1500 $ budget for a new lens

<p>Hi,<br>

I am a D700 user and i have Nikon 50mm 1.8 and 85 1.8 both auto-focus and i have a strange brand Katana 135mm 2.8 manuel focus lenses, i shoot everything except sport events, i have a 1500$ budget and planing to buy 20 2.8 and 180 2.8 AF Nikkors, is this a good plan or do i have to insist on 24-70 or 70-200 first, thanks for your help.</p>

<p>I realize this isn't a big help, but all of the options you mention sound like very good choices. I don't think you could much go wrong with any of them.</p>

<p>I would avoid the 20/2.8 prime; it's one of those lenses which do not work well with digital sensors. For general wide angle, I recommend the 24-70/2.8 if you want autofocus and don't mind the size of the thing, or if manual focus is ok for you, then consider the 35/1.4, 28/2, 28/2.8 Ai-S Nikkors and the Zeiss ZF lineup (the Zeiss lenses are more modern, excel in consistent corner-to-corner sharpness, with a different color and intensity contrast and "look", but they're more expensive than 2nd hand Ai-S Nikkors).</p>

<p>If you are interested in architectural shots and landscapes, a 24mm PC-E Nikkor is optically fabulous at f/5.6-f/11 but expensive. It allows you to control the convergence of lines and tilt the plane of focus to gain sharpness in near-to-far subjects. If you're really interested in a true superwide (you mentioned the 20mm), then the 14-24/2.8 Nikkor and the 21mm ZF are the current state of the art in that kind of lenses, though neither is small nor inexpensive.</p>

<p>The 180/2.8 AF (D) Nikkor is excellent, one of my favorite lenses. If you want the 70-200, wait for the new version (II) due this fall.</p>

<p>Ilkka,<br>

I love the character of MF lenses but i realized that i don't have a good eye for focusing manually, so MF lenses are unfortunately not an option for me.</p>

<p>What do you recommend instead of 20mm as a prime AF wide angle?</p>

<p>its a good plan if you dont mind switching lenses frequently and dont miss having a zoom. i wouldnt hesitate to get the 180/2.8 for the sharpness and bokeh. you'd be addressing a gaping hole--wideness--with the 20/2.8, but i'd research the wide options carefully before purchasing, including 3rd party 2.8 zooms.</p>

 

<p>Unfortunately, there is no really top-notch Nikon AF prime lens in the 17-28mm range. The 24-70mm zoom is superior to Nikon's 24mm and 28mm prime offerings. </p>

<p>If you must have a full frame AF lens wider than 24mm you perhaps need to bite the bullet on the Nikkor 14-24mm. A possible ultra-wide solution would be the Sigma 14mm f2.8, or their 15-30mm zoom, but that 14-30mm lens is known to flare like crazy. There really is a gap for any high quality 15 to 21mm full frame prime that fits Nikon.</p>

<p>You have a little LED on your viewfinder that tells you when you are in focus, even with a manual lens. It works great on my D3. <br>

80-200 AF-D (aprox. $1000 new) is not bad, even for D700. I use it on D3 and is super sharp! 17-35 is OK, better for film camera and is kind of flaring on my D3 ($1200-1400 new). I just discovered the manual 35/2 AIS that is cheap and great ($200 used). No need for the expensive 35/1.4 unless you want to pay $$$$$... There are a lot of choices and good glass that you can get cheaper on the used market from known dealers.</p>

 

<p>"You have a little LED on your viewfinder that tells you when you are in focus, even with a manual lens. It works great on my D3"</p>

<p>Yep, i know that but when you move an inch then you have to re-focus then i miss the object, you know what i mean, i don't always work with the tripod.</p>

<p>A 28-70 f/2.8 is a great choice, so is the 35-70 f/2.8D is also a great lens.</p>

<p>A 35 f/2 might be a good choice for you too.</p>

<p>Merheba Uzay, save another 300 bucks and buy the 24-70 :) </p>

<p>As we are talking about wides, I would suggest the AF-S 17-35 2.8. It is excellent and wide-angle photography gives a lot to learn. It even lets room in your budget for a 180/2.8 on the long end, if you find a good deal on a second hand one.</p>

 

<p>I use several wide AIS primes with my D700. All of them are soft in the corners wide open. By f8-f11 they are acceptable to good in the corners. After using them for a year I still like them and don't feel the need to buy a big, heavy, expensive Zeiss wide. You may be able to find a used 180mm f2.8 AF-D and 17-35mm f2.8 if you look carefully. I don't find focus an issue with the 20mm f2.8 when stopped down and I love my 180mm f2.8. There is also the 18-35mm Nikkor and a few other third party wide zooms that may give decent results. I did not care for the 18-35 Nikkor enough to keep it.</p>

<p>I would get an used 17-35mm f2.8 first and save more for 70-200mm or 80-200mm f2.8 later. One drawback is all of these lenses are heavy. If you prefer a prime lense for its light weight, 20mm is a little wide for me, I find myself use 28mm more than 20mm, 24mm wouldn't be bad either.</p>

<p>There is no lens like the 14-24/2.8 AFS, it beats them all. Highly recommended and well spent money.</p>