Spec me a full frame lens

PaulStat

PaulStat

Suspended / Banned
Messages
64
Name
Paul
Edit My Images
Yes
Ok so I'm really seriously considering getting a Nikon D700.

Currently I have Nikon D70, Nikon 18-70mm DX, Nikon 50mm f1.8D, Sigma 70-300 DG

99% I am use my 18-70, which I will obviously need to replace for a full frame lens.

I can't afford to stretch to the Nikon 24-70 so I'd like a few other options preferably no more than £600 (less would be better of course). I'd consider wide primes.

I'm not so much of a snob so will look at Sigma/Tamron etc. I consider this as a stepping stone to get me on the full frame ladder.

Cheers,
Paul
 
I know it's a lot of money, but to my mind there's not much point upgrading to a D700 unless you spec a decent optic to go with it and the 24-70 is a peach...seriously gorgeous - one of, if not the best lens I've ever used on an SLR body...
 
I have the nikkor 28-80 AF on my film camera, great results no probs at all
 
Tamron 28-75 f2.8 is a good stepping stone
 
How about 24-85mm F2.8-4 or F3.5-4.5?
Both are good... I have used 24-85mm F2.8-4 before..
Good lens with macro as well.
 
Remember that you 18-70 field of view (not focal length :D) on your D70 is the same as 27-105 on a D700.

So you with a 24-70 you'll gain some width (3mm is more than you think) but loose some length - actually, a fair bit of length.

Oh and you will find suddenly you've got quite a heavy/bulky lens to carry around too - the combo is fantastic but quite single minded - its about photography and nothing else.
 
How about looking for a mint example of the Beast. 28-70 2.8 Nikkor. Seriously good and can often be found at around £650. I've got it and have no plans to replace it with the 24-70. On my D700 it's simply wonderful, mind you, it's no lightweight !
 
The 28-70 is the previous incarnation of the 24-70.... so its a second hand hunting job.

Remember you are loosing some of the wide end :D
 
There were a few 28-70s on here a while back so guess that is a good bet. I have the Tamron 28-75 on my D300 and find it very good and you can get these SH for £200-£250.
 
trevorbray said:
How about looking for a mint example of the Beast. 28-70 2.8 Nikkor. Seriously good and can often be found at around £650. I've got it and have no plans to replace it with the 24-70.... It's no lightweight !
Click to expand...


:agree: - So I got one for my D300s & Nikon's 70-200mm VR
 
Ok here are the options I am now considering

Nikon D300s + Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 ~ £2050
Nikon D300s + Nikon 35mm f1.8 ~ £1160
Nikon D700 + Nikon Af-S 24-85mm F3.5-4.5 G Lens ~ £1870
Nikon D700 + Nikon 24mm f2.8 D AF Lens ~ £2028

If I went for option 1 that would give me a great camera a great lens and mean If I wanted to I could upgrade to full frame at some point in the future and still have a great lens.
 
My advice... buy the 24-70 and use it with your D70 for now... the D700S (or whatever they are calling it) is just around the corner... either choose to buy the latest and greatest or take advantage of the market crash and sudden availability of decent 2nd user ones of the D700.
 
desantnik said:
My advice... buy the 24-70 and use it with your D70 for now... the D700S (or whatever they are calling it) is just around the corner... either choose to buy the latest and greatest or take advantage of the market crash and sudden availability of decent 2nd user ones of the D700.
Click to expand...

Mr Sensible :suspect:
 
Agreed - glass first - worry about the camera later on...maybe next year.
 
Will the 24-70 be wide enough for me though?

99.9999% of the time I use my 18-70 and I use mostly in the range 18-35.

Would I be better off investing in something like the Nikon 17-35 f2.8?
 
The 17-35 is nice, very nice but thats your UWA for FX....
 
Under Water Activities...


Oh wait: Ultra wide angle...lol
 
If you think you need it...

I have a 17-35, a 24-70 and a 70-200, which I find covers all the bases.
I sold my 14-24 as i didn't like using it and the 17-35 more or less does what I need it to do at that end of the spectrum...

I also have a 35mm f/2, a 50mm f/1.4 and an 85mm f/1.4, all of which only come out of the bag for special occasions...I don't need them, but they're nice to have.

If I had to make do with one lens, it would be my old AF-D 35mm f/2...because I'm old-school.

Work out what you need before you buy what you want.
 
Just a thought if I were to stick with my D70 and go with a 24-70 or a 17-35 would they basically become DX lenses then therefore be 36-105 and 25.5-52.5

Or have I misunderstood that?
 
PaulStat said:
Just a thought if I were to stick with my D70 and go with a 24-70 or a 17-35 would they basically become DX lenses then therefore be 36-105 and 25.5-52.5
Click to expand...

something like that... as I've got the Nikon 28-70 2.8 on a D300s & makes mine something like a 44-112mm
 
ed_o_brain said:
I don't think you should discount the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8.
Pleased with mine, which I'm also using on a D700.
Click to expand...

Quality wise how's it compare to the 18-70, I'm not expecting it to match the pro Nikon lenses but I don't want to upgrade my camera only to downgrade my lens.
 
17-35mm becomes something like 24-50mm-ish... that was my main lens when using the DX-format D2x. I accepted the gap between that lens and the 70-200 (which behaved more like a 105-300mm) and just 'zoomed with my feet' as we used to say.

Now that I've gone full-frame, I'm back to using 24-70mm (well, I sold my 28-70 in favour of a 24-70 as I didn't need both lying around...) and 70-200 as my main 'go-to' lenses with the 17-35 in the bag if I need it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top