$1700: D300, 70-200 f2.8 VR, or Canon 5D

I would buy a D300. You can use your 85mm on it. I`ve had a look at your portfolio, I think the 70-200 will be so good in your hands, but after the D300.

Many of my photography are children`s and baby portraits: The 70-200 minimum focus distance is more or less 1.5 meters, it is a big drawback to me. Think that with your 85mm you can surely shot at less that 1meter. Of course, with the 70-200mm you can have a narrower field of view, but at the expense of a longer focus distance. I wonder if it could work for you.

I have switched to the Micro 105VR which is also great for portraits, absolutely sharp althought with other different issues. For some details (baby hands, very close faces, eyes, etc.) the 70-200 is unusable to me. The 105/2DC is also another great choice with a reasonable min. focus distance but pretty expensive too.

The 5D looks to be replaced soon. If so, I`ll wait to see, althought it will be very expensive. Also, if you aren`t a current Canon user, you`ll need to buy new lenses.

Well, a 5D means you'll need lenses, flash, batteries, etc., theNikon gear you have won't work with it. The D300 won't help your lens situation, you may still feel cramped there. The 70-200 is a great lens.

I guess it depends on what you feel cramps your style or your interests/growth the most? I think I'd suggest the 70-200 for it's verstility in many different kinds of applications. Of course, it could well depend on what other gear you have besides the D50 and the 85mm.

Where do you get a D300 and 70-200 VR or a Canon 5D and L telephoto lens for $1700?

The 70-200 is nice, but it's a big lens, make sure you're comfortable with it for the intended use. Like Jose says, the minimum focus distance can be a problem.

At one point I thought about the 5D, but it's a slow camera compared to the D300 and feels less solid. Also, the excellent display of the D300 is very useful for checking expressions when shooting portraits.

Oskar,

I think she meant either the D300, the 70-200 OR the Canon 5D.

I am not a big fan of the D50 (had one and didn't like it but my dislike had nothing to do with IQ). I have a D300 and 5D but I feel compelled to tell you to keep your D50 and improve your technique. Unless you are shooting at high ISO, there would likely not be any difference in IQ [at lower ISOs] between the D300 and D50 IF you have your camera set correctly and use it correctly, you should be getting stunning portraits with your 85mm lens. If you are not, post some samples so you can get some assistance.

Unless you are printing huge posters or cropping significantly, the increase in megapixels will not have any effect in your prints (certainly not in an 8 x 10). And I don't understand why you would need the high frame rate of the D300 for shooting portraits?

You say you are '...a little cramped by it's limitations". What specifically is the D50 not doing for you? If you just want a new camera, go for it. If you really want to improve the quality of your portraits, improve your technique.

...a D200 and a 50-150mm SIgma HSM f2.8....unless you want to change systems or can afford both, to have a cheap FF camera, but what would that really do for you....just think about the things that really matter to you, you don't need the newest or best to make great images, you really just need creativity. A D200 would just give you what you need with your 85mm F2 and the 50-150mm gives you a great range for portraiture....jmho...all in you budget..this being said as an owner of a 5D, 40D and D200 and D60...

As enticing as full frame sounds if you are not using wide angle lenses the only reason would be high ISO preformance or improved dynamic range. I like my D200 over the D70 because of lens compatibility, view finder and control features. I rarely print over 8x12. With full frame you would lose the field of view of the 85mm you currently use. Sometimes I wish for better high ISO preformance but still can not justify a D300, its a hobby for me.

I had D200 in the past and now D300, but frankly the dropping 5D price is often tempting. I really like their fast primes, like 50/1.2L, 35/1.4L, 24/1.4L, and so on. And it is a good camera still. Will probably be for a while.

Nikon on the other hand is catching up fast. The D200 was somewhat noisy, but D300 is very good. And D3 is of course the king. I like Nikon colors and absolutely love ergonomics. I do not know what I would do, I still would probably wait till the next FF Nikon camera is out. I do not think it will be long.

- Sergey

Looking at the photos in your portefolio, I think that a full frame camera is really not going to do much for you, nor would extra mega-pixels. As you shoot now, you seem to not have perfect focus, and use more than a little sharpening. Your lens is very sharp, but I know it requires very good technique to get perfect sharpness where you want it when you shoot with it wide open.

I would say that getting a 5D and switching system will do nothing for you. Why not rent a 3D for a week to see if FF will really make such a big difference?

If you feel cramped, what is the current limitation? The D300 is a great camera and has a very nice viewfinder (for DX camera), superb autofocus and will take weeks to learn to use properly. Try it out if you can. But perhaps what limits you is the lack of a high quality zoom? How far are you from your subjects when you shoot?

In your situation, I would go with the D300 first, then save for another lens, but I would not be sure that lens would be the current version of the 70-200 VR.