I done went full-frame - Page 3

sapporobaby · May 4, 2012, 08:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tekmoe

<insert foot into mouth>

I did what I said I was not going to do - I purchased a D800. After digging deeper and reading expert's reviews and opinions, I realized I was wrong - the D800 truly is the successor to the D700, like it or not. We will not see another mid-range FX camera from Nikon for awhile and I'm not interested in buying an entry level FX camera, which would presumably be the D600. So I said F IT and pulled the trigger. Should have it sometime next week. Now to figure out which FX lens to buy...

Better late than never. I have a D800 on order for the times I'm not using the D4. As far as lenses go, start with the trinity: 14-24mm, f2.8, 24-70mm, f2.8, 70-200mm, f2.8. These should work for a while. Then move to the 105mm, f2.8 for macro. And finally to the 300mm, f2.8 (my next lens purchase) for the reach... There are of course the assorted 50mm, f1.4 or f1.8. You are on your way.

tekmoe · May 4, 2012, 08:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sapporobaby

Better late than never. I have a D800 on order for the times I'm not using the D4. As far as lenses go, start with the trinity: 14-24mm, f2.8, 24-70mm, f2.8, 70-200mm, f2.8. These should work for a while. Then move to the 105mm, f2.8 for macro. And finally to the 300mm, f2.8 (my next lens purchase) for the reach... There are of course the assorted 50mm, f1.4 or f1.8. You are on your way.

Exactly the lenses I have been looking at. Was thinking the 24-70 should be the first lens I should buy if I go that route. Otherwise, I was thinking I could pick up the 50 1.4 and use that for awhile to get familiar with full frame. 105 macro is definitely on the list as well - some of the images I have seen from that lens are easily magazine quality. Just plain nuts.

sapporobaby · May 4, 2012, 08:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tekmoe

Exactly the lenses I have been looking at. Was thinking the 24-70 should be the first lens I should buy if I go that route. Otherwise, I was thinking I could pick up the 50 1.4 and use that for awhile to get familiar with full frame. 105 macro is definitely on the list as well - some of the images I have seen from that lens are easily magazine quality. Just plain nuts.

If I may. I would get the 24-70mm first simply because it can do so much more and that lens is sooooooo good that many Canon shooters buy an adapter to put it on their bodies. It is my go to lens most of the time.

tekmoe · May 4, 2012, 08:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sapporobaby

If I may. I would get the 24-70mm first simply because it can do so much more and that lens is sooooooo good that many Canon shooters buy an adapter to put it on their bodies. It is my go to lens most of the time.

You are right. 24-70 would more than likely be the best candidate as my first FX lens. Thank you for the guidance.

sapporobaby · May 4, 2012, 08:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tekmoe

You are right. 24-70 would more than likely be the best candidate as my first FX lens. Thank you for the guidance.

No worries. You're gonna brin every time you snap something and see how amazing it looks.

My daughter has a D700 and she loves it. I offered her a D800 and she turned it down. Kids right.

Anyway, congrats.... Welcome to the world of FX shooting.

Vudoo · May 4, 2012, 11:01 AM

I have the trinity and would recommend the 24-70mm f/2.8 first and follow it up with the 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII. The 14-24mm f/2.8 is a tough one. It's a superb lens, one of the best out there, but I am finding that I don't use it much so I'm actually selling it.

I used to have the 105mm f/2.8 macro and even though it is a great lens as well, it was too long for table top work and too short for insects. I replaced it with the new 60mm f/2.8 macro instead, since I do mainly table top and flower macros.

For the 50mm, I got the Sigma f/1.4 which only gets used when I really need a low light lens. The 24-70mm is great for all other times.

tekmoe · May 4, 2012, 12:31 PM

Vudoo, I have the 10-24 DX lens and use it a lot. In fact, it's probably my most used lens for my paying gigs. How much are you looking to sell the 14-24 for?

Razeus · May 5, 2012, 08:59 PM

The quality is flat out astounding:

201204280700.jpg by D. Harris, on Flickr

201204220271.jpg by D. Harris, on Flickr

Ramirez Tattoo by D. Harris, on Flickr

shashin · May 8, 2012, 03:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Razeus

The quality is flat out astounding:

Image
201204280700.jpg by D. Harris, on Flickr

Image
201204220271.jpg by D. Harris, on Flickr

Image
Ramirez Tattoo by D. Harris, on Flickr

Nice shots! I am impressed with the detail (of course) but also with the contrast range that has been captured in these photos. This is one of the main reasons that I, too, want to go to a full frame camera.

Razeus · May 8, 2012, 08:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shashin

Nice shots! I am impressed with the detail (of course) but also with the contrast range that has been captured in these photos. This is one of the main reasons that I, too, want to go to a full frame camera.

Thanks. I feel I take better shots with a full frame. I see the image in the viewfinder completely differently now. I take way less shots than I used to.

shashin · Jan 15, 2013, 06:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Razeus

Thanks. I feel I take better shots with a full frame. I see the image in the viewfinder completely differently now. I take way less shots than I used to.

Well, here I am ressurrecting an old thread. The reason is that I, too, have gone full frame. However, my move was from a small point and shoot Canon, that I dearly love, to a much larger Nikon D800e. This is actually a move back to SLR photography for me. I was once, long ago, a pro camera person in the era of film and the like.

Yeah, you've heard this before, I know. Anyway, with 5 Nikon lenses sitting around unused for the better part of 10 years, I thought it was time to get back into the SLR game, namely a DSLR.
Here's one of my first shots.

