14-24/f2.8 & 70-200R II /f 2.8

[sonicbuffalo]

Does anyone have either of these lenses, and type of camera body do you have?

 

[Trever1t]

I wishg I had the first one, I have the 17-35f2.8 and that 14-24 is the KING. I do have the 70-200vr2 and have used it on a D300, D700 and D800. Those lenses are great, best possible glass on any body.

 

[sonicbuffalo]

I just bought both of them and they're great lenses....need to get over my allergies so I can go shoot....the 70-200 is a beast....but I'll love it I'm sure. Also buying the D610, but it's on backorder....need the full frame as I'm shooting with a D7100 right now, which I'll either sell or keep as a backup.

 

[480sparky]

I have the 70-200 on a D600. I can also toss on a 1.4 or 1.7 Nikon TC if need be.

 

[sonicbuffalo]

That will give your 200 a boost, but how many stops do you lose by using a TC?

 

[kundalini]

Does anyone have either of these lenses, and type of camera body do you have?

Yes. D300 & D700.

.... and the 24-70mm as a bonus.

 

[480sparky]

That will give your 200 a boost, but how many stops do you lose by using a TC?

1 stop w/ 1.4, 1½ stop with 1.7.

So I end up with a 100-280 f/4 or a 119-340 f/4.8.

 

[tevo]

I chose to buy an 85 1.4 instead of putting that money into a 14-24... that is definitely the next lens on my list. I want to complete the holy trinity.

 

[sonicbuffalo]

I could have bought the 24-70 f/2.8, but the 14-24 and the 70-200 are much harder to find used, in great shape, so I bought those two used, but both are in excellent condition.

 

[hamlet]

Your kit body turns into a interesting camera when you hang one of these lenses on it.

 

[sandollars]

Great lenses for a pro. I own all 3 of the trinity and use them when I am serious and close to the bag. My bodies are a D-800 and a D3s. For zooms, you simply can't beat these bad boys.

HOWEVER.

They are HEAVY, every single one of them! This might sound strange to some of you but I find myself pulling out my 28-300 when I need a zoom and primes when I get REALLY serious. Consequently, these lenses stay in my bag a lot....

Would I buy them again?

The 70-200 for sure and don't forget a 2x Nikon converter to go with it!. This set up is super heavy but great.

The 14-24? no, I would not. I would buy the 16-35 f4 since this kind of lens is almost always used outside the 2.8 is not as important to me as the VRII is and if I am using it in low light I am using a tripod anyway. I would take the difference and buy some primes.

The 24-70 nope. It's so heavy and when I am shooting for serious in this range, i am using primes. I use my nifty 50 (indoors) or my 85 (outdoors) and use my feet as the zoom and when I am shooting more for fun and need a zoom, I tend to forget my 24-70 and grab my 28-300. For a thousand bucks, it simply can't be beat.

Do the math. You can buy a full range of primes with the savings described above and get much better photos.

AS ALWAYS, this is just my 2 cents.

 

[sonicbuffalo]

Well...I finally found a company that has the D610 in stock, so I will be able to use my 14-24 mm f/2.8 and get the full wide angle that it can produce on a full frame camera. I know from shooting the 14-24 on my D7100, the pictures are incredibly sharp. I love the lens and haven't even tapped into what it can do yet. I will be looking for a 24-70mm f/2.8 as soon as my finances will allow. I'm starting to think that I may travel with my D7100 and DX lenses, as the FX lenses are so heavy. I don't know though. I hate giving up the sharpness!

 

[Braineack]

you get used to the weight; it's the bulk, for me, that makes it harder to travel with.

 

[astroNikon]

UWA is addicting.
You'll love the UWA on a FF.

I have the 18-35 on my d600
I also had a 24mm, 20-35/2.8 and an old 17mm Vivitar but sold those off to pay for the 18-35

I'd love to have the 14-24 .. maybe some day

 

[Mach0]

The 70-200 VRII is very very nice.