D810 in a very narrow environment

<p>End of the month I have to take photos in relatively low light and very narrow space of people working with products in boiling water. I have the D810 and imho only good lenses, however, the experts tell me, that they are not good on D810 only on my D700! If I decide to use D810 - very likely – which of the these lenses would you recommend:<br>

Nikon 17-35mm f/2.8<br>

Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8 ver 1 without VR<br>

I have primes from 50mm to 135mm, but I do not have any wide primes.<br>

Anyone with experience with any of these combinations?</p>

<p>17-35mm.</p>

<p>Clearly not experts in photography. Were they perhaps bankers?<br>

All the lenses you mention should be good in low light. Since the narrow space wideangle could be best but it also depends on the pictures you have to take, overview or close-up.</p>

The quality of the lens is constant, it's just the

higher resolution of a D810 shows tiny lens

aberrations more readily.

 

If you need wide, you need wide. The 17-35mm

would be my weapon of choice if I didn't have the

14-24mm zoom Nikkor.

<p>It has been proven that any lens will give better technical results on a D810 compared to a D700 when printed at the same size so don't listen to such stories. I don't know why people make them up.</p>

<p>I'm sure either lens will be fine, although possibly not wide open. The concern for me is that you're taking photos of people - and if you're going to get the kind of shot where you include a wide angle of them (because you're necessarily up close) you're going to get wide-angle stretching at the edges of the frame. (I refuse to call it "distortion" because it isn't - you just need to get your head very close to the image to compensate.) That may be fine, or may mean that you'd struggle to use the edges of images anyway, depending on what you're doing. Not an issue for the flames themselves, though. I'd take both, and bring a monopod and a cable release so you can stick the camera in corners where you're not behind it. Oh, and it sounds like a protective filter might be wise (or, if you're fussed about reflections of flame, maybe a polariser.)<br />

<br />

I've not used the wider lens, only the 24-70. It's in no way bad on a D810, but might not be as crisp as the best primes - and it does have a bit of "sombrero" field curvature, which is a bit awkward to handle. (The 14-24 has quite a strong concave field curvature, which is the main reason I end up stopping mine down so much.) I now own the Tamron version (I'd only hired the other - the Tamron is possibly a bit better behaved while being cheaper and smaller), but I'd not feel in a rush to replace the Nikkor if I had it.</p>

<p>Those two lenses should be excellent on the D810, only in the corners you may expect some softness that is less evident in the latest 24-70/2.8 E VR and 14-24/2.8. In a documentary photography context the corner softness should be of no consequence. However, that boiling water at a close distance sounds potentially problematic! I don't know how hot temperatures the lenses can handle but the maximum operation temperature for the camera body at least is +40 C if I recall correctly. I would use NC or UV filter on the lenses to protect the front element from splashes of hot water, if that is a risk.</p>

The wide end of the old 17-35mm/f2.8 AF-S is no longer good on modern DSLRs such as the D800 and D810. The edges

at 17, 18mm are soft. It is fine if you mainly use the mid to long range of the zoom, or you only care about the quality of

the center of the frame.

 

I suppose it is unlikely that you'll put someone at the edge of the frame at 20mm. The person will look very distorted.

<p>Since the photo shoot will take place during the busiest working period, I will have not come very close to the boiling water and portraits of the workers will definitely be with the 24-70mm, which I use 80% of the time on the D810. The shoot is not something, which are organized with the workers, I just get in and out, so I am not worried about the equipment I may get permission to stay long enough, so I can try the 17-35mm for overview of the workflow - or I can visit them again, as not too far.<br /> Thank you everybody incl. Jos for the comments, which confirm my original thoughts.</p>

<p>If your camera and lens are cold, you might get condensation on the lens/filter, so make sure it's at least a bit warm.</p>

<p>John Stockdale - cold camera/lenses will not be a problem, as we have around 30 gr C already 6 am and I am on motorbike, but can be an issue when some of us go by car, some of my friends insist on using aircon in the car!</p>

<p>either lens will likely be fine. the question is whether you will need to zoom in past 35mm; if so, i would take the 24-70. if you will mostly be taking wide shots and need wider than 24mm, take the 17-35. as others have suggested, don't put people at the edges at 17-18mm if you can help it. 20mm is generally as wide as i like to go for people shots. comparing the two lenses, the weaknesses are full frame corners with the 17-35 and distortion at 24mm with the 24-70. if you center your subjects and avoid shots which emphasize the subpar aspects of the lens, you should be ok. i think the recommended lens list assumes optical perfection and landscape use. in the center of the frame, either lens should be a good performer. i prefer to shoot the 24-70 at f/4, but i wouldnt say it's terrible wide open. </p>

<p>Eric Arnold - thank you very much for your comments. 17-35mm has been used exclusively for landscape in the past, whereas the 24-70mm to anything. The shoot will be focus more on workflow than portraits, and should there be time for the latter, then the 24-70 or 50&85mm will be my friends.</p>

<p>I use my 17-35 on my D810 all the time, I find the corners at 17mm are a bit soft due to some field curvature but other than that, in real world pro use it is actually great.</p>

<p>I had a 14-24 and got sick of having to repair it every year because the zoom helicoid is a crap design, a very expensive fix. I sold it and replaced it with the new 20mm 1.8G which is fantastic. </p>