Upgrade Nikon body or new lense?

[page40]

Hi ladies,

I'm a newbie here with a question: Should I upgrade my Nikon D40x to either a D90 or D300 or get a new lense. I currently have the kit 18-55 mm lense, 55-200mm VR, and 50mm 1.4 AF-S. I have four boys who all play baseball and basketball, involved in scouts, and piano and band...sigh (as I catch my breath). I am really getting into photog. (currently taking a class) and am thinking about eventually making a little money down the road. I've been wanting a new camera body for awhile, but I'm also having trouble getting good indoor sports and band shots. What should I do??? My budget is around $1500. I'm also going to sell my D40x and 2 kits lenses. Thanks for any advice!

[neonglow]

Do you know how to shoot in manual mode, and adjust your aperture and shutter speed? These are great things to know when you're indoor and in low-light.

Also, shooting in RAW mode is awesome, because you can totally correct the low-light in Photoshop (there's a plugin for dealing with RAW files). Just keep in mind that RAW files will take up more space on your memory card and harddrive.

I shoot with a D60, but man, I'd kill for a D700!

[page40]

Yes, I'm finally learning how to adjust my shutter speed, ISO, and aperture to get the proper exposure. I'm hoping that with lots of practice, I'll be able to comfortably shoot in full manual someday. For now I shoot in aperture priority and shutter priority. I know the D90 has some preset scenes and the D300 doesn't which will be get some getting used to. I just don't want to grow out of another camera too soon which is why I'm considering the D300. Anyone else make a similiar decision?

[Amy L]

I was in the exact same situation and opted to go with the D300. I knew I wanted to eventually upgrade my lenses and wanted a body upgrade first. I got it at Christmas and needless to say am totally thrilled with it.

[Myra]

I think you have to weigh what deficiencies you feel your current body has, and what you would want to accomplish. Considering you're getting more serious about your photography, I would have to agree with Amy that upgrading your body is probably the way to go. If you start shooting sports in RAW, you'll want to add a huge memory card and a nice reader, and also evaluate the frames per second the camera can shoot. You can buy a lot of camera with that budget!

[Aino]

I had the D50 and recently upgraded to the D90.
The D300 is great, but I think the D90 is more than enough camera for me and can do everything the D300 can - at least, the difference is too small for me to notice. But the price is a big difference.
With your $1500, I would get the D90 and a good lens.
It is a FANTASTIC camera: quick, easy to learn, takes phenomenal photos with an incredible dynamic range.
But you need to learn to use it and set the camerasettings to suit your needs.
I shoot mostly aperture or shutter priority around the house. When I shoot "artsy" photos, I use manual. Easy peasy on this great camera.

And why spend the money on a more expensive camera when you get some glass in additon? Good luck.

[Starlite9711]

Im in your boat (without the $1500 budget, lol) I have the D40x and I really want the 50mm. Problem being that the "normal" 50mm wont auto focus (I noticed you have this lens, do you just manual focus?) And the 50mm that WILL auto focus is nearly $500. Which I am saving every penny to buy
That being said. IF I had a 1500 budget, I would most definitely buy a new body, and new lens!

[audrey77]

I have the 30mm 1.4 HSM Sigma lens that autofocuses on my D40... It's great and cheaper than the new 50mm autofocus lens!

[donitab]

What's the lowest f/stop on your 55-200? If it is 2.8 and you are not taking great sports pictures, definitely upgrade your camera body. If your f/stop is greater than the 2.8, spend your money on a 70-200 2.8. That lens will give you great sports pictures in low light situations. It is a fast lens & you need that for the sports pictures, it will freeze the action.

You can upgrade your camera body, but if you don't have the low f/stop, you will still have trouble taking great sports pictures in low light (such as night games or indoor sports).

Such a fun dilemma - where to spend money?? If only we had enough for both!

[sam ellis]

I would say - go for the body. You have got nice lenses and I would definately do that.

How does the d300 handle higher ISO's ? ( anyone with the D300?)

I have the d700 and I am soooooo n love with the high ISO. But my D200 was a shocker - nothing above 400. But I think the D300 is better then the lense because if you can use higher ISO then your problem is solved and you got a GREAT body.

[Aino]

Concerning high ISO...

Again, the D90 handles high ISO exeptionally well.... see review at dpreview.com... the difference between D300 and D90 in jpeg is minimal. Some even say that the D90 is better than the D300 in high ISO.

(The D700 is *marginally* better, especially in RAW, but us "normal" people wouldn't need or could afford that one, I think...) (I mean, it is for professionals.) (Who wouldn't want a D700 if they could afford it?)

Again, the D90 is your best choice I'd say.

(No, I am not paid to say this.)

[patriciaz]

I was in the same situation 2 months ago, I had the D70, good camera that I never used on manual mode except the last two weeks before I went for the D300.
I did a lot of research trying to decide what was better: new body or more lenses? since I already had some lenses (like you) I decide to buy a new body that was going to make the best of them.
Now that you are getting more serious about your photograph the best option will be a body, the last thing you want is to outgrow a new camera.
I absolutely love the D300, but you have to be ready to shoot fully manual, it doesn't have any presets like other Nikon cameras, the only options are M, P or aperture/shutter priority.

Sam: up to 1600 the quality is perfect, at 3200 it's ok, there is visible noise but easily fixable with PS or LR
Bailey: Have you seen the new 35mm 1.8? it seems a good option and better price than the 50mm 1.4g

[Starlite9711]

Yes, I have looked into that new 35mm, but everyone I have spoken to in camera stores about it says that it wont be great for portraits/kid photos that it will warp the heads a tad. (I've been told the same about the 50mm too but decided on my own that it wasn't an issue with this lens, (something about it being equal to 85mm somethingorother that I don't understand)...anyone have any input with the 35mm?

[page40]

Thanks everyone for your advice! You've all been so helpful. It's such a big decision so I'm going to have to take awhile to think it through. However, my son's travel baseball team is playing in a big tournament in cooperstown, ny this summer. Whatever I decide to do I need time to play with my new toy(s)! LOL! Decisions, decisions....

[Aino]

Originally Posted by Starlite9711

Yes, I have looked into that new 35mm, but everyone I have spoken to in camera stores about it says that it wont be great for portraits/kid photos that it will warp the heads a tad. (I've been told the same about the 50mm too but decided on my own that it wasn't an issue with this lens, (something about it being equal to 85mm somethingorother that I don't understand)...anyone have any input with the 35mm?

I would really like the 35mm - I like that it is a "real" 50mm and I like the photos I gave seen from it so far .