I am a relative newbie -- had a Nikon D7000 for the past year, came with the basic kit lens 18-105mm. Looking to upgrade this Christmas (with some pointed gift requests).
Here's my question: I plan on buying for myself a 50mm f/1.4 to serve as a prime lens... what would be the best compliment to that, in the $1000-1500 range? I'm considering either the 80-200 mm f/2.8 (i.e. the older but still "new" lens in that family -- http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/80200.htm ) or else the 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6 VR (http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/28-300mm.htm). Looking for something for longer distance, sports/nature, with something of a range...
I like the f/2.8 of the 80-200 (I do like some sports and fast-action photography), but other than that, I have a hard time understanding why the 80-200 is so much more highly touted. The 28-300 gives a broader range on the near and far end, its lighter, has VR, and is a little cheaper.
NOTE: While I have D7000, I am shopping with an eye towards the possibility that I may one day buy an FX camera - so I'm trying not to limit myself, nor overspend given the limitations of my current camera.
I would love any help or suggestions, thanks!!