DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> Upgrading & I need lens sugestions
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 8 of 8, (reverse)
AuthorThread
08/28/2011 08:46:17 PM · #1
I've decided to go for the D700, I just don't want to wait for an upgrade to a D800 one day...

Of my lenses
the
Sigma 10- 20mm f/3.5 EX-DC HSM
Nikon AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED VR

Work but are restricted

& my
Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D
Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 Di II LD Aspherical (IF) for Nikon

Work but are perhaps under powered for this camera.

I use the 10-20 daily so that is a must replace, but the 70-300 just collects dust. I'll be keeping the D200 so it may get some use.
The 17-50 is my next most used lens.

What should I get to replace the 10-20 & perhaps the 17-50?

Steven
08/28/2011 10:04:36 PM · #2
Im Looking at the

Nikon 17-55 2.8 ( $2129 )
&
Nikon 14-24 2.8 ( $2327 )

But each are expensive + the D700 body ( $2735 ) a scary prospect

Is there anything in a sigma/ tamron that would be as good but cheaper?

Actually thinking about it the 17mm on a full frame would be almost as wide as the 10-20 on my D200. So perhaps I need the 17-55 & something longer
08/28/2011 10:08:32 PM · #3
Somewhere around a 20mm prime and a 50mm prime each with the lowest f# you can afford.
08/28/2011 11:08:23 PM · #4
Originally posted by Shadowi6:


Nikon 17-55 2.8 ( $2129 )
&
Nikon 14-24 2.8 ( $2327 )

But each are expensive + the D700 body ( $2735 ) a scary prospect

Is there anything in a sigma/ tamron that would be as good but cheaper?

Actually thinking about it the 17mm on a full frame would be almost as wide as the 10-20 on my D200. So perhaps I need the 17-55 & something longer


But the 17-55 is a DX lens so it will only work as a DX on the full frame, I can't see the point in getting that lens at all for a full frame camera. This lens is the equivalent of a 24-70 really in full frame terms. ETA. I have the 17-55 and it's been one of my most used lenses on the D300.

I would say the 14-24 is the only way to go if you want the benefits of having the full frame.

Message edited by author 2011-08-28 23:10:30.
08/28/2011 11:11:48 PM · #5
Originally posted by Shadowi6:

Im Looking at the

Nikon 17-55 2.8 ( $2129 )
&
Nikon 14-24 2.8 ( $2327 )

But each are expensive + the D700 body ( $2735 ) a scary prospect

Is there anything in a sigma/ tamron that would be as good but cheaper?

Actually thinking about it the 17mm on a full frame would be almost as wide as the 10-20 on my D200. So perhaps I need the 17-55 & something longer


Why would you look at 17-55 ? that is a DX

you can do whatever you like with your money but for Nikon, FX "holy trinity" is 14-24 2.8, 24-70 2.8, 70-200 2.8

salmiakki just beat me about 17-55

only problem can be if you like to use filters on wide glass (14-24 does not take filters)

Message edited by author 2011-08-28 23:13:52.
08/28/2011 11:30:45 PM · #6
whoops thanks for that ok scratch the 17-55

Ive been quoted $6800 for the D700 the 14-24 2.8 & the 24-70 2.8

If the 14-24 doesn't take a filter can you use a coken P series on it? or is the problem that it doesn't have any thread on the front at all?
08/28/2011 11:36:35 PM · #7
if you like filters look at 17-35 afs
08/28/2011 11:40:18 PM · #8
D700 is awesome, enjoy! I wish I had the flow for that... but I spent it on my beloved 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII :)
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 07/25/2021 08:08:18 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2021 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 07/25/2021 08:08:18 AM EDT.