14/24 f2.8, 24/70 f2.8 or 70/200mm f2.8

ndwgolf

ndwgolf

Suspended / Banned
Messages
4,692
Name
Neil Williams
Edit My Images
No
Guys,
Two months ago I asked if should go for a 35,50 or 85mm lens on my new D7000 for taking portrait pictures and after many many replies I decided to go with the 50mm f1.4G and bought it and love it.
Two months later and a little bit more money saved up I now want to buy something else while I am waiting for the new FX D800 (or whatever they call it) to come out
So I was thinking of either getting the 14/24mm f2.8 or the 24/70mm f2.8 or the 70/200mm f2.8 or going crazy and getting the 200/400mm f4.0 .and use it on my D7000 while waiting for the new FX body. Saying all that I really don't know if any of these lens will even work on my DX body and if not then I will just wait but if they can work on my D7000 then I would like to give one of them a go.
I did try the old style 70/200mm on my D7000 already (just for 5 minutes) and liked the look of it even though it weighed a ton compared to my 18/200mm
Anyway any feedback will be much appreciated and it will give me something to think about while I am working hard on an Oil Rig in the middle of sunny Angola for the next 28 days
 
They will all work just fine on a DX body.

For portrait work the 70-200 will only be useful at the 70mm end (105mm on a DX) I would have thought. The 200-400 will have you standing in the next room... ;)

Short answer to "which one" is - "it depends"... On what you want to use it for, and what focal length that use requires.

HTH!
 
Agreed with above, they will all work with your current body setup.

But I think it's really only you who can decide which is more appropriate?
Find out which end of your current lenses you are using at the moment. You say you have an 18-200mm, check your EXIF and see if you see a trend focal length you use frequently and that will be your answer, as they are three different lenses for mostly different purposes.
 
having just bought both the 24-70 and 70-200 to use on my d700 i would say the 24-70 is defently more usefull.
i used a 50 and 85 primes before buying the two above lenses and in the past week or so the 24-70 has had twice as much use.
this has mainly been for portrate style shots and when chasing my kid around.
its lighter and smaller than the 70-200 aswell.
preformance wise there both great
 
J4MIE_P said:
Agreed with above, they will all work with your current body setup.

But I think it's really only you who can decide which is more appropriate?
Find out which end of your current lenses you are using at the moment. You say you have an 18-200mm, check your EXIF and see if you see a trend focal length you use frequently and that will be your answer, as they are three different lenses for mostly different purposes.
Click to expand...
WoW that is a bunch of Canon equipment that you have there.......stupid question but I guess you prefer Canon over Nikon?????
 
pmac said:
having just bought both the 24-70 and 70-200 to use on my d700 i would say the 24-70 is defently more usefull.
i used a 50 and 85 primes before buying the two above lenses and in the past week or so the 24-70 has had twice as much use.
this has mainly been for portrate style shots and when chasing my kid around.
its lighter and smaller than the 70-200 aswell.
preformance wise there both great
Click to expand...
Most of my pictures that I have taken over the last 3 months have been portrait and sunset pictures
I have been using the 50mm for the portrait and the 18/200mm for the sunset, so I would hazard a guess that i have been using about 50% of each.
My gut feeling is to go with the 200/400mm as I don't have anything like that and it would then open up another avenue for say nature and sports photography.............or would that be crazy right now???
Forgot to mention the RM21k for that big beast
 
Last edited:
ndwgolf said:
My gut feeling is to go with the 200/400mm as I don't have anything like that and it would then open up another avenue for say nature and sports photography.............or would that be crazy right now???
Click to expand...

Only you can answer that- do you want to get out there and photograph wildlife and sports?, will you have time and chance to do so?, is no then yep, its crazy, if you'll do these things its not
 
jezgb said:
They will all work just fine on a DX body.

For portrait work the 70-200 will only be useful at the 70mm end (105mm on a DX) I would have thought. The 200-400 will have you standing in the next room... ;)

Short answer to "which one" is - "it depends"... On what you want to use it for, and what focal length that use requires.

HTH!
Click to expand...
how much of a difference is the 70/200mm compared to the 18/200mm that i already have??
 
haha, I was hesitant to buy, as i wasn't sure whether to go for VR1, or VR2, plus, it was alot of cash.....

