calling Mr fizzwheel or anyone with DSLR knowledge

Out of the choice you have it is one of the better ones. It is not suited for low light pics as it is not a fast lens but the image stabilizer in your camera will certainly help things when you are using the longer zoom settings.
If you are not happy with it you can just return or replace with some other model but my guess is you will be pleased with it.

I just noticed Jambo mentioned same lens and also posted a link to Warehouse express

cheers thanks for that i'm glad you know what your on about because i deffo dont

Originally Posted by fizzwheel

Thats what I was getting at above. At Donnington you can be a fair distance from the track itself, and you've also got two layers of safety fence to content with an 18-55mm lens just isnt enough unless you like a small dot in the distance as a pic, and theres no way your going to zoom and crop that to get a decent pic with photoshop IMHO..

I have a Nikkor DX-70-300mm VR Lens, I am very pleased with it, to me the cost was reasonable, I dont know if I could justify paying anymore than I did for it. I think if I wanted bigger I'd just hire something for the odd weekend I was going to use it for.

Fizz i have the Nikkor too and am also real pleased with it. The copy i have is pretty sharp at the 300mm end and was money well spent IMO

[jambo]

Plenty of good advice in this thread.

I tend to believe that money spent on good glass is money well spent.

In the tele-photo category, I only have a rather aged, and cheap 80-200mm Canon EF lens I got 3rd or 4th hand for not a lot of money. I spend so little time using long focal lengths I've not got round to spending the cash yet.

Meanwhile I upgraded the 18-55 to the Canon 17-85 IS, which is what spends 90% of the time on the front of my camera. The Sigma 10-20mm gets a fair amount of camera time too.

Workout what focal lengths you most want to use and spend what money you can. Sure the £1,200 lenses will be better than a £200 piece of glass with the same focal lengths, but it's a touch extravogant if you're not selling photos or using it all the time.

Jambo

[fizzwheel]

Originally Posted by jambo

Sure the £1,200 lenses will be better than a £200 piece of glass with the same focal lengths, but it's a touch extravogant if you're not selling photos or using it all the time.

Jambo

Very true. Like I said before, if your only going to use it one or two weekends a year, look a hiring something instead....

Originally Posted by fizzwheel

Thats what I was getting at above. At Donnington you can be a fair distance from the track itself, and you've also got two layers of safety fence to content with an 18-55mm lens just isnt enough unless you like a small dot in the distance as a pic, and theres no way your going to zoom and crop that to get a decent pic with photoshop IMHO..

I have a Nikkor DX-70-300mm VR Lens, I am very pleased with it, to me the cost was reasonable, I dont know if I could justify paying anymore than I did for it. I think if I wanted bigger I'd just hire something for the odd weekend I was going to use it for.

By general shooting I did not mean events or motorsports. I had hoped that was clear enough. I dropped it in there because Kwak never did answer the question of intended use.

[jamesterror]

Kwak how you getting on with the camera? I'm looking for a DSLR for christmas, Nikon (3000D) and Sony (one down from yours, or same model) particularly.

I read that the best idea is to buy a camera which friends have too for lenses, however my crowd are students and also not photographers!

Is it extravagant to demand quality? I guess that is determined by the standards that you set for yourself. For me it is a case of why bother if I cannot do it right. The limitations of the lenses discussed are too much for me.

The kit that I take nearly everywhere consists of an FM3 (film), 4x Zeiss lenses (25/2.8, 35/2 50/1.4 & 105/2 - general shooting, NOT motorsports), light meter, a handful of filters and sundries. Value? Over 6000 Euros and unlike (almost) the rest of my gear was not paid for through photographic pursuits. Extravagant? Possibly. This is the sort of kit that will last a lifetime and that is how long I intend it to last.
Those lenses could just as easily have been Nikkor equivalents or two quality zooms for a lot less money, add whatever digital body is the flavour of the moment and still beat the never ending update cycle. The cost in real terms is lower.

