Nikon D750? Nikon 16-35mm f2.8 or f4?

[salmeida86]

Hello!
I would like to update my travel photography gear. Maybe a Nikon D750 + Lens 16-35mm. What do you think about this choice? Any experience with this equipment? Should I buy a 16-35mm f2.8 or f4?


Thanks!

 

[Braineack]

Do you plan to shoot indoors mainly?

 

[Designer]

Hello, and Welcome!

What type of photography do you like to do while traveling? Do you like to really get into the photography mode, and take your time to set up a few very nice photos? Or would you rather enjoy the trip, taking mostly "record shots"?

The reason I ask is because when most people hear "travel gear", they automatically think of a smallish camera with one attached lens. I think of a compact camera with optical zoom and some technological advancements, but not necessarily a DSLR.

 

[salmeida86]

Do you plan to shoot indoors mainly?

Mainly outdoor

 

[salmeida86]

Hello, and Welcome!

What type of photography do you like to do while traveling? Do you like to really get into the photography mode, and take your time to set up a few very nice photos? Or would you rather enjoy the trip, taking mostly "record shots"?

The reason I ask is because when most people hear "travel gear", they automatically think of a smallish camera with one attached lens. I think of a compact camera with optical zoom and some technological advancements, but not necessarily a DSLR.

Hi! I understand the question. I am already shooting with a entry-level DSLR, trying to shoot very nice photos and feeling very frustated because the gear is limiting my progress. I am also not satisfied with the quality that the entry level cameras offer. For this reason I would like to upgrade my gear with a quality wide angle lens and a good body.

 

[photoflyer]

I'm sure the f 2.8 is considerably more expensive but if the price is acceptable, go with speed: the 2.8. You may not need it that often, but you'll be glad you've got it when you do.

 

[mountainjunkie]

I own a D750, and in my obviously biased opinion, it offers a great value for a full frame camera given what you can buy the model for now. With that said, while it may not be as heavy as the newest Nikon models (mirrorless excluded) it isn’t light. Especially with any fast lenses.

When you say “travel camera” my assumption is you want something lighter with a single lens for easy portability and general use for many types of shots. If that’s the case, a 16-35 lens probably isn’t the best option either as it limits you to a wide angle for everything.

 

[ac12]

Hello, and Welcome!

What type of photography do you like to do while traveling? Do you like to really get into the photography mode, and take your time to set up a few very nice photos? Or would you rather enjoy the trip, taking mostly "record shots"?

The reason I ask is because when most people hear "travel gear", they automatically think of a smallish camera with one attached lens. I think of a compact camera with optical zoom and some technological advancements, but not necessarily a DSLR.

Hi! I understand the question. I am already shooting with a entry-level DSLR, trying to shoot very nice photos and feeling very frustated because the gear is limiting my progress. I am also not satisfied with the quality that the entry level cameras offer. For this reason I would like to upgrade my gear with a quality wide angle lens and a good body.

What gear do you have; camera and lens(es)?
HOW is the gear limiting your progress? And please be as specific as possible.

What kind of traveling are you talking about; where, mode of travel, etc.?

 

[Solarflare]

Hello!
I would like to update my travel photography gear. Maybe a Nikon D750 + Lens 16-35mm. What do you think about this choice? Any experience with this equipment? Should I buy a 16-35mm f2.8 or f4?

Well .. on the basis that there is no 16-35/2.8 I would suggest getting the 16-35/4 ?

In fact the lens I'd recomment to get would be the AF-S 18-35/3.5-4.5.

If you dont fear large sensitive front elements, and either dont want to use filters or dont fear very expensive and large filter solutions, the Tamron 15-30/2.8 is it.

 

[Braineack]

I would hate traveling with such a bulky heavy limited lens.

 

[photoflyer]

I kinda missed the whole "for travel" thing. For business travel I still like to bring a DSLR and just picked up the Tamron 18-400. Yes, it is full of compromises but is a single medium sized lens that replaces what was two lenses previously.

 

[Derrel]

Doesn't the 16 to 35 millimeter f/4 have vibration reduction? Isn't it the lens that Thom Hogan recommends that most people buy in this category?

It is supposed to be a very good lens,part of the new F4 series zooms with vibration reduction that Nikon designed just a few years ago for its high resolution digital single-lens reflexes with great new high ISO performance and incredible sensor performance in general. With the new ISO invariant sensors in modern Nikons, f / 2.8 is no longer a really significant Advantage except in the most marginal of lighting situations, and even then if you need a lens for dim available light you can do better than 2.8 quite handily by two full f/stops by going with a prime lens in the f/1.4 category, or by 1 and 3/4 stops by going with one of the many F / 1.8 lenses that Nikon has designed within the past 10 years. If you need a lens for low-light an F 1.8 G Series 20,24, 28,50, or 85 mm is a practical choice.

 

[Solarflare]

Again: Nikon doesnt offer a 16-35/2.8.

I mean sure they offer that old 17-35/2.8 with that plastic aspherical lens element ... I wouldnt recomment getting that one.

 

[Derrel]

You are absolutely correct Nikon does not make a 16 to 35 mm f/ 2.8 zoom lens, but they do make a 16 to 35 mm f/ 4 Zoom with vibration reduction or VR.

 

[Solarflare]

[...] but they do make a 16 to 35 mm f/ 4 Zoom with vibration reduction or VR.

I never said otherwise.

In fact I already discussed that lens. I own it, but I wouldnt recomment it. The genius lens is the AF-S 18-35mm f3.5-4.5 because its amazingly lightweight, half as expensive, and optically slightly better than the AF-S 16-35mm f4 VR.