Hi all, I'm new to posting, but I've benefited greatly from reading here for some time. My business is finally starting to pick up a bit, thank God, and I'm finally ready to invest in some new equipment. Will you all forgive me if I copy/paste my question from another board and give me your opinions? (I've got a sleeping baby in one arm, and only one hand to type )

(quote) I have purchased a Nikon D200. I get so bogged down with all these technical specs on equipment--I just want to shoot pretty pictures Right now I'm so confused it has almost taken away the joy of having a new camera! Here's what I need it for: I shoot weddings, senior portraits, babies, and families all on location, no studio work. I also own a D70 and a Tamron 18-200 3.5 lens that has served me admirably thus far.


I thought I wanted a faster lens, so that I don't have to rely on my flash so much during weddings. I have tested a Nikkor 80-200 2.8 without VR and I like it, but for the money, I'm afraid I won't get too much use out of it. It will be great for shots during the wedding ceremony, but I'm worried that it might not be as practical for other uses. It is quite heavy. I guess I'm just used to my Tamron lens being so darn versatile.


Should I get another wider range lens that will be useful in more situations and just rent a faster lens for my weddings, or should I get this Nikkor 80-200 2.8? Will I be unsatisfied with the 80-200 2.8 lens without VR in a wedding situation? Will I find the 70-200 with VR too cumbersome to use frequently enough to make it seem worth it?


Now I'm just wondering if I should go with the AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 28-70mm f/2.8 D IF-ED, since I'd probably get more everyday use out of it, as well as portraits at weddings. I could then rent the bigger lens when I need it. I'm so wishy washy, but this is just such a huge investment for me.

Thoughts? and thanks!!!!!

Kathy
www.klpuckettphotography.com

I think Tamron must make a 28-75 for the Nikon too right? Probly about $350? I'd have that in my bag FOR SURE. And then the 70-200 VR would be the next choice (probably first choice but it IS heavy). I love those two lenses - they're fast, they are sharp and they rock!

Thanks for the fast reply! I'm sure Tamron would make that lens, but I was really wanting a 2.8. I'll look into what Tamron offers there--the Nikon lens in that range at 2.8 is around $1500 (!!) I'm willing to make an investment, I just want to make sure it is the right one.

You almost can't go wrong in buying good lenses. It depends on what you do with it, really. For me, the Nikkor 17-55mm f2.8 is the best lens for Nikon cameras. The next most useful would probably be the 70-200mm f2.8 VR. The VR makes a huge difference. Then the 50mm f1.4 would be the next one. After that, go with what you feel is lacking. If you find that you're using a particular focal length a lot but want something with a wider maximum aperture, then buy a prime at that focal length.