D800 or Nikon 24-70 2.8

[Pookeyhead]

Indeed. The practical difference between 24MP and 36MP isn't actually that noticeable unless you print A2 or bigger anyway. The 24-70 is such a versatile lens too. It's heavy though. It will weight slightly more than the D600 itself I think. I've heard it's front heavy. I'll let you know when a certain well known grey supplier pulls their finger out.

 

[Soda Farl]

Indeed. The practical difference between 24MP and 36MP isn't actually that noticeable unless you print A2 or bigger anyway. The 24-70 is such a versatile lens too. It's heavy though. It will weight slightly more than the D600 itself I think. I've heard it's front heavy. I'll let you know when a certain well known grey supplier pulls their finger out.

The 24-70 is supposed to have a few issues at 24mm on the D800 it would be interesting to see if it fairs a bit better on the D600 due to the lower resolution.

 

[the_local_jacko]

I must say all the input on here has been fantastic. Thank you to all for take the time to post.

I don't think I've seen anything to change my long term thinking of a D800 + 24-70 except ill maybe need to consider adding something like a 85mm prime to that set up eventually which I agree is something to look at. I am however constrained by cost of that ideal set up so it's not an option to get both now. I therefore think I'm leaning towards a 24-70 + D700 now and see where that takes me with a view to moving to the D800 next year if/when I hit the limits of the D700. In coming from a D90 plus kit so that's still a big leap up I guess.

Now The challenge is to source both a D700 and a 24-70 second hand from somewhere where paying CC is an option with a budget of about £1800.

 

[Soda Farl]

I must say all the input on here has been fantastic. Thank you to all for take the time to post.

I don't think I've seen anything to change my long term thinking of a D800 + 24-70 except ill maybe need to consider adding something like a 85mm prime to that set up eventually which I agree is something to look at. I am however constrained by cost of that ideal set up so it's not an option to get both now. I therefore think I'm leaning towards a 24-70 + D700 now and see where that takes me with a view to moving to the D800 next year if/when I hit the limits of the D700. In coming from a D90 plus kit so that's still a big leap up I guess.

Now The challenge is to source both a D700 and a 24-70 second hand from somewhere where paying CC is an option with a budget of about £1800.

The 85 1.8g seems to be really well regarded, especially on the D800. I have the 85 1.8d it's a really good portrait lens although I haven't used it much recently as I prefer the flexability of my 70-200 which is superb for capturing the kids when outside although a heavy burden to lug around.

D700's and 24-70's pop up in the classifieds here alll the time and a lot of people will accept payment by paypal gift so you can use your card for payment. There are a few in the classifieds now including a 24-70 for £850.

 

[twist]

My point was, it's there so you CAN do a wet clean of the sensor.. because sooner or later... ALL sensors will need cleaning. It's routine maintenance. Dirt on your sensor is just something you'll have to deal with, with all cameras. What's the big deal.. just clean it! I never understand this whole dirt on the sensor thing, and people sending their cameras away to be cleaned.. just buy some sensor wipes and clean it.. it takes 30 seconds!

I agree, its easy BUT its far more difficult and worrying that a camera throws oil around internally on the sensor and also seen a report of paint fleks around the sensor. In my mind a camera shouldnt do this out the box after only 500 shots, none of my cameras have thrown oil even after thousands of actuations (touch wood). Dust from external sources is normal, dust, paint and oil internally is not.

 

[Soda Farl]

I agree, its easy BUT its far more difficult and worrying that a camera throws oil around internally on the sensor and also seen a report of paint fleks around the sensor. In my mind a camera shouldnt do this out the box after only 500 shots, none of my cameras have thrown oil even after thousands of actuations (touch wood). Dust from external sources is normal, dust, paint and oil internally is not.

To be fair this is hardly something new. The D3 and D7K were well known for throwing oil around as well.

 

[twist]

Have heard of the D7k but not D3 (good to know, thanks), but I was mainly talking about cameras in discussion at the time of making the post.

 

[twist]

I must say all the input on here has been fantastic. Thank you to all for take the time to post.

I don't think I've seen anything to change my long term thinking of a D800 + 24-70 except ill maybe need to consider adding something like a 85mm prime to that set up eventually which I agree is something to look at. I am however constrained by cost of that ideal set up so it's not an option to get both now. I therefore think I'm leaning towards a 24-70 + D700 now and see where that takes me with a view to moving to the D800 next year if/when I hit the limits of the D700. In coming from a D90 plus kit so that's still a big leap up I guess.

Now The challenge is to source both a D700 and a 24-70 second hand from somewhere where paying CC is an option with a budget of about £1800.

I think youve made a good compromise (pesky financial constraints), the d700 will lose value but so will the d800, when you have enough just switch cameras in the meantime youll have an excellent camera but also an excellent lens.

