Help Me spend my Income Tax Refund

[Fortkentdad]

I'm not so sure we are talking about the same lens. Here is a current ebay search--lenses are in the $200-$300 price range with some even falling below $200. The one I'm talking about has a constant aperture of f/2.8, too.

sigma 28-70mm f/2.8 for nikon | eBay

I quoted prices from eBay.CA the Canadian overcharge site. I do see some come with HSM for a few hundred more. (Which may be of interest because it would make it useful on my D5100 too).

 

[SkvLTD]

I'm on the inexpensive Docia and used it with my 70-300, 70-200 no problems whatsoever. Not the strongest ball head, but with proper balancing it works far better than you'd expect from a 50$ tripod+head. If you have good pods already, why not just a sturdy-than-your-current ones head and avoid more leg clutter.

 

[Fortkentdad]

I'm on the inexpensive Docia and used it with my 70-300, 70-200 no problems whatsoever. Not the strongest ball head, but with proper balancing it works far better than you'd expect from a 50$ tripod+head. If you have good pods already, why not just a sturdy-than-your-current ones head and avoid more leg clutter.

The reason I'm thinking of adding a dedicated monopod to my clutter is pure laziness. I can take the leg off of my Benro and then mount a head onto it. And I do, occasionally. I like to do that when I take my long lens out for a walk. With the old Tammy 200-400 it is a big lens - 4 pounder. And long. When I shoot long with it I think it really could benefit from being mounted. Tripod is idea, but if not a tri, then a monopod is better than hand held. I could also get a monopod a little longer than my Benro. I shoot birds (occasional squirrel and whatever else gets in front of my lens) but frequently I'm shooting up a tree. On the pod when I tilt the camera to point up, way up, I need to bend down to look up into camera. A taller pod would reduce the bending I need to do. (Did I mention the primary cause is laziness?). What I'm thinking is if I had a ready to go monopod with pan-tilt head (I already have an old one of these) then I'd be more likely to grab and go. While the "transfunctional" feature of the Benro is handy when I'm travelling and want to travel light, I'm thinking having that monopod (a longer one) ready to go might encourage more photo-walks - and more walks is a good thing. Better photo's while out on my photo-walks bonus.

 

[Fortkentdad]

Off to the big city a week from now.

Have an appointment with a seller who has a few lenses for me to consider

1) used - Nikkor AF-D ED 80-200mm F2.8 Zoom Lens w/ Case, Caps ex+ $595.00 Cdn


2) used - NIKKOR AF-D 80-400mm F4.5-5.6 ED VR Zoom Lens w/ Tripod Mount, Nikon HB-24 Hood, Case, Caps, ex++ $595.00 Cdn


3 a & b) New Tamron 70-200 F/2.8 without VC for about $800 with VC for $1,100


4) used - NIKKOR AF-S 70-200mm F2.8G IF ED VR Zoom Lens w/ Tripod Mount, Nikon Case ex++ $1250.00 Cdn

Have to really decide if VRing is worth the extra cash.

With a D610 can I not just up the ISO and live with a little more noise and get the same effect of improving a couple of F stops?

Love to hear from those who have shot with VR vs non-VR of the 70-200.

I did see some Youtubes comparing them. Seems there are those who find the Tamron 70-200 gives Nikon a good run for the money. 95% of the quality for 60% the cost or something like that.

Hmmmmmm

One more week to mull it over.

 

[Fortkentdad]

went out hunting for a 70/80-200 2.8 and bag a 28-70 2.8.
and a monopod
and a WU-1B
and a new laptop
and ....
oh that income tax return - all gone.

 

[Its Just Me]

Have some tax money coming back - a little of which will go into my "fun money" account. We are talking a few hundred not thousands.

As much as I appreciate the offer, it would cost far more than a few hundred to go to Canada and help to diminish your fortune.

But thanks anyway!

 

[SteveH]

Just a thought, but if the money is burning a hole in your pocket, you're not sure what kit to buy or what direction your photography is going, then why not use the money to go on a course? Like these 1-2 day wildlife or studio things where a small group go off with a pro?

 

[RocketCowboy]

went out hunting for a 70/80-200 2.8 and bag a 28-70 2.8.
and a monopod
and a WU-1B
and a new laptop
and ....
oh that income tax return - all gone.

From the sounds of it, you could have helped me pay my tax bill this year! But where's the fun in that. Sounds like you grabbed a good score!

 

[Fortkentdad]

update - that 28-70 2.8 that I picked up worked for one week.
today the zoom failed to zoom
took it back to "The Camera Store" in Calgary. Initially they offered to help get me the best price on a repair after explaining that they do now offer warranty or refund on consignment lenses (which apparently is different from "used" lenses) I asked for a store credit - a very kind clerk called the owner on his cell - and lucky for me she managed to connect and got permission to break the rule. Great service. I did look for another full frame lens that a) was not redundant with what I have and b) I could afford. Sadly there was none. But the credit will remain on my account.

 

[RocketCowboy]

Bummer, but glad that there's no money lost!

 

[cadomniel]

+1 for The Camera Store. I've ordered from them a few times and great service ...

Glad you didn't lose all hte money ...

