Best Nikon mid zoom?

big soft moose said:
arent they only compatible with DX cameras though (that is they throw an image circle smaller than full frame even if they do fit , which they might not) ? - the D810 is a FF camera , so there isnt a great deal of point of putting a lens on it that can only be used in crop mode if it fits at all..
Click to expand...
Thats why he said he will still have a 25mp image from the D800, not actually the best use of your equipment, its like putting £15 remoulds on a Range Rover
 
The23rdman said:
Why on earth would you put a cheap DX kit lens on a D810??
Click to expand...

Desperation.

If the kit lens were basically good (I have no idea whether the Nikon DX kit lens is OK or not - the SAM II kit lens for my Sony system is actually OK) then it could produce useful images, but not great ones. I'd have thought the point of buying a D810 was to get incredibly detailed images to make into large prints - otherwise one might just use camera with a smaller sensor.
 
A lot o advice for the 24-120 f/4 but what about the 28-300? I was reading that it is as good and barely bigger but does offer the extra 180mm only loosing 4mm at the wider end?
 
Lemaildetom said:
A lot o advice for the 24-120 f/4 but what about the 28-300? I was reading that it is as good and barely bigger but does offer the extra 180mm only loosing 4mm at the wider end?
Click to expand...
No way is it nearly as good. That's another step down the quality ladder that is wasting the D810.
 
minnnt said:
Isn't the 25mp option x1.2 crop? Would that allow DX lenses to be used for their full range? D810 DX crop is 16mp isn't it?
Click to expand...

if hes happy with a lower MP count and crop only photos and wants to reduce weight he'd be better off selling the D810 and getting a 7200 or 5300 , and putting the rest of the cash released towards better glass
 
big soft moose said:
if hes happy with a lower MP count and crop only photos and wants to reduce weight he'd be better off selling the D810 and getting a 7200 or 5300 , and putting the rest of the cash released towards better glass
Click to expand...


I've never mentioned or want a DX lens, so to answer your question.

No I'm not and no I won't.

Now bought the 24-85mm f4 VR (none DX) lens.
 
JustMe said:
I've never mentioned or want a DX lens, so to answer your question.

No I'm not and no I won't.

Now bought the 24-85mm f4 VR (none DX) lens.
Click to expand...

I kind of assumed as much - my post was in response to #58 and related discussion where someone suggested you buy a 18-55 DX
 
JustMe said:
Hi

I'm looking at getting a mid zoom for D810 but would prefer not to get a f2.8 due to size and weight as mostly backpacking.

I've got the 16-35mm vr lens, I see Nikon do a 24-85mm lens, any hands on experience of this combo? Is their any alternatives?
Click to expand...

For backpacking I'd look at the older 35-70mm f2.8 AF D. It's tack sharp, not too large or heavy, beautifully made, tough as hell and the push pull mechanism lends itself well to travel photography. I travelled for two decades straight and had one of these on the front of a Nikon FM2N.
 
WingTsun said:
For backpacking I'd look at the older 35-70mm f2.8 AF D. It's tack sharp, not too large or heavy, beautifully made, tough as hell and the push pull mechanism lends itself well to travel photography. I travelled for two decades straight and had one of these on the front of a Nikon FM2N.
Click to expand...
If you find a good one, but it's also only 35mm at the short end and prone to flare.
 
Gary Coyle said:
Get you big boy, You need to chill out, FYI I tried to get an acceptable copy but never did, too much CA, not sharp in the corners, de-centreing issues, ive also owned 8 Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 lenses and 6 different Nikon 16-35mm f/4 lenses and all were excellent copies, I don't keep expensive lenses sat in cupboards and tend to buy as I need them then pass them on when not needed.
I bet you got a good copy first time round

here's way too much snobbery with some Nikon glass.
Click to expand...

It is really bad for C/A in the short end the 24-70F2.8. It is as sharp as my 16-35f4

Never had de-centering issues and its pretty good edge to edge, slightly better in the corners than the 16-35 but man, it fringes badly in the short end which I think is poor given what it cost.

I don't mind the weight as it goes on a tripod and handholding it balances well on a heavy body (D800). On a light body like a D610 it doesn't feel good in the hands.

I've toyed with off loading it but it does the job (I use the 16-35 if shooting shorter than 28mm) and from 28mm mine sings all the way to 60mm.

Buying again though, I would have bought an F4 zoom and saved money and weight but as I have it, I will keep it.
 
Lemaildetom said:
what about the really cheap Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8?
Click to expand...
Great value for money, super sharp, very light, only thing is if you want a "wide angle" this probably isnt wide enough, thats the only reason i dont use mine and also have the 24-85mm VR, if i need/want wider i usually get hold of a 16-35mm VR
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top