Lenses to match a D3

ShawWellPete

ShawWellPete

Suspended / Banned
Messages
3,699
Name
Pete
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi guys, I have been getting tempted to switch from Sony/Minolta to Nikon and get myself a D3. The A900 would give me loads of megapixels I don't need and the D3 high ISO noise is winning me over. I may hang back and wait for the next Sony full frame or sell my kit and switch brands.

Here's the preliminary shopping list to go with the D3

14-24mm AFS f2.8 G ED Lens
Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 G AF-S ED Lens
Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 G AF-S VR IF ED Lens
Nikon Speedlight SB-900 Flashgun

I don't want to make the same mistake I made with Minolta, buying cheap lenses then mid range lenses then finally the ones I really wanted in the first place!

My photography is a generallly mixture of landscade and portraits, mostly portraiture for family and friends.

How does that list look? anything else I should consider?
 
Have you got a mortgage sorted first :)

That's top shelf gear right there, nothing wrong with any of that if you've got the wonga.
 
ShawWellPete said:
Hi guys, I have been getting tempted to switch from Sony/Minolta to Nikon and get myself a D3. The A900 would give me loads of megapixels I don't need and the D3 high ISO noise is winning me over. I may hang back and wait for the next Sony full frame or sell my kit and switch brands.

Here's the preliminary shopping list to go with the D3

14-24mm AFS f2.8 G ED Lens
Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 G AF-S ED Lens
Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 G AF-S VR IF ED Lens
Nikon Speedlight SB-900 Flashgun

I don't want to make the same mistake I made with Minolta, buying cheap lenses then mid range lenses then finally the ones I really wanted in the first place!

My photography is a generallly mixture of landscade and portraits, mostly portraiture for family and friends.

How does that list look? anything else I should consider?
Click to expand...

That's my kit now apart from the SB900 (I have the 600 & 800) and it works for me. I don't really have a need for anything else at the moment. As Radiohead says the 50 1:4 would be great. I have the 1:8 and thats good for me. You are probably aware that the 14-24 is the dog's danglies but doesn't take filters, so if you plan on using filters you may want to look at the 17-35 which I believe has just been discontinued, as an alternative.

Chris :)
 
You've picked about the best lenses you can buy right there.
 
ShawWellPete said:
I wasn't aware of this, no polarising filters?
Click to expand...

No filters at all. Can't be done.

Personally I replaced the 14-24 with a Nikkor 17-35 f/2.8 which I much prefer for landscape (even though its not as sharp)
 
ShawWellPete said:
I wasn't aware of this, no polarising filters?
Click to expand...

No any filter. It does not take them. There have been a few people that have tried to find ways to attach filters and if memory serves me right Gary (Edinburghgary) made it his mission to find a way. I don't know if he has succedded as yet.

Chris :)
 
Blue Moon 7 said:
No any filter. It does not take them. There have been a few people that have tried to find ways to attach filters and if memory serves me right Gary (Edinburghgary) made it his mission to find a way. I don't know if he has succedded as yet.

Chris :)
Click to expand...

On a D3 you can't attach a filter, no matter how you try because any filter holder will show in the frame, you can handhold something but you'll get light leakage - if you cover up the lens hood cuts out to prevent light leakage, it shows in the frame.

The DIY solutions are DX only.
 
ShawWellPete said:
Here's the preliminary shopping list to go with the D3

14-24mm AFS f2.8 G ED Lens
Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 G AF-S ED Lens
Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 G AF-S VR IF ED Lens
Nikon Speedlight SB-900 Flashgun

How does that list look? anything else I should consider?
Click to expand...

Hi Pete,

I made the switch a few months back and for my needs I couldn't think of a better system. The ISO performance, the full frame, the FPS, ergonomics and personalized set up facilities are top banana.

The lens list is safe enough IMO, I'm one for preference on Nikon glass rather than third party despite the fact I have plenty of third party lenses :|.
I'm lucky in the respect that I have alot of kind mates who lend me nice lenses from time to time but, I do own the 24-70 and plan the same hit list as yours for future aquisitions, only addition for me would be 300mm f/2.8 for sports :)

Maybe cut back with an SB-800, in theory they should be half the price of a 900 if you can find any. Nikon discontinued them recently but they are a superb flash, I have 2 x 800's and would like more!

*Indeed, the 14-24 won't take filters

T
 
puddleduck said:
On a D3 you can't attach a filter, no matter how you try because any filter holder will show in the frame, you can handhold something but you'll get light leakage - if you cover up the lens hood cuts out to prevent light leakage, it shows in the frame.

