Should I keep 12-24mm or use 70-200mm on D90?

[kiatchun_sin]

<p>Hi everyone, I'm being fickle minded, and need some opinion & advice about my equipments.<br>

Current equipments:</p>

<ul>

<li>D90</li>

<li>AF-S 12-24mm </li>

<li>AF-S 24-70mm </li>

<li>AF-S 70-200mm VR</li>

<li>AF-S 50mm </li>

</ul>

<p>I'm planning to get a D700 soon as my main camera, and thinking of using my current D90 as 2nd body. I'm trying to decide which of these lens is best to use with D90 & which lens to go with the D700.<br>

Should I keep my 12-24mm to use with D90 & leave the rest for D700?<br>

Or should I revamp the list, sell the 12-24mm lens and get a 14-24mm and D700 instead (which will cost me more money) and use 70-200mm VR solely on the D90?<br>

Or am I better off to sell both D90 & 12-24mm lens, for a 14-24mm lens & D700, and use just D700 as main camera ?<br>

I shoot company events, landscape most of the time. Portraits & product shots occasionally.<br>

Appreciate your feedback.</p>

[hans_janssen]

<p>Why don't you try it for a month or so with these lenses: 12-24 on the D90 and the 70-200 on the D700 or on the D90 when 200mm isn't enough and the 24-70 on the D700.</p>

[Ed_Ingold]

<p>The 70-200 is a full-frame lens, and will work on either camera. The 24-70, also full-frame, will probably be the main lens for the D700 - very wide to medium tele. The 12-24 will only work on the D90, since it has a DX image circle. If you need a super-wide zoom, the 14-24 will work on either, or you could get a 17-35. The latter has about the same effect on the D90 as the 24-70 on the D700.</p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>First off, you mostly have a good kit for FX (and not, imho, the best combo for DX). So... get the D700... use it with just the lenses you have now. You should NOT buy a lens till you KNOW you need it. Once you shoot with the D700 for a little while (a week? two?) you'll know what you need.</p>

<p>But perhaps you are an ultra-wide junkie (like me) who just loves to shoot with that Tokina. I wouldn't start with the 14-24, though. It's very specialized and very very wide. I suspect many people buy it because it's the latest thing from Nikon, not because they really take proper advantage of 14mm on full-frame. The 17-35 is more practical for most of us and still outperforms many primes in its range, and it's a touch wider on FX than your 12-24 is on DX.</p>

[bms]

<p>keep the D90 and put the 12-24 on it. If it has not come out of your bag in a few months, sell both and get a 17-35 or a 14-24.... I am not a pro, don't know if you are. I tried the "two body thing" (D30/700) for a while and then sold the D300 andmy only DX lens since I NEVER used it.</p>

[sandysocks]

<p>200mm will seem shorter on the FX. Priority one should be a 300mm. Next, how about a macro?</p>

[ramon_v__california_]

<p>it seems like you don't need to sell to fund your purchase. just get the D700 now and play with combinations of your lenses. edward laid it down well, to start with. no need to purchase a lens either. you've got what you need. but you definitely need two bodies to do company functions more efficiently.</p>

[glenjo]

<p>Are you planning on using both cameras while you work? This is pretty common for PJ style shooting, a long lens on one camera hanging off one shoulder, and a wide on the other camera hanging off the other shoulder. (You'd better have strong shoulders to do that all day!) I was at an event yesterday (town hall meeting) and one of the PJs covering the event was using two D700s, one with the 70-200, and one with the 17-35. Otherwise, it's easy to get a slightly bigger gear bag and bring both cameras, but just carry/shoot one at a time.<br>

And just so you know, the 12-24 DX works pretty good as an 18-24 on FX, it only vignettes badly from 12 to about 18.</p>

 

[kiatchun_sin]

<p>I hope my shoulders can take the load, lolz!... But nevertheless, I am eager to move towards FX, although not entirely (to minimize cost).<br>

Initially I intended to use only 1 camera body, & was planning to shift to FX; so I sold my beloved 17-55 for the 24-70 lens. But after giving more thoughts about it, I am skewing towards using both cameras for shooting company events (DX & FX), so that I wouldn't need to change lens too often. So I am considering to keep the D90 and get the D700.<br>

Most probably, to use the 70-200 on D700 and 12-24 on D90 (i'm still considering). Should the 70-200 be on the D700? I read somewhere on internet, that it's better to use 70-200 on a crop sensor. If that is the case, then I would consider using 24-70 on the D700. So I'm all confused now, lolz!</p>

[glenjo]

<p>For shooting like a PJ, I would probably keep the 12-24 for the D90 only. I'd hate to blow a shot by working too fast and using the 12-24 at too wide an angle on an FX camera. That's a shame because it makes more sense to use DX for long work (and get the "lens boost" so the 70-200 seems to be a 105-300) and FX for wide work. You should get a good FX wide lens sooner or later.</p>

[mizuho_saito]

<p>For company events personally I would like the extra reach of the 70-200 on the D90 and stick the 24-70 on the D700 for pretty much everything else in the normal range. There is minor problems on the corners in terms of falloff and sharpness of the 70-200 on FX but for practical use it's mostly likely negligible as the corners will normally be out of focus anyways. If you need anything wider than 24 on the D700 then you'll have to switch the 12-24 onto the D90. As for landscape I would use the 12-24 on your D90 since it's your widest angle.</p>

[joshuamck]

<p>It might be helpful to do a back calculation of your lenses to FX->DX (i.e. how the lenses will shoot on the d700 when compared to what you're used to seeing on the D90). I realise that this is often expressed the other way (35mm equivalent), but you're moving from a crop sensor to 35mm equivalent, so it pays to look at it the opposite direction from usual. The right hand numbers are the focal lengths that you can set your D90 to to judge which focal lengths will be covered on the d90.</p>

<ul>

<li>AF-S 12-24mm = 8-12mm with vignettes (via glen above), and 12-16mm DX equivalent</li>

<li>AF-S 24-70mm = 16-47mm DX equivalent </li>

<li>AF-S 70-200mm VR = 47-133mm DX equivalent </li>

<li>AF-S 50mm = 33mm DX equivalent</li>

<li>14-24mm = 9-16mm DX equivalent</li>

</ul>

<p>So you can see from above, if you stick the 70-200mm on the D700, you lose 65mm from the long end. So this lens goes on the D90 unless you really need something in between 50mm and 70mm DX = 75mm and 112.5mm (35mm equiv)<br>

The 24-70 on the D700 covers much the same as the 17-55 did on your D90, so leave it on the D700 for most of the time.<br>

You don't really gain anything by putting the 12-24mm DX lens on the D700 instead of the d90 due to the vignetting. On the D90 you get 18-36mm, on the D700 you get 18-24mm. If you get the 14-24mm, you get an extra 4mm on the wide end of the D700 or an equivalent of what a 9-16mm lens would look like on your D90.<br>

So numbers alone would agree with what Mizuho just said.<br>

I hope this makes sense.</p>

[kiatchun_sin]

<p>Thank you all for your valuable input. Now i know what to consider for my equipments. I will try your suggestions.</p>