1. Welcome to NikonCafe.com—a friendly Nikon camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

LLD, BLD or Both?

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Retief, Aug 11, 2005.

  1. Well, it is obvious that I have neither LLD (Lens Lust Disease) or the even more dreaded variant BLD (Body Lust Disease) but I am coming to a point where I need to determine if I should upgrade my kit or simply sit tight watching everyone else spend their money. The short background is:

    Current Kit which is meaningful for this discussion:
    Nikon 70-200 f2.8 AFS VR
    Sigma 120-300 f2.8 HSM
    Sigma 500mm f4.5 HSM

    The 500 with TC-14 is my most-used animal and bird lens, the 70-200/120-300 are the "sports guys", which make the money...

    Option 1:
    Do nothing, save my money, be boring......

    Option 2:
    Sell D2H and 120-300, buy D2X, approximate $1500 upgrade cost, wait for firmware fix for focus tracking.
    Pros: More pixels, HSC for more apparent "reach", coolest body around
    Cons: File size, loss of Auto-ISO from 800-1600

    Option 3:
    Sell 120-300 and 500, buy 200-400 AFS VR, approximate $1500 upgrade cost
    Pros: Add VR to longer range, with TC-17 a wash on the long end, coolest lens around
    Cons: No more pixels, no HSC

    Option 4:
    Sell D2H, 120-300 and 500, buy D2X and 200-400, approximate $4500 upgrade cost
    Pros: Obviously all of the "most cool" there can be
    Cons: The cost of a divorce will mean I have to selll ALL of my gear, oops...

    So, the bottom line is, if $1500 or so is available at this time, which upgrade makes the most sense to you? The hope, of course, is that the funds become availabe to get the "other half" sometime next year.

    And, no, I an NOT lusting after either, not at all, no way, no how, not me...

    Lastely, a D70 is my backup body and as my wife Nancy now says "Her Camera". That and the 70-200 are staying, no matter what.... :wink:
  2. PGB


    Jan 25, 2005
    If I had to do it all over again Bill. I would probably look really hard at the D2Hs.
  3. gho


    Feb 7, 2005
    Well, how large are you printing?
  4. Commodorefirst

    Commodorefirst Admin/Moderator Administrator

    May 1, 2005
    Well, My personal opinion is to keep the Sigma 500. It is a nice lens and with the 1.4 you have a real good reach. you will miss the reach at the long end and the 200-400 which I have works best either plain or with the 1.4 tele. I would just sell the sigma120-300, get the 200-400 and wait a while. I think there might be an upgrade to the camera line for photo/sports users soon in between the D2H and the D2X Give it a few months and get the great glass.


  5. Flew


    Jan 25, 2005

    I'll be absolutely honest. If, unlike me, you have a ton of money to spend, take option 2. If not, option 1. There is no way that I would trade the Sigma 500 for the 200-400, especially if I already had the 500 and the 120-300. I personally think that you have an outstanding kit. I would be thrilled with it.

    I know that none of this makes any difference though. I can see that an X and 200-400VR is in your near-term future. :lol:
  6. you know me, option 4 all the way :^))
  7. Ok Bill, I'll be practical. You say that the 120-300 is one of your money lenses. If you were to get the 200-400 would it serve the same purpose?

    The sage advice I see repeated over and over is to invest in the glass as the bodies will come and go. If the budget allows it and you need it, sell the D2h and buy the D2x. If not, keep what you have, keep using the equip to raise the money to increase the budget so you can have both the D2x and 200-400.
  8. For me, the Hs isn't an option because I am plenty happy with my D2H, and the Hs doesn't do anything but reduce the money in my wallet :lol: .

    Refresh my memory please, you are saying you would go the Hs route vs. the X? I just can't remember, for the life of me, what you are shooting now.
  9. Gregory, for me it really isn't an issue of how large I print, but how much I can crop. Unlike those lucky folks in Florida where the birds come up and sit on your lap :wink: , we are lucky when we can count the distance with only 2 digits in feet, and most often with 3, and even the large birds sometimes require a lot of cropping. That is the attraction of the X at this time, but I am certainly considering waiting a few more months to see what else shows up.

