never thought i'd ask about a lens recommendation... arghh

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by flosseR, Feb 17, 2011.

  1. flosseR macrumors 6502a

    flosseR

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2009
    Location:
    the cold dark north
    #1
    Ok, I am pretty well versed in Nikon FullFrame land in both lenses and bodies as well as DX bodies. Recently I sold my D700 and most of my glass. partly because it was just too much money tied up and partly because someone offered me a REALLY good price. Anyway, I am leaning towards a DX (crop body) and I do want proper glass.
    I shoot anything really but as of late mostly landscapes and portraits. I already own a 50mm f1.4 and a manual 50mm f1.2 but in the DX world there are gazillion options for "normal zooms.2 I scanned my Aperture Library and I shoot mostly between 24 and 85 mm.
    So I narrowed it down to the 17-55 from nikon but people give it very mixed reviews and then i am blank. I like the silent motors, so noise is not an option but what other glass is there to give stellar image quality on, say a d7000 body..

    Cheers,

    //F
     
  2. Ruahrc macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2009
    #2
    I've been kind of going over the same thing myself. For landscapes, I don't think you need the f2.8 and for portraits a faster prime might be more effective (you already have the 50mm 1.4). Consider a lighter zoom? I have been considering trading my 18-200 up for a 16-85, which supposedly gets very good reviews. If you trust them, photozone rated the IQ of the 16-85 as good or better than the 17-55 at similar apertures.

    If you don't shoot wider than 24mm, the full frame 24-70 should still fit the bill...

    Otherwise for landscape work, the 10-24 is great as is the 12-24 which I own. I have always wanted to try the 24mm PC-E but I hear it doesn't work quite as well on DX because of the viewfinder prism/flash housing interfering with the movement of the lens. Thom Hogan even goes as far as to specifically state that although Nikon says you can use the 24PC-E with the D7000, he considers the two to be functionally incompatible.

    Some alternatives might be a Zeiss wide angle prime, like the 21mm f2.8. Best used at a slower pace and with a tripod and live view due to the manual focus.

    Just a couple of ideas.
     
  3. Abstract macrumors Penryn

    Abstract

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Location:
    Location Location Location
    #3
    Sigma 24-70 mm?? If your budget is higher than that, how about the Nikon 24-70 mm?

    Not sure what to recommend if you need wider than that.
     
  4. gnd macrumors 6502a

    gnd

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2008
    Location:
    At my cat's house
    #4
    I think he used a D700 so 24-85mm would roughly correspond to 17-55mm on a D7000.
    I would guess 17-55mm would be the perfect replacement standard zoom. Might even consider the Tamron 17-50mm (non IS) which would be much cheaper (almost two thirds cheaper) with a comparable IQ.
     
  5. pdxflint, Feb 18, 2011
    Last edited: Feb 18, 2011

    pdxflint macrumors 68020

    pdxflint

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2006
    Location:
    Oregon coast
    #5
    Get a Nikkor 17-55, you really shouldn't regret it. This is assuming your most common focal lengths that you mentioned (24-85mm) were on full-frame, it will be a close match. It probably balances a bit better on a D300 or D300s than on a D7000, but that's probably a minor point. It's a fairly heavy, bulky lens, and if you're not going to shoot wide open all the time, you might consider the Tamron 17-50, but I think a clean used 17-55 in the $800-850 range is a good deal.

    Edit: I also had a thought... you might want to consider the very good, affordable Nikkor 18-70. It's considerably lighter than the 17-55 and is decently built. It's got great image quality. I swapped my 17-55 for a buddy's 18-70 for an hour or so during an event (he wanted to try my lens... and I was curious about his.) I was impressed with the 18-70's decent images and lighter weight, but still preferred the 17-55 for it's overall operational feel (smooth, fast focusing, great focus acquisition in lower light) and how it just seemed like a much more natural physical match for my D300, where the 18-70 just didn't have that intangible "fit" with the body, but seemed more at home on a D70/D80/D90, as if the overall build, weight, materials were better matched with those mid-level bodies. Image quality was stellar, and I'd not hesitate to use it where I didn't need f/2.8, but I shoot wide-open 80% of the time... so it's an easy choice for me.
    Hope my random ramblings help... :)
     
