Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register ☰
Main Photography Discussion
Another lens or a 2nd camera body?
Page <<first <prev 3 of 8 next> last>>
May 18, 2020 09:12:27   #
denwin580 Loc: Kettering, Ohio
 
Short and Quick ! I use a Nikon 7100 with a 18-400 on it and I have never looked back !!!!! Greatest way to go !!!!

Reply
May 18, 2020 09:18:49   #
dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia
 
kb6kgx wrote:
Here's what I'm using: Nikon D7100 with a Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED IF AF-S VRII and a Sigma 17-50mm f2.8. Yes, I know that the Nikon is a "FX" lens and the Sigma is a "DX" lens.

I am a photographer for my local county fire department. For helicopters and aerial tankers, nothing beats the 70-300. It gets the job done. For most everything else, the Sigma is great when I need to "go wide". Now, here's my question:

I'm tired of missing shots because of having to change lenses. I also don't want to have to change lenses when there is a lot of dust and burning things flying around in the air around me. Do I just add a second camera body and put a lens on each or do I keep both lenses in the bag and put on something like a Tamron 18-400? For this type of photography, I've never found that I need the extra 100mm that the Tamron would give, which makes my question a simple one of (1) second body or (2) super-zoom?
Here's what I'm using: Nikon D7100 with a Nikon 70... (show quote)


One of the rare occasions when a second body is sound advice.
1) You maintain the quality of the two lenses relative to a longer zoom
2) You have a backup if something happens
3) You will just look WAY cooler with two bodies!

Reply
May 18, 2020 09:20:06   #
Al Beatty Loc: Boise, Idaho
 
We are using an 18-400 Tamron on our D7200 and are VERY pleased with it. We understand some people indicate it's not as sharp as they wish but we do not have that problem. If you have that lens on a camera you can shoot through the complete range without having to grab a second body. I would think some of your work happens in a split second when grabbing for another camera could cause a missed shot. We vote for the Tamron and use it for our professional as well as "fun" work. We think you'll like it. Take care & ....

Reply
 
 
May 18, 2020 09:23:11   #
47greyfox Loc: on the edge of the Colorado front range
 
Two suggestions immediately come to mind..... if just adding a lens will do the trick, a simple approach, the Tamron 18-400 should serve you well. On the other hand, a second body that would more flexibility? How about, since you’re a Nikon shooter, a P900 or P1000? Both are capable bridge cameras.

Reply
May 18, 2020 09:30:01   #
Nantahalan Loc: Savannah originally; western NC now
 
You’ve hit the place where I opted for a second body and never looked back. Last year I bought 2 new D7200s for our sons for about $800 and a used low mileage one for me for $600 or so. Perfect companion with my D7100.

For what it’s worth, when gear syndrome hits me or I have a clear legitimate need, I try to remember “The image is the object.”

Reply
May 18, 2020 09:30:31   #
Nantahalan Loc: Savannah originally; western NC now
 
You’ve hit the place where I opted for a second body and never looked back. Last year I bought 2 new D7200s for our sons for about $800 and a used low mileage one for me for $600 or so. Perfect companion with my D7100.

For what it’s worth, when gear syndrome hits me or I have a clear legitimate need, I try to remember “The image is the object.”

Reply
May 18, 2020 09:33:00   #
lsaguy Loc: Udall, KS, USA
 
I'm not a professional photographer, barely a photographer if you look at some of the images, but I think I'd go with a second body for convenience, and in your line of photography, safety. You don't need to be fooling around changing lenses while big trucks, lots of personnel, and a fire are all going full tilt.
The other issue is $$$$. KEH sold me a Nikon D300 in EX condition for $138. Far more camera than I need but what a buy!!!
You might find a lens for that price, used, but what if the lens fails? I bought a cheap, old Sigma 28-300 lens recently. I mounted it, took some shots at both ends or the zoom range and put it back in the camera bag. The next time I tried to use it, it had become a 28mm prime. Zoom collar is stuck tight.
Just a thought,

Rick

Reply
 
 
May 18, 2020 09:44:35   #
Nortfish Loc: Port St. Lucie, Fla
 
There is a popular saying in the world of survival that may be appropriate here. I think the originator is Dave Canterbury(Not positive). It goes:"One is none and two is one". That might be true in the world of fast action photography.

