D700 what none Nikon Lens

Wilky76

Wilky76

Messages
373
Name
Ste
Edit My Images
Yes
I've always wanted to go full frame & basically now i can afford the D700 body.

But with the prices of the Nikon 24-70 being what it is atm, im still abit hmmmm about spending £1700 on a body & not getting the best out of it.

I currently have a 50mm F1.8 the "older one" & the 70-300mm VR, but would need an everyday lens.

So what lens would you recommend from either Sigma or Tamron to go with the D700 till the day comes i can afford a Nikon 24-70mm.
 
Stick with Nikon, go for a used 35-70 f2.8D around £300 mark, bargain price for a great lens.
 
Not very wide thou is it, i really could do with a lens starting at 24mm.
 
Another possiblity is to let go of my D300 & 16-85mm VR that would proberly raise enough just to buy brand new.
 
Wilky76 said:
Not very wide thou is it, i really could do with a lens starting at 24mm.
Click to expand...

True, still a bargain for a cracking lens, which was the fore runner of the 28-70 & 24 -70 Nikkors.

I have kept mine as I intend getting a D700 at some point, and think it will be a stay on lens on that body.

Looks like 3rd party then.
 
Tamron Twins :D

17-35mm F2.8-4 & 28-75mm F2.8

over 95% of the performance of the Nikon Glass for less than 25% of the price
 
Tamron 28-75mm 2.8 cracking FF Len's for about £300ish,i just bought one from Puddleduck, and a nice Len's it is to, i'm using it on my D300 but hopefully will be the D700 very soon :D, there's a couple of other's on here who use it on the D700 and are very happy with it, a third of the price of a Nikon ;)
 
I've had a few Tamron 28-75's (in recent cases as backup to my 28-70 when it got broken and reaplced) and I find them to be excellent.

I sold my Nikon one, and am looking for the same lens in Sony fit. I'm sure it'll be excellent on 24 megapixels, and its certainly good enough for 12 megapixels.

I don't think the lack of 24mm is reason enough to discount the optics.
 
Well after a good think about things i've decided it would be better to stick with the D300 for the time being at least, it's not like it takes crappy pictures lol.

No doudt in the future when i got enough spare cash floating about, i'll upgrade to a full frame body.
 
I have to ask, why a D700 now? It seems odd that you are desperate to go FF but want to skimp on the lenses. If you can afford a D700 now why not get the 24-70 first and use it on the D300 - it's even better on there as you are using the sweetspot of the lens.

Of course you may have sane and sensible reasons but as I said I have to ask.
 
SimonTALM said:
I have to ask, why a D700 now? It seems odd that you are desperate to go FF but want to skimp on the lenses. If you can afford a D700 now why not get the 24-70 first and use it on the D300 - it's even better on there as you are using the sweetspot of the lens.

Of course you may have sane and sensible reasons but as I said I have to ask.
Click to expand...


This may not be the case with the OP; but for me, going to D700 from D300 was purely for high ISO capabilities.

The 24-70 AF-S was perfect on the D300 and even better on the D300; however, if and when I shoot in dark situations .. even the f/2.8 of that lens wasn't good enough ... hence where the D700.

Sure, it would be great to be able to have the D700 and the 24-70AF-S; but sometimes a compromise needs to be made.


Shutterman said:
Why not try a second hand 24-120 VR I would have thought that would have been the perfect stop gap lens.

Nigel
Click to expand...

I had one of these, and I did like it. I used it with good results on my D70, D200 and D40.

Looking back now, I think I would have done better going with the Tamron 28-75 and a Sigma 105 macro .. far better results and roughly the same optical range and price.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top