Good landscape lens before upgrading to FX? D810 vs. D750 for first FX Body?

Malavok · Dec 12, 2015

So I've been saving money to upgrade my 7200 to a D810. I would mainly use my D810 for landscape but unfortunately my current landscape lens is DX only, so I'd like to get a good FX landscape lens first, which I will use on my 7200 until I get the 810.

My spending limit is $2000 for the lens.

Does anyone have any recommendations? So far I'm considering:

Nikon 14-24mm - supposed to be amazing, but heavy and no screw-on filters
Nikon 24-70mm - also supposed to be amazing, but also heavy and not as wide as 14-24
Nikon 20mm 1.8 - cheaper and lighter but prime

Other FX lens suggestions? It doesn't have to be Nikon, I'm open to 3rd party suggestions.

jaomul · Dec 12, 2015

14-24 is the most respected landscape lens, but you should look at the tamron 15-30mm f2.8 vc also before spending so much money

DB_Cro · Dec 12, 2015

I've read a lot of reviews on the mentioned Tamron and it should kick 14-24's ass, probably even better then the
current Canon 16-35.. However.. that new Canon 11-24.. omg. :O

Anyways, a side note.. I couldn't live without a 24-70 on a FF body, so I'd get that first, but only you know
what range you can't live without. I'd shoot for a year with a zoom then check my EXIF stats to figure out
if I could use a prime and at what range.

Malavok · Dec 12, 2015

The Tamron is an excellent suggestion, I'll look into that one!

jsecordphoto · Dec 12, 2015

The tamron 15-30 is a very good option, not quite as good as the 14-24, but very close. Gotta use a filter adapter with that too though.

D-B-J · Dec 12, 2015

Both the Tamron 15-30 and Nikon 14-24 are well regarded lenses. HOWEVER, if you plan to use filters with your wide angle, they are significantly larger and more expensive for both lenses. You need extra special adapters and filters for both, as they both have a bulbous front element and no filter threads.

The above being said, when I bought my D800 I did hours and hours and hours of research, and ended up settling on Nikon's 16-35 f4 VRII. It's about $1300 new, which leaves you with $700 left to spend. If I were you, I'd get the 16-35, a lee 77mm wide-angle adapter, the Lee foundation kit, a Lee little stopper (100mm), and a set of 3 graduated neutral density filters in the soft edged format. That puts you at about $1900 USD, so spend the last $100 on a Vello wireless shutter boss.

The images below were taken with a D800+16-35+Lee filters.

_RSP9031-2 by f_one_eight, on Flickr

_RSP6821-Edit-Edit by f_one_eight, on Flickr

_RSP3235 by f_one_eight, on Flickr

Seriously, I love this lens. The 14-24 might be a bit faster 2.8 vs. 4), but it's a lot heavier, a lot more expensive, and considerably larger.

Cheers!
Jake

P.S., Oh yeah, the 16-35 has VR too.. so you can shoot at 1/8th of a second on a moving high-speed ferry and still get tack-sharp images!

Homeward by f_one_eight, on Flickr

Malavok · Dec 13, 2015

Fantastic images!

I decided to go with the Tamron 15-30mm and after deliberating all weekend, I also think I will go with the D750 instead of the D810. It seems like the 750 will be a better fit for me as my first FX DSLR and will pair nicely with my 7200.

With the cheaper prices, I can later splurge on the filters for the Tamron, accessories, or save up for another lens for my 750.

DB_Cro · Dec 13, 2015

While I'd get the D750 in most cases over the D810, landscape is not one of them, but yeah, 750 with 2 lenses is better then 810 with one.

jsecordphoto · Dec 13, 2015

the 750 is an amazing camera, you'll love it. The 36mp would be nice, but the 750 is about a stop better at high ISO/low light/shadow detail which was more important to me. Enjoy your new kit! I'll be dropping my 16-28 to pick up the 15-30 soon

jaomul · Dec 13, 2015

Slightly off topic but why you getting an fx model?

goodguy · Dec 14, 2015

Own the D750, love, love, love it!!!...............just felt like sharing it with you

As for wide lens, only few months ago I posted exactly same thread here and I got a lens that no one really talks about but is an excellent lens.
I got the Sigma 12-24mm 4.5-5.6 II
As far as I know this lens is the widest FF lens you will find and its super sharp and has little distortion, I got it used in mint condition for 500$ (CAD) I am totally happy with it, its not too big or heavy, well made and its just perfectly made for landscape and architecture photography.
Only drawback you might see is the fact its not fast, when its day time its not a problem and when its night I will use tripod anywyas whether lens is fast or not as I like to shoot around the f8.

Malavok · Dec 14, 2015

I'm going to change the thread title to include 750 vs 810 decision, since that seems to be where this is going.

I'm 'upgrading' to FX mainly for low-light capability and the better wide-angle lenses. I do plan to still use my DX alongside it.

I initially thought the D810 was *the* camera I wanted, since it is better for landscape and the 36 MP sensor is very attractive.

However, after comparing all features side-by-side, is it really better for me than the 750? 750 has some advantages at high iso, is lighter and smaller, and has swivel screen. I hike up mountains a lot, for most of my shots, so weight and size matter. I also do a lot of "getting down on the ground" handheld shots, even for landscape. The 750 also has a very similar feel and button layout to the 7200; since I plan on carrying both bodies with me in some cases, this seems like an advantage.

The 810 looks a little heavy, large, and clunky. Is that the case? The size/weight is really pushing me to the 750.

I'm a hobbyist, non-pro, don't make any $ off my images, and don't print larger than 20x30, so I wonder if I really need the 810. The extra detailed landscapes are tempting.

jsecordphoto · Dec 14, 2015

Literally the only thing I wish the d750 has is the 36mp, but I sell a fair amount of prints and printing larger would be nice. If I were you I'd grab the 750 and use the money you save on more glass.

jaomul · Dec 14, 2015

Is there a worthwhile advantage to spending all that money on upgrade to fullframe for landscape photography. Will a d750 than a d7200 give better image quality at iso 100 all else being equal? Would your money be better put buying the best possible dx lens?

DB_Cro · Dec 14, 2015

Like mentioned before, other then the mpix advantage which IS important for landscapes, the D750 does everything else better, especially the high-ISO thing.
So this is a bit tricky, since you're doing it all (D7200 is great for sports).

I do everything but landscapes and when I do, even the D7200 would be good enough for me so there's no contest, the faster D750 wins for me every time,
and having LESS mpix (smaller file size) is actually a benefit to me. I'd get the D810 for studio portraits or product shots, and/or landscapes.. but.. again..
the D750 is so well rounded I'd switch from Canon side just to have that thing.

I think you'd KNOW if you needed the D810, for anyone wondering between the two I'd say my default recommendation would be the D750.
Then again.. even the D810 would be a huge upgrade in terms of high ISO performance (which is not an issue for landscapes since you
don't shoot them in high ISO, right?) after the D7200.