Reply
May 18, 2020 09:53:42   #
gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast
 
Nikon makes a nice 18-300 for your D7100. Best of both worlds.

Reply
May 18, 2020 09:59:19   #
charlienow Loc: Hershey, PA
 
If you can swing it I think I would consider a used fx body for the 70-300 lens.

Chuck.

Reply
May 18, 2020 10:00:59   #
dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia
 
Another way of looking at this is that pro action photographers (not that I think everything pros do is a good idea for civilians) usually have at least two camera bodies. So if a second body is comfortable within your budget, do it.

Reply
 
 
May 18, 2020 10:04:07   #
imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida
 
kb6kgx wrote:
Here's what I'm using: Nikon D7100 with a Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED IF AF-S VRII and a Sigma 17-50mm f2.8. Yes, I know that the Nikon is a "FX" lens and the Sigma is a "DX" lens.

I am a photographer for my local county fire department. For helicopters and aerial tankers, nothing beats the 70-300. It gets the job done. For most everything else, the Sigma is great when I need to "go wide". Now, here's my question:

I'm tired of missing shots because of having to change lenses. I also don't want to have to change lenses when there is a lot of dust and burning things flying around in the air around me. Do I just add a second camera body and put a lens on each or do I keep both lenses in the bag and put on something like a Tamron 18-400? For this type of photography, I've never found that I need the extra 100mm that the Tamron would give, which makes my question a simple one of (1) second body or (2) super-zoom?
Here's what I'm using: Nikon D7100 with a Nikon 70... (show quote)


The cheapest/simplest way out would be a Sigma 18-300 lens....

The BEST way out is a second body - and as a back up.......BUT, are you ready willing and ABLE to manage two bodies ??
.

Reply
May 18, 2020 10:06:09   #
jonfrei
 
My vote would be for a 2nd body. It would give you the immediate switch, keeping the performance you are accustomed to, and avoid the downright massiveness of those “super-zooms” (one of my friends has one of the something-to-600 lenses and it is longer than her forearm!!!). The added benefit you would get out of a second body would be an (immediate!) backup if one of them failed.

Reply
May 18, 2020 10:13:23   #
DebAnn Loc: Toronto
 
kb6kgx wrote:
Here's what I'm using: Nikon D7100 with a Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED IF AF-S VRII and a Sigma 17-50mm f2.8. Yes, I know that the Nikon is a "FX" lens and the Sigma is a "DX" lens.

I am a photographer for my local county fire department. For helicopters and aerial tankers, nothing beats the 70-300. It gets the job done. For most everything else, the Sigma is great when I need to "go wide". Now, here's my question:

I'm tired of missing shots because of having to change lenses. I also don't want to have to change lenses when there is a lot of dust and burning things flying around in the air around me. Do I just add a second camera body and put a lens on each or do I keep both lenses in the bag and put on something like a Tamron 18-400? For this type of photography, I've never found that I need the extra 100mm that the Tamron would give, which makes my question a simple one of (1) second body or (2) super-zoom?
Here's what I'm using: Nikon D7100 with a Nikon 70... (show quote)


I think you've answered your own question. For the kind of work you do, it would be better to have a second body so you don't have to changes lenses on the fly.

Reply
May 18, 2020 10:47:16   #
Tomcat5133 Loc: Gladwyne PA
 
kb6kgx wrote:
That'd be nice, if I can swing it. I was thinking of just adding a D7200, which is essentially he same as what I have (D7100), but has a much better buffer if doing continuous firing. I don't really NEED more camera than that, but if I can get into full frame, that'd be awesome, since the 70-300 is a full-frame lens.


This is just an out-of-box idea. Maybe a Nikon Coolpix P1000 Digital Camera with a super zoom lens.
I believe they are on sale now. FF is a good idea. But once you get started is becomes costly.
I carry a Sony 24-600 2.8 bridge camera when I am shooting certain stuff. It has been great
for soccer and a running festival I shoot video of as a 2nd camera. Their are 6 or 7 models
mine is the first with 600mm lens it puts our great images.
I have had the privilege of shooting first responders in action and helping raise funds for them.
Great people. Hero's and we could learn from their dedicaton for very little or no pay.

Just an idea. Good luck.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 3 of 8 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections
Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use | DMCA
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.