8 (excellent for portraits on a crop sensor) but that's a matter of personal preference.
I'd save my pennies and sell the 55-200 for a 70-300 VR.

My next round of purchasing would be lighting (another flash and flash modifiers).

Of course, I'm biased, as I've basically just described my own kit! I have very low regard for the 55-200 and the 18-105 (I've owned both) so I think it's important to replace them. Others wiser than I (like Ziggy) might still lean toward keeping those lenses and upgrading your lighting situation.

ZBlack · December 31, 2011

The laptop definitely isn't a necessity as I have a fully functional one that is plenty fast (1st gen i5), but it is a Samsung Windows laptop, so the switch to a Macbook Pro is just because it'd be cool to have one. I think that'll be put on the save up for next type of list and worry about the camera upgrades now.

Thank you everyone for your input and suggestions. Describing your own setup is perfect for what I'm after as I'm very new to all of this, and just want, solid performers that will get me sharp results (assuming I operate it correctly :P). Portraiture is probably what I'll do most. Likely just family and a few family friends for now, so thinking that should be where the most money on a lens goes. If you're not a fan of the 18-105 then I'll definitely go body only for the D7000, after the Tamron suggestion, was thinking body only would be by far the best way to go.

So I guess picking the lens then with the suggestions above. Time to start shopping around for a good used D7000 as well.

Thanks again everyone.

Matthew Saville · December 31, 2011

ZBlack wrote: »

The laptop definitely isn't a necessity as I have a fully functional one that is plenty fast (1st gen i5), but it is a Samsung Windows laptop, so the switch to a Macbook Pro is just because it'd be cool to have one. I think that'll be put on the save up for next type of list and worry about the camera upgrades now.

Thank you everyone for your input and suggestions. Describing your own setup is perfect for what I'm after as I'm very new to all of this, and just want, solid performers that will get me sharp results (assuming I operate it correctly :P). Portraiture is probably what I'll do most. Likely just family and a few family friends for now, so thinking that should be where the most money on a lens goes. If you're not a fan of the 18-105 then I'll definitely go body only for the D7000, after the Tamron suggestion, was thinking body only would be by far the best way to go.

So I guess picking the lens then with the suggestions above. Time to start shopping around for a good used D7000 as well.

Thanks again everyone.

Personally I usually stay away from recommending the Tamron, on account of the older autofocus technology that Tamron is still using in 99% of their lenses. I'd much, MUCH rather get a lens with the newer style of autofocus, the only 3rd-party maker with a good assortment would be Sigma with their HSM autofocus. They make a 17-50 2.8 HSM and also now a 2.8 OS HSM, OS being Sigma's stabilization.

It will cost a little more than the Tamron, but it's just one of those things where you don't know what you're missing until you try it. Trust me, it's going to be more accurate, quieter, and more functional because of the autofocus/manual capability.

Anyways, other than that I'd say some great advice has been given. The D7000 is amazing!

For a "budget" portrait zoom, you just cannot beat the Sigma 50-150 2.8 It's a discontinued and VERY hard to find model, but man is it worth it. Amazing sharpness, if you get a good copy. I've used mine since the first generation came out in 2006 or so, and it has served me well for a couple hundred thousand clicks and years of professional shooting on a D70, D200, and D300. Heck, I even use it on my D700, with or without DX crop mode, for theater and stage photography in which black corners don't matter lol. And unless full-frame is in your near future, 50-150mm as a focal length just goes very well with 18-55 or 17-50, much more than 24-70 2.8. 24-70 2.8 on a crop sensor is more for portraiture in extremely close quarters, and/or larger groups like families. 50-150 is much better suited for solo / couple portraits, and anytime you want to achieve more shallow DOF. I know I'm sounding like a Sigma ad by now with my 2nd recommendation, but I promise I don't work for them

.

Good luck deciding!
=Matt=

Pupator · December 31, 2011

Look for d7000s on Nikon Cafe and Fred Miranda. There are some good deals out there right now.

I'd agree with Matt about the Sigma 50-150 if I could actually get my hands on one. I found out about the lens several months ago from another of Matt's posts and have been keeping my eyes open for a copy. In the last 4-5 months I've found exactly one copy for sale. It sold before I could get to it. I had the Nikon 17-55 f/2.8 and it was fantastic, but I didn't really need the f/2.8 much and I find the 16-85 more useful more often. Even when I find the 50-150 I'll still be keeping the 16-85 I think (unless I've moved to full frame by then).

FYI I saw two of the Tamron 17-50s available used. The non-VC version for $325 and the newest version with VC for $425.

