backup lens?

[Steve's Girl]

Do any of you keep a lens just as a backup in case you need to send one in for repairs,etc.? I bought my Nikon D80 with the 18-135 lens while I was waiting to get the 18-200VR. Now that I have the 18-200, it hardly ever comes off my camera (only when I am using the 50mm prime). So, does it make any sense to keep the 18-135 as a backup?

 

[MICKEY88]

hmmm in my camera bag as we speak, I have an

18-70

28-75 2.8

35-105

75-300

28-300.


I also have a 100-300 but that doesn't fit in my bag...

2 flashes 2 gary fong diffusers and all my battery chargers take up too much room LOL

so I guess the answer is yes, it's good to have a back up lens or 2...

 

[jann1033]

is there a reason you'd want to use the "spare"other than the one being repaired? ie is one macro, do you have others that are the same mm/f stop? right now i have 3 with a 100 mm but one is longer zoom( had forever and rarely use but not anything i could get much for) 1 is macro and one is zoom...i wouldn't keep one just "incase" though,instead i'd get something that had some other feature( in addition to the same mm) the first didn't have and use that if something happened to my walk around lens ie i've been using my 50mmf1.8( larger aperture) and 100mm ( macro) when my lens has been being repaired.

 

[Steve's Girl]

is there a reason you'd want to use the "spare"other than the one being repaired? ie is one macro, do you have others that are the same mm/f stop? right now i have 3 with a 100 mm but one is longer zoom( had forever and rarely use but not anything i could get much for) 1 is macro and one is zoom...i wouldn't keep one just "incase" though,instead i'd get something that had some other feature( in addition to the same mm) the first didn't have and use that if something happened to my walk around lens ie i've been using my 50mmf1.8( larger aperture) and 100mm ( macro) when my lens has been being repaired.

Good point. The two lenses are very similar except one has VR and a little more zoom. I have been wanting a faster lens (ie 17-55 f2.8 or something similar) for indoors, night parades, etc. Maybe it makes most sense to sell or trade my 18-135 and get a lens that has other features, but could also work as a back-up if needed.

 

[AZ JazzyJ]

I have 3 camera bodies (Nikon D100, D70s, D200) and each of them have a lens or two so I have a built in back-up. Between the cameras I have these lenses to share:

• Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8 (1)
• Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 VR (2)
• Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8 (2)
• Nikon 35-70mm f/2.8 (1)

I'm trying to justify getting a 105mm f/2.8 VR micro and a 28-70mm f/2.8 zoom but so far I can't come up with a good argument for them. I think I just need to be a little more creative is all.

Jeff

 

[seashoreCM]

Somehow I never thought of carrying an extra lens simply for a backup, but come to think of it, I have carried a second camera for backup purposes.

I have not yet had a misfortune such as a roll of film from one of the cameras being lost or spoiled but the second camera has come in handy for a short notice shot every now and then when I did not have time to change the film in the first camera.

I still carry multiple cameras (rarely more than two) when each camera has features (e.g. faster lens but less zoom) the other does not have.

Disney hints:
http://members.aol.com/ajaynejr/disney.htm

 

[tinksdad]

I have 3 camera bodies (Nikon D100, D70s, D200) and each of them have a lens or two so I have a built in back-up. Between the cameras I have these lenses to share:

• Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8 (1)
• Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 VR (2)
• Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8 (2)
• Nikon 35-70mm f/2.8 (1)

I'm trying to justify getting a 105mm f/2.8 VR micro and a 28-70mm f/2.8 zoom but so far I can't come up with a good argument for them. I think I just need to be a little more creative is all.

Jeff

Nice stable!!

How do you like that 17-55mm?? I'm really lusting after that one!!

I have the older 105mm micro and it's a GREAT lens! Tac sharp and works for many different shots.

 

[MICKEY88]

I have 3 camera bodies (Nikon D100, D70s, D200) and each of them have a lens or two so I have a built in back-up. Between the cameras I have these lenses to share:

• Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8 (1)
• Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 VR (2)
• Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8 (2)
• Nikon 35-70mm f/2.8 (1)

I'm trying to justify getting a 105mm f/2.8 VR micro and a 28-70mm f/2.8 zoom but so far I can't come up with a good argument for them. I think I just need to be a little more creative is all.

Jeff

I think you should get those lenses to field test them and write a report for the people on this board...

 

[AZ JazzyJ]

Nice stable!!

How do you like that 17-55mm?? I'm really lusting after that one!!

I have the older 105mm micro and it's a GREAT lens! Tac sharp and works for many different shots.

When I first read about the 17-55mm f/2.8 and how it was only compatible with Nikon's digital bodies I really wanted nothing to do with it. Instead I was going to get the 17-35mm because I thought it would be more versatile. A friend though was sold on the potential of the 17-55mm and really pushed me to get one and do some testing and write up a report. He said after the report if I still hated it he would help me sell it. I reluctantly agreed and got the lens. After the 10 photos I was hooked. The zoom is extremely smooth and the light gathering is better than any zoom I have ever used. It is the most consistent lens I own and is perfect for everyday shooting. When I go to the parks this is the only lens I take. It's 2.8 aperture is great for low light situations or when you want extreme depth of field control. If I could have only one lens this would probably be it. The zoom range is limited compared to say the 18-200mm but in most cases I'll make that trade off to get the low light capabilities.