 

[mpe]

Apologies... no idea why I'm getting you mixed with mpe....

I don't feel it's appropriate to recommend a 12MP camera to someone who lists image quality being a primary concern. Let's be honest... it just isn't.

I did not recommend getting D700 either. In fact I fully agree with you and I would definitely get D800 now bacuse it is newer technology and is better than D700 in everything but framerate, some handling aspects and cost.

I was just arguing against your statement that "12MP is really limiting when quality is concern". It is not unless you want to do very tight crops or present your final pictures in larger formats than let's say 24"x36".

There are much better reasons why to take D800 over D700 than megapixel count. D4 has 16mp which is only marginally more than D700 and significantly less than D800 I still consider D4 as superior camera to D800/D600.

 

[Pookeyhead]

The 24-70 is supposed to have a few issues at 24mm on the D800 it would be interesting to see if it fairs a bit better on the D600 due to the lower resolution.

What issues? I've not noticed any on mine.

 

[the_local_jacko]

I think youve made a good decision (pesky financial constraints), the d700 will lose value but so will the d800, when you have enough just switch cameras in the meantime youll have an excellent camera but also an excellent lens.

At the end of the day if the D700 dosen't suit me then I should be able to re-sell with little lost. For the record I believe the D600 would prob suit me even better for IQ but judging by the D700 second hand prices on here there's about a £450-500 gap between a D600 and a second hand D700. My thinking is that's money I can set aside and use on a D800 next year if the D700 doesn't meet my needs. I can hardly believe I'm saying that though given when I bought my D90 I could only really dream of doing a D700 any kind of justice.

 

[Soda Farl]

What issues? I've not noticed any on mine.

I havent used the combo but have read in a few places that I.Q at 24mm is particularly bad on the D800. It's the lenses weakest focal length so it makes sense that the higher resolution of the D800 makes it more noticabke.

 

[twist]

At the end of the day if the D700 dosen't suit me then I should be able to re-sell with little lost. For the record I believe the D600 would prob suit me even better for IQ but judging by the D700 second hand prices on here there's about a £450-500 gap between a D600 and a second hand D700. My thinking is that's money I can set aside and use on a D800 next year if the D700 doesn't meet my needs. I can hardly believe I'm saying that though given when I bought my D90 I could only really dream of doing a D700 any kind of justice.

I think youre going to find the D700 a hell of an upgrade compared to the D90. Best of luck with the new gear.

 

[Pookeyhead]

I havent used the combo but have read in a few places that I.Q at 24mm is particularly bad on the D800. It's the lenses weakest focal length so it makes sense that the higher resolution of the D800 makes it more noticabke.

Can't say I've noticed. I've just had a rummage through my stuff.. it's hard to judge on most shots as DOF seems to be making it hard to judge. I'd have to go and shoot a brick wall or something to be sure.

 

[mpe]

Talking about 24-70/2.8G. One of my concerns with this lens is the curvature of the focal plane. I can normally have both center and corners in focus. However, at aprox. 2/3 of the FX frame it gets out of the focus and improves towards extreme adge

Since I do astrophotography I noticed that on my wide-angle photos of starfields. Also it can be seen on some of my group portraits where I sometimes get some parts out of the focus. I did a small research on the internet and I noticed this is relatively common problem of this lens and many wedding proffesionals noticed that problem too. It can be worked around by careful focusing if you know what is the dengerous part of your frame.

Also the lens suffers from quite heavy astigmatism (wide-open it renders point sources of light as small crosses instead of dots towards the edge of the frame) so it is not the best lens for night shoots.

No lens is perfect and neither is the 24-70/2.8G

 

[Soda Farl]

Talking about 24-70/2.8G. One of my concerns with this lens is the curvature of the focal plane. I can normally have both center and corners in focus. However, at aprox. 2/3 of the FX frame it gets out of the focus and improves towards extreme adge

Since I do astrophotography I noticed that on my wide-angle photos of starfields. Also it can be seen on some of my group portraits where I sometimes get some parts out of the focus. I did a small research on the internet and I noticed this is relatively common problem of this lens and many wedding proffesionals noticed that problem too. It can be worked around by careful focusing if you know what is the dengerous part of your frame.

Also the lens suffers from quite heavy astigmatism (wide-open it renders point sources of light as small crosses instead of dots towards the edge of the frame) so it is not the best lens for night shoots.

No lens is perfect and neither is the 24-70/2.8G

Correct however it's the best mid range zoom for Nikon.

 

[Pookeyhead]

Quite true. It's still probably the best zoom of that range. No zoom is perfect, and will always be compromised in one way or another compared to a prime. For astro photography, yeah, most zooms will cause you all manner of problems.

You have to weight the disadvantages against a bag full of primes.

 

[EspressoJunkie]

I was in a similar predicament a few months ago. I had the option of either buying a 24-70, or selling my D700 and putting that towards a D800.