Update: Found a 50-150 for sale but I need to put the funds elsewhere right now. http://www.borrowlenses.com/product/For_Sale/Sigma_50-150_nikon

ThatCanonGuy · December 31, 2011

Matt,

I agree about HSM/USM/whatever Nikon's is, but IMHO it's not worth a lot more money unless you're used to it and need it for your work. If the Sigma is the same price as the Tamron equivalent (it seems like that's the case), then maybe it would be worth looking into. If it's a few hundred dollars more, I'd rather save the cash and buy a 50 1.8 or something, you know? I wouldn't really not recommend the Tamron because of it's lacking HSM; it's a nice feature, but the lens is still good, esp. if you're doing landscapes or something where AF isn't critical. I've found most non-USM lenses to be surprisingly fast-focusing. That said, yes, I do enjoy using USM lenses more. Now if you really want or are used to USM, or if this is a lens that's gonna be on your camera most of the time, then yeah, you should probably pay the extra cash and go for the USM.

Just some thoughts. I think I like USM as much as you do (I really like it

), but there are non-USM lenses that I do like, ya know?

Matthew Saville · December 31, 2011

ThatCanonGuy wrote: »

Matt,

I agree about HSM/USM/whatever Nikon's is, but IMHO it's not worth a lot more money unless you're used to it and need it for your work. If the Sigma is the same price as the Tamron equivalent (it seems like that's the case), then maybe it would be worth looking into. If it's a few hundred dollars more, I'd rather save the cash and buy a 50 1.8 or something, you know? I wouldn't really not recommend the Tamron because of it's lacking HSM; it's a nice feature, but the lens is still good, esp. if you're doing landscapes or something where AF isn't critical. I've found most non-USM lenses to be surprisingly fast-focusing. That said, yes, I do enjoy using USM lenses more. Now if you really want or are used to USM, or if this is a lens that's gonna be on your camera most of the time, then yeah, you should probably pay the extra cash and go for the USM.

Just some thoughts. I think I like USM as much as you do (I really like it ), but there are non-USM lenses that I do like, ya know?

Indeed I would stick with the Tamron if the Sigma is a whole $200-300 more. But yeah, I think the difference is down around $100 or so... Also, especially if it's landscape work, I'd definitely be going for a lens like the 16-86 Nikon or 15-85 Canon, for sure. (Although both of those lenses are FAR more expensive, I think?)

I understand what you're getting at with the "if you're already used to it" thing, and if it were just a matter of the quietness and manual focus capability I would certainly not bother bringing it up. But I do find that the newer technology does bring a quite noticeable improvement in low-light accuracy and consistency, which I think is extremely important to everyone. Yes, you can get consistent results from the older style of autofocus, but it always feels to me like I have to try much harder for it. Having Nikon's SWM lenses just makes my job easier. So I guess we come full circle back to it being just a "if you're already used to it" thing, lol...

=Matt=

ZBlack · December 31, 2011

Roughly speaking the Sigma 17-50 2.8 HSM is about $120 more than the Tamron, so that doesn't seem to bad. My total budget can flex a couple hundred if need be as well. I do shoot a fair amount of landscapes, but it will primarily be used for family and couple portraits. I plan to sell pretty much everything I have as I get some new pieces and hopefully recoup a bit of the cost. Honestly, if the differences are minimal, there's a good chance I won't be keen enough to notice them at this point in time, but who knows heh. Obviously I won't sell the 3100 till I have the 7000 in hand, so maybe once that happens, I can just stick with what I have, sell the 3100 with kit lens and then use that to drop on the better lens. More or less thinking out loud here, but I guess this entire thread is about that!

So far the plan is to obtain a D7000, then a good midrange to higher quality portrait lens. Preferably a standard zoom as you guys have mentioned for a bit more flexibility, though if you guys swear by a prime(s), I'm not against that, I can zoom with my feet. This lens would be used for the random landscape, bridge, sunset type shot, but I do plan to get a wider angle one eventually for that sort of thing. So for now, I think portraiture of the couples to family size groups will be my main focus. I do take a lot of random family shots with me 35 1.8 since our house has minimal light, though these are more the fun shots good for 4x6 albums, not for portfolio type work.

This is great reading some thoughts on the variety so far. Great to see/hear why people have chosen what they did.

*edited to add this*
Found http://www.ritzcamera.com/product/RI541538916.htm Which is a Refurbished D7000, and comes with a 1 year extended warranty. Seems like a good price for a refurb, though Nikon themselves have one for $80 more. Assuming one or both are available in 3 weeks, would that be a reasonable route to go, or shopping for a used one for a bit less even better idea?

angevin1 · January 1, 2012

ZBlack wrote: »

*edited to add this*
Found http://www.ritzcamera.com/product/RI541538916.htm Which is a Refurbished D7000, and comes with a 1 year extended warranty. Seems like a good price for a refurb, though Nikon themselves have one for $80 more. Assuming one or both are available in 3 weeks, would that be a reasonable route to go, or shopping for a used one for a bit less even better idea?

