Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Nikon DSLR Cameras
General Digital SLR Cameras
Help me assemble my FX kit
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Dave_W" data-source="post: 278654" data-attributes="member: 9521"><p>I switched over from a D7000 to a D800 about 2 yrs ago. Here's what I decided on (and probably what I would do again, if I had the opportunity.)</p><p></p><p>14-24mm f/2.8</p><p></p><p>24-70mm f/2.8</p><p></p><p>28mm f/1.8G</p><p></p><p>85mm f/1.8G</p><p></p><p>105mm f/2.8</p><p></p><p>The wild card, IMO, is on the long end lens category and like Hippie suggested, it really depends on how you plan to use it. Because I've been in the market for a long telephoto, this range is something I've spent a lot of time looking into. The 70-300mm is a very nice and inexpensive way to get reach. The 80-400mm is also very nice but considerably more expensive than the 70-300mm and like the 200-400mm, doesn't play nice with TC's above 1.4. The 300mm f/4.0 is a very popular choice and according to Nasim is slightly better than the 80-400mm, however, it lacks the VR that makes the 80-400mm so versatile. Then there are the 300mm f/2.8G and 400mm f/2.8G, both are highly rated but also quite pricey. After weighing the pro's and con's, I went with the 300mm. For one, it is considered by most the sharpest lens Nikkor makes and is the lens others are most compared with. In addition, it is one of the very few (possibly only) Nikon lens that plays well with all the TC's, with the 2.0 being the least of the 3. Also important is that unlike the 400mm, the 300mm is relatively small, weighing about half that of the 400mm (6.4 lbs vs. 11.2), and is still capable of fitting in a normal camera bag.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Dave_W, post: 278654, member: 9521"] I switched over from a D7000 to a D800 about 2 yrs ago. Here's what I decided on (and probably what I would do again, if I had the opportunity.) 14-24mm f/2.8 24-70mm f/2.8 28mm f/1.8G 85mm f/1.8G 105mm f/2.8 The wild card, IMO, is on the long end lens category and like Hippie suggested, it really depends on how you plan to use it. Because I've been in the market for a long telephoto, this range is something I've spent a lot of time looking into. The 70-300mm is a very nice and inexpensive way to get reach. The 80-400mm is also very nice but considerably more expensive than the 70-300mm and like the 200-400mm, doesn't play nice with TC's above 1.4. The 300mm f/4.0 is a very popular choice and according to Nasim is slightly better than the 80-400mm, however, it lacks the VR that makes the 80-400mm so versatile. Then there are the 300mm f/2.8G and 400mm f/2.8G, both are highly rated but also quite pricey. After weighing the pro's and con's, I went with the 300mm. For one, it is considered by most the sharpest lens Nikkor makes and is the lens others are most compared with. In addition, it is one of the very few (possibly only) Nikon lens that plays well with all the TC's, with the 2.0 being the least of the 3. Also important is that unlike the 400mm, the 300mm is relatively small, weighing about half that of the 400mm (6.4 lbs vs. 11.2), and is still capable of fitting in a normal camera bag. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Nikon DSLR Cameras
General Digital SLR Cameras
Help me assemble my FX kit
Top