Best lens for Nikon D700

Hi friends: I think the best lens for street photography is the 24-70mm because I have the besto of two worlds, a bit of wide angle and a bit of zooms. But when I read what the experts say, they prefer very wide angle and primes! And I do not understand why. Can you please choose the best lens for the D700 and why? Thanks a lot

<p>You are partly right, but the Nikon 24-70 is a bit too huge and heavy. So the 35mm 2.0 is better to carry, and better in low light. I have both the 50 1.4 (bit more than 200 gram) and the ca.500gram zoom Tamron 28-75 2.8<br>

I like them both. The 50 1.4 in the night and the zoom in daylight.<br>

I believe you should have the Tamron 28-75 to begin with. Working with it will tell you how wide lwns you prefer, and then you lern which prime has the the best angle of view for you. The Tamrion 28-75 will not break your economy to hard. The only bad thing with the Tamron is that the corners are less sharp than with primes or the best Nikonzoom.</p>

<p>I think a lot of the preference for primes over zooms is a holdover from a time in the past when zooms where not as sharp as primes. Today this is not the case as zooms like Nikon's 24-70 2.8 are equally sharp and often sharper than some prime lenses. <br>

Unless you are also doing a lot of low-light work, the main negative of the 24-70 is it's size/weight. In which case, it might be good to supplement your street shooting kit with a classic 50 1.4 or 35 f2 lens. </p>

<p> Carlos, there is no best lens. There's lenses that aid and abet your vision and application. For some people, it might be the 24-70, for others, a 35/2. You have mentioned before wanting a lens for street candids and portraits. 70mm will work for torso to bust length portraits. Some people don't mind a nose-heavy rig, others prefer the lower polar moment of a light, short prime lens. For low-light, f/2.8 is not very fast, so they prefer a prime.</p>

<p>In other words, there is no best lens. All lenses are compromises between many parameters. It doesn't matter what the experts say. In the end, <em>you </em> need to make a decision that works for you.</p>

<p>The best lens is the one you have on your camera when you need to make a shot. I think the reason that primes are touted, and it is lost on most today, is that when you have one lens on the camera, you learn to see with that lens and it is perfect for everything you ("see") want to photograph.</p>

<p>There is a certain "art" of photography that gets lost in equipment that having a camera with a prime brings you back to.</p>

<p>Carlos - I don't think there is a best lens, only the one which delivers what you want when you want it. By way of example, I spent a year in Europe with only a 35mm lens on my film camera the first time I went. I borrowed a friend's 135mm for a week, but the 35 really did it for me, street photos and some routine portrait work. It was small, precise, and always delivered. Today, many years later and with a collection of cameras, I often still use a 35 supplemented by a 90 or 135 on film cameras, and a 20, 50, 105 macro on my DSLR. I have longer lenses for some nature work, but I still rely heavily on the shorter focal lengths. Although I have some terrific zooms, I still generally prefer prime lenses...they're smaller and lighter. Your comment on the experts preferring very wides I think is just another trendy thing, really triggered by DSLR cameras which have cropped sensors (think DX format) rather than full format (compared to 35mm), and certain types of action shooting (think skateboards). In the end, it is each photographer's choice, and experts tend to report trends...not necessarily what is best for a job. Trends are driven by popular demand and marketing hype from the manufacturers. So there you have it....do you really care what the "experts" say the latest trend is, or do you care about what works for you?</p>

<p>A lot of street photographers like to work with small cameras they can hide, that's why Leicas are widely used for it. Primes are used because they are almost always smaller than a zoom. True, they are not as versatile, but often that massive zoom kills spontaneity because it's just so, so obvious. It screams "I'm taking your picture!" In all honesty, I'd rather have a D40 and the 35/1.8 than a D3 and the 24-70 zoom.</p>

<p>Oh, and I'd use a 50/1.4</p>

<p>I want to suggest something similar to what somebody said about a lens question for the D3 yesterday or so.</p>

<p>If you are buying a D700 and don't know what lens you want with it and have to ask us, you might be buying the wrong camera. </p>