I'm so glad i got it (VR1)! :)
 
Ditto the above. Only you can decide.

Bear in mind that the effective focal lengths will all change a lot if/when you go full frame. Everything moves up by 1.5x, eg your 18-200 is equivalent to 27-300 on full frame.

And make sure you try before you buy, especially that 200-400 - it's a beast, and a seriously hard-core lens. Price apart, it's not for the feint hearted.

You need to decide on the camera format first as priority (Get a D700 now? You'll love the image quality :)) and the main lens you'll use on that - probably the 24-70. Then build your lenses around that, according to specific need - and only buy one at a time.

The running order usually goes like this:
1) Camera format, 2) Main lens, eg 24-70, which you will probably use for at least 50% of everything you shoot, 3) Tele-zoom 70-200ish, 4) wide-zoom, 5) couple of fast primes, 6) specialist eg macro or long prime. No hard and fast rules though.

Don't forget a decent flash, preferably two, which can make a bigger difference to your picture taking and creative options that any lens :thumbs:
 
Dont you mean the focal lengh will reduce.. On the d7000 it has a 1.5x crop factor and on full frame the lenght with be what the lens says.
Ie its a 18-200 on the d700 and a 27-300 on the d700.
I found the 70-200 alot shorter than i expected on my d700 after using dx with zoom lens
 
Last edited:
pmac said:
Dont you mean the focal lengh will reduce.. On the d7000 it has a 1.5x crop factor and on full frame the lenght with be what the lens says.
Ie its a 18-200 on the d700 and a 27-300 on the d700.
I found the 70-200 alot shorter than i expected on my d700 after using dx with zoom lens
Click to expand...

Focal length doesn't change when you switch formats, but the field of view captured by the sensor does, eg if you want to frame things the same as an 18-200 on a cropped DX format, then you need a 27-300 lens on full frame FX.
 
I got the 70-200 1st and only recently the 24-70. Nothing wrong with the 70-200, great lens, but I wish I had the 24-70 sooner as it is almost as sharp as the prime and a great everyday lens.
 
I recently purchased the 70-200 VR1 and I love it! My main lens however is a 17-55. I really love this lens on my D300s but it's for DX not full frame - cheaper than the 24-70 but if your going FX then not worth it maybe. 70-200 is still amazing and as long as you have the space, great for portraits :)
 
cambsno said:
I really did find the 24-70 loads better than the 17-55.
Click to expand...

Having never used the 24-70 I can't compare. I presume it's much sharper and more flexible.
 
Sorry been traveling and just arrived at mums in Birmingham
What I really want to know is what FX lens will be Ok to put on the D7000 while waiting for the next FX camera body (D800)..............I think that is what I am trying to say
 
ndwgolf said:
Sorry been traveling and just arrived at mums in Birmingham
What I really want to know is what FX lens will be Ok to put on the D7000 while waiting for the next FX camera body (D800)..............I think that is what I am trying to say
Click to expand...

Any FX lens will be okay. It will just have a different (wider) field of view when you put it on a full frame camera.

Divide focal length by 1.5x to get the equivalent on your D7000. You need to understand the crop factor.
 
ndwgolf said:
so if I put a 70/200 on the DX it will in fact be a 105/300mm is that correct???
Click to expand...

Yes and no. It will remain a 70-200 on DX, but the field of view will be the equivalent to a 105-300 on full frame.
 
HoppyUK said:
Yes and no. It will remain a 70-200 on DX, but the field of view will be the equivalent to a 105-300 on full frame.
Click to expand...
um now thats got me confused.............what i am saying is that i will be buying a 70/200mm FX lens and on a FX body you are saying it will be 105/300mm???
 
Hay I just been reading the Ken Rockwell article on the Dream team Nikon lens and he suggests not getting the mid range zoom but just use the 14/24mm and the 70/200mm and seeing as I already have the 50mm just use that in between the two zooms..........what do you think of that??
 
ndwgolf said:
but just use the 14/24mm and the 70/200mm and seeing as I already have the 50mm just use that in between the two zooms..........what do you think of that??
Click to expand...

Dunno about that...

Depending on what you shoot, the 14-24 would be quite wide....Good for using for like landscapes or something....

