I just called KEH and got the return information for my 180 2.8. I am trading it back (for full refund) and getting the 70-300 VR instead. The gentlemen on the phone was very nice and talked to me in length about the 180. You can all make fun of me for being a big flip-flopper for doing this and yes I do feel a bit embarrassed about the whole thing, but this is just what I desire to do. Let me first point out that the 180 is a fine optic, but for some reason I just couldn't find happieness with this lens. I know the 70-300 VR is not in the same league, but I believe the range of zoom and VR will be more helpful for my style of shooting. I think I might have expected too much, or maybe I am just satisfied right where I am, either way I have discovered something about myself, that it's not the lens that makes the photographer, it's the photographer himself/herself. I think I expected having a pro optic would make me 'more of a pro', but to be honest I am just satisfied with something more middle of the road. Oh well, just don't be too hard on me....
Everyone is going to kill me!!!!!!!!!!!!!
- Thread starter watsonD50
- Start date
No reason to hit on you Daniel. For your own good reasons this is your conclusion, so good on you.
I followed your other thread with intrest. Personally I absolutely love the 180 / 2.8 - be it the Ai-S ED or the AF version, both outstanding!
But tastes are personal and we are all correct in pursuing our individual preferences.
Best of luck with your new lens, it is a fine one no doubt. I look forward to see some of your results with it.
I followed your other thread with intrest. Personally I absolutely love the 180 / 2.8 - be it the Ai-S ED or the AF version, both outstanding!
But tastes are personal and we are all correct in pursuing our individual preferences.
Best of luck with your new lens, it is a fine one no doubt. I look forward to see some of your results with it.
It is about you and your needs Daniel!
Thanks
I feel like i have been a real pain on this forum, but everyone here has such great advice and support. The problem is that everything looks good, you have one lens you lust after the other and vice versa.
I feel like i have been a real pain on this forum, but everyone here has such great advice and support. The problem is that everything looks good, you have one lens you lust after the other and vice versa.
No Daniel. I think you are OK. I have gone thru that. By getting rid off an used 180 2.8, I settled for a 70-200 2.8 VR.
As much as I liked my 180 f2.8 AF, I just didn't use it much. When I got the 80-200 AFD, the 180 just sat. You have to get what you need/want to do what you need to get done. In the era of my 180, I found myself shooting mostly with the 75-300 AF. While the 180 is sharper, it's not a 75 or a 300, the range of the zoom provided me more options (this was back in film days when I cropped with the viewfinder) so that's what I used.
The 180 is nice, but if you're not going to use it, it makes an expensive paperweight.
The 180 is nice, but if you're not going to use it, it makes an expensive paperweight.
Nothing wrong with changing your mind and fitting your own personal needs, and if you ever have doubts abut a lens and it's ability, it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.
You were smart to change if you weren't happy
Wade
You were smart to change if you weren't happy
Wade
At least you made a decision, which is something I admire. I'm still sitting here debating a few purchases and trying to decide. Eventually, I think I'll buy all of the glass on my list. The hard part is deciding which one to get first.
The voice inside me is just telling me to pull the trigger on something.
The voice inside me is just telling me to pull the trigger on something.
Reasons
My reasons are discussed below, as you can see these are all based on my needs, not the performance of the lens.
1) Too long of a prime. Though I love telephotos, the 270mm is just too long for me. I found myself not being able to 'zoom' far enough back with my feet at times.
2) The 2.8 aperture is sweet and makes for some impressive bokeh, but I do 90% of my shooting in good light and have found with other lenses I hardly ever needed faster aperture as my D50 has very clean upper ISOs. I thought this might be useful for indoor shoots, but the lens is too long for me indoors.
3) The 2.8 aperture produces some very shallow DOF. This can be hard to master. I took some bird shots and found it was difficult for me to get the whole subject in focus.
4) The autofocus speed is decent, but I am bit spoiled by the AF-S on my 18-70 DX, and my D50 has a slower screw as others have mentioned.
My reasons are discussed below, as you can see these are all based on my needs, not the performance of the lens.
1) Too long of a prime. Though I love telephotos, the 270mm is just too long for me. I found myself not being able to 'zoom' far enough back with my feet at times.
2) The 2.8 aperture is sweet and makes for some impressive bokeh, but I do 90% of my shooting in good light and have found with other lenses I hardly ever needed faster aperture as my D50 has very clean upper ISOs. I thought this might be useful for indoor shoots, but the lens is too long for me indoors.
3) The 2.8 aperture produces some very shallow DOF. This can be hard to master. I took some bird shots and found it was difficult for me to get the whole subject in focus.
4) The autofocus speed is decent, but I am bit spoiled by the AF-S on my 18-70 DX, and my D50 has a slower screw as others have mentioned.
I'm not sure why people judge lenses before they use them. You said the 70-300 is not in the same league. Why don't you wait until you get it before making such statements?
I like the 180/2.8 but it's not crazy super awesome like folks on the forums tried to get me to think. It's not a must-have lens and it's not leaps and bounds ahead of other lenses at its focal length. People try to cheat you into purchasing lenses with comments like, "if you care about image quality, you should get [insert lens here]. The alternatives are fine though if you're just doing snapshots." Don't fall for it.
Good luck with the 70-300vr, and again don't judge it before you use it.
I like the 180/2.8 but it's not crazy super awesome like folks on the forums tried to get me to think. It's not a must-have lens and it's not leaps and bounds ahead of other lenses at its focal length. People try to cheat you into purchasing lenses with comments like, "if you care about image quality, you should get [insert lens here]. The alternatives are fine though if you're just doing snapshots." Don't fall for it.
