D600 start-up kit on a budget

[RRRoger]

I don't know about the "latest" 80-200. It is supposed to be very good.
I had a "push-pull and had lots of trouble with it, but others liked it.
I took it back and got the AF-S version.
On FullFrame, I think it is better than anything but the much more expensive AF-S Nikkor 70-200 VRII

[Tommo1965]

Im not sure the 80-200 can be bought new in AFS anymore..I think its the older AF version thats still available..I think Nikon canned the AFS 80-200 when they released the 70-200VR I

I tried the new Sigma 70-200 OS and it was very good..and only a tad behind the Nikon...I still bought the Nikon though is a mad moment...do I regret it..Nah

the Nikon VR II can be had for a bit over $2000 from various grey vendors , theres a bloke in perth that brings gear ib and is selling it for $2181 with no import tax as they are already here.

the VrII is the only lens I've bought new...the others I've been lucky with Gumtree

[peterb666]

As for a fast prime, I never use the 50mm focal length on FF, rather opting for either slightly wide angle or slightly telephoto and hence why my only two primes...are the 35mm f1.4G and 85mm f1.4G. I just find that the 50mm length is too narrow for most things and to wide for others and the 35mm f1.4G is great as a walk around prime when you don't want to use a zoom.

I agree with you there. It is a little while since shooting ff but I used a 35mm f/2 and 85mm f/2 or f/1.8 almost exclusively. I too found the 50mm f/1.8 either too narrow or too short most of the time. It wasn't a good compromise.

I tend to shoot wider these days and would most likely go for a 24mm or 28mm and 85mm. I have been thinking of picking up a D600 in the not too distant future and already have a 28mm f/2.8 AF lens (pretty ancient being a pre-D AF lens) and the ubiquitous 50mm f/1.8 AF-D so not much to add in full-frame lenses (and also adequate ff coverage to 500mm).

Lenses like the 24, 28mm and 85mm AF-D lenses are quite cheap and tough as guts.