The DIY solutions are DX only.
Click to expand...

Agreed PD. There were some examples on flickr (I think it was flickr) of a workaround but this was on a D300.

Chris :)
 
fabs said:
Knowing Gary, he'll have used the words "Challenge accepted" and he WILL find a way! :D
Click to expand...

The lens has been out for 15 months now, and there is no solution.

If you owned the lens and put it on a D700 or D3 you'll see why instantly.
 
puddleduck said:
The lens has been out for 15 months now, and there is no solution.

If you owned the lens and put it on a D700 or D3 you'll see why instantly.
Click to expand...

Would that be as it's shaped like a bloody great eyeball on the end of a stalk?
 
Tomas Whitehouse said:
Hi Pete,

I made the switch a few months back and for my needs I couldn't think of a better system. The ISO performance, the full frame, the FPS, ergonomics and personalized set up facilities are top banana.

The lens list is safe enough IMO, I'm one for preference on Nikon glass rather than third party despite the fact I have plenty of third party lenses :|.
I'm lucky in the respect that I have alot of kind mates who lend me nice lenses from time to time but, I do own the 24-70 and plan the same hit list as yours for future aquisitions, only addition for me would be 300mm f/2.8 for sports :)

Maybe cut back with an SB-800, in theory they should be half the price of a 900 if you can find any. Nikon discontinued them recently but they are a superb flash, I have 2 x 800's and would like more!

*Indeed, the 14-24 won't take filters

T
Click to expand...


Thanks for the advice everybody. Is there a Nikon off camera flash system like the Sony/Minolta one that works of IR?
 
ShawWellPete said:
Here's the preliminary shopping list to go with the D3

14-24mm AFS f2.8 G ED Lens
Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 G AF-S ED Lens
Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 G AF-S VR IF ED Lens
Nikon Speedlight SB-900 Flashgun

I don't want to make the same mistake I made with Minolta, buying cheap lenses then mid range lenses then finally the ones I really wanted in the first place!
Click to expand...


The only item I am yet to get is the 70 to 200, but the others bits you have listed, from my experience, you wont be disappointed. The 14 to 24 is UBER WIDE, on Full Frame, 9mm crop I think? If you have used the Sigma 10 to 20, it will feel similar. Rememeber though, it will NOT take ANY filters at all.

The 24 to 70 is by far my favourite lens, I have only had it a month or so, but I do love it.

The 50mm f1.4 is also excellent, you would be silly not to pick one up.

And the Sb900, well I dunno how to use it. Sure does look pretty though :D

Please bear in mind I am a novice, so my opinion should be grain of salt material!
 
Blue Moon 7 said:
No any filter. It does not take them. There have been a few people that have tried to find ways to attach filters and if memory serves me right Gary (Edinburghgary) made it his mission to find a way. I don't know if he has succedded as yet.

Chris :)
Click to expand...

Nope, I failed. GOt the 24 to 70 instead :D

There MUST be a way though :thinking:
 
EdinburghGary said:
The only item I am yet to get is the 70 to 200, but the others bits you have listed, from my experience, you wont be disappointed. The 14 to 24 is UBER WIDE, on Full Frame, 9mm crop I think? If you have used the Sigma 10 to 20, it will feel similar. Rememeber though, it will NOT take ANY filters at all.
Click to expand...


Thanks Gary, the 70-200 is the one I may hang back from, I have the Sony 70-200G which is a lovely lens, but doesn't get used as often as it should.
 
ShawWellPete said:
Thanks Gary, the 70-200 is the one I may hang back from, I have the Sony 70-200G which is a lovely lens, but doesn't get used as often as it should.
Click to expand...

Its been out of stock in my local Calumet and Jessops for months. Also, I don't think it's "as good" as the 14 to 24 and the 24 to 70, on paper anyway (no Nano coating etc). Now in the real world, it will be just as good I guess.

Anyway, good luck, its all awesome kit.

Gary.
 
EdinburghGary said:
Now in the real world, it will be just as good I guess.
Click to expand...

It is mate, as soon as the pence is there I'm the 70-200VR all up for meself yessiree!

2945122534_4923a23769_o.jpg
 
Pete,

Yes, CLS (Creative Lighting System), and it's very good.

You might want to consider a D700 over a D3. Portrait and landscape are D700 terrirory, sports and action benefit from the higher FPS of a D3.

First line of Ken Rockwells D700 review

The Nikon D700 is Nikon's top new amateur camera. Unless you're a full-time sports, news or action pro, the D700 replaces the D3 for studio, wedding, portrait, nature and landscape pros...
Click to expand...