If you've got time on your side, then you're typically at an advantage. I wanted to mention that
B&H
Adorama
KEH

All sell New as well as used/refurbed equipment.
Rfurbs tend to come with 90 day wtty.'s. But so do used from B&H and Adorama. KEH offers a 14 day no question return policy on All of their gear, but 14 days is about all you get from them unless it's new or refurb. I've bought from all three, had to return to all three at some time er the other and all three were easy to deal with. ALl three offer Online purchasing. If you have a problem though it is best to pick up the phone and call them..that's the best way to get a handle should issues arise.

As far as Flash goes. If you're still in the early learning stages with flash. I'd suggest sticking with Nikon's new/new-ish offerings: SB700/SB600/SB900 I think it helps to have just one brand and a brand that's meant to play well together when in learning mode.

Good Luck~

Matthew Saville · January 1, 2012

ZBlack wrote: »

Roughly speaking the Sigma 17-50 2.8 HSM is about $120 more than the Tamron, so that doesn't seem to bad. My total budget can flex a couple hundred if need be as well. I do shoot a fair amount of landscapes, but it will primarily be used for family and couple portraits. I plan to sell pretty much everything I have as I get some new pieces and hopefully recoup a bit of the cost. Honestly, if the differences are minimal, there's a good chance I won't be keen enough to notice them at this point in time, but who knows heh. Obviously I won't sell the 3100 till I have the 7000 in hand, so maybe once that happens, I can just stick with what I have, sell the 3100 with kit lens and then use that to drop on the better lens. More or less thinking out loud here, but I guess this entire thread is about that!

So far the plan is to obtain a D7000, then a good midrange to higher quality portrait lens. Preferably a standard zoom as you guys have mentioned for a bit more flexibility, though if you guys swear by a prime(s), I'm not against that, I can zoom with my feet. This lens would be used for the random landscape, bridge, sunset type shot, but I do plan to get a wider angle one eventually for that sort of thing. So for now, I think portraiture of the couples to family size groups will be my main focus. I do take a lot of random family shots with me 35 1.8 since our house has minimal light, though these are more the fun shots good for 4x6 albums, not for portfolio type work.

This is great reading some thoughts on the variety so far. Great to see/hear why people have chosen what they did.

*edited to add this*
Found http://www.ritzcamera.com/product/RI541538916.htm Which is a Refurbished D7000, and comes with a 1 year extended warranty. Seems like a good price for a refurb, though Nikon themselves have one for $80 more. Assuming one or both are available in 3 weeks, would that be a reasonable route to go, or shopping for a used one for a bit less even better idea?

For the record, the type of autofocus system that you're already used to is indeed Nikon's SWM system, in the 18-55, 55-200, and 35 DX. So, you would PROBABLY notice the difference in focusing if you tested a Tamron 17-50 in some extreme, dim conditions. I would consider the Sigma 17-50 2.8 if you're more of an "up close and personal" type of portrait and candid photographer, or definitely the 50-150 2.8 Sigma if you're more of a "fly on the wall" type of candid / portrait photographer. Personally I'm the latter, which is why I love my 50-150 so dang much and also why, when my Nikon 17-55 2.8 was stolen, I didn't even bother to replace it since I had a couple primes in that range and I was about to get FX anyways. But, you could feel the opposite way, and *need* a mid-range zoom as much as I need my tele zoom. Who knows!

=Matt=

cab.in.boston · January 3, 2012

Matthew Saville wrote: »

For the record, the type of autofocus system that you're already used to is indeed Nikon's SWM system, in the 18-55, 55-200, and 35 DX. So, you would PROBABLY notice the difference in focusing if you tested a Tamron 17-50 in some extreme, dim conditions.... (snip)

I have the 55-200 VR, the 35 f/1.8DX, and the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 (non-VC version). I can't say I ever notice a difference between the focus on the Tamron vs. the 35. Yeah, I guess there's a little noise, but it seems to be fast and accurate on both the D90 and D300.

When I have used pro lenses like when I rented a 70-200 VR1, then yes, there's a huge difference. Those lenses are phenomenal, but alas, out of my price range. Of course, there's a big difference between the focus performance of the 70-200 and the 35 as well, and those are both Nikkors, so there is clearly a different system in use in the high end glass.

I would not hesitate to recommend the Tamron as a normal zoom. I think for most amateur uses it is more than up to the task. However, I have never used the VC version, nor either of the Sigma 17-50 lenses, so I cannot offer any comparison. All I can say is the Tamron has been quite good for me. I have used the Nikkor 17-55 f/2.8 a little bit as well, and while it is a better lens (faster focus, better IQ) than the Tamron, it is also WAY heavier and 3x the price. I do not believe it is that much better, unless you will be shooting in treacherous conditions (it's so much heavier b/c it's built like a brick). But that's neither here nor there, as I don't think this lens is under consideration here...

jasonstone · January 4, 2012

cab.in.boston wrote: »

I have the 55-200 VR, the 35 f/1.8DX, and the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 (non-VC version). I can't say I ever notice a difference between the focus on the Tamron vs. the 35. Yeah, I guess there's a little noise, but it seems to be fast and accurate on both the D90 and D300.

