Home Forums Gear Photography Camera Question, NIKON D80 or D300 vs Canon 40D

Sounds like a nice set up. Congrats! Why the 70-200 2.8 Vs the F4 IS? I've had both and I greatly prefer the F4 IS. However if your a bokeh lover or into portraits the 2.8 is the better choice. The IS on the F4 is one generation newer, it's a fraction of the weight and about 70% less expensive. The 70-200 F4 IS is easilly one of my favorites.

That one I am still undecided on, I may go with the F4...my thoughts were that the F2.8 would give me more for later at dusk and early dawn shots.

No question the 2.8 performs better in low light. It just comes at a fair price both financially and in weight. The next generation IS helps bridge the normal disparity between the f4 and f2.8 IS. I see the 2.8 IS as a portrait lens. Consider the 100-400L. It will give you the reach you want for wildlife if that's what you are talking about at dusk and dawn. If you want a fast lens for the price difference between the two 70-200's you could get a prime. Both 70-200's take the 1.4x TC well so you can squeeze 280mm out of them but you loose one f stop.

Good point Stetson, I was just doing some reading on the F4 and that is a better choice...you just saved me some money!!! I maybe able to squeeze in that 100 macro too

Here is a photo I took last deer season (10-13) testing out that lens. There's nothing special about the photo. I was just testing in low light. I had to edit my initial post because I'm not sure how much day light was left but I think it was getting pretty close to dark. I can't seem to find the shots I actually took late in November but the lens worked well for me in this application.
This was taken with the XTi and 70-200 F4 IS. ISO 1600 f7.1
1/160

That does seem like the correct choice in your case. The 70-200/2.8 is for the most part a photojournalist and wedding/event type lens, not necessarily a nature/wildlife lens. Sure it would work great, but at dusk and dawn and at that range of focal lengths the extra stop is probably not that valuable since it's able to be handheld to ridiculously slow shutter speeds.

Go that way, you'll be better off.

Speaking of the 100-400.

Man I need bigger glass..:GRIN:

I hope it's warmer there then it is here Randy. Freakin cold. LOL

Its cold here it's 23f.

23? That's warm! It's 7 here this morning. Amazing jow much vibration you can get at 400-560mm just from shivering while holding a release. LOL

Holy smokes thats to cold! lol The wind was bad here made it a little tuff. Your pics are awesome! :GRIN: what did you have your ISO set on?

Thanks! The first was 400 & the second was 800.

I knew I should have just stayed out of this forum.. I also remember several other times you've been in dustups when someone doesn't agree with you 100%... I wasn't absolutely certain about the definition of 'irasible', so I looked it up. Not sure why the word came to me and frankly I hadn't thought about it for years.. But it fits you to a tee... Now, is that sarcasm? YUP.. Tried to make it plain this time...

If I said the sky was blue, you'd say "it is NOT!.. It's AZURE!"

So, Stets old boy, I'm asking for a small favor; one I'm thinking you'll easily agree to.

Place me on 'ignore'. I'm doing the same to you, only the second person I've ever done that to in 10 years.. That way, this whole hilarious episode comes to an end.

To: VTi, I truly thank you for being much more the gentleman.. I'll try mightily to do the same in return.. But in the end, I think it's best if I just read here and say bupkis.. It's obvious that Stetson plainly does not want me here.. Fine. It's his turf, not mine..

"It's obvious that Stetson plainly does not want me here.. Fine. It's his turf, not mine.. "


I thought you were over this? You said you dropped it seventeen hours ago!
In regards to the quote I pulled out of your post nothing could be further from the truth. I do think you've had ample time to back up your earlier accusations. Still not one single quote? Clearly you miss-understood what I said about a P&S . Why not just move on with the conversation in a civil manner?
Sorry the links, web site referrals and other information that you were provided with both here and in private were of no use to you. I did my best to help you out. May I remind you sir that you contacted me and asked for help?
If putting me on ignore will quash the drama by all means feel free but IMO you could have easilly sent me that little nasty via PM instead of continuing your conniption here. I don't suppose it's occured to you that you are not the OP in this thread?
Just a friendly suggestion but you might want to look up 'irasible' again.
I hope your not going to use this as an excuse to not put up some photos from your new gear. I'm sure I'm not the only one waiting to see your photos.
Enjoy!

With the 40D and 17-55 this past weekend inside the field museum.

Redneck - You can just read only if you want, but you are going to have to post some photo's from your new $3k toy We're all waiting to see what she can do. Not everyday on here that someone drops that kind of coin on a SLR/Lens combo.... Let's see some images!! If they need a little post processing, which most do, we'll give you a hand and some tips to get the most out of the setup.

Whatever you do, after spending that kind of cash, don't settle for second rate images.

I'll do my best.. But in all honesty it may be a while.. I'm backed up four custom rifle builds (due to hand surgery) and I just gotta get these done for my customers. Also, I'm taking your advice on obtaining the 'Photoshop' software; sometime next week.. I'm sure that alone will take another learning curve..

'Post-processing'.. ewww.. That ought to be rich.. The camera might do just fine but I'll prolly end up screwing up the whole file..

Along with this body/lens I had them ship the SB-800 flash and a good UV and polarizing filter that Stets recommended... I do thank him for that (gotta give credit where it's due (truthfully, not sarcasm here))..

Yeah, the whole thing ran nearly $3800, but I hope it's the last kit I have to obtain. Time will tell..

Thanks for the note, VTi..

Wow, my 2200 bucks for the stuff I bought now seems rather pathetic!

We are both in the same situation though, both with new first time SLR kit.

There are a lot of Bald Eagles here now along the river. I'm thinking of making a Saturday of trying to stalk them for decent photo's. It's a dead time of year now with limited hunting, and too cold to shoot carp yet.

And the funny part is you bought a much better, more functional kit.

For the record, if there's anyone else out there looking to spend $3800.00 on a dSLR kit, please look hard at this set up instead:

Canon 40D
17-40/4 L
24-70/2.8L
70-200/4 L IS
580EX II Speedlite Flash

Redneck. This package is worth the same as what you spent on the D300 and 17-55 (I believe that's the lens you said you bought). This is +/- a few dollars compared to a D300 and SINGLE wide angle lens

Just make sure to keep all the packaging, there's still time to return it and get a very good "all around" kit For that kind of coin, why limit to pure wide angle photography?

Let's talk about it There may be hope for you yet (that was my bit of sarcasm )