Advice on 3 Lenses for D7000

graecyn · Feb 23, 2012

Greetings!

I'd like to get 3 solid lens recommendations that I can invest in for my D7000. The only one I know for sure I want is the 50mm (since the 50mm is the one I used most often when I had a Canon). I also love the 85mm (my 2nd most used focal length when I had a Canon), and the idea of the 70-200mm, but I'm willing to accept suggestions for other lenses that may suit my immediate needs better. I'm hoping to spend between $3000 and $3500 for now (so I'm thinking I'll limit myself to 2-3 lenses right off), and I shoot mainly portraits, stationary objects and nature/landscapes - but I'd like to experiment with wedding and event photography as well (I frequent concerts, festivals and the like a lot too). I like to shoot a lot of things, but haven't really settled on a niche yet so I'm open to considering a wide range of recommendations. If you'd like to make accessories recommendations beyond what is in the list below, that would be fine too.

Here is a list of the stuff I'd like to pick up in the immediate future, piece by piece as I can. If you feel I'd benefit from any thing in this list more immediately than others (between $3000-$3500 total), please let me know which and why if you like! Or, if something is not on this list that you think would be a better idea, again, feel free to let me know what and why. Links are good too! Just a side note: FX lenses are preferred but not necessarily mandatory.

Nikon 50mm f/1.4G SIC SWM Prime
Nikon 35mm f/1.4G AF-S FX SWM
Nikon 85mm f/1.4G AF-S
Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II AF-S

Accessories list (just things I'm looking at right now - nothing solidly decided on, recommendations welcome):
Nikon MB-D11 Multi-Power Battery Pack
Nikon SB-910 Speedlight Flash
Pelican 1510-004-110 Case (for storage)
Tenba 638-227 Small Messenger (for carrying around)

Alrighty. Suggestions, advice, anything along the lines of "You should buy this first, and here's why" - would be very welcome. Again, FX is preferred but not mandatory, so if you think I'd be better off investing in a DX instead, feel free to let me know (with a link to your recommendation if possible). Thanks!

o hey tyler · Feb 23, 2012

The list of lenses you outlined, 35mm, 50mm, and 85mm are all focal lengths I myself own and use regularly. I shoot primes more than zooms. The ones you listed are all fully usable on an FX camera. I would strongly suggest those if you are shooting portraits. The 70-200 f/2.8 is on my list to get as well in the future.

I wouldn't be surprised if someone also suggested a 24-70mm f/2.8, but IMO you don't need it if you have the 35, 50 and 85. It's more for the workable focal range of the zoom, but that matters more to some than to others.

Infinite_Day · Feb 23, 2012

If you shoot a lot of landscape you may want to consider eliminating the 35mm in favor of a wider zoom that goes to that focal length. Say the 16-35mm f/4 or the 17-35mm f/2.8 - both are pro-quality glass.

There is also the 17-55mm f/2.8 DX lens which would allow you to get one very good lens instead of buying multiple primes. By all accounts this lens is very sharp and good all-around and I am considering it very heavily myself. Of course, it's DX specific and won't work on an FX sensor without it being in DX mode or getting vignetting. It does retain it's value very well, however, and you'd be able to re-sell it easily when/if you chose to move to a FX body.

graecyn · Feb 23, 2012

o hey tyler said:
The list of lenses you outlined, 35mm, 50mm, and 85mm are all focal lengths I myself own and use regularly. I shoot primes more than zooms. The ones you listed are all fully usable on an FX camera. I would strongly suggest those if you are shooting portraits. The 70-200 f/2.8 is on my list to get as well in the future.

I wouldn't be surprised if someone also suggested a 24-70mm f/2.8, but IMO you don't need it if you have the 35, 50 and 85. It's more for the workable focal range of the zoom, but that matters more to some than to others.

My gut was telling me to go with the 35, 50 and 85 and wait on the 70-200 too, so that's great advice thank you!

graecyn · Feb 23, 2012

Infinite_Day said:
If you shoot a lot of landscape you may want to consider eliminating the 35mm in favor of a wider zoom that goes to that focal length. Say the 16-35mm f/4 or the 17-35mm f/2.8 - both are pro-quality glass.

There is also the 17-55mm f/2.8 DX lens which would allow you to get one very good lens instead of buying multiple primes. By all accounts this lens is very sharp and good all-around and I am considering it very heavily myself. Of course, it's DX specific and won't work on an FX sensor without it being in DX mode or getting vignetting. It does retain it's value very well, however, and you'd be able to re-sell it easily when/if you chose to move to a FX body.

Hmm, well - I wouldn't really say I shoot a lot of landscape. I mean... I TRY to, but I'll be honest, I prefer people to landscapes. I like to dabble in landscapes at best right now and don't really travel enough to fully utilize a good landscape lens. But! I will take your advice into consideration if I find that I want to take a larger interest in it haha.