I used a 28 year old 35mm f/2. Does a pretty good job, don't you think?

Tech details: ISO 1250 f/2.8 1/200 sec

alphaod · Jan 15, 2013, 07:02 PM

The D700 was also the camera that I chose when I went full frame.

mtbdudex · Mar 9, 2013, 08:47 AM

Not to start a canon vs Nikon flame, but seems Nikon has taken the FF lead from canon.....

Razeus · Mar 11, 2013, 10:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alphaod

The D700 was also the camera that I chose when I went full frame.

To an extent. For photojournalists, I think the 1DX from Canon is ruler.

Chuck-Norris · Mar 11, 2013, 11:48 PM

cant afford full frame LOL

MacCruiskeen · Mar 12, 2013, 09:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shashin

I used a 28 year old 35mm f/2. Does a pretty good job, don't you think?

Tech details: ISO 1250 f/2.8 1/200 sec

I have a 70's-vintage 35mm f/2 Nikkor, and it's one of my favorite lenses. It usually lives on my full-frame F2.

shashin · Mar 12, 2013, 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MacCruiskeen

I have a 70's-vintage 35mm f/2 Nikkor, and it's one of my favorite lenses. It usually lives on my full-frame F2.

They still do an amazing job. I know that the newer versions are probably a bit better, but still...

girl in driveway by Smithshashin, on Flickr
Not too bad.

alphaod · Mar 12, 2013, 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Razeus

To an extent. For photojournalists, I think the 1DX from Canon is ruler.

I'm not sure why that's relevant. I'm not a photojournalist.

Anyways I've already stuck with Nikon and have tons of their glass, no reason to switch.

Chris64tx · Mar 12, 2013, 02:07 PM

Congrats!!!

I went Full Frame about six months ago. Nikon D300 to D800. Make sure you get some really good Glass!!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Razeus

Sold the D7000+15-55 f/2.8 and got the D700. She has arrived. And she's a beast to hold.

Image

Only 233 shutter slaps, now 234...

Image
DHarris201204130001.jpg by darrylwharrisjr, on Flickr

Full-frame is where the party is.

Razeus · Mar 12, 2013, 02:50 PM

Wow, I forgot about this thread. I moved up to a D800 this past fall. I LOVE it.

----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by alphaod

I'm not sure why that's relevant. I'm not a photojournalist.

Anyways I've already stuck with Nikon and have tons of their glass, no reason to switch.

It seems I quoted the wrong post...

I meant to quote this:

Quote:

Originally Posted by mtbdudex

Not to start a canon vs Nikon flame, but seems Nikon has taken the FF lead from canon.....

dmax35 · Mar 12, 2013, 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Razeus

Wow, I forgot about this thread. I moved up to a D800 this past fall. I LOVE it.

----------

It seems I quoted the wrong post...

I meant to quote this:

Hopefully you don't have the left side focus issues or paint fade mine did.

Razeus · Mar 12, 2013, 07:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dmax35

Hopefully you don't have the left side focus issues or paint fade mine did.

Nope. No issues with mine.

May 5, 2012, 08:59 PM	#58
Razeus Thread Starter macrumors 68020 Join Date: Jul 2008	The quality is flat out astounding: 201204280700.jpg by D. Harris, on Flickr 201204220271.jpg by D. Harris, on Flickr Ramirez Tattoo by D. Harris, on Flickr __________________ Twitter \| Google+ \| Tumblr
	0

Jan 15, 2013, 07:02 PM	#62
alphaod macrumors P6 Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: NYC	The D700 was also the camera that I chose when I went full frame. __________________ Mac Pro \| 27" iMac \| 15" MacBook Pro with Retina display \| iPhone 5 \| iPad 3 \| iPad mini
	0

Mar 9, 2013, 08:47 AM	#63
mtbdudex macrumors 65816 Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: SE Michigan	Not to start a canon vs Nikon flame, but seems Nikon has taken the FF lead from canon..... __________________ Mike R, P.E. ;iMac 27"(i7), iPad2, iPhone4, 24" iMac, TV(160) Canon: T1i + lens:70-200 L f2.8 IS II /TC 1.4x 2x / 15-85 / f1.4 50; FEISOL tripod CT-3441S DIY acoustic panels. . .HT Project
	0

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

May 4, 2012, 11:01 AM	#56
Vudoo macrumors 6502a Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Dallas Metroplex	I have the trinity and would recommend the 24-70mm f/2.8 first and follow it up with the 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII. The 14-24mm f/2.8 is a tough one. It's a superb lens, one of the best out there, but I am finding that I don't use it much so I'm actually selling it. I used to have the 105mm f/2.8 macro and even though it is a great lens as well, it was too long for table top work and too short for insects. I replaced it with the new 60mm f/2.8 macro instead, since I do mainly table top and flower macros. For the 50mm, I got the Sigma f/1.4 which only gets used when I really need a low light lens. The 24-70mm is great for all other times.
	0

May 4, 2012, 12:31 PM	#57
tekmoe macrumors 65816 Join Date: Feb 2005	Vudoo, I have the 10-24 DX lens and use it a lot. In fact, it's probably my most used lens for my paying gigs. How much are you looking to sell the 14-24 for?
	0

Mar 11, 2013, 11:48 PM	#65
Chuck-Norris macrumors 6502 Join Date: Sep 2012	cant afford full frame LOL
	0