Recommended lens for D700
- Thread starter kktpesb
- Start date
ZerocoolAstra
Senior Member
Do you have any lens at the moment?
After buying the 50/1.4 (which version, by the way?), you're left with a budget of around 2K.
A zoom lens in the range 20+ to 70mm would be quite versatile, in my opinion.
Cheaper options include 24-85 (variable aperture) and 24-120 f/4 VR
or 24-70/2.8 second hand
niccon2
Senior Member
2nd this option or with other wide angle prime.
flashboy00
New Member
Sorry for OT abit. I'm also on the way upgrade to FX. I'm considering on 17-35mm or 24-70mm. Only can get one of these base on the current budget. Will you recommend 17-35mm for all purpose? (of course not mean tele zoom).
In yr current DX setup do you shoot more often in the ultra wide or normal zoom range?? let that decide whether which FX lens u should get...
is that?I just pair my D700 with a 50/1.8D ONLY,
it just suit me,no complain anyhow,at least I enjoy :bsmile:
kentwong81
Senior Member
For me, I will also never consider the 24-70mm zoom lens, because within those focal lengths range, the 24mm, 35mm, 50mm and 85mm f1.4G have better IQ, DOF control, low light performance and smaller size/weight than the 24-70mm.
I will only consider the zoom lenses like 70-200mm VRII, 14-24mm f2.8, 16-35mm f4 VR or 17-35mm f2.8.
I will only consider the zoom lenses like 70-200mm VRII, 14-24mm f2.8, 16-35mm f4 VR or 17-35mm f2.8.
ZerocoolAstra
Senior Member
I can apply the same logic and specify 85/1.4, 105DC, 135DC, 200/2.8, which are on paper superior to the 70-200.
Ultimately the flexibility of a zoom lens wins out in some cases.
Certainly 24-70/2.8 is lighter than 24+35+50+85
I'm also a fan of prime lenses, though my budget doesn't stretch to the 1.4 'exotica'
Alan Chan
Senior Member
I'm using the Tamron 28-75mm without built-on motor which is said to AF faster in low light. Though it can never compare to the 24-70mm, the price is a huge pushover.
may i suggest this, while saving up for the 24-70 you can get the Tamron at 2nd hand for less than 450. use it and start shooting. if you dun like the range you can forget about 24-70 and you wont really lose much selling off your Tamron.
may i suggest this, while saving up for the 24-70 you can get the Tamron at 2nd hand for less than 450. use it and start shooting. if you dun like the range you can forget about 24-70 and you wont really lose much selling off your Tamron.
Last edited:
i try on a very cheap lens tamron 19-35mm , 2nd hand $150-200,not much distortion,
PAT_3039 by pattan1109, on Flickr
DSC_3012 copy by pattan1109, on Flickr
PAT_3031 by pattan1109, on Flickr
PAT_3039 by pattan1109, on Flickr
DSC_3012 copy by pattan1109, on Flickr
PAT_3031 by pattan1109, on Flickr
ageha
Senior Member
True, that range isn't worth carrying around the weight.
Previously I owned a 24-70mm for my FF, no doubt is a good lens but i dun like the focal length coz is too short @ 70mm n I dun like idea of chging it often.
I sold my 24-70mm to get 24-120mm n I nv regret coz the sharpest n bokeh r there but definitely can't compare to 24-70mm. Btw I shoot mainly landscape.
Just my 2-cents.
I sold my 24-70mm to get 24-120mm n I nv regret coz the sharpest n bokeh r there but definitely can't compare to 24-70mm. Btw I shoot mainly landscape.
Just my 2-cents.
ageha
Senior Member
That's still pretty new for a lens. I highly doubt Nikon and Canon will ever release a pro lens starting at 24mm with VR or IS.
Foress
New Member
whats the usual lifespan of lenses?
http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/threads/767973-AFS-24-120mm-F4-sample-pics./page1
No doubt so many saying about how good a 2470 is but the weight & price of this lens is high. I got the 24120 because of the additional zoom which offered more flexibility.
Last edited:
Similar threads
