You can have one body and two lenses

[Frank F.]

..... What are they? And why this choice?
Just a bit of a not to serious thread..

I take two bodies, one lens....

No you don't. You can't play with us..

OK. D850, 1.4/105mm, 8-15mm fish.

happy?

I was joking, you can play if you want.
Nice kit me thinks

in reality I go with two bodies. The 850 drives the 105, the 500 drives the fish. because i do not zoom two bodies are my way to go.

i sold the D600, mbd14 and sell the d3 and 1.4/24 ... My bag is still full of great glass apart from the two lenses

 

[Frank F.]

@Braineack I love the look of the D850 files. Megapixels are nice to have. Not that I need them, but my computer is fast enough and the pixel density is the same as the D500, so technique is the same. Very rewarding results.

I hate SD Cards. Why do the bodies not have both XQD cards? bollocks

 

[benhasajeep]

I'd chose a hot 24-year old chick. With glasses.

Buba "I'ma going to trade my 40 year old wife in on 2 18 year olds"
Me "That math doesn't add up"
Buba "They can keep the change"

 

[benhasajeep]

For me it would be D850, 24-70 f/2.8 and 70-200 f/2.8. For STARTERS! I could never stop at just 2 lenses!

 

[chuasam]

if it's work system:
D850 with 105mm f/1.4 and 24-70 f/2.8 E

if it's vacation system:
EM5 II with 12-40 f/2.8 and 40-150 f/2.8

 

[goodguy]

My ideal would be
Nikon D850
Nikon 24-70mm 2.8G
Nikon 70-200mm 2.8E

So if I would be able to justify and replace my wonderful Tamron 70-200mm 2.8 VR with the new Nikon version I would have my ideal set up but I think its close enough and really I don't need the Nikon version, the Tamron is good enough and then some for my needs of it.

 

[benhasajeep]

My ideal would be
Nikon D850
Nikon 24-70mm 2.8G
Nikon 70-200mm 2.8E

So if I would be able to justify and replace my wonderful Tamron 70-200mm 2.8 VR with the new Nikon version I would have my ideal set up but I think its close enough and really I don't need the Nikon version, the Tamron is good enough and then some for my needs of it.

If we number a lens the same number can we have more than 2?? For instance 2 lenses listed as #5.

Hint - Hint!

 

[raschmidt]

If I care about price (so most realistic for me)
Panasonic G85 + Panasonic 14-140mm II l& Panasonic 42.5mm f/1.2 lens

If I don't care about price:
Olympus E-M1 ii + Olympus 12-100mm Pro & Olympus 25mm f/1.2 Pro.

If I don't care about price or weight:
GH5 + MB & Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 & Panasonic 100-400mm

 

[ac12]

FX
D850 + 24-70 f/2.8 + 70-200 f/2.8

DX
D7200 + 10-20 + 18-140

 

[Dave Colangelo]

ill it down by format:

Digital:
The latest Nikon body dejour D850 if I could
50mm 1.2 (Oh so sharp)
300mm (for da birds) what ever they are offering up these days.

35mm Film
Nikon F3
50mm 1.2 (oh so sharp again)
300mm Ai-s 4.5 (Still for the birds)

Medium Format Film
Hasselblad 500CM
50mm
150mm

 

[Derrel]

ill it down by format:

Digital:
The latest Nikon body dejour D850 if I could
50mm 1.2 (Oh so sharp)
300mm (for da birds) what ever they are offering up these days.

35mm Film
Nikon F3
50mm 1.2 (oh so sharp again)
300mm Ai-s 4.5 (Still for the birds)

Medium Format Film
Hasselblad 500CM
50mm
150mm

You've got some great 1980's lenses listed there! The 300/4.5 Ai-S was okay, I owned one and used another pool version of it,hard to focus fast with it on anything moving but built like the proverbial brick waste disposal facility; the 300mm f/4.5 ED~IF was better, and more compact, and has that astoundingly fast, feather-touch internal focusing mechanism that allows manual focusing with amazing speed and accuracy even on fast action; these days Nikon's new 200-500mm autofocusing zoom is pretty popular, and it might be (I stress it might be) the next long lens I buy.

The allure of the 50/1.2 has never caught the fancy of many people, but it is uber-fast,for sure.

Looking forward to seeing some pictures out of the newly-acquired 500mm Tele-Tessar you recently got off of the e-Bay site!

 

[Destin]

these days Nikon's new 200-500mm autofocusing zoom is pretty popular, and it might be (I stress it might be) the next long lens I buy.

Agreed. I’m regretting having sold my Tamron 150-600 and I want something similar.. I’m thinking the 200-500 May be the next addition to my bag.

 

[Derrel]

I met a fellow at Pier 39 in Astoria, Oregon, on the mighty Columbia River, and he let me use his Nikkor 200-500 on my D610 to shoot a bunch of test files...I was greatly impressed by the files I shot with it. Seems to me like it could be the "one long lens" solution for most of the fair weather months of the year, now that Nikons have such amazing higher ISO performance.

I am thinking about heading in the Pro Photo Supply, to see the all-day Sigma representative show, but am afraid I might drop $1399 for the new 135 f/1.8 ART lens...so, thinking about NOT going to the demo day...watched three on-line reviews of the 135/1.8 this morning...

 

[Dave Colangelo]

You've got some great 1980's lenses listed there! The 300/4.5 Ai-S was okay, I owned one and used another pool version of it,hard to focus fast with it on anything moving but built like the proverbial brick waste disposal facility; the 300mm f/4.5 ED~IF was better, and more compact, and has that astoundingly fast, feather-touch internal focusing mechanism that allows manual focusing with amazing speed and accuracy even on fast action; these days Nikon's new 200-500mm autofocusing zoom is pretty popular, and it might be (I stress it might be) the next long lens I buy.

The allure of the 50/1.2 has never caught the fancy of many people, but it is uber-fast,for sure.

Looking forward to seeing some pictures out of the newly-acquired 500mm Tele-Tessar you recently got off of the e-Bay site!

Regrettably I was born in the wrong decade, but now I get to buy glorious 80's gear for a fraction of the cost. The 50 1.2 and 300 4.5 Ai-s came to me in a package deal, both near mint, from a local antique shop for $120. Ill agree that the 300 is not perfect but on my D3300 its great for birds in the summer and cheap enough that Im ok bringing it onto the beach with me near sand.

The secret to the 50 1.2 is not its speed, frankly at 1.2 the depth of field is so shallow its hard to use and with modern ISO ranges its not super necessary. But... at F2, 2.8 and 4 its sharpness is second to none. There is also something about the glass that renders colors in a very true and satisfying way.

Im hoping to get the tele-tessar out soon. I have encountered an issue whereby my ball head is a bit small for it so I think im going to need to up my tripod rig to something more serious. I may look for an old Bogen with a tilt head that can handle the weight better, off to craigslist!

 

[Dave Colangelo]

The allure of the 50/1.2 has never caught the fancy of many people, but it is uber-fast,for sure.

I almost forgot, in the end I'd say its one of their best looking lenses!