u_b

<p>well... for the telephoto, the decision has been made ... 300mm + 1.4 TC. I will be glad if you say something more for the walk around lens. Here, I mean a lens for landscapes, architecture and also to take photos of people either a group of people or one's head and shoulder shots. I don't take much photos at low light conditions, weight is not important but sharpness for all and bokeh for portraits is important for me.<br>

16-35 f4 (sharpness, wideness and VR are okay but 35mm for head-shoulder portraits ?????) <br>

24-70 f2.8 (sharpness, bokeh is okay but is 24mm on a DX camera enough wide + no VR ????)<br>

16-85 (wide enough for land., arch. and long enough for portraits, VRII but sharpness and bokeh??)<br>

17-55 f2.8 ?????? no VR old technology ?????<br>

What about 16-35 f4 + 85mm or 50mm f1.8 G or 50mm f1.4 G<br>

which one should I choose ?<br>

Thanks for your contributions....</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Thanks for the reply Dave and Rick. And what do you think about sigma 50-500 OS version or nikon 80-400 as an alternative to nikon 300mm + 1.4TC ? in between, i want to make one decision and buy them at once.<br>

And also should I understand that d7100 + 16-35 f4 is the choice for the beginning ?</p>

<p>Hi,<br>

I am new in this forum and will appreciate if you help me in choosing a new photo equipment set. I am very confused about selecting the camera type and suitable lenses. Previously, I had nikon d80, 14-24mm for landscape and architecture, nikon 105mm f2.8 VR for macro and 50mm 1.8D for portraits and give them all back after 3 years of use to the place where I bought them. Now, it is time for an upgrade. My problem is that I don't want to change lenses and keep their number at a minimum. Photos I want to take are landscapes and big buildings like palaces , churches etc., on holidays, portraits and family photos at picnic, sometimes bird photos. I thought a lot on it and created some alternatives sets as follows:<br>

Nikon D7100 (DX) as the camera or should I buy a FX camera like d600 (but oil-dust problem), d700 (low resolution 12MP), d800 (too expensive)<br>

For landscapes, architecture Nikon 16-35 f4 VR (actually for FX cameras but on a DX an enough wide lens)<br>

For portraits nikon 85mm f1.8 (actually I don't want a second lens just for portraits, prefer one lens for lands., arch. and portraits but 16-35 mean 35 mm is suitable for portraits for example for head and shoulders shots??)<br>

or instead of above two lenses only nikon 24-70 (70mm is okay for portraits but is 24mm enough for lands. and architecture on a DX camera)<br>

or only nikon 16-85mm VR (okay for both lands., arch., and portraits but isn't it a little weak in image quality compared to 16-35 or 24-70 ????)<br>

For bird photos nikon 300mm f4 + 1.4TC EII teleconverter<br>

In between, 14-24mm was a very sharp and suitable lens for lands. and arch. but 1) no circular polarizer filter, 2) no VR like 16-35 3) 24 vs 35mm on the long end so faces are seen more natural with 35mm if I buy the 16-35 for both lands, arch and portraits. <br>

Total budget <= 4000$.<br>

I have to decide as soon as possible. Therefore I will appreciate any recommendations. Thanks.<br>

</p>