There is a lot of extravagance in my cupboard (eg D3x and a few lenses that'll never be used to their potential), but I would never consider a couple of good lenses as extravagant, even given my current status as a disinterested amateur.

Something else to consider when taking action shots (hey, it is a motorsport forum) is the much stronger AF performance of better lenses. The motors are stronger and they transmit more light to the AF sensors. The former is not such an issue for motorsports - use focus capture not the focus motor. The latter is a twofold benefit. Focusing is done wide open and the aperture is stopped down on release so the F2.8 already has a one stop (one stop = double the light) advantage over a F5.6 lens. Better lenses also have one stop or more better light transmittance (T-stop) than many budget lenses. I am talking ~2-2.5x more light on the AF sensor. This greatly increases the performance of even budget AF sensors found in low end dSLRs and can make the difference between a good day at the track and a bad one.

Cheers

Originally Posted by MattCo

Is it extravagant to demand quality? I guess that is determined by the standards that you set for yourself. For me it is a case of why bother if I cannot do it right. The limitations of the lenses discussed are too much for me.

The kit that I take nearly everywhere consists of an FM3 (film), 4x Zeiss lenses (25/2.8, 35/2 50/1.4 & 105/2 - general shooting, NOT motorsports), light meter, a handful of filters and sundries. Value? Over 6000 Euros and unlike (almost) the rest of my gear was not paid for through photographic pursuits. Extravagant? Possibly. This is the sort of kit that will last a lifetime and that is how long I intend it to last.
Those lenses could just as easily have been Nikkor equivalents or two quality zooms for a lot less money, add whatever digital body is the flavour of the moment and still beat the never ending update cycle. The cost in real terms is lower.

There is a lot of extravagance in my cupboard (eg D3x and a few lenses that'll never be used to their potential), but I would never consider a couple of good lenses as extravagant, even given my current status as a disinterested amateur.

Something else to consider when taking action shots (hey, it is a motorsport forum) is the much stronger AF performance of better lenses. The motors are stronger and they transmit more light to the AF sensors. The former is not such an issue for motorsports - use focus capture not the focus motor. The latter is a twofold benefit. Focusing is done wide open and the aperture is stopped down on release so the F2.8 already has a one stop (one stop = double the light) advantage over a F5.6 lens. Better lenses also have one stop or more better light transmittance (T-stop) than many budget lenses. I am talking ~2-2.5x more light on the AF sensor. This greatly increases the performance of even budget AF sensors found in low end dSLRs and can make the difference between a good day at the track and a bad one.

Cheers

Nothing wrong with owning good quality glass if you can afford it. For someone starting out though it is a good move to get a sub 200 quid lens to get a feel as to what focal lengths they will use most. then maybe further down the line they may want to get better gear all depending on what they want from the gear. On hands experience is the best way to learn limitations of cheaper lenses.
Sure the cheaper glass can have limitations but often it is not a big deal breaker for your general camera enthusist who has a lot to learn as it is.
I myself went from a Pentax K100D (which i still have with some of thos excellent Pentax old primes) to a Nkon D90 as i wanted the better AF and quality Nikon CLS flash system and have not been dissapointed. No doubt i will move up to another higher end model within time but this is not something i could do straight off. what i have learnt is buy the best glass for the camera you can afford as the glass lasts a life time but cameras come and go.

Originally Posted by jamesterror

Kwak how you getting on with the camera? I'm looking for a DSLR for christmas, Nikon (3000D) and Sony (one down from yours)

I think mine is the basic sony alpha model (a230)

sofar i think its ace! pictures are crystal clear, its quite easy to use, my only gripe is no live view on the LCD screen at the back (you need to use the viewfinder)

I'm deffo no expert lol but i think the camera was good value for money, it came in for just under £300 with the sony £50 cash back and i got a camera bag, 4gig memory card, lense protector and free delivery thrown in.

i got mine from here - http://www.cameracentrecardiff.co.uk...ords=sony+a230

ignore the price on the web site you can haggle with them