WakeWorld (http://www.wakeworld.com/forum/index.php)
-   Video and Photography (http://www.wakeworld.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=87667)
-   -   What Lens??? (http://www.wakeworld.com/forum/showthread.php?t=477959)

snyper1d 07-19-2007 11:50 PM

Well, I have to say that I have the coolest girlfriend ever. For my birthday she got me a Nikon D40 SLR. The lens it came with is good for general photography, but I would like to get a good lens for shooting wakeboarding shots. What lenses have you guys used and had good luck with for action shots?

peter_c 07-20-2007 7:20 AM

You are going to want a 200mm lens. Many of us use the 18-200mm, but they are expensive, in the $750-800 range. The 70-200mm is more cost effective and will work excellent for wake shots from the tow boat and a chase boat. <BR> <BR>Did it come with a kit lens?

rson 07-22-2007 12:13 AM

I just got the 18-200 VR.....it is the bomb and well worth the money. <BR> <BR><a href="http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/18200.htm" target="_blank">http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/18200.htm</a>

scott_a 07-22-2007 12:44 AM

Thank you for reminding me why I hate Ken Rockwell so damn much.

richd 07-22-2007 7:58 AM

I just looked at Rockwell's D200/18-200 sample images, went looking for my glasses and realized I already had them on. Is Nikon's in cam noise reduction that strong? The lens looks decent at ISO100 stopped down but the wide open stuff shot at ISO400 and above is just plain mush. <BR> <BR>Back to OP's question, I'd get the 70-200 for WBing.

snyper1d 07-24-2007 8:49 PM

Just a quick question...I keep seeing a couple different lens manufacturers online. I know Nikon is probably going to be my best bet and I can go that route. Has anyone heard anything about Sigma lenses or any other manufacturers that make good lenses?

phantom5815 07-24-2007 9:16 PM

70-300 VR isn't as expensive as the 18-200. <BR>My friend recent went on a rafting trip in Alaska and was able to get several great clear shots of Bald Eagles while all the others got blurry shots. <BR>Just a thought if on a budget.

getssum 07-25-2007 3:17 PM

Todd, I'm very happy with my Sigma 70-200 2.8 (canon mount) <BR> <BR>PM me and I'll send you the link to my smugmug gallery if you want to see some of the shots.

caskimmer 07-26-2007 6:59 AM

I owned Sigma's 70-200 2.8 for 5 years and it was every bit as good as the Canon L lens I thought I needed to replace it with.

barry_vaught 07-30-2007 9:38 AM

Todd <BR> <BR>I have an extra Nikon 80-200mm 2.8 for sale that would be great for what you need. <BR>Mint condition, in box with all papers. <BR> <BR>Sigma lenses are usually less expensive, however their electronic compatability with nikon cameras is not as good as nikon lenses. <BR>Good luck <BR>You have a nice girlfriend. <BR>Barry

snyper1d 08-20-2007 12:39 PM

Barry, How much for the lens? Is it a DX? I have the D40 and its AF capabilities isn't compatible with all of Nikon's lenses. <BR> <BR>I have been looking around, and I think im gonna go ahead and save up for the 18-200 VR. It looks like what im looking for.

barry_vaught 08-22-2007 6:20 PM

Hey Todd <BR> <BR>The 18-200vr looks good, however I have not used it and have no opinion or exp with it. The 80-200 2.8 was one of the most common pro sports lenses before vr became available. <BR>The 2.8 F stop allows you to shoot without flash at concerts, plays, auditorium shows, weddings, glamour, models, etc. <BR>I will send you the info on the lens. <BR>Thank you <BR>Barry <BR>Image below shot with the 80-200 2.8 and published full page in AllianceWake mag <BR><a href="http://www.pbase.com/barryvaught/image/41506371" target="_blank">http://www.pbase.com/barryvaught/image/41506371</a>

byrd 08-27-2007 10:56 AM

Barry, IF Todd doesnt want that lens, let me know what you want for it. Thanks, Byrd

barry_vaught 08-30-2007 10:17 AM

Hey Todd <BR> <BR>I will have some images of the lens and the asking price soon. <BR>Thanks

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:41 PM.