<snip>

I would not hesitate to recommend the Tamron as a normal zoom. I think for most amateur uses it is more than up to the task.

I have almost the same gear that's been variously recommended: D7000, Tamron 17-50 f2.8, Nikkon 75-300 VR, Nikkor 35mm f1.8

I can recommend all of it!
get the Tamron WITHOUT the optical stabilization - frankly for a 17-50 with f2.8 you don't really need it that often and the optical quality of the Tamron without stabilization is superior to the one with (can't remember where all the reviews are but they're on the web....)

The focus difference between the 35 1.8 and the Tamron isn't too noticeable - only really in low light when the Tamron sometimes hunts a bit

Oh I also have the 13" MacBook Pro

but... if you don't really need a laptop i'd highly recommend nabbing an iMac - the one with the dedicated video card - that will serve you much better and be more useful for photo editing and what's more - the video editing of the 1080p video files - the MacBook Pro 13" I find to be a tad slowish for that....

One tip I would make is to look at all your photos in the photo library program you use - hopefully it will tell you - as Lightroom does - the number of photos you take a each focal length. Then you can decide where it's best to invest your money - at the short or the long end...

I found that to be a good indication that I shoot a lot more wide angle than I do long zoom - so this time after my gear was all stolen i got the 17-50 f2.8 instead of a 70-200 f2.8

Another benefit of the Tamron is that it's quite compact so easy to walk around with it on a family holiday without one arm becoming 5" longer than the other <img src="https://us.v-cdn.net/6029383/emoji/mwink.gif" border="0" alt="" >

Choices are always nice to have - good luck!

ZBlack · January 7, 2012

Thanks for the continues input and suggestions. Definitely picking up the D7000, where I have not decided yet. May end up being a new one, or a refurb. When I actually go out to purchase, I'll look around for a used one as well.
Still debating the Sigma or Tamron, but will hold off on one of those until after I find the cost of the camera with an extra battery.

That's a great idea to check my library to see what my average focal length is. After looking through quite a few, it's definitely in that 17-50 range, more being done with my 35mm prime as I find it to be the most sharp. My landscape ones tend to be in the 18-20 range. So I think the standard zoom would by far be used the most. Then save up a little longer for the 70-300 type. www.zlbphotography.com is my site, you can get an idea of what I shoot, and it's pretty much only been family so far and a few shots from my buddies wedding, but not as the paid photographer. The site is constantly changing though, so ignore the layout etc...

The laptop/computer idea was just because I love getting new computer stuff. I have a very capable desktop with 2 24" monitors along with my tv, i7 2600k, but only 8 gigs of ram. The new laptop would be just because I want a mac laptop for my next one, and it'd be used for on the fly editing and school, but no heavy use really. So this is more or less out of the equation at this point.

Getting very antsy as the time I'm able to purchase this stuff is drawing closer. I feel like a little kid at Christmas! Thanks again everyone for the comments and suggestions. It is a great help.

NikonsandVstroms · January 7, 2012

I'd toss in a 50mm 1.8 for portraits, it's dirt cheap but a great lens.

ZBlack · January 7, 2012

I have considered sticking with what I have for a while longer, haven't looked into many workshops though, that's a great idea. I'm pretty set on the camera, but the lenses are still up for debate. You're absolutely right that it's definitely more about the photographer than the gear, but new gear is so shiny and pretty!! I think the low light performance of the D7000 and some of the programmable buttons to save presets will be very handy. I have thought quite a bit about if dropping money on the 7000 is worth it, at this point, I think it is, but definitely do need to just get better and more familiar with everything photography as well.

Do you have any workshops or people you suggest looking into to price some things out? I did attend Jeremy Cowarts LifeFinder Tour when he came through Seattle, which was fantastic, but that was much more of an inspirational setup vs tutorial and workshop oriented.

ZBlack · January 24, 2012

So the D7000 has been shipped, it is a refurb though, but that's okay with me! Should be here tomorrow hopefully, along with the Sigma 17-50 and a spare battery. If I do need repairs, (90 day warranty on refurbs) after the warranty, are the costs and turn-a-round time pretty reasonable? I know times are much slower as of late, but in general.

Would it be worth considering something like a Squaretrade warranty on it? Typically I stay away from those, but I am a fan of squaretrade as their plan for my phone worked perfectly when it bit the dust.

Another Help Me Spend My Money Thread

Comments