But the 24-70 is a very versatile lens - i for one certainly wouldn't rule it out/be without it :)
 
ndwgolf said:
um now thats got me confused.............what i am saying is that i will be buying a 70/200mm FX lens and on a FX body you are saying it will be 105/300mm???
Click to expand...

To repeat, yes and no. The lens focal length remains the same, but the field of view is cropped so the effect - what you see through the viewfinder - is as if you'd fitted a 105-300.

Google crop factor. Briefly, imagine this - you have a 70-200mm lens on a full frame camera, which has a sensor which is more than twice the size of as cropped format sensor. Now take some masking tape and cover the top/botom and sides of the full frame sensor so that the area left is the size of the cropper.

You now have a cropped sensor camera. The lens hasn't changed, but the field of view has been cropped, so you get less in the picture. The result, known as the field of view, is effectively the same as if you had fitted a 105-300 lens without the masking tape.

ndwgolf said:
Hay I just been reading the Ken Rockwell article on the Dream team Nikon lens and he suggests not getting the mid range zoom but just use the 14/24mm and the 70/200mm and seeing as I already have the 50mm just use that in between the two zooms..........what do you think of that??
Click to expand...

Ken Rockwell has an unconventional take on things. He openly admits to saying controversial things to drive traffic to his site. I'd leave it at that ;)

The sensible thing to do is to get your main lens properly sorted first, because it's the one you'll use most. For normal folks, that will be 24-70ish on full frame, or 17-50ish on a cropper. Then build your system around that core.
 
Warning - if you get the 200-400 and use it on your cropped sensor, you will feel it seriously short if and when you go full frame... Your only options then are the long primes.

And that way lies madness... (And serious money!).

We won't discuss how I know...

;)
 
Hay I just been reading the Ken Rockwell article on the Dream team Nikon lens and he suggests not getting the mid range zoom but just use the 14/24mm and the 70/200mm and seeing as I already have the 50mm just use that in between the two zooms..........what do you think of that??
Click to expand...

I have all three and would say that taking this piece of Ken's advice will leave you wishing you had gone for the most versatile of the three first, namely the 24-70.

Just my 2 bob's worth.
 
specialman said:
Any sharper than the 17-55 and you'll cut yourself :lol:
Click to expand...

I have always been very impressed with mine :thumbs:
 
ndwgolf said:
WoW that is a bunch of Canon equipment that you have there.......stupid question but I guess you prefer Canon over Nikon?????
Click to expand...

Sorry for the late reply, but funnily enough I've used both in the past. I've been an assistant for other weddings on many occasions shooting the exact same setup pretty much but for Nikon with a Nikon D700.

It was just the personal preference, both give similar images and both have their advantages and flaws
 
Just sold the D7000 and getting a D3s on Tuesday along with the 70/200mm........I already now have the 24/70mm f2.8 and the 50mm f1.4G
Roll on Tuesday:):):)
 
And you've made a great choice, asuming you've had a good play with the D3s before buying of course. It's a big body compared to the 7000 and a bit heavier. However for me both of these traits were beneficial to my photography... I have big hands and find the heavier body more balanced and stable in my hands. For your landscape work, remember filters when considering your wide lens(es)
 
V8burble said:
And you've made a great choice, asuming you've had a good play with the D3s before buying of course. It's a big body compared to the 7000 and a bit heavier. However for me both of these traits were beneficial to my photography... I have big hands and find the heavier body more balanced and stable in my hands. For your landscape work, remember filters when considering your wide lens(es)
Click to expand...
I found that when I had the extra battery grip on the D7000 the weight compared to the D3s was about the same.
I have already started to accumulate a few filters and will continue to do so as and when I need them
 
Aaah, I meant when considering the 14-24 over other wide lenses as it requires a VERY expensive filter system. I use one for indoor architectural work and it is stunning, but worth considering re filters
 
V8burble said:
Aaah, I meant when considering the 14-24 over other wide lenses as it requires a VERY expensive filter system. I use one for indoor architectural work and it is stunning, but worth considering re filters
Click to expand...

I sold my 14-24 and bought the 16-35 f4. Not missing the 14-24 at all. I didn't like the idea of the filter and mounting kit costing £350.00 just to fit the 14-24. Just my 2p's worth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top