lens for D800

[bs0604]

I have preordered a Nikon D800 and tentatively plan on getting the Nikon 28-300 f/3.5-5.6G VRII lens and probably the 14-24 mm wide angle lens. Comments on these choices? Cost is not particularly a factor.

 

[Trever1t]

I have heard good things about the 28-300 but it's not my choice of lens. Most will agree that the 14-24, 24-70 and the 70-200vr II are the best for the job.

 

[Mach0]

I have preordered a Nikon D800 and tentatively plan on getting the Nikon 28-300 f/3.5-5.6G VRII lens and probably the 14-24 mm wide angle lens. Comments on these choices? Cost is not particularly a factor.

http://amzn.com/B002JCSV8U

There's a used one for $1,300. I'd take it over the 28-300.

 

[cgipson1]

I have preordered a Nikon D800 and tentatively plan on getting the Nikon 28-300 f/3.5-5.6G VRII lens and probably the 14-24 mm wide angle lens. Comments on these choices? Cost is not particularly a factor.

I have a 28-300... and I love it as a general purpose walk around. But if you are really serious about that D800.... it may not be the best lens for serious work. The Nikon Holy Trinity (as Trever mentioned above) is what I would really recommend for the kind of resolution that the D800 is capable of. The 28-300 will give your great photos.. the others (especially the 70-200 2.8) will give you AWESOME photos! That is assuming you can do your part!

 

[bs0604]

Is the 70-200 the type of lens I can use for general walk around?

 

[Sw1tchFX]

/facepalm

I want a mega resolution camera with a crappy lens! And no, the 70-200 is not a walk around lens unless you're a glutton for punishment.

If you want a lens that's walk-around and will easily resolve a D800, than either get one of the new 50mm's or the 35mm f/1.4G, any of those 3 will easily resolve the sensor.

 

[Trever1t]

I will use the 70-200 for most outdoor portraiture but for walkaround the 24-70...until I get my hands on a 35f/1.4G but that's prolly xmas

 

[DorkSterr]

I have both those lens and let me tell you now that their worth the money. Mostly the 14-24mm lol.

 

[Yangpei]

I have preordered a Nikon D800 and tentatively plan on getting the Nikon 28-300 f/3.5-5.6G VRII lens and probably the 14-24 mm wide angle lens. Comments on these choices? Cost is not particularly a factor.

I have the 14-24 2.8 lens and even on my D90, it's awesome. On the D800, it should be ever better!

 

[Vtec44]

I love the 70-200 f2.8 VR2 for portrait work. It is sharp even at f2.8.

 

[ekhphoto]

I have a D700 and a Mamiya 645AFD with a good selection of lenses. I have a d800e on order. My plan is to test the 28-300 on the d800 as soon as it arrives. In use on the D700 it seems to be adequately sharp, but a little contrasty. It needs to be held steady, despite the VR function, for best results. I've also ordered an adapter to allow use of Mamiya lenses on the Nikon F-mount body -- but automatic functions are out the window. That's OK. You can still use M or A mode, and just focus manually. My idea is to find out if with the stellar glass of the Mamiya the D800 will really function as well as a medium format camera. My guess? It won't. But we shall see.

 

[manaheim]

/facepalm

I want a mega resolution camera with a crappy lens! And no, the 70-200 is not a walk around lens unless you're a glutton for punishment.

If you want a lens that's walk-around and will easily resolve a D800, than either get one of the new 50mm's or the 35mm f/1.4G, any of those 3 will easily resolve the sensor.

I'm glad I wasn't the only one who was wondering about this.

36MP $3,000 camera... and that lens. Wow.

 

[manaheim]

You know, I just had to come back to this...

OP... If you have the money to spend on a D800, I suppose more power to you, but I have to ask... If you're asking what lens you should buy for a particular camera... not just what lens, but for a particular camera, I kind of have to wonder why you're buying a $3,000 camera... and especially one as specialized as the D800.

Again, if you have the money, sure... why the hell not. But, you really can't be just sticking any old glass on the front of that thing and expect it to work well. We're talking about a camera that the manufacturer basically says "Hey, you need to have this thing on a tripod... like all the time!" and you're going to buy a super-zoom for it? Frankly, (and I haven't checked), but I wonder if that lens even has the optical quality necessary to take full advantage of the D800. I'm guessing at $1,000 for that zoom range that it most likely does not.

Most people buying a camera of that caliber are going to be sticking to some much better glass. If you have the budget to go for the 24-70 2.8 or the 70-200 2.8 VR2 I think that would be more in the range you should be looking at. If you don't, then you might consider buying a lesser camera and save a few bucks to invest in the glass? D700 maybe? They're going down to like $2200 pretty soon.

Again... whatever. If you've got the cash, go for it... it's just really odd to see someone spending $3K on a camera 1. Not know what lens to use, 2. Be buying THAT lens.

 

[zamanakhan]

You know, I just had to come back to this...OP... If you have the money to spend on a D800, I suppose more power to you, but I have to ask... If you're asking what lens you should buy for a particular camera... not just what lens, but for a particular camera, I kind of have to wonder why you're buying a $3,000 camera... and especially one as specialized as the D800.Again, if you have the money, sure... why the hell not. But, you really can't be just sticking any old glass on the front of that thing and expect it to work well. We're talking about a camera that the manufacturer basically says "Hey, you need to have this thing on a tripod... like all the time!" and you're going to buy a super-zoom for it? Frankly, (and I haven't checked), but I wonder if that lens even has the optical quality necessary to take full advantage of the D800. I'm guessing at $1,000 for that zoom range that it most likely does not.Most people buying a camera of that caliber are going to be sticking to some much better glass. If you have the budLget to go for the 24-70 2.8 or the 70-200 2.8 VR2 I think that would be more in the range you should be looking at. If you don't, then you might consider buying a lesser camera and save a few bucks to invest in the glass? D700 maybe? They're going down to like $2200 pretty soon.Again... whatever. If you've got the cash, go for it... it's just really odd to see someone spending $3K on a camera 1. Not know what lens to use, 2. Be buying THAT lens.

Lol completely agree, I am kinda jealous that op has the cash to spend on a specialized body with the experience to know what kind of lens you may need. But you earned your money, spend it however you'd like, I am just a an envious broke bloke.Personally if I had the d800 my needs would be suited with the a 24-70, 50 1.8, 16-35, already have a 80-200 2.8 and a 105 micro vr. The first lens I'd get wold be the 50 1.8g then 16-35 and Finnally the 24-70


If u want a super zoom I'd save the money and get a d7000 with an 18-200. You don't buy the d800 to pair it with a slow zoom.

 

[2WheelPhoto]

Get the 24-70 and 70-200 VRII and you'll not regret it.