I thought long and hard about it, but ended up going for the 24-70 on my D700, rather than the D800. I would have had a 50mm 1.4 and a Tamron 28-75 for the D800, both of which are fantastic lenses, but in the end I decided that having the 24-70 would make the most impact on my photography.

Also with regard to the comments regarding IQ, while I realise that, to an extent, MP will have an impact on quality, dismissing the D700 because it's "only 12 MP" is quite frankly ridiculous. I was editing some of my own photo's today on work's 27" iMac (um in my break of course.....) and even at 100% on a screen that size, the quality is stunning.

Of course the D800 and D600 will give better image quality, but in my eyes, especially at the current S/H prices, the D700 is still a fantastic camera, and combined with the 24-70 is hard to beat for the money.

Would I love a D800? Of course I would, but would I give up my 24-70 to get one? Not a chance!

 

[the_local_jacko]

I was in a similar predicament a few months ago. I had the option of either buying a 24-70, or selling my D700 and putting that towards a D800.

I thought long and hard about it, but ended up going for the 24-70 on my D700, rather than the D800. I would have had a 50mm 1.4 and a Tamron 28-75 for the D800, both of which are fantastic lenses, but in the end I decided that having the 24-70 would make the most impact on my photography.

Also with regard to the comments regarding IQ, while I realise that, to an extent, MP will have an impact on quality, dismissing the D700 because it's "only 12 MP" is quite frankly ridiculous. I was editing some of my own photo's today on work's 27" iMac (um in my break of course.....) and even at 100% on a screen that size, the quality is stunning.

Of course the D800 and D600 will give better image quality, but in my eyes, especially at the current S/H prices, the D700 is still a fantastic camera, and combined with the 24-70 is hard to beat for the money.

Would I love a D800? Of course I would, but would I give up my 24-70 to get one? Not a chance!

The 24-70 is now a given for me. In fact I just enquired on one. It's now whether I plunge for a D700 as well as I seem to have convinced myself that if I can pick one up for £900 and sell my D90 kit for £350 then it's a no brainer.

 

[PDM]

I've got a D90, D700 and a D800, so hopefully, can offer some advice. The D800 is really a specialist camera for those who need to print big or sell large file sizes. In a sense it is a poor man's medium format camera. It is less suitable for general use. The file size is large and takes time to load into software and process unless you have a fast computer (and even then it is noticeably slower). The D700 is a very good full frame camera and can be got for well under a £1k 2nd hand (I paid £800) . It has enough pixels (12mp) to blow up to a size that most people will find useful (portraits, weddings etc). Going from C to FX does require replacing any C size lenses. However, the advantage of a D800 here is that you can use the C size lenses and it will crop to 15mp. But, the frame in the viewfinder is small and not comfortable to use. Other choice being the D700 and being able to afford a FX lens at the same time. Don't forget you can sell your C size lenses to finance you FX ones. Going for the D600 is also an option (or even changing over to Canon and the excellent 5D Mk II or III. The sensor size of 24mp has been described as being the optimal for an FX sensor. I made my choice having both D700 & D800. I don't use my D90 at all now and will be selling it soon. Hope this post has helped and not confused you.

 

[Nod]

I must say all the input on here has been fantastic. Thank you to all for take the time to post.

I don't think I've seen anything to change my long term thinking of a D800 + 24-70 except ill maybe need to consider adding something like a 85mm prime to that set up eventually which I agree is something to look at. I am however constrained by cost of that ideal set up so it's not an option to get both now. I therefore think I'm leaning towards a 24-70 + D700 now and see where that takes me with a view to moving to the D800 next year if/when I hit the limits of the D700. In coming from a D90 plus kit so that's still a big leap up I guess.

Now The challenge is to source both a D700 and a 24-70 second hand from somewhere where paying CC is an option with a budget of about £1800.

Enjoy them! I do my D700 and 24-70 (although I've compromised on my 24-70 and have a (good copy) Sigma version. For almost all normal uses, the D700s MP count will be plenty. Yes, if you crop heavily, you may run into problems but I haven't yet! The D700 is also more forgiving to less than perfect lenses than the D800 is reputed to be.

If ultimate quality is the aim, surely a large format camera and high end scanner is the only answer, as shown in David's earlier thread? Not so good for snaps of the kids though!

