Need Primes for Photo Pop?

[Neuner]

For my D80 I started out with a Nikkor 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6D AF and was happy with the results until I picked up a 1.8 50mm. With the 50 my images 'pop' and have that sharpness and contrast that the 24-120 is lacking.

I'd like to get another lens in the ~24-120 range that performs better. Do I need to stick with primes to get the sharpness & contrast that I see with the 50?

 

[ShaCow]

I love my 1.8 50mm prime.. primes are generally better then zooms.. but.. if you get a decent quality lens then you will have no need to stick to a prime.

 

[Neuner]

What's a decent quality zoom around this range?

 

[Big Mike]

For the most part, an easy way to tell the quality of a zoom lens is to look at the price.

The Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED, for example, is probably a fantastic zoom lens...the cost: $ 1,699.95

 

[sabbath999]

For the most part, an easy way to tell the quality of a zoom lens is to look at the price.

The Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED, for example, is probably a fantastic zoom lens...the cost: $ 1,699.95

No probably about this one... a friend of mine has one, I have shot with it a bit... I will see if I can dig around and find the pictures.

It is very, very sharp.

My only complaint about it is that it doesn't go as wide as I would like, it is a full frame sensor lens design... which means I would have to carry something like a 10-20 as well for a small sensor camera like my d80.

Still, the 24-70 is a beast of a lens, and I would really like to have one.

 

[Neuner]

Pretty cool, but too expensive for me. Love the 2.8 factor though...

I'd like to only get full-frame lenses b/c I am thinking that all dSLRs will go this way in the near future. I don't want to have to upgrade the lens along with the camera.

I have a feeling I may be SOL for getting a higher quality zoom lens.

 

[Big Mike]

While full frame cameras are becoming more common...I don't think they that crop sensor cameras will be disappearing any time soon. There are too many lenses designed specifically for them...and realistically, the crop sensor cameras are so good now, that 95% of people won't need anything better (although what they need and what they want are not the same thing).

There are cheaper options. Have a look at the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro DF . It is certainly not as fantastic as the Nikkor lens...but it's probably 90% as good for less than 1/3 of the price.

I've got a Tamron 17-50 F2.8...which isn't quite as good as the Canon 17-55 F2.8 IS or the Nikon 17-55 F2.8...but it was about 1/3 of the price.

 

[sabbath999]

If I hadn't just bought my 70-200 2.8 VR and a TC17-E in the last couple of weeks, I would be buying this today just to see what it is like:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Sigma-24-60mm-F...yZ106863QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

Great reviews on the web on the lens, and it is only $240 Like This One Here (clicky)... and basketball season is coming up.

On the other hand, $2K USD is about my spending limit on lenses per month, I think...

 

[Neuner]

These are great suggestions. I like the 24-70mm.

Even though I shoot a wide range I was thinking about the focal range & when I would use it most. I'm tossing around getting a wide-angle prime and then a zoom to cover the higher end. I used the full extent of the lens quite often at 120mm but since that it is on one end of the range there's more distortion.

Looking back, when I use the wide angle I'm taking my time to capture more scenic shots and don't mind swapping for a prime. When I'm zooming in and trying to compose the pic correctly it's on the fly like a sporting event, capturing animals at play, etc and would need to be quick. I think this is usually in the 50/70+ range.

It looks like I might be better off getting the 24-70 and then a 70+. I'd then have the 50 for portraits which has been excellent. Any suggestions for the upper range?
​

 

[Big Mike]

70-200 F2.8 VR is about as good as it gets...but again, it's pricey. I would assume that Nikon has a non-VR version (I don't know...I'm a Canon guy).

Nikon has a 70-300 VR, which isn't a nice F2.8 lens...but it's more affordable, I'm sure.

Sigma sells a 70-200 F2.8 that is supposed to be pretty good...but it's rather large and heavy.

 

[Garbz]

www.photozone.de has a list and sharpness tests of many Nikkor and Canon lenses except for the most recent top of the range ones.

Actually the primes are rather crap. The 50mm f/1.8 is a horrible lens below f/4.5 and it's contrast and sharpness is unusable (reads art-worthy) at f/1.8. That said some other lenses are fantastic. The Nikon 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5 is amazingly sharp and shows little contrast problems for a lens in it's price class. So there's lemons and gems in every area.

 

[itoncool]

70-200 F2.8 VR is about as good as it gets...but again, it's pricey. I would assume that Nikon has a non-VR version (I don't know...I'm a Canon guy).

Unlike Canon which have 4 versions of 70-200, Nikon only have 1 version of 70-200, but Nikon has 80-200 f/2.8 for non-VR version, less cost and still darn sharp. I have 70-200VR, I spent a lot for this beast but like Big Mike said, it is "about as good as it gets".

To me, Primes and Zooms are two different worlds, you just can't get enough with any of those two.

In 24-120 range, the upcoming Nikkor 24-70 (or the predecessor 28-70) is perfectly one option with in your range, the others that come close are 70-200VR, 80-200, 17-35 and 17-55DX (if you don't mind with DX lenses). Those lenses aren't cheap and heavy.

for primes I can recommend you with 35 f/2, any 50 (f/1.4 or f/1.8) or any 85 (f/1.4 or f/1.8). The 105 f/2D also great but some people tend to just go with the 105 f/2.8 Macro instead.

 

[Garbz]

There were 4 models of the 80-200 from Nikon as well. The most recent revision was discontinued as it had an AF-S motor and ate into the market of the 70-200. The 3rd release is the one most talked about and mine should arrive friday after I pay my import duties.

 

[itoncool]

Yes Gabz, thanks you are right but compared to Canon 70-200 which you still can easily find any of those 4 new, what Nikon has is totally different situation, currently only 1 version of Nikkor 80-200 is still in production, the AF-D 80-200 (I believe this is the one that you're expecting) and the last version AFS 80-200 like Gabz said, was discontinued after the 70-200VR came but still not hard to find one in the used market. The first two models? Well, I won't make the OP having a difficult time finding the others 80-200.