  10. Wade, I really REALLY like my Sigma 500, especially as it works very well with the Nikon TC-14 when it won't work with the Sigma 1.4. The only way that I could see going the 200-400 route is if I can sucessfully use the 1.7 to get me about the same reach as the 500 and have it do the sports duty of the 120-300, both of which I intend to test as well as possible in two weeks. I suspect that you may very well be correct on something new that might work, which is why #1 is a good option for now, even if it is the most boring of the bunch :lol: .


  11. Not unlike you at all, Frank, not only do I not have "a ton" of money to spend, but the number of pounds in any currency is rather limited right now :lol: , which is why the $1500 number keeps popping up.

    The real question for me is will I change to my kit generate me significantly more money for the fall High School season. I wish I was the Oracle and had all the answers for that one. Now, if the season really goes well, then you are right, they could both be in my future, without the need to resort to fire-sales of my current bits :lol: . Which, in all seriousness, is why Option #1 is a very serious contender.


  12. The way I read your answer is:

    "Yeah, I WANT some of that stuff, and as soon as the divorce is rolling and I've ruined his life, I can get it REAL CHEAP, and blame it all on LLD and BLD" :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

    Way to go, trying to get my butt in deep doo-doo, but I AIN'T falling for this one, no way. Not, that is, unless you want to give me a long term no interest $10,000 loan. And just like my old friend Wimpy "I'll gladly pay you next Tuesday for the loan you give me today....." :wink:
  13. Kevin, that is exactly the question regarding the 200-400. In order to pull this off now, I need it to replace 2 lenses, which requires that the VR let's me shoot in the dim light of high school stadiums at night and that the 1.7 TC works well enough to get me what I have with the 500 and the 1.4. The second part of that will be the simplest one to test, I have to give the first one some thought before I pick up the lens. I think, though, that you make a very good point regarding the glass vs. the body issue.

  14. MontyDog


    Jan 30, 2005
    #1064 - You have an error in your SQL syntax;
  15. Steve S

    Steve S

    Feb 1, 2005
    SE Florida
    The way I see it

    You're NOT going to like the performance of the 200-400 with the tc 1.7. Too much hunting in poor light. Bearing in mind the typical WA weather, you may not even like it with the tc 1.4, unless the light is good. Also, bearing in mind how you so hate to go to high iso's, I don't see the 200-400+tc's as a viable solution to the replacement of your 500 f4. It's killer w/o any tc's though! It's just "ok" with the tc 1.4 depending on how good the light is. Remember what these tc's do to your max aperture.
    BUT, the X, ahh the glorious croppability and the HSC of the X. Now you're really onto something there pilgrim! :twisted:
  16. Re: The way I see it

    And here, my friend, you really hit the nosey right on the old nosey. The comparison that I have to make, and luckily I'll have the lens long enough to do this, is to compare it with the perfomance of my Sigma 500. Given the the Sigma 500, remember the Sigma is f4.5, plus the 1.4 TC isn't much different than the Nikon 200-400 f4 plus the 1.7 TC. So if the AF-ability is equivalent at, say, twilight and pre-dawn I'm OK. On the other hand, if it turns out that the 200-400 is much worse than my 500 with that combo, then it makes the decision quite easy. What is interesting with my 500 is that I can maintain fast AF with my Nikon 1.4 but the 1.7 hunts like mad, and the Sigma TC's won't work at all. The worst thing that can happen is that the 200-400 performs as well as my 500, then I have the really tough decision to make.... :wink:

    No argument here. And the more I look at the ISO 1600 shots I took, and how easy they clean up, I'm pretty convinced that my high-ISO needs for Hight School sports won't be an issue.

    Thanks for the input, and I am torn as to whether or not i want you to be correct regarding the performance of the 200-400 with the TC's....
  17. MontyDog


    Jan 30, 2005
    #1064 - You have an error in your SQL syntax;
  18. MontyDog


    Jan 30, 2005
    #1064 - You have an error in your SQL syntax;
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.