walk around lens?

D

DaveKoontz

Senior Member
I've married my D700 with a 28-300mm - well worth the money. Not as fast as I would like, but all in all it's a very versatile lenses and most likely the best
lens I own.... even better than my 70 -200mm (DX) in sharpness.
 
I

Iansky

Senior Member
I have recently acquired the 24-120 f4 and it is a superb lens at all focal lengths. For street work I use the 50mm f1.4G lens as it gives me a good perspective and has been a popular focal length for years - used by Cartier Bresson and many others as their street lens of choice!
 
S

stmv

Senior Member
yes, the 28-105 is a real solid high quality lens, and yes, the macro does work. but....

My walk around is the 35-70, small, ultra sharp. and I'll throw a 20 mm in a side pocket if I need wide, and a tiny 100mm (about the same size as a 50mm).
 
S

stmv

Senior Member
I really like the 28-105, and when I want that range, it is on my camera.

but most of the time, I go for the smaller zooms as a walk around, and then a couple of tiny primes.

I read and know photograpers that love their 24-70 2.8.
 
Marcel

Marcel

Happily retired
Staff member
Super Mod
When I took off for vacations in Vietnam, I took the Tamron 28-200 with the D600. This lens I got from the famous bay site for 115$ has been wroth many more to me. It's very light and non invasive to the person on the other side of the camera. It's one of my lightest lens and for a long walk, the weight eventually gets to me.

It's no way as good as the 24-120 or 24-70, but the size and weight makes it a perfect all around lens for me.

Maybe I'll try the Nikon 28-300, but I've heard it was quite heavier than my Tamron.

There are many lenses out there, and none of them is perfect for all occasions. Compromise don't always hurt.
 
F

fotojack

Senior Member
stmv said:
I really like the 28-105, and when I want that range, it is on my camera.

but most of the time, I go for the smaller zooms as a walk around, and then a couple of tiny primes.

I read and know photographers that love their 24-70 2.8.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I use the 28-105 most of the time, too. Other times it's the 18-105. Both are great lenses for walking around with.
 
D

Dave_W

The Dude
WJYPhoto said:
The 24-70 would be my 1st choice, great picture quality, even though it's heavy I still pick it.
Click to expand...

I can't agree with you more, it's even better than what people told me it would be. Fact of the matter is I'm wondering if I ought to sell my 28mm f/1.8G lens. As wonderful as the 28nn lens is, it's just too easy to access that same focal length with my 24-70mm.
 
S

stmv

Senior Member
ok,, I have said this a few times, but,, let me say again,,, try the 35-70 2.8,,, This lens is a gem, I really really wish Nikon would update this to say a 30-75 but not one bit larger, but ok.. gasp,, switch out the metal to plastic on the outer barrel for even more weight reduction, but same quality glass please.
 
R

Ruidoso Bill

Senior Member
Dave_W said:
I can't agree with you more, it's even better than what people told me it would be. Fact of the matter is I'm wondering if I ought to sell my 28mm f/1.8G lens. As wonderful as the 28nn lens is, it's just too easy to access that same focal length with my 24-70mm.
Click to expand...

The 24-70 is really versatile on a FX body, I used it for most of the Ballet last night, used the 70-200 for a bit I wanted closer and then the 14-24 for the wide cast shot. By the way Dave, they changed the lighting on me from the dress rehearsal, went even darker for some reaso. Shot the entire thing in manual 1/125 @ ISO 3200, working the shots now.
 
Top