I'll definitely have to look at the 105mm. I used to do a bunch of macro work with my old Olympus SLR set-up and I miss that.

Jeff

 

[AZ JazzyJ]

I think you should get those lenses to field test them and write a report for the people on this board...

But Trina, I had to get the new lenses. The guys on the board are counting on me. Hmm, that might work. Then again that might get me a month on the couch. I dunno, that might be worth it.

Jeff

 

[Groucho]

No backup lenses here. None of my lenses have any kind of stuff like image stabilization or motherboards or focus motors, so about the only way they'll break if is they're physically damaged, which has never happened to one of my lenses (I'd be knocking on wood here if I was superstitious.)

I do have slight overlap, but only because I have a couple old manual-focus lenses that I got in my 35mm days that are replaced by newer autofocus ones - a cheap old Craig 28-55 (or something like that, actually a Ricoh mount. ugh) and a Quantaray 70-210mm. I don't carry them with me, though I did use the Quantaray some before I got the Pentax 50-200mm.

 

[jann1033]

hey groucho since you said the magic "motherboard" word how do you know if they do or not..guessing auto focus doesn't mean it does so is it just something like IS?

 

[MICKEY88]

But Trina, I had to get the new lenses. The guys on the board are counting on me. Hmm, that might work. Then again that might get me a month on the couch. I dunno, that might be worth it.

Jeff

just one month...sounds like a reasonable sacrifice, to make for your fellow photographers.....and for a good lens....

 

[tinksdad]

When I first read about the 17-55mm f/2.8 and how it was only compatible with Nikon's digital bodies I really wanted nothing to do with it. Instead I was going to get the 17-35mm because I thought it would be more versatile. A friend though was sold on the potential of the 17-55mm and really pushed me to get one and do some testing and write up a report. He said after the report if I still hated it he would help me sell it. I reluctantly agreed and got the lens. After the 10 photos I was hooked. The zoom is extremely smooth and the light gathering is better than any zoom I have ever used. It is the most consistent lens I own and is perfect for everyday shooting. When I go to the parks this is the only lens I take. It's 2.8 aperture is great for low light situations or when you want extreme depth of field control. If I could have only one lens this would probably be it. The zoom range is limited compared to say the 18-200mm but in most cases I'll make that trade off to get the low light capabilities.

I'll definitely have to look at the 105mm. I used to do a bunch of macro work with my old Olympus SLR set-up and I miss that.

Jeff

Thanks for the review! I've nothing but good/great things about that lens. In fact the other day I was listening to an older Nikonians podcast and the hosts both had one and were extolling it's virtues as well!!

Now I REALLY want one......

 

[Groucho]

hey groucho since you said the magic "motherboard" word how do you know if they do or not..guessing auto focus doesn't mean it does so is it just something like IS?

I actually just tossed that in after hearing your tale of woe.

I can't believe that that term is really correct there. Generally, a motherboard has daughterboards attached to it - I would think that it's a lot more likely that your lens has a simple circuit board to control the IS and focus.

The lenses without focus motors in them (like all mine) are focused via a motor in the camera body, so there's no need for any "brains" on board.

I was recently flipping through an old Time/Life Photography Year book, don't remember exactly which one - '76? '77? Anyway, they had a big article about the first auto-focus camera, which was brand-new back then. Kind of amusing, looking at that 30 years later.

 

[handicap18]

I have 3 camera bodies (Nikon D100, D70s, D200) and each of them have a lens or two so I have a built in back-up. Between the cameras I have these lenses to share:

• Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8 (1)
• Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 VR (2)
• Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8 (2)
• Nikon 35-70mm f/2.8 (1)

I'm trying to justify getting a 105mm f/2.8 VR micro and a 28-70mm f/2.8 zoom but so far I can't come up with a good argument for them. I think I just need to be a little more creative is all.

Jeff

Nice setup Jeff, though I love my D50 and its high ISO capabilities. I've thought about getting a D200 or D80 if money ever became a non factor, but everytime I go on the different boards and read posts and/or reviews, it always comes down to the D50 having the better high ISO. But thats getting off topic. I'll continue to spend my money right now on more lenses.

As for a backup, I do have an older 28-80mm Nikkor that stays with my N70 in the drawer so I could use that in a pinch.

I'm leaning towards the 80-200 f/2.8 for cost factors (though the AF-S version is around $1000, but still $700 less than the 70-200 f/2.8 VR). Maybe someday I'll be able to afford the 17-55 f/2.8. I really like the 105mm f/2.8 VR, though that is pricy for me, so instead I went with Tamron's 90mm f/2.8 macro. No VR which would be very nice to have with a macro, but its just about as sharp.

Once I do change my everyday lens to the 18-135 or 18-200, I'm not sure what I'll do with my 18-70mm. Honestly I don't think its very sharp (maybe a bad copy?) and I'd be reluctant to sell it with that knowledge. Guess I could keep it for a backup along with the 28-80, but never really thought about it.