Which one would you choose?

K

kevin612

Messages
1,008
Name
Kevin
Edit My Images
No
Recently my friend want to get a DSLR system and I am trying to help him out and myself as well.

We were thinking of these setups:

D700, Tamron 17-35mm, Nikon 24-85mm F3.5-4.5, Tamron/Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 or (Nikon 70-300mm VR)

A900, KM/Tamron 17-35mm, Tamron 28-75mm F2.8, Tamron/Sigma 70-200mm F2.8

Would like to see what you all think of.
We both do landscape and family shootings.
Would do portrait sometimes and might go to a Concert soon. (Interested in faster focus system) (except D3/D3x/1Ds/1D system)

We do thought of Crop sensors one.

D90, Tokina 12-24mm, Nikon 16-85mm, Tamron/Sigma 70-200mm

A700, Sony 11-18mm, Sony 16-80mm, Tamrom/Sigma 70-200mm

Considering about noise performance too as know the nikon would be better than the sonys. but then Sony ones might be able to kept more details for all the pictures.
As quite important for landscape shooting

Currently me and my friend could think of these.
Hope you all could help me out too..
 
That's a strange mixture you've got there.

Most people start with a budget and a decision between full frame and crop. Your reasoning isn't clear and you just can't compare the D90 with a D700. Do you want full frame or crop, and why? What's your budget?

Why Sigma/Tamron and not Nikon? Why not Canon?

All I would say right now is that unless you are very clear about what you want, getting all that lot in one go would be rash. Get the camera first and your main general use lens, almost certainly a standard range zoom of some sort, and maybe just one more lens that your are certain is exactly right. Then use it for a bit before you spend any more.
 
As above, work out what you need in the way of FF or Crop, then think very carefully about you first lens selection.

If i had to choose a line up from above it would be the D700 with Sigma 70-200 f2.8 if you need a fast tele or the Nikon 70-300 if you need the reach
 
Budget would be around 2000-2500GBP
Me and my friend used D90 before and I tried out the D700 as well..
He got his kit stolen and I sold my DSLR due to money issue at that time.
Now he got the E-P2 and few lenses and I got A550 to use at the moment.

Reason we didnt choose Canon because the lenses we considered would be out of budget E.g. 70-200mm F2.8 L IS already taken half of our budget.
And my friend in to nikon more and I used Sony and don't mind nikon/sony.

The thing is that nikon D700 doesnt have IS in body and Sony has.
So if getting a Tamron/Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 there would be advantage in using Sony.
But the noise performance of Sony not as good as D700 but then Sony would give more details in the image.
Also would think of the dynamic range of the camera and I think Sony would have larger DR.
Cause we do landscape shooting at bit more.
Do some candid and family shootings..
And there would be a concert in May wish want to shoot if possible as well
Also would like to prepare for graduation shootings for our friends as well.
Like to shoot inside in quite lower than normal light condition e.g. chapel/church
Which focusing system would be better D700/A900?

In terms of getting FF or crop, prefer FF of course but then if budget is the limit might consider crop DSLR..but eventually will get back to FF.
And would like to use it for quite a while first.
 
kevin612 said:
Reason we didnt choose Canon because the lenses we considered would be out of budget E.g. 70-200mm F2.8 L IS already taken half of our budget.
Click to expand...
That doesn't make sense. The Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8 G IF-ED VR II is even more expensive than the Canon, but you didn't rule out Nikon on that basis - you just decided to buy a cheaper lens.
:shrug:
 
You r right. The nikon is expensive too
Forgot to mention that the handling of canon isn't right for me n my friend
Not that they aren't good quality camera n lenses. Just doesn't feel that right for us
Of course we want to get the best iiq lens with less value
As tamron/sigma 70-200mm is a quality lens for its value
And also me n my friend r not professional that shooting weddings and others
So we don't need to buy the 1k nikon or canon top lens.
Therefore wish to get the best lens out of what the budget allows

Yes I do sold the lens n camera
It was financial problem that I need to sell but then I am fine now
And so used sony for a while quite interested
So want to ask for some advice
 
My first question would be....why if you don't need professional level lenses are you spending a lot of money on a high-end body.

You'd be better off spending less on the body and more on glass....imo!
 
