New to FX glass, thoughts?

What will you primarily be shooting? And do you currently have any other Nikon lenses that are full frame?

I use this set-up:

24mm
35mm
50mm
85mm
135mm

35 & 85 are my lenses of choice. I take the 50 with me too but not as much as the 35 & 85 combo.

28Fiend said:

I'm basically new to the FX world, picked up a D700 with 800 actuations. Looking to put together a descent gear bag, though I only have enough money left over for one or two lenses depending on the lens. Trying to decide between:

24-70mm
24mm (maybe)
50mm
85mm
Possibly the 17-35mm with a 50mm

I've been reading quite a bit and there are quite a few people that see the 24-70 as good as any prime. Just trying to weigh whether two or three primes would be considered equal with the 24-70? Obviously the 24-70 would be more versitile. Any thoughts, advice, or ideas are greatly appriciated.

Click to expand...

I have yet to talk to anyone who's disappointed with the 24-70- the real question is "Is it overkill?" I'm not a fan of the 24mm f/2,8 prime. If you're going faster than 2.8, then it depends on what and when you shoot- if not then personally, I'd go with the 24-70. If you shoot a lot at 24mm, then there's some distortion and CA-- but both are software correctable quite easily.

Paul

I have the 24-70 and i am with compuwar. You would be hard pressed to find a better, sharper and overall more amazing zoom than the 24-70 (70-200 vr2 maybe ) and i have it on my cam most of the time. I am strongly voting for that. It is the perfect companion lens for the d700..

compuwar said:

I have yet to talk to anyone who's disappointed with the 24-70- the real question is "Is it overkill?" I'm not a fan of the 24mm f/2,8 prime. If you're going faster than 2.8, then it depends on what and when you shoot- if not then personally, I'd go with the 24-70. If you shoot a lot at 24mm, then there's some distortion and CA-- but both are software correctable quite easily.

Paul

Click to expand...

I have to agree with compuwar. I have the Nikon trinity (14-24mm, 24-70mm, 70-200mm, all f2.8) I LOVE my 24-700mm, f2.8. It is my daily go to lens. I have a 50mm prime, as well as a few other zooms, but I always come back to the 24-70mm when I want to head out and shoot. Get it. You won't regret it.

28Fiend said:

Since I've made the jump, most of my lenses are dx. Though I do have the 70-300 VR which is full frame. I'm just trying to decide what gives me the best range considering the price.

I haven't really been bias towards prime or zoom. For me they both serve a purpose, though if the 24-70 is just as sharp as primes it would seem like the best option. However it wouldn't be wide like my Tokina 11-16.

Click to expand...

It sounds like the 24-70 might be the best choice for you. Also remember the 11mm on DX is like 16.5mm on FX so while you're losing some wide angle, it may not matter depending on what you shoot. You could always save towards the 14-24 as a third lens.

sapporobaby said:

I have to agree with compuwar. I have the Nikon trinity (14-24mm, 24-70mm, 70-200mm, all f2.8) I LOVE my 24-700mm, f2.8. It is my daily go to lens. I have a 50mm prime, as well as a few other zooms, but I always come back to the 24-70mm when I want to head out and shoot. Get it. You won't regret it.

Click to expand...

I would love to see how big that 24-700mm 2.8 is!

leandroc76 said:

I would love to see how big that 24-700mm 2.8 is!

Click to expand...

That's what she said.

70-200mm, f2.8

16-28 - I rarely use this, unless Im shooting snowboarding or live music/bands.
50 - I use this one most of the time. 50mm is great.
60mm Macro - Meh, macro is fun but only gets used a few times a month.
85 - Use this one 2nd most, after the 50. Great for portraits and candid scenes when you need some distance but not too much compression.
135 - I love this lens, but don't use it as often. Its a keeper, but I dont tend to shoot that tele often.

I am thinking of renting a 35L to try that FL out, I have a feeling I would really like it.

Bear said:

What will you primarily be shooting? And do you currently have any other Nikon lenses that are full frame?

Click to expand...

I just got the 35mm f/1.4, and I absolutely love it. It's a great lens. I have the 14-24 and the 70-200, but I didn't go for the 24-70 because, in that range, I'd rather shoot fast primes rather than a slightly slower zoom. So I have the 35mm and the 50mm f/1.4. Honestly though, I'm beginning to HATE my 50mm just because of the AF speed (I have the D700 as well), and the vignetting wide open is pretty pronounced. Sometimes that's good, sometimes not.. it all depends.

