Selling Things for Full-Frame.. Ideas?

[D-B-J]

So, this is the idea. Sell my D7000, Sigma 17-50 2.8OS, Tokina 11-16 2.8, and buy a Nikon 16-35 f4 VRII.

Then I'd have this:
Nikon D800
Nikon 16-35 f4
Nikon 50mm 1.8G
Nikon 85mm 1.8G
Nikon 80-200 2.8D


I've found I often rarely use the 17-50 since I've been prime happy. I really just use the wide angle and the 85. Also, I'm not sure I have the need for two camera bodies…. Thoughts?

Jake

 

[SnappingShark]

What would you do for wide angled shots?

 

[D-B-J]

What would you do for wide angled shots?

I shoot a ton of landscapes, mostly at 11mm on DX...

So 16mm on FX would be solid.

Check out my Flickr, most of my landscapes are near 11mm on DX

 

[hamlet]

Just zoom all the way in and use your 11-16 as a prime lens.

 

[D-B-J]

Just zoom all the way in and use your 11-16 as a prime lens.

I could. I'm worried about the quality of the lens on the D800. And I think I'd rather have a good wide angle than a second body.

 

[hamlet]

Just zoom all the way in and use your 11-16 as a prime lens.

I could. I'm worried about the quality of the lens on the D800. And I think I'd rather have a good wide angle than a second body.

Although filters are gonna be an issue, i would also look into the 12-24 if you are worried about quality.

Nikkor AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm f/4G ED VR on Nikon D5000 versus Nikkor AF-S NIKKOR 14-24mm f/2.8G ED on Nikon D5000 versus Tokina AT-X 11-16 PRO DX Nikon on Nikon D5000 - Side by side lens comparison - DxOMark

 

[D-B-J]

No. I have close to a grand sunk into the LEE system, and I NEED a lens that is compatible. I don't need the extra 2mm, or the aperture. I've shot the Tokina below f4 maybe twice in my 6 months of ownership. And I'd rather have the "reach" to 35 over 24.

 

[Tailgunner]

The Nikon 16-35mm F/4 VRII is a nice piece of glass. I personally went with the Nikon 18-35mm F/3.5. The reviews where good and I really didn't see needing VR. A lot of my landscape shots are taken from a tripod and you have to switch VR off when shooting on a tripod. That and i generally keep my shutter speeds up slightly above my focal length to help counter shakes. I don't have any complaints with the 18-35mm yet.


Sample shot from my D800 w/18-35mm F/3.5 using my MeFoto Globe Trotter tripod.

 

[D-B-J]

The Nikon 16-35mm F/4 VRII is a nice piece of glass. I personally went with the Nikon 18-35mm F/3.5. The reviews where good and I really didn't see needing VR. A lot of my landscape shots are taken from a tripod and you have to switch VR off when shooting on a tripod. That and i generally keep my shutter speeds up slightly above my focal length to help counter shakes. I don't have any complaints with the 18-35mm yet.


Sample shot from my D800 w/18-35mm F/3.5 using my MeFoto Globe Trotter tripod.

I strongly dislike variable aperture, and really want the 16mm over the 18. And for a few hundred dollars difference over the expected lifetime of me owning the lens... it's worth the extra.

Jake

 

[Tailgunner]

strongly dislike variable aperture, and really want the 16mm over the 18. And for a few hundred dollars difference over the expected lifetime of me owning the lens... it's worth the extra.

Jake

Pros and Cons, the Nikon 16-35mm F/4 is a good quality lens and constant aperture glass is generally built well. I was just offering an affordable suggestion. If you got the cash, go for it.

There is roughly $600 difference between the 18-35mm and 16-35mm. Then you also have the weight difference, the 16-35mm weighs 1.5 lbs while the 18-35mm weighs 13.6oz (less than a lb). My usual walking around glass is the Nikon 28-70mm 2.8 which weighs 2 lbs. So I wanted something wide and light to hike through the mountains with. I wouldn't mind a Nikon 14-24mm but it weighs slightly more than my 28-70mm.

 

[hamlet]

No. I have close to a grand sunk into the LEE system, and I NEED a lens that is compatible. I don't need the extra 2mm, or the aperture. I've shot the Tokina below f4 maybe twice in my 6 months of ownership. And I'd rather have the "reach" to 35 over 24.

What about a good Nikon 24mm f/1.4? Could you really afford to throw away all that light on a f4 lens? Next thing you know you'll be using your popup flash. With f1.4 you don't even need light, it actually creates light. :mrgreen:

 

[sscarmack]

I had the 24 1.4 and I actually sold it within 3 months of having it haha.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[D-B-J]

I had the 24 1.4 and I actually sold it within 3 months of having it haha.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I feel like id do the same. It wouldn't be even close to wide enough. And like I said, I NEVER use my Tokina at 2.8... And have used my sigma at 2.8.. Not often.

 

[astroNikon]

If you want the 16 35 f4 and have the cash get it
i also have the 18 35 f3.5 and I love it but I have the AF D variety which costs even less than the AFS but the resolution may be less on the d800. I use it for all the car shows, landscapes , fireworks.

i still have my d7000 as my kids may use it, I also use it for testing concepts and I now use it for outside weather time lapse stuff.

 

[astroNikon]

I do want the 85 1.4 D lens .. That's the only 1.4 that I want