The 17-55mm -- also a nice suggestion. I quite like the idea of the focal range on that one. I'll add it to my list of considerations! Thank you!

Derrel · Feb 23, 2012

Again, there's that statement "FX is preferred but not mandatory"...I was one of the few all in favor of you buying an FX Nikon, the D700 specifically, or the D800 if you want to, since prices are so similar. But, seriously, if you want to commit to a DX camera, then your need something like the 17-55 f/2.8 DX Nikkor, or a Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8, as a workable event/wedding lens.

Also, the 85mm 1.4-G overlaps with the 70-200 VR-II, and I think instead of the 35/1.4-G, the 24/1.4-G would be a better lens on DX. The 24/1.4-G is an EXCEPTIONALLY well-designed lens. It offers incredibly good correction for coma, meaning that point sources of light are rendered as round, point sources, and not as big,blurry,elliptical footballs--meaning is is a superior lens for night-time work, cityscapes, photos of the stars, and in general, for low-light work. AND, it offers shallow DOF and wider angle of view; on APS-C, the 24mm-G is "sort of" the equivalent of a 35mm 1.4 on full-frame...wide-ish field of view + the ability to have selective focus shots + it's one of the best 24mm lenses one can buy. BUT, it *is* expensive.

Cases, accessories, sure. Whatwever you like. I'm sure those are adequate. Link? Look at Adorama or B&H. They have good links with info.

MLeeK · Feb 23, 2012

If I were shooting portraits only I'd love to have either a 24 or 28mm prime with the 50 and the 70-200 f/2.8. I use the 70-200 for most of my portrait work.
Now weddings? 24-70 and 70-200. I do not like the super wide below 24 PERSONALLY, but it does come in handy and especially on a DX sensor.

Your accessories list I'd ad a justin clamp and gorilla pod to it-you can use those to take that speedlight off camera almost anywhere.

bentcountershaft · Feb 23, 2012

I disagree with Derrel on the the 17-55. If I understand correctly you're still planning on upgrading to a D700/800 or what not at some point in the future so stay away from that DX lens. If you only shoot the occasional landscape just keep using your kit lens for that for now. It doesn't need to be a fast lens to do landscapes.

chuasam · Feb 23, 2012

Great selection

I'd say get the 70-200 first and hold off on the 85. It is entirely untrue that wide angles are for landscapes. If money is an issue, go for the 35/1.8 first and then sell it off when you upgrade to Fx.

Robin Usagani · Feb 23, 2012

replace the 35 with 24mm.

graecyn · Feb 23, 2012

This is all great food for thought! Thank you guys! I've got a couple of weeks to make decisions, so I'm sure I'll be referring to this thread often and will ask final thoughts on the lenses I land on just to make sure no one thinks I'm going horribly, atrociously wrong.

graecyn · Feb 23, 2012

Schwettylens said:
replace the 35 with 24mm.

I LOVE that lens. It is definitely on my list of things to get in the future.

DScience · Feb 23, 2012

I would go with the primes for sure!

graecyn · Feb 23, 2012

Derrel said:
Again, there's that statement "FX is preferred but not mandatory"...I was one of the few all in favor of you buying an FX Nikon, the D700 specifically, or the D800 if you want to, since prices are so similar. But, seriously, if you want to commit to a DX camera, then your need something like the 17-55 f/2.8 DX Nikkor, or a Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8, as a workable event/wedding lens.

Also, the 85mm 1.4-G overlaps with the 70-200 VR-II, and I think instead of the 35/1.4-G, the 24/1.4-G would be a better lens on DX. The 24/1.4-G is an EXCEPTIONALLY well-designed lens. It offers incredibly good correction for coma, meaning that point sources of light are rendered as round, point sources, and not as big,blurry,elliptical footballs--meaning is is a superior lens for night-time work, cityscapes, photos of the stars, and in general, for low-light work. AND, it offers shallow DOF and wider angle of view; on APS-C, the 24mm-G is "sort of" the equivalent of a 35mm 1.4 on full-frame...wide-ish field of view + the ability to have selective focus shots + it's one of the best 24mm lenses one can buy. BUT, it *is* expensive.

Cases, accessories, sure. Whatwever you like. I'm sure those are adequate. Link? Look at Adorama or B&H. They have good links with info.

I ADORE the 24mm and you're right it is expensive so will probably have to wait a bit... but it is definitely on my list of things to get!

mjhoward · Feb 23, 2012

If you're heavily into portraiture and you think that might end up being where you settle in, you will need much more lighting than a single speedlight. You may want to consider some strobes w/modeling lights and good modifiers and start practicing with that. Since you also like to shoot food (I noticed in your other thread) and other small stationary objects, you might consider swapping out one of your primes with a Micro prime. This will allow you, with at least one lens, to focus to 1:1 magnification but also be able to continue to use it as a portraiture lens since it will also focus to infinity. In general it will be slower (only f/2.8) but optical quality is still very high and you should be stopping down in a studio anyway. Have fun with your new toys!