| Joined: | Thu Apr 19th, 2012 |
| Location: | United Kingdom |
| Posts: | 4424 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
Now, JK, you know how I feel about weightlifting!!! If I wasn't so pathetically weak in the arm dept, I would buy myself a D800 but I'm just not prepared to go to the gym often enough to be able to use it!! So, that also rules out silly, heavy lenses as well. And, as for the high iso capabilities of the D200... And, no, I'm not buying your D300!! lol
Eric, I'm on dry land but surrounded by water in Shetland. Am working as a technical clerk at on the construction site of the new gas plant they are building there. I even have my very own hard hat!Hard work, long hours and 5.00am rises but at last I'm seeing some of that nice money stuff in the bank.
So, back to lenses. Well, Shetland has thrown a spanner in the works of my usual photography which makes that 70-300 quite attractive as there is a lot of scope for nature photography between bird colonies, otters and killer whales. There's even a company taking you on photography jaunts to the best spots for piccies which I might try out next summer. I wouldn't normally have bothered about getting to 300mm but the lure of cute little otters is making it attractive.
Long lens aside, I want something that will be decent enough for portraits as well as general photography so the 18-105 might be ok for that.
Hmmmm...
The 70-300 would still work for portraits as well...being = 105 at the short end. Traditionally the 135mm was favoured by many portrait shooters.
You may have to stand back on Orkney for group shots though.
____________________
Eric