<p>But if you're set on one, if it were me, I'd get the D700 and at first JUST the excellent/cheap 50mm f1.8D, then after shooting with it for a while, you'll know if you need something wider, and maybe you'll know exactly what.</p>

<p>john a. and stephen lewis gave you a good combination of thoughts. whatever works for your syle of shooting is the best for you.</p>

<p>in my younger years (film), carrying an F2AS an an F3 with a mid zoom and a prime (sometimes a longer zoom) is nothing to me as far as carrying them is concerned. i even run with them (especially when dodging bullets and batons :-)).........now i'd go with the lightest i can go but with the functionality that i want......................i did try to see the D700 in person and ouch! it was too heavy and expensive for me. imagine adding the 24-70mm there.</p>

<p>but just to throw in something at you, you are right, i would say the 24-70mm is the best range for you for street. but i would suggest you carry an f/1.8 prime in your pocket for extreme low light and for those situations where in you have to take a sneak peak indoors.</p>

<p>me now, i carry a D60 with a tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 for street. sweet on my neck or shoulder. sometimes i mount my reliable 18-70mm. whatever i have mounted, i have the 50mm f/1.8 in my pocket or bag --- excellent for street portraits. i'm capable of shooting manual, thanks to my film days' training. i like the rangefinder function of the D60.</p>

<p>so good luck in your choices and have fun.</p>

<p> </p>

Hi Peter: thanks for your answer. I do not care about weight and I love zooms. For me the 2s-70 works very well. BUT I wanted to know your opinions because I think that is what forums are for! In this way I can learn everyday a bit more.

<p>Carlos, I wonder how much good it is to know what others use anyway. It is more about working style and how you use the camera/lens than what lens or camera you use. I could use a wide lens and another person the same lens as well, but how we use it can be totally different. One of us might use it to get into the action while the other might use it to stand back and distance oneself from what is going on. The results would be so different and yet the equipment identical. </p>

<p>If I were doing "street" photography, I'd be using a Nikon D5000 as the camera. It's very small an unobtrusive and does very well with ISO up to 1600, maybe even 3200. The other big feature I like about it is the flip out LCD screen. Using that I could have the camera at waist level and people wouldn't realize I was taking their photo. For lens I'd want the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 in low light and the Nikon 16-85mm VR otherwise. These are DX lenses and that won't help you. If you think you can get away with a huge camera and a huge lens, then yes, the 24-70mm f2.8 would be the most versatile. Maybe carry the Sigma 50mm f1.4 for extreme low light, if you ever photo in those conditions. I agree with John, above. As you see, my own approach would be different than yours. I prefer a more discrete camera like the D5000, especially with "waist level" screen.<br>

Kent in SD</p>

<p>The D700 is a big camera and 24-70 is a huge lens - not the ideal street combo. If you want to use the D700 buy an old manual focus prime since you don't need af for street photography.</p>

<p>Hi Carlos - if you can get hold of one second hand as it is now discontinued, I'd try the Nikon AF Nikkor 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6D, it used to be called the "Street Sweeper" and was very popular with news people because of it's excellent optics, lightness and speed of focus. The newer VR version is a bit of a dog IMO. I use a D700 and a D3 - if I am traveling light I usually have a 28-200 on. I have both the 14-24 and the 24-70 and must admit that the 24-70 is seldom off the D3, but I do not mind the extra weight. The older 17-35 and 35-70 are also worth a look at. </p>

<p>Carlos... If you don't need f/2.8, consider the 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G AF-S lens as a lighter, smaller zoom alternative. I'll also cast a vote for the 35mm f/2.0D or a 50mm 1.8 or 1.4 on a D700, depending on your vision.</p>

<p>But I'm more inclined to agree with Kent. A D5000 or the excellent (and even smaller) D40 makes a great low-key street camera, especially with something like the 35mm 1.8G lens mounted.</p>

<p>It also depends on the streets where you shoot. I heard that it may not be good for your health to come along with a very big and expensive camera :-P</p>