The money you save will buy you the 85mm 1.4, also known as the "Cream Machine", which is touted as the perfect portrait lens (sharp wide open, slightly softer corners, awesome bokeh, fast focus). User reviews here.
 
rdh said:
Pete,

Yes, CLS (Creative Lighting System), and it's very good.

You might want to consider a D700 over a D3. Portrait and landscape are D700 terrirory, sports and action benefit from the higher FPS of a D3.

First line of Ken Rockwells D700 review
Click to expand...

Thanks RDH, It's something I've considered but would I save that much after buying the vertical grip?
 
ShawWellPete said:
Thanks RDH, It's something I've considered but would I save that much after buying the vertical grip?
Click to expand...

Yes, it's only £170. You do not need to buy the D3 battery and charger, as the grip also takes AA batteries (which is damn useful - you can stack up on batteries that fit both flash and camera, that's less charger hardware to carry about with you).

D3 == D700 + grip + 84/1.4 == £2.5K

I'm going for the latter, since I'm not into action photography :¬)

- Only thing that drew me to D3 was the card slots
- D700 has sensor cleaning
- 95% vs 100% viewfinder is negligible, and will not effect your photography
- D700 with grip is nearly at the speed of D3
- D700 is lighter, which for some, is a huge bonus
- Voice recording of D3 is not important to me

Both awesome cameras really, you can't go wrong.
 
DizMatt said:
that's a lot of dosh to spend on non-pro photography...enjoy!
Click to expand...

Its a lot of money for sure....but its swings and roundabouts. I know guys that blow £100 on a night out, every week. Said nights out might require naff shirts every so often, loads of hair cream and bling. It soon adds up.

I know guys who blow £200 a week right up their noses.

And, a guy I know struggles to choose between his new Aston and his Porsche GT3 every morning...

It's all relative to ones income, it might be loads to some, bud diddly squat to others.
 
I know guys who blow £200 a week right up their noses.
Click to expand...

Must have big noses in Scottish Land then:)
 
EdinburghGary said:
It's all relative to ones income, it might be loads to some, bud diddly squat to others.
Click to expand...

It's certainly not diddly squat to me, which is why I will spend plenty of time making the right choice. One of the things I have learn though is that camera bodies come and go but good lenses keep their value better than most things. I reckon I have about £2000 worth of Sony/Minolta lenses which didn't cost me much more than what I could sell them for.

I can, however, appreciate that there are many far better photographers than me that would love to have that gear and would not be able to afford it.

Does that mean I shouldn't buy it?

:shrug:
 
ShawWellPete said:
It's certainly not diddly squat to me, which is why I will spend plenty of time making the right choice. One of the things I have learn though is that camera bodies come and go but good lenses keep their value better than most things. I reckon I have about £2000 worth of Sony/Minolta lenses which didn't cost me much more than what I could sell them for.

I can, however, appreciate that there are many far better photographers than me that would love to have that gear and would not be able to afford it.

Does that mean I shouldn't buy it?

:shrug:
Click to expand...


I'm sure most people here would take the view that you earned the money, you should be able to enjoy it the way you see fit. I would hate to think people resent others for the gear they can afford.

Gary.
 
ShawWellPete said:
It's certainly not diddly squat to me, which is why I will spend plenty of time making the right choice. One of the things I have learn though is that camera bodies come and go but good lenses keep their value better than most things. I reckon I have about £2000 worth of Sony/Minolta lenses which didn't cost me much more than what I could sell them for.

I can, however, appreciate that there are many far better photographers than me that would love to have that gear and would not be able to afford it.

Does that mean I shouldn't buy it?

:shrug:
Click to expand...

unless you beat those people and stole the money then you should not feel bad.

its a harsh world we live in no reason you should suffer for some ones situation you can't change.
 
ShawWellPete said:
I can, however, appreciate that there are many far better photographers than me that would love to have that gear and would not be able to afford it.

Does that mean I shouldn't buy it?

:shrug:
Click to expand...

Absolutley not Pete, spend your money how you see fit.
You want a D3, you earned it!
If your sure that it meets your requirements or even surpasses them and you feel confident with the purchase then go for it. :thumbs:

There's another thread with similar topics here, have a gander.
 
I have all those lenses but with a D700 rather than D3 and they are all beauties! I would agree that the D700 might be a wiser choice as the D3 is quite a bit bigger/heavier so unless you need the dual CF slots and extra fps then I would consider saving the cash and maybe picking up a 50mm 1.4/1.8 or a macro lens?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top