 

[orangeframestudio]

If my heart was set on a 24-70 and d800, and even after heavy debate and research, my heart still said d800 and 24-70, I wouldn't go out and spend half my savings on something that is just a stop-gap.
You want a d800 and 24-70, in your first and last post, but budget doesn't allow that yet, don't change your goal posts yet.
Get a d800 and add the lens ASAP would be my advice, or the opposite. Yes a d700 or d600 would be nicer than a d90, but if its not what you want don't waste your money.
The d800 with your 50mm will be awesome and you'll feel like you got a great new toy for a few months while you save up for the lens. Buy the lens first and I feel you may not get the same buZz. Buy what you want and buy once, it's cheaper in the long run, see all the 1000 tripod threads, never understood why people don't use that logic an bodies and glass more!
Btw, I just bought the d800 and have a 24-70, it is out of this world, go for it

 

[pmac]

The d700 is a great camera, but I do agree that if your set on a d800 why bother getting the d700 as a stop gap. The prices have dropped and probably will continue to, there's a few d700 in the forum that have been there for a while now,even one that's priced cheaply, maby it's the time of year or people realise its getting on tech wise.

I went from a d90 to d700 and loved the jump there will be a significant difference in image quality,but the d800 will just blow you away even more.

I have a 50/85/24-70/70-200 for my d800 and to be honest the 50/85 get used the most,about 90% of the time and I'm mainly shooting portraits/shots of my family,2kids 2 and 4 years old. I have no problems keeping up with them most the time. The 24-70 is a heavy beast as well.

You can also use the crop mode if needed which will turn the 50 into a 75mm.

 

[the_local_jacko]

Well one part of this chapter is complete. I'm now the proud owner of a 24-70 2.8g. I have only taken one or two test shots so far and will probably give it a run tomorrow but it seems to have raised the bar so much just on my D90.

Thanks for the great advice everyone.

Next decision is D700 or wait for D800 although I can afford myself more thinking time for that. My impatience has grown some-what however after reading this thread and feel like I will def want to take the plunge one way or another.

 

[Soda Farl]

The d700 is a great camera, but I do agree that if your set on a d800 why bother getting the d700 as a stop gap. The prices have dropped and probably will continue to, there's a few d700 in the forum that have been there for a while now,even one that's priced cheaply, maby it's the time of year or people realise its getting on tech wise.

I went from a d90 to d700 and loved the jump there will be a significant difference in image quality,but the d800 will just blow you away even more.

I have a 50/85/24-70/70-200 for my d800 and to be honest the 50/85 get used the most,about 90% of the time and I'm mainly shooting portraits/shots of my family,2kids 2 and 4 years old. I have no problems keeping up with them most the time. The 24-70 is a heavy beast as well.

You can also use the crop mode if needed which will turn the 50 into a 75mm.

To be fair the D700 you are talking about in the classifieds is in fairly bad condition and the cheap price reflects that. They still fetch around the 1k mark on ebay every day of the week and in fact someone on this forum in the classifieds has just offered £950 + £15 p&p for one. While yes the D700 will fall in price so will the D800 so I don't really get your point there to be honest.

As for using it in crop mode with a 50mm that's not great advice as 50mm is a terrible perspective for portraits and using a D800 in crop mode won't change that, as you are just cropping, which you can just as easy do in post, the perspective will stay the same.

The simple matter is that o.p is buying to his budget, the 24-70 he feels and I agree suits his needs best. He then has to make a decision on if he waits to get the cash together for a D800 or decides to get a D700 now within his budget and upgrade later on down the line if required. Either option is a massive step up in terms of I.Q from a D90. The D800 is not always the best option for everybody and only the o.p can know what is going to suit his needs and budget best. The D600 for example may well still be an option.

Well one part of this chapter is complete. I'm now the proud owner of a 24-70 2.8g. I have only taken one or two test shots so far and will probably give it a run tomorrow but it seems to have raised the bar so much just on my D90.

Thanks for the great advice everyone.

Next decision is D700 or wait for D800 although I can afford myself more thinking time for that. My impatience has grown some-what however after reading this thread and feel like I will def want to take the plunge one way or another.

Congrats on getting the new lens, you moved fast Nothing like a new toy.

 

[the_local_jacko]

Congrats on getting the new lens, you moved fast Nothing like a new toy.

Thanks. It just so happened that's one i had been watching on the classifieds on here for a few days was about 15 minutes away from me so all moved through quickly this morning.

 

[the_local_jacko]

As a further update on the above, a unforeseen change in circumstances has meant I was also able to order a D800 today a lot earlier than anticipated. So its looking like the best of both worlds. I can't wait to get the 24-70 on it and give it a run out. I could only have dreamed of this combo a few months ago.

 

[TonyNI]

You should add a sigma 35mm 1.4 to your arsenal, I have never seen a sharper lens

 

[Soda Farl]

You should add a sigma 35mm 1.4 to your arsenal, I have never seen a sharper lens

Aye you have my vr2.

 

[the_local_jacko]

You should add a sigma 35mm 1.4 to your arsenal, I have never seen a sharper lens

My Photographic spending is wiped out for some time now to be honest but im hoping to add a 80-200 f2.8 (2 touch) next for a bit more flexibility but it will have to wait until back end of the year. Then i may look at primes but at the moment the 24-70 suits me fine.