I have taken a lot of classes and worked on different photo shoots. I am looking into getting something that will give me great picture quality for more urban landscapes with a lot of depths to them. I also want something that I can get a lot of shots off in good quality at a rapid rate(5 to 8 FPS). I have about $2500 to spend total.

My thoughts seem to be going to the Nikon D300. It seems to have everything I am looking for and will enable me to actually work with it too, and not just for fun. I really am up in the air as far as lens and add ons go though. I would love to hear what your opinions are and what you would do if it was your $2500. TIA

The D300 is a great camera, but I'm concerned that at your $2500 budget you'd be limited to only one good lens or two mediocre ones. I guess you can always add or upgrade later. In the meantime you may have to make do, rent or borrow, or boost your budget.

The D200 is also very nice (I've got one) and about one good lens cheaper. And they may be available in deals as interest moves to the D300.

I'm unfamiliar with the Canon compeitors.

I don't mind bumping up a little if I have to. I am not needing new lenses either, so I may be able to save a little there. I have been searching and I actually fond just the body of the D300 for just under$1000. I have to search to find the link again though. I just glanced so I am hoping it isn't bogus. Any suggestions on lenses???

I would be very hesitant to believe a legit seller has it for $1k.

From your first post, sounds like you will be doing urban shots, not using a tripod. That suggests a reasonably fast wide angle like the 12-24mm F4. Look a few threads down under "Nikon ALMOST.... almost got it right with this lens.." for some discussions on wide-angle zooms. If 12-24 is "too wide" for you, also check out the very inexpensive 18-55mm than Ken Rockwell highly recommends.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/18-55-ii.htm


The really great thing about the D300 is that you can pick up a 30 year old Nikkor prime lens at a swap meet and use it. So keep an eye out for something like a 28mm f2.8 as well.

Urban landscape really doesn't help me visualize what you need. It could be wide angle, it could be telephoto. A wide angle will expand the depth in a picture while a telephoto will compress it. Between 30-50mm, you'll find that your scene will appear very close to what it looks like to the naked eye. A cheap kit lens will give you a chance to play and figure out what focal lengths suit your shooting before you go out and spend over $1K on a NICE lens.

And I'm certainly not complaining about that statement...often times we hear the opposite. Someone is venturing into dSLR land and wants 1 do-it-all lens!

Generally speaking, you'll probably want a "normal zoom" that covers 17-55mm. That will probably be your first lens. Next will depend on your shooting habits. If you're at the wide end mostly, you'll probably opt for the 12-24DX, and if you're finding yourself at the long end, then the 70-200 is a nice addition. In the end, if you're willing to spend the cash, you'll probably end up with all three.

If you think there is ANY possibility that you'll be considering a D3 or full frame equivalents that Nikon offers down the road, don't get the DX lenses, as they won't work on a full frame camera. Nikon released a 24-70 lens that you can substitute for the 17-55 I mentioned. They also released a wide angle that you can substitute for the 12-24 I mentioned. The 70-200 mentioned above already works on a full frame camera.

The D300 is NOT going to be available under $1600, and anybody that is selling it for less is either not an authorized dealer (kiss post sale service of any kind or a warranty goodbye!), or it's a blatant scam.

Use www.resellerratings.com to evaluate the legitimacy of any retailer you plan on handing your credit card digits to.