liljuddakalilknyttphotogra Posted March 20, 2009 Author Share Posted March 20, 2009 <p><strong>Hi Mary</strong> -<br /> 18-200VR is good for the D300 - - but not on the D700. Guess I want something which I feel will work for both of them....<br /> <strong>Hi Sean</strong> -<br /> Thank you for your input. It really comes down to how you shoot I think....<br> <br /> LOL LOL LOL <strong>Thank you Daniel</strong> - if for nothing else - at least for the good laugh....<br> <br /> <strong>Thank you Brian</strong> -<br> I did consider the 35-70 f/2.8..... But decided it was/is not wide enough.... I will tell Ross hi, he's not home from work yet.<br> Lil :)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertbody Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 <p>I had 35-70mm f/2.8 shortly, didn't enjoy it on my F100, the push-pull can be a strange way to focus for a small range like that, it didn't feel much like a zoom. I would rather take a 50mm f/1.8, because that's what the zoom can feel like, the range doesn't give much variety for most applications.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew_gale Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 <p>how about the 50/1.8 and some walking? Lightest combo I know of :-P</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rayyeager Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 <p>Hey, if you really want to spend some money how about the Nikon 17-35mm F2.8. I use it as my walk around on the D300 and my wide on the D700. Not that much lighter than the 24-70, but feels a ton more comfortable when handheld ... Ray.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
debejyo Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 <p>nobody counts the camera weight... get a D40 kit.... I'll sell you mine (LOL)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jvf Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 <p>Lil. just come home from a 8 days vacation carrying a D700 with battery pack and 24-70 2,8 8 hours a day and the pains in my shoulder only lasted a day or two. It is heavy! But get yourself a OP-TECH strap instead of the Nikon standard strap. It's amazing how much it helps taken the load of ones shoulder. It is also cheaper than a new lens</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert_benner1 Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 <p>My favorite lens and camera combo to go walking with is the D700 and 50mm f/1.4 AF-D. I also think that by using a prime like the 50 you improve your skills, you learn to move more and find the right angle.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stwrtertbsratbs5 Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 <p>I agree with John. One or two fast primes are great when you are walking about. And you already own the 50/1.8, Lil Judd. The flip side is that the economy needs a stimulus . . .</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derek_thornton1 Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 <p>Hey Lil,</p> <p>Dont forget about the 60mm f/2.8 and the 105mm f/2.8. Macro photography is very fun. The lenses that you are interested in are not much better than the 18-200mm you are trying to get rid of. The 24-85mm is pretty nice but not as nice as the 24-70mm. If you are wanting to decrease weight the primes would be best. However, the 105mm is quite heavy. Also, the 60mm and 105mm do not have to be used for closeup only. I use my 60mm and 105mm for landscapes all the time.</p> derek-thornton.artistwebsites.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jane_rickard Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 <p>Don't buy the lens, Mat's correct, go Crumpler. I have serious back and shoulder issues and have two Crumpler bags and wouldn't be without them. Good looking and simply distribute the weight correctly.<br> They do such a good job I'm even considering getting a 3lb red ring in the future to go with my new 50D. I never would have considered that before the big Crumpler.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobsimsphoto Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 <p>I would stay away from the Tamron 28-75. It is very poorly built.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilkka_nissila Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 <p>Add a 28mm f/2.8 Ai-S Nikkor; you can combine it with the 50/1.8 and a tele of your choice. I don't think going down the variable aperture zoom path makes much sense with the D700.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glockman99 Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 <p>...You want ME to talk you out of buying a new lens?<br> Ok. If you buy a new lens, I'll hunt you down, beat you up, and take that new lens from you. (I AM big-enough, and mean-enough to do it.).<br> How's that?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
photo5 Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 <p>Bob, you must be rough with your equipment. There is nothing wrong with the Tamron 28-75mm build quality if you treat your equipment well. And there are no reviews that I know of that states the lens is 'very poorly built'.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdigi Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 <p>Why don't you ad a fast prime in the FL that you use most. This could create some new photographic opportunities to you and make your setup more versatile. I used to own the 28-75 Tamron and while its a decent lens it will not match a high end pro zoom in anyway.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liljuddakalilknyttphotogra Posted March 20, 2009 Author Share Posted March 20, 2009 <p><strong>Thank you Robert</strong> ,<br> I have the 50mm f/1.8 - - still would need to pick up a wide angle.... :)<br> <strong>Thanks Galen</strong> ,<br> got that one - 50mm f/1.8<br> <strong>Thanks Ray </strong> -<br> don't see the 17-35 working for me.... I already have the 14-24....<br> <strong>Hi Dedejyo</strong><br> no - no D40x please..... ;-) Sorry but I think I'll pass<br> <strong>Hi Jens</strong> ,<br> you are so right about the camera strap. I have a Tamrac on the D300 & a Crumpler on the D700 - - have not used a Nikon strap in many years.....<br> <strong>Thank you Robert Benner</strong> ,<br> I am considering going to a 50mm f/1.4 D from my 50mm f/1.8 - so that is a thought...<br> <strong>Thank you Robert Budding</strong> ,<br> yes the economy needs stimulus.... You are tight - I do have the 50mm f/1.8 - adding a 28mm or a 60mm would be a good idea....