Ready to pull the trigger...

ac12 · Apr 10, 2018

Be prepared to upgrade your lenses also. You said over half your lenses will work on FX, but what about the other half? You need to make the decision if you will upgrade them to FX lenses, or not.
Basically, you need to sit down and plan a lens kit for FX, then see what you need to replace or buy new.
Example these kits:

24-70 f/2.8 (or 24-85 f/3.5-4.5 or 24-120 f/4), 70-200 f/2.8 (or the f/4 lens), 200-500, 50 f/1.8, 105 micro
- This is virtually a completely new kit.

24-85 (or 24/120), 70-300, 150-600, 50 f/1.8, 60 macro
- This kit is just one new lens, the 24-85 or 24-120.
- When you don't need the reach of the 150-600 the 70-300 is lighter and easier to handle/carry.

Do you need/want something wider than 24mm?

ac12 · Apr 10, 2018

Since you are upgrading your camera, what about the other stuff?

Tripod and head, monopod. Upgrade to carbon fiber, and higher load capacity.
Flash(es), remote triggers.
Pelikan case.

Derrel · Apr 10, 2018

The "old" 70-300 lenses are just not good enough for 45 megapixels...or even 36 MP...you'd want the NEW 70-300 AF-P, for its new optics...or a 70-200 f/4 AF-S VR-G, or maybe an f/2.8 model of new design, like Tamron's G2 version of their 70-200 f/2.8. I dunno...Nikon's 70-300 AF-S VR-G is simply NOT satisfying to me on the D800 and its 36MP sensor....the images just are not...good enough for landscapes...just not crisp...not fully satisfying, even stopped down to f/7.1...the 36 million pixels is revealing the 70-300 VR-G's 15 year-old optical weaknesses, where it was FINE back in the 2.7MP and 4.2MP and 6 Megapixel digital era...

Nwcid · Apr 11, 2018

My initial plan for lenses was 24-70, 70-200, likely Tamron, in their G2 series. I use my 150-600 a lot and once the other 2 lenses are in place, I would move to the G2 in this. The earlier portion of this thread has me reconsidering those choices.

Right now my 10.5mm and 60mm mainly get used underwater on my D90 and that won't be changing anytime soon.

I am sure the older 70-300 are not up for the challenge, but I can try it, along with the others, to help figure out exactly what ranges I will need for the FX. In the mean time I will still have my D7100 and will continue to use it as needed.

I have a Manfroto 290 tripod already which is rated for 11lbs and and the RC2 head is rated for 8.8lbs. I think I would like to try a gimbal style head sometime for a more fluid motion when shooting wildlife or action. My Nikon SB 700 should work fine for now, unless I am missing something with that. While it is not specifically a Pelican hard case, I currently use a Pelican S115 backpack which has been put through its paces.

ac12 · Apr 11, 2018

A gimbal is GREAT for tracking moving subject with a long lens.
I used it for shooting tennis with a 500mm lens.

mrca · Apr 11, 2018

The last couple of days I have been editing a shoot with the 850. I upgraded after 7 years with a 12 mp to 24 mp 6 months ago and now 46. Dynamic range and detail difference is stunning. I actually USE a lens designed 25 years ago and still produced today and the results are amazing. I suggest you shoot your lenses and determine if you see a problem. I wonder how many testers could see the difference side by side if at all. I would worry more about camera technique than lens selection when it comes to image quality with th is camera. 46 mp forces me to increase my shutter speed hand held. I found doubling the 1/length guide line makes a huge difference. With the iso performance of the 850 that is no problem. In studio I shoot on a rolling camera stand. Outdoor in full sun, have plenty of speed, if using flash, the flash duration helps. And remember, sharpness is not the only or for many of us, the most important quality in a lens.

jcdeboever · Apr 11, 2018

ac12 said:
24-85 f/3.5-4.5, smaller and lighter (465g) than the 24-70 f/2.8 VR (1070g)
AF-S NIKKOR 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G ED VR
It would complement either 70-200 or 70-300 lenses.

The 24-120 f/4 is the closest to the 18-105.
AF-S NIKKOR 24-120mm f/4G ED VR from Nikon
Bit wider on the short end, and bit shorter on the long end, which is what I like. I found the 18mm not quite wide enough. I used a 24 on my F2, and the 18 is equivalent to a 27. Those few mm makes a difference.
Comments have been made that the Nikon 24-120 is not as sharp as some of the 3rd party lenses.
The 24-120 f/4 (at 710g) is not a light lens, but it is 35% lighter than the 24-70 f/2.8 VR (at 1070g).

As a GP lens, I would take the 24-120 over the 24-70.
For me, the extra zoom range is the key.
If you are working in the 50-100mm range, you don't have to swap lenses or carry two bodies, like you would if you had the 24-70 and 70-200.
I admit, I am spoiled by the zoom range of the 18-140 on my D7200.

I used a 43-86 for MANY years, but as soon as I got a 35-105, it replaced the 43-86. Not for optical quality, but for the extra zoom range.

I have that 35-105 AIS. Pretty darn exceptional lens even if it suffers from lens creep. I fixed that with gaffer tape. I recently used it on a short, film portrait shoot. I was very happy with the results. Every time I use it, I am thrilled with it.

texxter · Apr 11, 2018

I own a D800 body and the triad, 14-24, 24-70 and 70-200 pro lenses. This is top notch equipment, but extremely expensive and heavy. The 36 mpixel sensor is wonderful - if I were in your shoes I would consider a used D800 and invest in FX lenses. I find myself using the 70-200mm most of the time as I am focused on portraiture, and also the 85mm f/1.4 for the same purpose. Find out what you plan to shoot and get the lens you'll use the most often.