james_priestley

<p>I wasn't aware that the 17-35mm was being discontinued. It was first on my list to get though. Nikon still lists it on their site if I recall correctly, and it's still listed on Ritz, Adorama, J&R, B&H Photo and Video and Amazon. And yes, the 17-35mm is just downright <em>amazing</em> on a D700 from what I've been able to play around with them for, and from what I've seen from other people.</p>

<p>I see Shun's point, but when I say I'd be buying a 17-35mm f/2.8 and 70-200mm f/2.8, I meant it as in the next few months. I don't think the D700 will be out-dated by another camera within its class in that time period. </p>

<p>So when I buy it, I'd like to have a nice midranged zoom to use the camera until I have the money to buy the more expensive glass in the following months. A midranged zoom + 50mm f/1.8 prime for low light would hold me over until then for most things in my opinion.</p>

<p>My primary interests in moving to a full frame sensor are exactly what Wouter outlined. The high ISO performance really shines, as I have a tendency to take a lot of photos in situations with dim lighting. Add that to the fact that I'm a big fan of wide angle shots . Having played with a D300 in conjunction with DX wide angle lenses like the 12-24 f/4, I find them lackluster in comparison to shooting wide angle shots with a full frame sensor. I have a friend with a D700 and a 17-35mm f/2.8, and I was completely blown away. </p>

<p>Thanks for the insight Peter! I also was drawn towards the 28-85 for its more robust construction, being mostly metal as compared to the generic plastic prosumer lenses in its class. I was also looking at the 35-70mm f2.8, but the low availability and high asking prices for new / mint condition models shifted my interest in favor of the 28-85. And yes, I was looking at the AF-n version, with the cosmetic upgrade. I read that it has particularly nicer handling on the manual focus ring, as the original had a thin plastic ring, while the AF-n uses a ruberized-plastic that is much easier to handle. </p>

<p>Thanks again for the help, I think I've made my decision. :)</p>

<p>The 28-70 was another one I was considering. Since you've owned both, how do they compare in terms of AF speed / accuracy, distortion and sharpness? Thanks for the help so far!</p>

<p>After shooting with my friend's D700 for a good week, I was convinced that it's time to move on to a camera with an FX sensor. So I'm buying a D700, and was looking for a nice mid-range zoom to start off with until I get the money for a 17-35 and 70-200 + a 50mm prime. Particularly, I've been looking at some older AF lenses originally made for film cameras.<br>

I'm looking into buying a mint condition AF-n 28-85mm (f/3.5-4.5). Based off of reviews that I've read, it seems like a good starting place until I can afford some better glass. My question is, am I in any way hindering my experience with the D700 by using older film AF lenses? Does anyone have any experience with this lens in particular? Does anyone have any lens suggestions around the same focal length range of comparitive quality/price? <br>

Any help is appreciated. Thanks in advance! :)</p>