D700 and lenses

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by sukumaran_r, Feb 14, 2009.

  1. Keen to get insights from experienced professionals on what would be a good walkabout lens on a D700 ?
  2. My first choice would be the 24-70 but I know a few who prefer the ultra wide angle 14-24. It really depends on what focal lengths you use most often when walking around.
  3. 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.
    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.
    Just like the anything else, ask 10 people you'll get ten different answers. Everybody has their own pets.
  4. 35/70 2.8 if I can`t change lenses. add 24 2.8 and 28 2.8 if i feel strong. add a 105 or 80/200 either with the wide or in place of.
    Maybe just a new 28/105 consumer grade zoom if I did not expect low light.
  5. 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.
  6. jvf


    I am the very satisfied owner of a D700 and my walkaround lens is the 24-70 2:8.
    Did have to get another strap though, a potoproshop strap, it's a little heavy.
  7. Another vote for the 24-70, although as already noted, it is a heavy combination. The weight is not an issue for me, but could be for some.
  8. I think of the 24-70 as a good staggeraround lens.
    My preference is a 50mm prime. It's smack in the middle of the 24-70, so you just walkaround a little bit more, forwards or backwards as needs be, and avoid backache in the bargain.
  9. I have the 24-70/2.8. Great lens. But as a walkround? Not for me. Too big. too bulky, too heavy. I like to have the 17-35/2.8 mounted, and I will add a 50/1.8 and a 105/2.5 in the bag. Or I will replace the zoom with a 35/2 or 24/2.8.
  10. Tamron 28-75 2.8 very plastic, light, sharp and fast focusing.
  11. 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.
  12. 24-85/3.5-4.5 AF-S - unfortunately no longer in the program. Find it interesting that no one so far has mentioned the 24-120/4.5-5.6 VR, especially since it was sold as the kit lens with the D700.
  13. "kit lenses" = "kid lenses" :)
    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.
    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'.
    24-70mm + 70-200mm...... would cover it all, but indeed a heavy combo. 24-70mm + 180mm f/2.8? not losing much.
    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.
  14. 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.
  15. Sorry, that should have read "Gyeongbokgung"
  16. 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.
    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.
  17. 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.
  18. I recently purchased a Sigma 50mm F1.4 lens and accidentally put it on my D700 instead of D300. I did a lot of shooting at F1.4 and F1.8. What a great combination for low light and narrow depth of field images.
  19. 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.
  20. 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.
    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.
    Really, it depends on what you feel comfortable carrying and what YOU plan to shoot.
  21. 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.
    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.
  22. 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).
    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.
    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.
  23. Oops...I just saw that the question was for professionals...and certainly I am not ;-)
  24. 50mm f1.4 or 35mm f2
  25. I use the 24-70 or 17-35 f2.8 lenses as my primary walkabouts on my D700. When walking with the D300, can't beat the 18-200.
  26. I agree with Jon Butterwick.
  27. was in the same dilemna few weeks ago & decided to go for the 24-70 f2.8.
    if i want to go lighter I'll consider the 18-35 f3.5 and the 24-85 f3.5-5.6 combo.
  28. just reading everyones answers is rather interesting, it shows everyone is differentr which is what we want. me personally, well for a start i dont have a D700 i have a D90 much lighter (and i couldnt afford a D700 at the time) but the theory is still the same.
    the meaning of a walk around lens for me is, something that stays on your camera, something you dont need to change. on my D90 its an 18-200 (i know all its limitations) and having that hanging around my neck for long lengths of times is heavy enough, i cant imagine how having a D700 with a 24-70 would feel (but i would like to try none the less) dont get me wrong i am young and fit and could physically carry 5 x D700s....although refer back above (but i would like to try none the less)
    if i had a D700 i would defo get the 24-70 at some stage and use it for studio and professional shoots but for purely just walking around on holidays or whatever i think i would take the 24-85 something lighter.
    a person i know has a Nikon camera cant remember which one...and she ONLY has the 50mm f/1.4 and shoots everything with that and loves it, her portfolio is better than anything I have taken
  29. The 24-120 sure gets a bad rap — maybe deservedly so — but I use it until I can get something "better" and have no problem getting images accepted for stock. If I want something faster, I have the 50/1.4G and, of course, I'm not doing critical architectural work.
    I'm wondering about the Sigma 24-70 as an affordable alternative. I hear you have to "get lucky" with particular Sigma examples, but I've always had good luck with their products.
  30. I'm a professional photojournalist. For me, it would be a Zeiss 28/2 and Zeiss 50/1.4. Both lenses together are smaller than many fast zooms, and they are sharp, fast and wonderfully built. If I were going to take only one lens, it would probably be a 35/2, but then again I don't like zooms so I may be biased.

Share This Page