Jump to content

D700 and lenses


sukumaran_r

Recommended Posts

<p>As Bruce said, it just depends on what you want to do and what whimsey one has. That after all to me is what casual shooting is about. I'll just pick something and shoot it. My 28-70 is pretty much on all the time. It's has great range and excellent qualities. But I also throw on a Hasselblad 110 2 Planar TStar also.<br>

Take a look at what focal length you shoot mostly and pick something in that area. An older 28-105 3.5/4.5 is another good one with a longer spread and a very usable 1:2 macro.<br>

Just like the anything else, ask 10 people you'll get ten different answers. Everybody has their own pets.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I am not a professional but I have been thinking about a walkaround lens lately..I think it might depend on where you are walking around, how long are you going to be walking and what shape and configuration you bag is and also do you tend to prefer wide angle, normal or tele..But for myself I want a light lens, very capable of low light as well as blurring out the background..That means for me a f2.8 or faster lens..In order for it to be light then it has to be a prime..So I figure a 28mm, 35mm or a 50mm lens would be real good. A short f2.8 zoom would be very good also. Just not as light which may or may not be a factor. </p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>The 17-35 is maybe 5-6 oz lighter than the 24-70. If you really want a lighter weight alternative, consider the 24-85 which is nearly 1 lb lighter than the 24-70. Downsides are not AF-S, older style glass, and variable f/2.8-4 aperture but nearly 1/3 the cost of the 24-70 with a 1:2 macro and more range.</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>"kit lenses" = "kid lenses" :-)<br>

24-70mm f/2.8 is an easy top-quality recommendation, but if you really walk around with it in your hand, it gets heavy. 24-85mm f/2.8-4 would be lighter and probably as good at f/8... there were some issues with 24mm side of that lens.<br>

It's hard to argue against 24-70mm, except for weight. Then there are primes, but at least you want a single zoom with a bit of range. And there is different 'walking around'.<br>

24-70mm + 70-200mm...... would cover it all, but indeed a heavy combo. 24-70mm + 180mm f/2.8? not losing much.<br>

My walk-around set is all my gear basically, i don't like leaving gear behind, i have with my D300: - 17-35mm f/2.8 - 50mm/1.8 and 105mm/2.8 VR, sometimes switching lenses in a fanny pack, but for something like sunsets I just know i won't be switching lenses before the sun sets {from my 105mm} and then if i want reflections of buildings in a lake, i know i won't be switching from my 17-35mm.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I got the D700 last month for a trip to Korea to welcome a new grandson. It's my first Nikon, and I couldn't afford anything other than the kit lens. Used it heavily indoors with the new baby, and outdoors for sightseeing, pretty much all focal lengths. For a walking around lens, I couldn't be happier, but it is heavy. Here's an example, shot at 66 mm, ISO 1600, 1/30 sec with VR at f 5.3. Lighting was from a window eight feet behind the baby, and an incandescent light about 5 feet over my left shoulder.</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Well, unless you have a very strong neck, I'd not recommend the Nikon 24-70. It is huge. I like my Tamron 17-35mm 2.8-4 as a walkaround lens. It is lightweight, sharp, and a great focal length. A good prime is also a good walkaround lens. Sometimes I like to just have my Nikon 35mm f2 AI manual focus prime on my D700.<br>

Seems like many on this forum thinks unless you're shooting with a Nikon 2.8 zoom, you're not a serious photographer. I got a lot of great use out of my Nikon 18-70mm DX zoom with my D70, D80, and D300. Nobody can tell me the photos aren't excellent. And my Tamron 17-35mm is also an excellent lens and I've gotten a lot of use out of a $150 investment. I hope to get the Nikon 24-85mm 2.8-4 this year.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I am not a pro but I do have a D700 and I walk around a lot. Sometimes I walk around for a couple of hours with my dog and a Nikkor 500m f4 P with six pound tripod. If I want to go light then I carry a couple of primes like a 35mm and 105mm, one in a pocket. I use the old AIS primes. I also have a 28-105mm that is light.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Dieter, no one mentioned the 24-120mm lens because it is not very good. As has been said before in a previous post, the D700 kit with the 24-120 VR "is like dressing Miss America in a burlap bag". Using this lens on such a high quality camera will make the camera look bad. If it wasn't for the notorious lack of sharpness and the fact that it is a weapon of mass distortion, it would otherwise be the ideal walkaround lens. My ideal D700 walkaround setup within my budget is a 17-35, 50 f/1.8, and 70-300 VR (all Nikkor). Probably throw in a 105mm Macro for good measure.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Like others have said it really depends on what your plan is for your "walk". For instance I braved the cold yesterday (-20 C) and went walking along the river in my city. I started with my D700 and a 14-24. After a little while I spotted a bird and quickly switched to my 70-200. Then a short time later I changed to my 24-70. If I would have had my Sigma 150 macro then it would have seen some use as well.<br>

Keep in mind I had all this gear along with my sb-900, grip, batteries, and cables in my Compu Trekker 2. I only started to get a little sore after 2 hours of walking at which point I fastened my lower strap (I don't know why I did not in the first place) and instantly felt better.<br>

Really, it depends on what you feel comfortable carrying and what YOU plan to shoot.</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>An AIS 24/2.8 on camera and either the 85/1.4 AIS or 105/2.5 K (Ai-modified) in my pocket. All lenses CPU-modified and with their shades on, of course, so they're ready for action. My standard "walk-around" combination for decades, works equally well on the DSLRs as it did with the film-based cameras of days long gone. Unlike many older wide-angles, the 24/2.8 AIS holds up very well on the FX cameras and really shines on the D3x. The 85/1.4 AIS, while not as sharp as the AFD 85/1.4 at the widest apertures, has less colour fringing and a beautiful manner in which it "draws" the image. The 105/2.5 purrs along as smoothly and effortlessly as ever after being used for 36 years, so you simply can't let such a companion down.</p>

<p>Sometimes, when I feel lazy, I put on the AFS 24-70 though. This is so people can't complain I'm not up to date.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>For me, in terms of "stays-on-D700-time-interval" (1st) AiS 35mm-f14, (2nd) AF-50mm/f14, and finally (3rd) AF-85mm/f14. I use to be lazy when it comes to changing lenses, what, at least in my case, has the effect of pushing me to be creative to take the shot (because often, it is not what would be considered the "ideal" focus lens for a subject). <br>

I also tried the AFD-50mm/f18 and AiS-50mm/f18, where the latter left me more satisfied in terms of image quality results. My preference, however, is my old AF-50mm/f14 (Made in Japan) over my modern AFD-50mm/f18.<br>

Still did not try the AFD-180mm/f28, since as I screwed it on my D70s I did not take it off again, because the results are everything that one could desire.</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...