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
Mirrorless Z
Z5/Z5ii
Just purchased Z5 II with 24-200mm Lens for Alaska Cruise
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="Clovishound" data-source="post: 835367" data-attributes="member: 50197"><p>It really depends on what you are going to shoot. If you are interested in macro work, then obviously, something like a 105 macro would be in order. If you are interested in wildlife, then a long tele would be the ticket. You could probably get by with the 24-200 for landscape shooting, although if that becomes your focus (no pun intended), then a nice wide angle lens would be the consideration. </p><p></p><p>I'm into macro and wildlife, so the two lenses I use 95% of the time are my 105 macro and my long tele. I don't even own a 70-200 zoom, which a lot of photographers consider a must. I just don't have the need for that range often enough in my shooting style to justify spending the money, and taking up space in my bag. </p><p></p><p>At this point you may well not know the direction you want to go in. You may need to shoot for a while to get a sense of where your interests lay. Renting a long tele for this cruise might be a good investment, if you think you may be interested wildlife. The 600 Nikonpup recommended is a great lens, but you might consider the 180-600 as it will likely be cheaper to rent, and give the flexibility of shorter focal lengths that may possibly be needed. I don't know what your budget is, but the 180-600 is more likely to fit in than a long prime, if you decide to buy a long tele down the road. A long prime is going to be a little sharper, more durable, and probably faster auto focus than a long zoom, but modern long zooms offer excellent optical performance. The long primes are rather expensive. The Nikon Z180-600 F/5.6-F/6.3 runs about $2050 new, whereas the Nikon Z600 F/6.3 runs around $5200. The 600 is about a lb lighter than the 180-600. </p><p></p><p>The 24-200 you have will cover the focal lengths needed for a wide variety of shooting genres. It seems a good starting place to me. I would advise to carefully choose your lenses from here on out. It is easy to get the itch for a new lens and then end up with a purchase that you wish you had chosen differently once you have some experience with it. Sometimes that is unavoidable, and sometimes taking your time and doing your homework can lead you to a better long term solution. Don't cheap out on your lenses. The more expensive lens is not always the better lens, but lenses are the heart of your photography, and a good lens should serve you well for many many years. A poor quality, or poorly chosen lens will just take up space in your bag and lighten your wallet.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Clovishound, post: 835367, member: 50197"] It really depends on what you are going to shoot. If you are interested in macro work, then obviously, something like a 105 macro would be in order. If you are interested in wildlife, then a long tele would be the ticket. You could probably get by with the 24-200 for landscape shooting, although if that becomes your focus (no pun intended), then a nice wide angle lens would be the consideration. I'm into macro and wildlife, so the two lenses I use 95% of the time are my 105 macro and my long tele. I don't even own a 70-200 zoom, which a lot of photographers consider a must. I just don't have the need for that range often enough in my shooting style to justify spending the money, and taking up space in my bag. At this point you may well not know the direction you want to go in. You may need to shoot for a while to get a sense of where your interests lay. Renting a long tele for this cruise might be a good investment, if you think you may be interested wildlife. The 600 Nikonpup recommended is a great lens, but you might consider the 180-600 as it will likely be cheaper to rent, and give the flexibility of shorter focal lengths that may possibly be needed. I don't know what your budget is, but the 180-600 is more likely to fit in than a long prime, if you decide to buy a long tele down the road. A long prime is going to be a little sharper, more durable, and probably faster auto focus than a long zoom, but modern long zooms offer excellent optical performance. The long primes are rather expensive. The Nikon Z180-600 F/5.6-F/6.3 runs about $2050 new, whereas the Nikon Z600 F/6.3 runs around $5200. The 600 is about a lb lighter than the 180-600. The 24-200 you have will cover the focal lengths needed for a wide variety of shooting genres. It seems a good starting place to me. I would advise to carefully choose your lenses from here on out. It is easy to get the itch for a new lens and then end up with a purchase that you wish you had chosen differently once you have some experience with it. Sometimes that is unavoidable, and sometimes taking your time and doing your homework can lead you to a better long term solution. Don't cheap out on your lenses. The more expensive lens is not always the better lens, but lenses are the heart of your photography, and a good lens should serve you well for many many years. A poor quality, or poorly chosen lens will just take up space in your bag and lighten your wallet. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Mirrorless Z
Z5/Z5ii
Just purchased Z5 II with 24-200mm Lens for Alaska Cruise
Top