Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="crycocyon" data-source="post: 161271" data-attributes="member: 13076">In a way you do have a trinity of the 28/50/85, all of which are very good prime lenses. You don't just have Tokina or Sigma lenses for it (or DX lenses).So are you saying that you can take a photo with your 50 or 85 1.8G and put it next to a photo of of the same subject taken with the 24-85 mm and say it looks the same? Or how about the Sigma at 16mm vs the Nikon at 16mm. Or (although just change distance for this comparison) the Sigma 150-500 at 150 vs the nikon 85 1.8G? Yes there are many lenses that work well with the D800, but that isn't the point. Look at the rankings and where they sit on the overall rating graph. There are still significant differences even if a given lens is a reasonably good performer. If you don't care that much about resolution then why not just stick with a D600, or D700? Or then why even go with an FX camera? And it isn't just about point to point resolution (ie: contrast, color rendition, flare, distortion, etc.). Also, I didn't say for him to get the most expensive. If you read my list carefully, I included examples like the 50 1.8 and 1.4, the 85 1.8 and 1.4. The less expensive lenses work as well if not sometimes better than the more expensive ones but if he needs the speed he has that option. But if you are shooting with a zoom, you might as well have two D600s instead of a D800 and D600. But each to his own. If someone is happy putting a $200 Tokina lens on a $3000 36 MP DSLR then that is their decision but they are missing the point of owning a camera like that in the first place. It would be like buying a Leica S2 and putting a Nikon lens on it just because a Nikon lens would be "good enough" and "when the image is reduced in size you won't notice a difference anyway".</blockquote>

Verification