So this happened

Discussion in 'Nikon Cameras' started by crimbfighter, Dec 27, 2017.

  1. crimbfighter

    crimbfighter Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2010
    Messages:
    1,598
    Likes Received:
    854
    Location:
    Wisconsin, United States
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I generally find the 70-200 is too long on crop bodies yet perfect for so many situations on full frame. I think there's a reason there was so much development put into that focal length in a full frame version.


     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  2. Derrel

    Derrel Mr. Rain Cloud

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2009
    Messages:
    40,239
    Likes Received:
    15,107
    Location:
    USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Yes...and there's been a shocking LACK of development in an equivalent field of view lens for APS-C cameras!
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  3. ac12

    ac12 No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2017
    Messages:
    163
    Likes Received:
    52
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    I am going through that very issue right now, 70-200 f/4 for my DX D7200, or a 50-200 variable aperture f/4-5.6. But I really want that extra stop at f/4, if not 2 stops at f/2.8, for lower light indoor and night events.

    The Nikon 50-200 f/4-5.6 is the closest DX lens by Nikon. But it is a variable aperture, and slow. I want at least a fixed f/4.

    The Sigma 50-150 f/2.8 was the best match (75-225 FX equiv), but then Sigma stopped making it. Instead they have the faster but shorter range 50-100 f/1.8, and it does not have VR.

    BTW, I think the 70-200 is too long for basketball and volleyball, from the court floor. Maybe it is OK from the bleachers. I just got through shooting a couple basketball games with a 35mm on my DX body (50mm FX equiv), and there were many times when I felt that I could use a wider lens.

    I do agree that the 70-200 zoom is a GREAT field sport lens for football, soccer and similar. One of my favorite lens was the first version of the 80-200 f/4.5 on a F2.

    I shot my 70-210 on my DX body and you are correct, at the short end it is not wide enough, for use on the sidelines.
     
    Last edited: Dec 30, 2017
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. crimbfighter

    crimbfighter Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2010
    Messages:
    1,598
    Likes Received:
    854
    Location:
    Wisconsin, United States
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Like Derrel mentioned, there is a distinct lack of development for DX lenses in equivellant focal lengths to FX.. I think that is changing, but I personally wouldn't expect any manufacturer to replicate every great FX focal length in a DX equivellant since there probably isn't the market for it when compared to the FX users.
     
  5. Derrel

    Derrel Mr. Rain Cloud

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2009
    Messages:
    40,239
    Likes Received:
    15,107
    Location:
    USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I think the reasons are multi-fold. DX customers are viewed as less-interested in high-performance,costly lenses with fast aperture ratings, or even f/4 max aperture ratings; the DX camera market demands and or is filled with a good number of low-cost $99-$599 lens options; the DX market seems to be based on lighter, smaller lenses (55-200 f/4.5~5.6 variable aperture,etc.); the camera makers might very well be holding the FF or FX full-frame bodies as a "carrot" for their users to migrate to full-frame model cameras in the future; many people shop on specifications alone, so a 50-135 or a 50-150 or a 50-100 seems "mehhhh!" to customers who shop looking for a wide-ratio zoom like say a 28-200mm or a an 18-200 or an 18-300,and so on; and other issues I'll not go into here.

    I dunno...I found Nikon's older, 1980's 50-135mm f/3.5 constant max aperture manual focus zoom, fairly uncommon it its day, was a fantastic walkabout lens for the Nikon D1,D1h,and D2x 1.5x crop-bdy Nikons, and was also pretty handy in its "native" 50-135mm settings for the full-frame D3x; I accidentally dropped my 50-135 with the D3x full-frame on it, and the lens landed face-first, hard!, and was damaged badly (zoom locked up, focus locked up) on an asphalt-drop. Nikon never did offer that 50-135mm focal length in a DX-type autofocusing zoom lens.

    The camera and lens market has never filled every user desire.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  6. ac12

    ac12 No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2017
    Messages:
    163
    Likes Received:
    52
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    OK in thinking about it, I see that the FX 70-200 is a great field lens, IF you are on the field.

    But if you are NOT of the field, most parents are in the bleachers, then the longer 70-300 DX makes more sense for the parents. They won't need the short end of the lens much, and need more reach.

    This presumes that the FX bodies are use by the pros/advanced amature on the field, and the DX bodies by the amature parents on the bleachers.

    So your though makes sense.

    Well, I'm off to shoot a basektball game, with my 35mm f/1.8 on a DX body, on the court floor.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. crimbfighter

    crimbfighter Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2010
    Messages:
    1,598
    Likes Received:
    854
    Location:
    Wisconsin, United States
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Without turning this into a DX vs FX debate, I think there is enough diversity in the market that DX and FX users alike can find something that suits their needs.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. Destin

    Destin Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2010
    Messages:
    3,123
    Likes Received:
    788
    Location:
    Western New York
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Link to the thread from my basketball game/xplor 600 review: click here.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. ac12

    ac12 No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2017
    Messages:
    163
    Likes Received:
    52
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit


    I'm just trying to NOT have to upgrade to FX, for $$$$ and weight reasons.
    It is us upper end DX users that are stuck in the middle. Lower cost DX body, but we want the similar coverage as the FX gear. But the key DX field sport lens is missing. Interestingly a good DX short zoom is available in the 16-80 f/2.8-4.

    If I got PAID for it, then I might put the $$$$ into FX gear.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1

Share This Page