Just Purchased D90 + 16-85 + 70-300 VR

[Gingersnaps]

I agonized over these purchases as well, and ended up buying the exact same things after much research. It was interesting to note in a recent Outdoor Photography Magazine article that a pro had also switched to that setup sometimes from his very, very expensive kit. He made the point that sometimes pros are so 'into' what they have always relied upon, that they neglect to try some of the new somewhat cheaper lenses that are coming out with all the newest technology for improving images. Clearly the $$$ pro stuff is still superior, but it was nice to hear a pro inadvertently validate that I made (you made) a really good choice of equipment from all the options out there.

My philospophy was that where the 2 lenses (16-85mm & 70-300mm) were weaker was in the area that they overlapped (more extreme focal lengths of each lens). So for example, if I needed a shot at 85mm, I'd do it with the 70-300 lens rather than the 16-85.

My concern was having to carry 2 lenses, especially on trips. I have to say I'm glad I have both. The wide angle at 16mm is astounding...it just gathers in the entire sky. And I wish I had even more telephoto than the 300mm!

I'm very much in a learning mode, but I love the D90 and am really enoying learning all the features...and how to capture really inspired images...long way to go on that one!
--
Gingersnaps

 

[Punctu]

I thought the same thing about the D80 after the D90 was released but didn't quite happen. My advice is to get the camera and never look back.
--
Pushed the button and the world stood still.

 

[TimStir]

I agonized over these purchases as well, and ended up buying the exact same things after much research. It was interesting to note in a recent Outdoor Photography Magazine article that a pro had also switched to that setup sometimes from his very, very expensive kit. He made the point that sometimes pros are so 'into' what they have always relied upon, that they neglect to try some of the new somewhat cheaper lenses that are coming out with all the newest technology for improving images. Clearly the $$$ pro stuff is still superior, but it was nice to hear a pro inadvertently validate that I made (you made) a really good choice of equipment from all the options out there.

My philospophy was that where the 2 lenses (16-85mm & 70-300mm) were weaker was in the area that they overlapped (more extreme focal lengths of each lens). So for example, if I needed a shot at 85mm, I'd do it with the 70-300 lens rather than the 16-85.

My concern was having to carry 2 lenses, especially on trips. I have to say I'm glad I have both. The wide angle at 16mm is astounding...it just gathers in the entire sky. And I wish I had even more telephoto than the 300mm!

I'm very much in a learning mode, but I love the D90 and am really enoying learning all the features...and how to capture really inspired images...long way to go on that one!
--
Gingersnaps

Indeed, I've heard pro photographers use the 16-85 and 70-300 on bodies like the d300 or D90.

I recently read that Thom Hoigan used a D90 and 70-300 and said the system was not so far removed from a D700 and 200-400. The lighter setup meant that it was all hand holdable and ready to snap away at passing birds. The 200-400 was tripod mounted and if hand held was slow to move across the sky for birds in flight. And to get 400mm FX equivalent needs about 250-260mm on the 70-300, which is before the lens start to suffer.

I also realised that 200mm on my 80-200 was not enough, adding a 1.4tc was an option but not cheap and I don't the image quality at 200mm is amazing anyway, et alone with a 1.4tc on. At 280mm 70-300 VR and the 80-200 2.8 with tc probably give similar performance one is a stop faster, one has VR.

 

[TimStir]

Played with it for 30 mins last night and was very impressed.It definitely seems like a nice upgrade.

The screen is real nice, and the viewfinder is a step up from the D70 even if it isn't a D3 viewfinder! So far everything is as I expect. The 11 focus sensors cover more area but as expected is not the same level as the 51-point D300. I need to do some focus tests with my 80-200 AF-D to see if this has improved enough. Everything feels natural (once I reversed the control wheel order). Jpegs looked great on screen. Seems like a good general upgrade, performance has increased, functionality has increased, image is definitely better.

The 16-85 is quite small, looks smaller than the 18-70. This no doubt due to the smaller aperture. Build quality is great (metal barrels), zoom a little stiff though. Makes a great travel lens I think. Now if it only shared the 18-70s aperture range (3.5 to 3.5) it would be perfect.
The VR works great, never used VR before but seems to do exactly as it says .

Similarly with the 70-300 VR. I took my 1st shot at 300mm 1/8 and it came out incredibly sharp - took enough 7-8 shots to repeat but again, a sharp shot at 1/10th 300mm. The sharpness looked similar to my 80-200 2.8 at 200mm.

Holding the gear in my hnad it is clear that I have the ultimate hiking camera and lens set up. Well, the D5000 may also work but I have non AF-S lenses and prefer the slight por build and features.

I'm hoping I will not feel the need up upgrade to a D300s, which at this stage I think I wont have to. I'll put the money into lenses (I need a fast normal lens.. maybe I will aim for the 24-70). Buying the new D90 ov er a 2nd hand D300 has saved me 600USD equivalent, or 900-1000USD from new D300 to new D90. This is a big chunk of 2.8 glass saved up for already.

A big meeting with the boss this afternoon, then I'm off to Croatia for a week!