  6. JDDavis macrumors 65816

    JDDavis

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2009
    #6
    I'll make one pitch for the 18-200 even though the 17-55 is clearly a better lens on the DX side. The one thing I like most and the reason that I'll probably always keep my 18-200 is it's great to have when you don't know exacty what you will be shooting and you only want to carry one lens. If reach out to 200 is not a concern then I wouldn't even consider it. It does perform well for what it is and has a decently big sweet spot where it takes great images in my opinion. I like the portraits that I get from it at 50-70mm and f5.6-f11 with a decent flash like the SB600 or higher. It's not a pro-class lens by any means and it's soft at both ends (more so above maybe 150mm) but for the money it gives pretty good images and a lot of versatility.

    Just FYI.
     
  7. Cliff3, Feb 18, 2011
    Last edited: Feb 18, 2011

    Cliff3 macrumors 65816

    Cliff3

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2007
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    #7
  8. El Cabong macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2008
    #8
    I've been pretty happy with the 24-70 Nikkor on a crop body. I actually like the 35mm equivalent range that it gives, as narrow as it may be.
     
  9. ssmed macrumors 6502

    ssmed

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2009
    Location:
    UK
    #9
    I have the 16-85mm as my holiday lens and this is sharp, light and would match your 24mm lower range (given that you were using an FX camera previously). However recently I have been using the 24-70mm F2.8 most of the time despite it being a FX lens as the IQ is very good. I never got on with the 17-55, the focusing seemed awkward. I am using a D2H and D300 FWIW. Which body are you thinking of getting?

    HTH

    SS
     
  10. revisionA macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 27, 2005
    #10
    I have the Sigma 17-50 EX DC HSM OS f/2.8 on my D7000, it's my only 3rd party lens and it definately was an improvement over the 18-105, I don't miss the zooming because I still have feet. :D

    Check out artoftheimage.com for an indepth review.
     
  11. flosseR thread starter macrumors 6502a

    flosseR

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2009
    Location:
    the cold dark north
    #11
    Hey thanks for all the replies... at this point, i am thinking of getting either the d7000 or the d300s.. whatever is on a better offer at adorama in the next 3 weeks.

    I am leaning towards the 24-70 with something on the wider end at this point. I tried the 17-55 and its not quite at the level of the 24-70 in handling.

    The third party lenses i am not inclined because of noisy focus motors (exception the sigma 24-70 but if you go that way you might as well get the nikon.. :))

    I don't know.. still torn..
     
  12. Ruahrc macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2009
    #12
    Seems almost like you're going full circle here. You got rid of your D700 + 24-70 only to replace it with... a D7000 and a 24-70... you didn't seem to want to keep it too badly then, what's different now? Next thing you know you'll be looking for another FF body again?

    I'm just saying, keep perspective on why you decided to change up the gear in the first place.

    Ruahrc
     
  13. Phrasikleia macrumors 601

    Phrasikleia

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2008
    Location:
    Over there------->
    #13
    flosseR, you are tough to figure out. After this purchase, you will have gone through four camera bodies in 15 months:

    Nikon D90 --> Canon 5D Mark II --> Nikon D700 --> Nikon D7000(?)

    ...I might even be missing one between the 5D2 and D700.

    And you've rotated through a whole bunch of lenses. Now you're considering replacing a lens you sold with the same lens??

    So: does it really matter what you buy? Aren't you just going to sell it and replace it when the next great thing comes out? [devil's horns] You know the 5D Mark III will be announced soon. And the D800 must be right around the corner. [/devil's horns] :p :cool:
     
  14. fcortese macrumors demi-god

    fcortese

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2010
    Location:
    Big Sky country
    #14
    I have to agree with Phrasikleia. I haven't gone through a 1/4th of your bodies and I'm waiting on the 5D3. I'm working on slowly accumulating some good glass first. Got a 50 f/1.8 (OK very inexpensive, not a L lens but it works) and just bought a referb 17-40 f/4 L. I am lining myself up (that is to say, saving up) to eventually get the 24-105 f/4L?II with the 5D3 when it comes out. So it seems that if you go with the crop body, your lens selection should reflect that choice and getting the same as you had with your FF doesn't quite make sense to me. But what do I know, I'm still on the front end of the learning curve when it comes to photography!:eek: However, waiting for this or the new Nikon means that you are w/o a camera so that's not good.:(
     
