Nikon D7000 - Lenses

[LizardKing]

In lieu of the AF-S 24-70 f/2.8 you coud get the Nikon 24-85mm f/2.8-4.0D IF AF Zoom Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras
which also has a 1:2 Macro close focus capability from 35 mm to 85 mm.

That's right... I saw this lens a couple of days ago and then completely forgot about it. It sounds like a great option... Is it a big deal it's no AF-S?
Also, could you please quickly explain what you mean with "1:2 Macro close focus capability 35mm to 85mm" ?

Thanks!

 

[cgipson1]

The 28-70 can be had for less than a grand used.

As can the Sigma 24-70, which I'd take over the 28-300 ANY day. Sigma makes some darn good stuff for the money.

There is also a 3 prime combo, which I listed above (24 2.8, 50 1.8, 85 1.8) that could be had for under a grand, and would be a very good start. I have nothing against that 28-300. I bet it's a nice little walk around/scouting lens. I'm just saying it's not even close to the best way to spend $1,000 on glass.

Interesting. Not to be rude or nosy, but you are what, 19? Shooting a D80, and own one inexpensive nikon lens... so what are you basing your opinions on? What you have read? Have you used (acutally shot with) the nikkor 24-70 2.8 or the nikkor 28-300?

Yes, I'm 19. I fail to see how that has ANYTHING to do with this thread. Grow up man. I've shot with the 24-70, but not the 28-300. I've also spend a good amount of time with a Nikon D700, and D300s (owned my my friend). I don't need to base my opinions on anything other than raw fact here... an f4.5-5.6 zoom lens is going to be too slow for many situations. The OP said he wants the best quality he can get for the money; the 28-300 doesn't fit the bill there. He also stated that he plans to purchase a telephoto in the future, and just wants a standard lens with a wide max. aperture for the time being. Once again, that's not the 28-300.

Actually the OP said he wasn't sure if a prime was the best way to go if he was going to have only one lens... (to me that means a non-prime.. or zoom!).

I disagree about the 3.5 to 5.6 aperture being an issue either... especially with the D7000.... kick the ISO up a notch or two.. boom... no problem.

The comment about your age was merely a comment.. obviously you haven't been shooting for 30 years...

You sound like you have been well versed in the religion of the primes.... so won't argue with you there. But they are not necessarily optimal when you are limited to a single lens. Lets say you have the world's best 50mm lens on your camera... but the subject you want to shoot is fairly small... and 100 yards away (and you can't get closer cause it's on the water)! That fat tourist next to you.. (the one in the bermuda shorts) will get a far better image than you will with his cheap 12x zoom point and shoot.. so much for your fancy prime, right?

The Sigma 24-70 you mention is fairly poorly rated in most of the reviews I have seen... prone to lens flare, very noisy AF, and low contrast. Most reviews state it is better for a DX body than an FX due to excessive corner softness. Also lots of CA and haloing when used wide open. Even comments about lack of true color reproduction. I would avoid it... why have a 2.8 you have to stop down 3 or 4 stops to make it sharp and kill the CA... I would be glad to post the reviews if you want?

I can shoot the 28-300 wide open with no issues.... and with VR... actually at the same shutter speeds you would get from a 2.8... or close to it....

 

[cgipson1]

In lieu of the AF-S 24-70 f/2.8 you could get the much less expensive, though still quite good, Nikon 24-85mm f/2.8-4.0D IF AF Zoom Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras
which also has a 1:2 Macro close focus capability from 35 mm to 85 mm.

That's a good call, Keith! I have never used that lens... but supposed to be good!

 

[cgipson1]

In lieu of the AF-S 24-70 f/2.8 you coud get the Nikon 24-85mm f/2.8-4.0D IF AF Zoom Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras
which also has a 1:2 Macro close focus capability from 35 mm to 85 mm.

That's right... I saw this lens a couple of days ago and then completely forgot about it. It sounds like a great option... Is it a big deal it's no AF-S?
Also, could you please quickly explain what you mean with "1:2 Macro close focus capability 35mm to 85mm" ?

Thanks!

The lack of AF-S means that it has no internal focusing motors... but could be focused by the motor in the D7000 body.

The macro part of that, means that it will allow some close focusing, and magnify subjects at a 1 to 2 ratio. Would take decent macro shots in other words... much like the 28-300 I used for the dragonfly shots. With the D7000's IQ, you could crop those up to the subject, and have nice shots...

 

[LizardKing]

Thanks!
The macro capability sounds like a good plus to that lens.
I do know what AF-S stands for, but I've read they are faster and quieter and the AF lens. But since I've no practical experience with neither of them, I was asking how big a deal it was. What do you think?

