Switched pre-order from 5d mk III to D800

[poker_jake]

Thanks, I think I'll go with the 70-300 and at saving close to a grand I'll be able to pick up a prime and wide angle. What wide angle zoom would you recommend? I'm interested in the 17-35mm f2.8

 

[ghache]

WHY the **** you guys says the d800 is going to be harder to use than a d700? you guys make my laugh. :thumbdown:

Just get the d800 and some good FF lenses. with a 7500$ budjet you can probably get the camera and 2-3 good glass along the 24-200 range,

shooting planes could get expensive haha, long range quality lense are expensive as hell.

 

[Trever1t]

the 17-35 is a great lens, I own one...but NEVER use it. Well almost never. On a FF body 24 is pretty wide, the 24-70 is my most used lens although I love the 70-200 much better

 

[poker_jake]

I thought about the 24-70 and 70-200 both f2.8 then pairing the 70-200 with a tc to give me the reach I want, but I'm not a fan of tcs

 

[Trever1t]

well 36mp gives you a little leeway to crop

 

[DorkSterr]

I'd just grab a 70-200 f2.8 with a 1.7 TC.

 

[Trever1t]

Don't need a TC. 50% crop still leaves you with plenty of pixles, just make sure your shot is steady

 

[Overread]

Using a TC generally gets you a better overall optical quality than cropping does alone (at least in all the tests I've seen done). The only time cropping is superior to using a TC is when using the TC pushes your shutter speed so slow that you end up having to push to higher ISOs or risking underexposure in a shot.

A 70-200mm VRII from Nikon would be easily able to take a 1.4TC with hardly any degradation and should be able to take up to a 2*TC for a 140-400mm and deliver a very usable optical quality (About in line with Canons L grade 100-400mm - at least based on similar performance of the canon 70-20mm f2.8 MII)

 

[poker_jake]

I went with the 16-35 f4, 50mm 1.4G, and 70-300 4.5-5.6. I'll be picking up an 85mm prime shortly. Thanks for your help.

 

[APHPHOTO]

Am I the Only one confused as to why you would order a canon body and then switch to a nikon?
Im assuming you started out using canon and I would also asume you have canon glass. So why would
you switch to nikon?

 

[Dao]

Why not 5D3 with 100-400L? Just wondering.

 

[mjhoward]

^IMO, the 100-400L is not a very good lens, both functionally (with the push/pull) and optically. It is quite soft at the longer focal lengths and less than stellar at the shorter ones. The only good is that it is a very solid construction and @400mm is relatively cheap. I've read of a version II coming out soon that has the rotating zoom and better optics so it should be a great improvement but the price will likely reflect that.

 

[poker_jake]

Am I the Only one confused as to why you would order a canon body and then switch to a nikon?
Im assuming you started out using canon and I would also asume you have canon glass. So why would
you switch to nikon?

Because I'm not impressed with the 5d mk iii specs. All the photos so far are soft and a majority of my shots are landscape so the d800 fits nice (especially for my 36x24 prints). I sold my 60d, 18-135, and 70-200 f2.8 non-is (sold it for more than I paid for it since I bought it used) for just over $2,000 so I nearly broke even. I've always been tempted by Nikon especially their sensor technology and wide angle lenses and figured this is the time to switch before I get too invested in Canon. And if I don't like it I can always switch back.

 

[Overread]

That Version 2 rumour of the 100-400mm has been going around for about 9 years or so. Each year there are various - confirmed rumours and leaked specs or reported copyright/design claims made. In general the rumours don't know its all just educated and rough guesswork. Asides even if they do make one it could easily hit the market at £2K (based on the fact that many new lenses are hitting at much higher price points than before).

 

[chuasam]

Nothing says Schmuck more than an expensive body and a cheaper lens.