Good luck with the 70-300vr, and again don't judge it before you use it.
I said that the 70-300 is not in the same league as I am attempting to be careful in comparing the too. You can ruffle some feathers when you tell people you are trading in an optic like the 180 for something like the 70-300 as people sometimes get very sensitive. So this statement was only meant to prevent people from posting threads such as 'you cannot compare to the two' as I tend to hate those subjective notions. I think you can compare lenses, it's a matter of taste. So don't hit me to hard for making this statement, it was just a matter of crowd control !
The only thing I've found "pro glass" to do for me is instill some sort of false confidence...or make me feel like I can take a picture that I couldn't of taken without it, but in the long run that's all bollocks. You have very valid reasons for switching lenses and I hope you have good luck with your (second) new purchase! :biggrin:
Adrien
Adrien
Personally you should have tried to get both. I have the 70-300 VR (got it from KEH and it is tack sharp) and now I am renting the 180 f/2.8 to try it out and I think it will be my next purchase, just so I can have a lower light tele to use on occasion.
Good luck and you'll love the 70-300 VR...it's a great piece of glass for a good price IMHO.
And here are some 70-300 VR shots to make you feel better about your decision:
Good luck and you'll love the 70-300 VR...it's a great piece of glass for a good price IMHO.
And here are some 70-300 VR shots to make you feel better about your decision:
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
Those who would get upset are insecure. When I sold my 180, I instead kept a much much cheaper 70-300 Sigma that optically was not far behind. I'm happy to ruffle feathers when my experience contradicts that of lens promoters, because it's a nice reality check for the occasional guy or gal who hovers around trying to make sense out of what kind of equipment to get.
I've been disappointed almost every time I bought a lens based completely on forum opinions, while my frugal spontaneous purchases have usually impressed me. There is a rude way to explain it, but the more polite way is to say that the needs of those promoters are not the same as my needs. You'll find that whether your stuff is liked or disliked is not going to be because of what equipment you use (except in these equipment-oriented communities), but by your decisions and aesthetic eye. I think everyone knows this, but conveniently forgets it when contemplating new purchases.
A lot of the promotion and hype comes from people who are psyching themselves up and trying to keep their enthusiasm high. Don't worry about their enthusiasm as much as your own, and try to focus your attention on equipment that you find interesting. This will sometimes conflict with the apparent interests of members here (and on other forums), but personally...I don't like always plodding along with the herd, since I'm not taking photos for them, nor do I think very highly of the aesthetic "norms" of the community.
Don't worry about crowd control. If you need to...I'm an expert at diverting scorn, so just drop me a msg.
I've been disappointed almost every time I bought a lens based completely on forum opinions, while my frugal spontaneous purchases have usually impressed me. There is a rude way to explain it, but the more polite way is to say that the needs of those promoters are not the same as my needs. You'll find that whether your stuff is liked or disliked is not going to be because of what equipment you use (except in these equipment-oriented communities), but by your decisions and aesthetic eye. I think everyone knows this, but conveniently forgets it when contemplating new purchases.
A lot of the promotion and hype comes from people who are psyching themselves up and trying to keep their enthusiasm high. Don't worry about their enthusiasm as much as your own, and try to focus your attention on equipment that you find interesting. This will sometimes conflict with the apparent interests of members here (and on other forums), but personally...I don't like always plodding along with the herd, since I'm not taking photos for them, nor do I think very highly of the aesthetic "norms" of the community.
Don't worry about crowd control. If you need to...I'm an expert at diverting scorn, so just drop me a msg.
Good for you Daniel!! I am glad that you were able to exchange it. I am also glad that you started the original discussions. It's always best to try before you buy. I just purchased a 70-300VR last week. I hope you enjoy it.
Daniel,
I think you definitely will like the 70-300 VR. All of us had to make a transition when we moved from 35mm film cameras to Nikon's DSLR system. The 1.5 Focal length increase takes awhile to get used to.
Camera shake is much more of an issue, especially as you get longer than about 100mm. Shutter speeds need to be higher to reduce camera shake and hand-held techniques must be improved and tripods need to be used in lower light situations.
All the above create a need for VR and the 70-300 VR lens does a great job in assisting for those long hand-held shots.
There are compromises with all lenses and different ones are going to suit different needs. No need to be defensive. We are all on a journey. Working with different alternatives and learning what works best for us is part of the fun (and sometimes the agony).
Part of being here on THIS forum is sharing our experiences without judgement, too. :biggrin:
Regards,
Paul
I think you definitely will like the 70-300 VR. All of us had to make a transition when we moved from 35mm film cameras to Nikon's DSLR system. The 1.5 Focal length increase takes awhile to get used to.
Camera shake is much more of an issue, especially as you get longer than about 100mm. Shutter speeds need to be higher to reduce camera shake and hand-held techniques must be improved and tripods need to be used in lower light situations.
All the above create a need for VR and the 70-300 VR lens does a great job in assisting for those long hand-held shots.
There are compromises with all lenses and different ones are going to suit different needs. No need to be defensive. We are all on a journey. Working with different alternatives and learning what works best for us is part of the fun (and sometimes the agony).
Part of being here on THIS forum is sharing our experiences without judgement, too. :biggrin:
Regards,
Paul
N
Nuteshack
Guest
gee Robert, so if anyone is high ona lens they're either a "cheater" or a "promoter"? ...gime a break..lol
Similar threads
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemojiForum GIFs powered by GIPHY: https://giphy.com/