 

[cgipson1]

Thanks!
The macro capability sounds like a good plus to that lens.
I do know what AF-S stands for, but I've read they are faster and quieter and the AF lens. But since I've no practical experience with neither of them, I was asking how big a deal it was. What do you think?

Some people don't like AF lenses because they are typically a bit slower to focus, and much more noisy than AF-S lenses.... but it depends on the lens and the camera driving them. My Tokina 100 macro is noisy, although the speed isn't too bad. I use it 99% of the time in manual focus, so it doesn't bother me too much. Most of the Nikon AF lenses aren't as noisy as some of their third party counterparts. AF lenses are typically significantly cheaper then full AF-S lenses though.. so it is a trade-off.

The noise usually isnt that objectionable.. it is just the comparison of that noise to what a AF-S lens (usually almost or totally silent) sounds like that emphasizes it, I think.

 

[LizardKing]

What do you think about these combinations?

- Nikon 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR AF-S Nikkor Zoom Lens for Nikon Digital SLR
- Nikon 50mm f/1.8G AF-S NIKKOR Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras

OR

- Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8D ED AF Zoom Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras
- Nikon 50mm f/1.8G AF-S NIKKOR Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras


This way, I have a really good lens for portrait and a nice multipurpose lens for going out.

I know it's a completely different scenario, but how about only buying the Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8G AF-S? Would I be aiming to high for the first (and only) lens?

 

[2WheelPhoto]

second option better indeed.

 

[LizardKing]

second option better indeed.

Do you think is a good combination to start with the D7000? What would you buy with 1000-1500$ budget for glass?

 

[cgipson1]

Either combination would do well for you.. although the second combination leaves you short on the wide angle end. Keep in mind that the D7000 is a crop sensor.. so you need to multiply the focal lengths you are looking at by 1.5 to get the actual Crop Factor on the FX lenses.

- Nikon 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR AF-S Nikkor Zoom Lens for Nikon Digital SLR.....>>>>> 42-450
- Nikon 50mm f/1.8G AF-S NIKKOR Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras....................>>>>> 75mm ( am not sure if the DX lenses are actually corrected to the sensor size.. am assuming so... but if you go with FX lens...>>> 75mm)

OR

- Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8D ED AF Zoom Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras.......>>>> 120 - 300mm
- Nikon 50mm f/1.8G AF-S NIKKOR Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras.....................>>>> 75mm

Nikon 24-70.... >>>>>> 36-105

 

[MTVision]

Either combination would do well for you.. although the second combination leaves you short on the wide angle end. Keep in mind that the D7000 is a crop sensor.. so you need to multiply the focal lengths you are looking at by 1.5 to get the actual FOV on the FX lenses.

- Nikon 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR AF-S Nikkor Zoom Lens for Nikon Digital SLR.....>>>>> 42-450
- Nikon 50mm f/1.8G AF-S NIKKOR Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras....................>>>>> 75mm ( am not sure if the DX lenses are actually corrected to the sensor size.. am assuming so... but if you go with FX lens...>>> 75mm)

OR

- Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8D ED AF Zoom Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras.......>>>> 120 - 300mm
- Nikon 50mm f/1.8G AF-S NIKKOR Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras.....................>>>> 75mm

Nikon 24-70.... >>>>>> 36-105

DX lenses have the same FOV on a crop sensor camera as the FX lenses on a crop sensor camera

 

[LizardKing]

I might be wrong, but aren't all these FX lenses?

 

[cgipson1]

DX lenses have the same FOV on a crop sensor camera as the FX lenses on a crop sensor camera

you are correct....about the FOV. I should not have used FOV in that example.. I should have used Crop Factor, as that is where the difference is. Brain fart, on my part.

 

[cgipson1]

LizardKing.. sorry if I confused you, used the wrong term in the above example. The FOV will be the same on either DX or FX lenses.. but the crop factor will be different. The FX lenses are designed to create an full size sensor image... and on a DX body only a part of that image is used... hence the 1.5 multiplication factor I mentioned.

You did not specifically specify DX or FX on the 50mm... and I thought Nikon made a DX 50 ( they do make a DX 35, but not a 50) Sorry for the confusion!

 

[LizardKing]

You all probably went several times through the process of deciding what lenses to buy... So please be patient with this poor lost soul :mrgreen:

Again, let's say I'd like to really focus on portraits for a while. What lens/lenses would you buy with 1000U$s? and with 1500U$s?
Please allow me to emphasize again I'm looking for FX lenses and the better quality I can afford. I prefer to have just 1 or 2 lenses to start but be sure they're good and they'll be useful in the future if I decide to go for a fullframe.

Thank you all again for your time a patience! :thumbup:
Have a nice day!

Regards,
LizardKing