Nikon Users: Top 3 Lenses

[kundalini]

They are $20 cheaper than B&H, however once I looked at shipping it was a deal breaker. They charge $40 for shipping and B&H charges $16, so it really evens out. Thanks for finding that though, I appreciate you looking out for me.

When I looked just before I posted that for you B&H and Adorama listed it for $1900 and Sigma4less was $1850. (I don't do pennies)

 

[Josh220]

How can one claim it's a top 3 lens if they don't have it and know it's characteristics?

I don't have the lenses in my signature yet. I'll be spacing them out over the next few months (1 per month-ish) but I still believe that they are some of the best lenses out there.

I think it may be unfair to limit it to only people who own them, because some people may have spent hours researching which lenses they want to own someday, and just don't have the funds for them yet.

 

[Josh220]

They are $20 cheaper than B&H, however once I looked at shipping it was a deal breaker. They charge $40 for shipping and B&H charges $16, so it really evens out. Thanks for finding that though, I appreciate you looking out for me.

When I looked just before I posted that for you B&H and Adorama listed it for $1900 and Sigma4less was $1850. (I don't do pennies)

Strange, B&H shows $1799 for me.

 

[blash]

The Absolute Holy Trinity of Nikon glass are the f/2.8 14-24, 24-70, and 70-200 lenses. Unfortunately, I can't afford ANY of them

What I do love and enjoy though are my 2 primes - the 24mm f/2.8 and the 50mm f/1.4. Especially the 50 f/1.4. Stopped down to f/2 or smaller that thing is just CRISP!! Next on my list is a 105mm f/2.8 VR Macro ($900... expensive but I'll get there someday) and then, 20 years from now, the Cream Machine (85mm f/1.4 ooohhhh soooo creameee and delishis )

 

[dl4449]

1st Nikon 24 70 2.8

2nd 10 20 sigma f4

3rd Nikon 70 200 2.8
of those 3 the one that's spends the most time on my camera is the 24 70
I would like to get the 14 24 2.8 and the150 500 Sigma just can't justify the money right now

 

[Defy]

I think this is also camera dependent!

W/D300
70-200mm
12-24mm (Freakin AWESOME!)
35-70mm 2.8 (the 24-70mm wasn't 1300$ sharper/faster AF than the older one)

With an FX camera it might be
14-24mm 2.8
70-200mm 2.8
200-400mm f4

Really i was going to get the D700 and the 14-24mm but after getting the 12-24mm i don't think i need anything wider! I think i will hold out for the next DX body!

 

[kundalini]

Defy,

You should check out the Nikkor 20mm f/2.8 on the D700. :thumbup:

 

[RONDAL]

200mm F2

STUBBY FTW!

otherwise the holy trinity always works.

 

[Josh220]

Anyone know if Nikon will be releasing a VR version of the 24-70 2.8? For those of you who have it, do you think VR is necessary, or should I just buy it when B&H gets it back in stock? After I get the 70-200 it will be a debate between which lens to get next: 12-24 f/4 or the 24-70 f/2.8.

 

[Josh220]

Anyone favor the 50mm 1.8?

 

[agitprop]

New member here

I would vote for the holy trinity too.

But in reality I'm going for cheaper and lighter (except for the big gun)

17-35mm 2.8
35-70mm 2.8D (currently looking for a good copy)
70-200mm 2.8 VR

 

[Junior897]

I am in the same boat all I have right now is the 18-200. These are the 3 I want.
17-50 f2.8
28-75 f2.8
70-200 f2.8