For fun.. go out and get a used film SLR to use some of those lenses with. I picked up a 15-year old N90s for $70, threw some B&W film in there, and shot with my 35mm lens... You'd be amazed at the difference between film and digital with the same lens.

28Fiend said:

Since I've made the jump, most of my lenses are dx. Though I do have the 70-300 VR which is full frame. I'm just trying to decide what gives me the best range considering the price.

Click to expand...

28Fiend said:

Very true, I guy I picked up the 700 body from has a newish 24-70 he hardly uses. I've been shopping around since these responses, $1400 a good price? Some similar prices on craigs list.

Click to expand...

You are absolutely going about this the wrong way. You should not buy a lens because it has a good price/quality/range ratio. You buy a lens because it fits your shooting style.... a question you have yet to answer. What do you shoot the most or what do you like to shoot the most? If you cannot answer this, then maybe you should re-evaluate buying more expensive camera gear. If you can, then the answer to what lens you should get will probably become a lot more obvious.

Every time you see someone who is selling a lens because they don't shoot it very much is likely someone who did exactly what you are thinking of doing- they bought the lens thinking it had a good price/quality/range ratio, but didn't think about how much they actually needed that lens.

28Fiend said:

What do you think of the 14-24? I've only ever read about them.



Very true, I guy I picked up the 700 body from has a newish 24-70 he hardly uses. I've been shopping around since these responses, $1400 a good price? Some similar prices on craigs list.

Click to expand...

I LOVE MY 14-24mm !!!!!! Did I mention that I love it? It is insanely sharp but has a drawback or two. A bit heavy. Also, no way to attach screw-on filters. If you can live without that, you will be fine. If you can get one cheap, get it.

Ruahrc said:

You are absolutely going about this the wrong way. You should not buy a lens because it has a good price/quality/range ratio. You buy a lens because it fits your shooting style.... a question you have yet to answer.

Click to expand...

Quoted for emphasis.

sapporobaby said:

I have the Nikon trinity (14-24mm, 24-70mm, 70-200mm, all f2.8)

Click to expand...

I would love to be able to justify the cost of getting that setup. Must be great !

OreoCookie said:

Quoted for emphasis.

Click to expand...

Double spot on. I am considering selling a Sigma 120-400mm, f4.5-5.6 because I never use it. Most of my shooting is in the 24-70mm, 70-200mm range. The Sigma was just too heavy to be practical to carry. I like to shoot street and landscapes. Currently my three main lenses fit the bill. If I need more, I'll buy more.

initialsBB said:

I would love to be able to justify the cost of getting that setup. Must be great !

Click to expand...

I am pretty pleased.

OreoCookie said:

Quoted for emphasis.

Click to expand...

re-quoted ..

it depends all on your shooting style. yes the lenses are all good, but will you be limited with your shooting style? I could never shoot purely primes in the 24-70 range since i tend to zoom both my feet and the lens.. but this is a preference thing... figure out what and how you shoot, then buy a lens...

28Fiend said:

I'm at a cross roads is I want to shoot more landscapes

Click to expand...

Are the landscapes static or dynamic? If they're static, you can shoot multiple shots and stitch them together If they're dynamic, then a zoom is probably a good answer.

Paul

28Fiend said:

...though if the 24-70 is just as sharp as primes it would seem like the best option. However it wouldn't be wide like my Tokina 11-16.

Click to expand...

Hey, the Tokina 11-16 covers FX at about 15-16 mm! (As someone noted, 11 on DX is 16.5 on FX, so this is actually wider than on DX.) It's solid, it takes 77mm filters (but watch for vignetting), it's fast at f/2.8, and it's sharp and cheap.

28Fiend said:

What do you think of the 14-24? I've only ever read about them.

Click to expand...

It's the lens that's on my D300 almost constantly, and it's going to be the same when my D800 is delivered. It's an amazing lens. It's sharp, fast enough -- everything you could want. Except being lightweight, which it's certainly not.

Obviously I like shooting wide. Can't wait for 14 in FX. In my film days, the widest I had was the 20 f/3.5, which I loved.

When the D800 comes, I'll start using my oldish (2003) 85 f/1.4 again -- in DX, it's effectively longer than I like. In my F5 days it was perfect for portraiture.

But I'll say again what others have said -- this should be about your shooting style first, and particular lenses second.