  15. Phrasikleia macrumors 601

    Phrasikleia

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2008
    Location:
    Over there------->
    #15
    Oh, he'll definitely buy something, but since his cameras seem to last him an average of less than four months each, he can be pretty sure that he'll get bored with the D7000 'round about the time that the next big thing comes out--or by June, whichever comes first. So he'd may as well just get another D90, since those are going for cheap right now and put himself in a better position for that shiny, new D800 (which is going to be soooo great that there will be no way to live without it!!) ;)
     
  16. John.B, Feb 18, 2011
    Last edited: Feb 18, 2011

    John.B macrumors 601

    John.B

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2008
    Location:
    Holocene Epoch
    #16
    At least flosseR has the good sense to sell the old stuff. I just keep my old stuff around until it's worthless. (Anyone interested in buying a 50D? LOL!)

    I wish it had VR (or that the Canon version had IS)... :(

    The 16-85mm on a D7000 is a great combination if the 24-120mm full frame focal lengths suit your eye. Unfortunately, that lens is not included in Nikon's current round of rebates ([threadjack] which strangely never actually seem to expire [/threadjack].

    If he's looking at the D300s or D7000, the D400 is literally right around the corner... ;)
     
  17. tfa8rva macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2011
    #17
    I'd say if you have the budget for the Nikkor 17-55 f/2.8 then go for it. I on the other hand have a limited budget, so I'm using a Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM on my D7000. I've been very please with this lens...and it's $900 bucks cheaper.

    A couple of example shots....actually taken with my old D80 body.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  18. Cliff3 macrumors 65816

    Cliff3

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2007
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    #18
    Current rumors have the D700 replacement showing up in late March or April. If the D300 replacement follows the same release pattern as the D300, then it will be announced at the same time or shortly after the announcement for the D4. The D4 is expected to be announced sometime this Fall.

    Shipments for either camera are likely to lag a couple of months behind the announcement. The D7000 is still somewhat difficult to find 5 months after it was announced and I would expect that to be true for these unannounced cameras too. Probably even worse since production quantities are much lower for pro bodies versus consumer cameras like the D7000.

    FWIW, it looks like your 50D is selling for around $800. That's not bad.
     
  19. flosseR thread starter macrumors 6502a

    flosseR

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2009
    Location:
    the cold dark north
    #19
    ok, I have a semi high turn over in lenses/bodies.. that is true. On a side note you cannot count the 5d mark 2, that was a mistake :).The problem with where I live is that you cannot rent equipment here. The rent alone will cover the new item in 2 weeks and renting something for a couple of days is , in my opinion, not enough.
    I guess i am fortunate enough to hold a position where i travel around a LOT (146000 miles last year) so I can purchase equipment at a price and sell it at home without loosing anything. I am not making a profit either but the money that I have invested into this hobby hasn't increased or decreased. I am also not buying things just to flog them. I have a few lenses that I am very fond of and that I keep because I like their output and performance and handling. Yes, one of my best friends is a professional photographer for a large newspaper with access to any lens you could think of. but you don't want to ask all the time for lens loans...

    For example, I like the fact that I can talk about sigma,tokina etc. lenses because I owned them not because someone on the internet wrote a review that I read :)

    personally that is a huge value because I am forming my own opinions.

    now, enough defending myself :)

    It is correct that I would come full circle if I buy the 24-70mm but in retrospect that was probably a lens I shouldn't have sold. Its a great performer but it was part of the package :(

    I just never thought of the possibility of adding a 10-24 or 12-24 to the collection. The 17-55 f2.8 Nikon looks still tempting but I just don't know .. and the announcement of the d400/d800 etc.. well it will be interesting to see if they can ship them faster than the last couple of cameras that were announced and shipped, as mentioned before, 5 months later. They are almost as bad as Nokia :)

    cheers for all the input though.
    //F
     

Share This Page