Surely landscapes require sharp lenses, and f/2.8 is not that necessary. Well Canon (and only Canon) has something right for you: 17-40/4L, 24-105/4L IS, 70-200/4L without the extra 2x weight. I also doubt Nikkor 24-85mm would be a match for D700 (it might be acceptable on D90 given it doesn't seen the corners). That would mean a Tamron 28-75 (also not perfect), or Nikkor 24-70/2.8. So perhaps Canon is a good option there as long as you don't shoot sports at twilight.
If you must, Sony a900 has an excellent IQ at ISO100, but also requires very good and expensive glass.
 
There is an advantage of using FF as personally think FF has better sharpness in using the same lens on Crops. Also even though I dont use expensive lens, it can see get very high quality pics..As the lens were made to use for old film camera before.
And the depth of field is better using FF as well even though in F2.8

Thanks for the advise daugirdas
Did think of Canon but then it would be out of my budget if I get the 5D mark II with those 3 lenses. Could make a change for the 24-105 and 70-200 L as I shoot landscape more so 17-40L would be very good.
The 5D hasn't got a nice focusing system i think as D700/A900. therefore I didnt consider of canon.
Not that canon doesnt make good camera and lenses just that doesnt suit me and my friend.

As except landscape we shoot normal stuff e.g. go out with a friend and shoot each other or together.
Therefore think of a lens that is reasonable in the mid range 24-80..
As in nikon the 24-85mm is good and the price is quite cheap therefore I can use it all the time. I love to get the 24-70 but then too heavy to take out for the whole day.

As I have said before there would b a concert coming up soon and I am going to watch it.
I hope to get a good tele-zoom for me to shoot.
As F2.8 aperture 70-200 are all very expensive therefore consider the Sigma/Tamron version as they are cheaper and in very good decent quality.
 
mid_gen said:
My first question would be....why if you don't need professional level lenses are you spending a lot of money on a high-end body.

You'd be better off spending less on the body and more on glass....imo!
Click to expand...

:agree:

The D700 and A900 will both really show up the weaknesses in cheap glass. Buying an expensive body and putting low-quality glass on it is like buying a Porsche and then going to kwik-fit for a set of elcheapo tyres :nuts:
 
Flash In The Pan said:
:agree:

The D700 and A900 will both really show up the weaknesses in cheap glass. Buying an expensive body and putting low-quality glass on it is like buying a Porsche and then going to kwik-fit for a set of elcheapo tyres :nuts:
Click to expand...

But I looked at the D700 with 24-85mm is pretty good....
And A900 with Tamron 28-75mm also very good too..

Of course I won't go to that cheap.but reasonable price for us to use.
 
You know that the A850/900 has twice the resolution of the D700 but at the expense of poorer high ISO (1600+) - so which is more important to you, detail or low light ability?

If you are using a tripod for your landscapes then the IS of the A850/A900 isn't an advantage. If you do a lot of handheld then it is.

As for crops you'll struggle to find a new A700 but it's a fine camera (nearer to a D300 than a D90).
 
well maximum ISO I would use would be 3200.
Won't go more than that.

Still a very hard decision to get which one me and my friend going to use.
 
I'm sure that I'd be happy with either a D700 or A900/850 and if I wasn't a Canon user I'd have bought one of these long ago rather than not buying the Canon rival.

The D700 has a built in flash and that really appeals to me but the Alpha has in body IS which I'm sure will be very very useful.

I'd go for three zooms, 12-24mm, 24-70mm f2.8 and a 70-300mm and possibly something straddling 35mm but I'd love a spread of primes more than the zooms.

Good luck choosing.
 
I guess probably choosing D700 with 17-35mm Tamron
With a 35mm F2 nikon
Tamron 70-200mm F2.8

Although might get 24-85mm as well but then currently thinking of 28-75mm Tamron for a change..
 
Also want to know that D300s ISO performance has improved to D300 right?
As i know that D90 has better ISO performance but then I saw some reviews that shows different ISO of D90 and D300, although D300 has more noise at high ISO but seems kept more details than D90....
Want to know that if D300s has improved or not...And I dont know what else improved in the D300s....of course video recording and extra 1fps in continuous shooting..
I am more interested in White balance performance of D300s

Also I have heard that D700 has new firmware 1.02 and seems that improved White Balance control but noise performance was a little decreased as well. Anyone notice that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top