 

[mikew_RIP]

Thats the way the stores can survive,its a new idea called customer care and service

 

[Fortkentdad]

Now I have the fun job of deciding which new lens to buy - with my 'down payment' - aka the funds on my account from the refund on this lens ($630)

The contenders at the moment (all new, all CDN prices, free shipping is included)


Nikkor 80-200 AF-D $1200 in stock
Nikkor AF 24-85mm f2.8-4 $721 in stock
NIKKOR AF-S 24-120mm f/4 VR II $1369 in stock

Sigma 24-105mm f4 DG HSM Art $999 (available within 14 days)
Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 II EX DG OS HSM $1,395 in stock

** Tamron AF 24-70mm f2.8 Di VC USD $1249 (available in 14 days)
** Tamron 70-200 f2.8 Di VC - not listed on website but was in their store? $1300ish

Tokina AT-X 16-28mm f2.8 PRO FX $738

--------

I'm really leaning towards replacing that 28-70 I came to love so quickly in the week I had it with either the Siggy 24-105 F4 Artsy one or the very similar 24-70 Tamron with VC.
Artsy Siggy is $249 less and longer, but a little slower. I'll be looking at images and reviews comparing these two.
There is a Nikkor AF 24-85mm f2.8-4 for $721 and a 24-100 VRII for $1369.

Both have to be brought in.

But a longer telephoto 70-200 VR Siggy or Tammy vs the non VR 80-200 Nikkor AF-D is also a consideration.

The extra wide Tokina has appeal to me, but I think I'd get more use out of either of the above choices. I do have that 20-40 for the widest shots. Could look at a fast 20mm prime too. (Nikkor AF 20mm F2.8D $607)

Time for some research.

And advice from my Nikonite friends

 

[hark]

Well...you asked for advice, but mine isn't what you'll want to hear...why do some of these prices tend to be higher than the manufacturer's prices? You list the 24-200 f/4 VRII as $1369, but Nikon lists it as $1299.95.

Looks like Sigma is offering a $200 rebate on the 70-200mm f/2.8 lens (scroll to the bottom of the page). Don't get me wrong...I'm all for buying locally, but I had no idea camera stores would sell gear for more. And I question some of the other prices, too. Sorry.

 

[J-see]

Don't get me wrong...I'm all for buying locally, but I had no idea camera stores would sell gear for more. And I question some of the other prices, too. Sorry.

Normally they charge the exact same price as the manufacturer. At least mine does. They get their % from Nikon but for some that isn't enough it seems. If they want to sell cheaper, that's up to them but if they charge more, I'd not bother entering their store.

 

[mikew_RIP]

Well...you asked for advice, but mine isn't what you'll want to hear...why do some of these prices tend to be higher than the manufacturer's prices? You list the 24-200 f/4 VRII as $1369, but Nikon lists it as $1299.95.

Looks like Sigma is offering a $200 rebate on the 70-200mm f/2.8 lens (scroll to the bottom of the page). Don't get me wrong...I'm all for buying locally, but I had no idea camera stores would sell gear for more. And I question some of the other prices, too. Sorry.

Are you taking into account the conversion to Canadian dollars

 

[J-see]

Are you taking into account the conversion to Canadian dollars

Is that like Rupee? 1 Canadian dollar being 2 American cent?

 

[hark]

Are you taking into account the conversion to Canadian dollars

No, missed that important fact which may very well explain the difference in pricing! Thanks for pointing that out, Mike! :eagerness: Just want him to get the best gear for the money spent.

 

[hark]

Fortkentdad, sorry about missing the important info the Mike mentioned.

Based on the lenses listed, these would be my choices:

1. NIKKOR AF-S 24-120mm f/4 VR II $1369 in stock -- Jake owns this lens and gets superb results with it! He also owns a Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 which I also own, but he put his Siggy up for sale because this Nikon lens has longer reach. It's a lens that you won't be wanting to get rid of for a long time. It's Nikon glass with a constant f/4 aperture. Certainly a worthy investment.

2. If the Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 is their latest version, I'd suggest it over the Sigma. I owned the Sigma but wasn't thrilled with it. Sigma suggested I send mine in to get calibrated, but I traded it in for my Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8. Test ratings for the Tamron are excellent, too.

 

[rocketman122]

eBay wants $300-$500 for the Siggy 28-70, also see a 24-70, both 2.8 - will google up some reviews on these lenses. I'm not crazy about my old 100-300 sigma but won't judge the whole company on one lens and the problem may be mine not the lens. How did you like your Siggy?

AND what kind of Uncle were you to let your nephew stray so far?

I had the sigma 28-70 ex 2.8 and the 24-70 dg 2.8. They are horrible shot open and lack contrast. Till today, they have not made a stellar 24-70 2.8. Theyre just horrible
They just never deliver


Those prices u quoted must be off because 1200 bucks for an afd 80-200 sounds way off. U get a 70-200 vr1 in mint for 1100.

I have the tamron 28-75 2.8 no vc (and nikon 28-70 2.8) and its very sharp and contrasty. Ull hear the focus motor but its not annoying to the point its unacceptable. Afd motors sound the same and my focus lock beep is much louder than that. So its no big deal.

If you can manage go for the 24-105 art. Its an amazibg performer. Dont want to boil peoples nerves who own the nikon 24-120 but it schools it without trying. Its also a newer lens. So its reasonable to expect it

70/80-200 ill recommend any 2.8. All are fine . Some better than others.