<br> <strong>Hi D.F. Thornton</strong> ,<br> I've been debating the 60mm f/2.8 macro for a while... A good thought. But not the 105VR - I will need something wider.....<br> <strong>Thanks Jane</strong> ,<br> I need to look into more efficient ways to carry more than one lens. I'll check things out...<br> <strong>Thanks Bob</strong> ,<br> sorry to hear you had issues with the Tamron. I've heard a lot of good things about it.<br> <strong>Hi Ilkka</strong> ,<br> You are on to something.... I wish I'd kept my 28mm f/2.8 - - it lives with my best friend back home in Stockholm. ;-) I'll start looking for a new one.<br> <strong>OK Dann</strong> - -<br> this thread is preferably going to be executed in a none violent manner..... ;-)</p> <p>Thank you all for your input. I have some ideas. Yes the 50mm f/1.8 - which I already have - is a great walk around lens. A new 28mm f/2.8 would be a good addition - as would the 60mm f/2.8 D.... I need to decide if I want to upgrade my 50mm to the f/1.4 D - - I do not want the G<br> Thanks for all the help to remind me I really don't need another lens. The 24-70 is a wonderful lens. I need to get over my fear of using it... But I do so handle that lens with such fear due to the mishap last year.....<br> Thanks all</p> <p>Lil :-)</p> <p> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike grossman Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 <p>Prime prime prime. Small and light. They're like microwave ovens - once you get one, you'll wonder how you ever lived without it. :-) On my D700 I enjoy my 35/2 lots. For something a bit different you might also consider the very compact and manual focus Voigtlander 40/2. I just ordered one today - can't wait to get it.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liljuddakalilknyttphotogra Posted March 20, 2009 Author Share Posted March 20, 2009 <p><strong>Thanks Tommy</strong> -<br> wish I knew which FL that would be. ;-) I'm all over the map unfortunately....<br> <strong>Thanks Mike</strong> -<br> I'm considering a few primes now.... & no - no more MF lenses. Always creates problems when we ask anyone else to take a shot for us...<br> Not that I'd hand over either camera to a stranger mind you....<br> Lil :-)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael_a._shapiro Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 <p>Since your post appears on the home page, I'll add my opinion. Sell all your lenses and buy a $250 50/1.4. If you can't get good images with that, none of the other lenses will work either.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdigi Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 <p>I am from the Canon world but I would think something in the 24-28mm range and then an 85 - 100mm range to go with your 50 would be a great set of primes.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liljuddakalilknyttphotogra Posted March 20, 2009 Author Share Posted March 20, 2009 <p>Michael A. Sharpiro wrote:</p> <blockquote> <p>"Since your post appears on the home page, I'll add my opinion. Sell all your lenses and buy a $250 50/1.4. If you can't get good images with that, none of the other lenses will work either."</p> </blockquote> <p>I don't know what to think Michael A Shapiro - but sarcasm or whatever does not belong here. It's got nothing to do with not being able to get good photos or something like that & I do take offense to your reply. :-(<br> <strong>Thank you Tommy</strong> -<br> a very kind suggestion. I was trying to keep a light weight setup with the 70-300VR & a second lens. Now it seems to be growing to a third or so....<br> Lil :-)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim r Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 <p>I don't know the Nikon system and suggest you consider a prime lens in a focal length equvilant to say 28mm - 50mm (35mm format) @f1.4 to 2 for when people visit. Primes are typically shorter in length then zooms. Spend 1 month shooting only with the prime of your choice and the improvement in your output and craft quality will make it worth the investment.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
josephwalsh Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 <p>Michael A. Sharpiro wrote:</p> <blockquote> <p>"Since your post appears on the home page, I'll add my opinion. Sell all your lenses and buy a $250 50/1.4. If you can't get good images with that, none of the other lenses will work either."</p> </blockquote> <p>I don't know what to think Michael A Shapiro - but sarcasm or whatever does not belong here. It's got nothing to do with not being able to get good photos or something like that & I do take offense to your reply. :-(<br> <strong>Lil, I love ya but I think Michael's reply is not sarcasm but his honest opinion..</strong><br> <strong>It's just not about what lenses you own.</strong><br> <strong><br /> </strong><br> Lil: "It's got nothing to do with not being able to get good photo." <br> Indeed.</p> <p> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liljuddakalilknyttphotogra Posted March 20, 2009 Author Share Posted March 20, 2009 <p><strong>Thank you Jim</strong> ,<br> I have a 50mm f/1.8 which I'm considering upgrading to a f/1.4 & potentially a 24 - 28mm as well. Appreciate your input.<br> <strong>Hi Joe</strong> ,<br> thank you for the feedback on this. I have been most unsure as to what to make out of Michael's comment. I am still unsure why the comment. But I'm not going down that road.... The idea that I would sell all my lenses & shoot solely with a 50mm is just insane. I'm an amateur wildlife photographer & a 50mm with small birds would be insane. But that's me & it may well be the headache "talking"..... <br> I will however agree - - it's not all about the lenses we own. Which is why I today have ordered a "fanny pack like" camera bag which I can carry around my waist. I will have no problem carrying the 24-70 & the 70-300VR for these kind of outings. I will even have room for a 50mm f/1.4 or my already purchased f/1.8</p> <p>Thanks for the help</p> <p>Lil :-)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
larry_pao Posted March 21, 2009 Share Posted March 21, 2009 <p>Your 24-70 f2.8 is one of the best that you can get. Why not keep it and buy a 35-70 f2.8 for your walk-around. It's almost as sharp, it's much smaller and you can get it for a song.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now