The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

What Lenses for the D800?

Shashin

Well-known member
A poor fellow who advertised his brand new IQ180 system for sale, purchased new in August last year probably for $50K-60K, just sold it on ebay. Highest bid was $26K. Ouch - like driving a new car off the seller's lot. Those backs might be the best ever made, but you better have deep pockets for the writeoff.
If he took that price, how do you know it was his? Or rather if he got the usual way rather than off the back of a lorry. ;)
 

f8orbust

Active member
A poor fellow who advertised his brand new IQ180 system for sale, purchased new in August last year probably for $50K-60K, just sold it on ebay. Highest bid was $26K. Ouch - like driving a new car off the seller's lot. Those backs might be the best ever made, but you better have deep pockets for the writeoff.
To be fair, it didn't reach its reserve at $26k so the guy relisted it and (I guess) took a best offer - no idea how much. The couple of IQ180s I have seen sell privately have gone for around the $30k mark (obviously still a big hit on the new price, but less so if it was originally bought with a trade-in).
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
No matter how much less these backs sell used, the loss is substantial.

So if you go MFD, then you should either be able to earn the price within short time or do a real good business case for how long you have to use your back.

End of the day MFD is serious business and not something for playing around.
 

D&A

Well-known member
No matter how much less these backs sell used, the loss is substantial.

So if you go MFD, then you should either be able to earn the price within short time or do a real good business case for how long you have to use your back.

End of the day MFD is serious business and not something for playing around.
Of course it's somewhat like comparing apples to oranges (or worse), but the original Nikon D1 DSLR (and like every DSLR body after it), which many of us paid exactly $5,000.00 for the D1, now can be easily purchased for $150.00 . Going by the percentage of $$ lost when comparing selling price vs. price paid when purchased new, all digital cameras and backs take a tremendous hit. Some of the loss percentage wise, may be more or less than others, but its always a big investment and likewise a big loss when selling. One can look at the actual amount of total $$ lost, but its also important to keep in mind the percentage amount of $$ lost too. Factors like the amount of use or money made of course also become part of the equation.

Dave (D&A)
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
Of course it's somewhat like comparing apples to oranges (or worse), but the original Nikon D1 DSLR (and like every DSLR body after it), which many of us paid exactly $5,000.00 for the D1, now can be easily purchased for $150.00 . Going by the percentage of $$ lost when comparing selling price vs. price paid when purchased new, all digital cameras and backs take a tremendous hit. Some of the loss percentage wise, may be more or less than others, but its always a big investment and likewise a big loss when selling. One can look at the actual amount of total $$ lost, but its also important to keep in mind the percentage amount of $$ lost too. Factors like the amount of use or money made of course also become part of the equation.

Dave (D&A)
Right, but I care more for how much I have lost instead of percentage ;)
 

rayyan

Well-known member
Why are we even contemplating comparing a 35mm full frame dslr with a MF

camera? The subject at title is ' What lenses for the D800 ?'. Include the

D800E too..please. But comparisons in terms of pixel jargon, sensor sizes,

weight, lenses diffraction limits etc. with any system other than a 35mm FF

does not answer the OP's question. It might be interesting, but really..a MF

and a 35mm FF are 2 different beasts. Irrespective of how many buckets of

pixels each one has.

Would a Zeiss ZF 100mm f/2 Makro Planar Version 1 or 2 do justice to the

yet to be available for purchase Nikon D800/D800E sensor ( and vice versa )?

Now that would definitely interest me. I do a bit of travel myself. For fun,

mostly, but I do take photography seriously. And travel plus photography

definitely interests me.
 

Jan Brittenson

Senior Subscriber Member
Would a Zeiss ZF 100mm f/2 Makro Planar Version 1 or 2 do justice to the

yet to be available for purchase Nikon D800/D800E sensor ( and vice versa )?
The D800E doesn't need the same high-acutance optics as the D800 to render fine detail, so has the opportunity to truly shine with lower contrast, high-resolution optics. Without the AA filter it's a subtler tool that doesn't require a hamfisted approach. I think a Mamiya 120 Macro, Leica Macro-R 60, or an AIS 105/2.5 would be more interesting on the D800E than the Z 100MP.

Why are we even contemplating comparing a 35mm full frame dslr with a MF

camera?
Because it lacks an AA filter, so has the opportunity to create a very similar look by using lenses which render that way.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
Maybe it is premature to speculate but which Nikkor lenses would you expect to be a good match to the D800?
Hmm. Well, maybe I'm simplistic, but if I were in the market for a D800 or D800e, I'd probably have some lenses already and I'd just try them out before I bought anything else to see how well they performed. I generally don't buy lenses other than at the middle or higher grade quality level so I expect most of my lenses to do just fine.

If I didn't have any Nikon lenses at all, I'd buy a used example of a lens I wanted to use most to start with and see how it performed with the D800 body. If it shone, I'd upgrade that to a new one (if I felt like it) and then think about other options with that experience behind me.

Worrying about and conjecturing about this and that too much gets in the way of making photographs... :)
 

rayyan

Well-known member
The D800E doesn't need the same high-acutance optics as the D800 to render fine detail, so has the opportunity to truly shine with lower contrast, high-resolution optics. Without the AA filter it's a subtler tool that doesn't require a hamfisted approach. I think a Mamiya 120 Macro, Leica Macro-R 60, or an AIS 105/2.5 would be more interesting on the D800E than the Z 100MP.


Because it lacks an AA filter, so has the opportunity to create a very similar look by using lenses which render that way.
Hi Jan.

The first part is very useful for me as the zf 100/2 is the lens I own. Love it
btw. Thanks for your reasoned response.

The second part..thanks again for taking the trouble to respond, but should
it not be then compared more to the M9? A 35mm FF camera without an AA filter?

Please do not misunderstand me. I just felt that comparing the Nikon D800 to a MF was somehow not doing justice to the MF and its complement of lenses for the situations it is geared towards. Concurrently, the D800/D800E is expected to perform better in situations playing to its strengths. Of course,
one can take a picture of anything with anything ( well almost!!:D)

Each camera has an advantage...be it weight/price/low light etc...and its
disadvantages. Some people use both an MF and a 35mm dslr and play each camera to its strengths.
I just feel that with the current technology, if those who put food on the table for their families using their cameras, were convinced that a 35mm FF could get a job done equally well in lieu of a MF; they would use the one that saved them money and provided the same quality to their clients as an MF.

I am hesitant, my ignorance to blame here, to compare my D-Lux 4 to my
Leica M8. Both have roughly the same number of pixels. Leica glass. F/2
aperture. The D-Lux4 has ventured where the M8 would fear to tread..in a
sandstorm. It really is unfair to compare these two. Unfair to both.
 

D&A

Well-known member
Hi Jan.

The first part is very useful for me as the zf 100/2 is the lens I own. Love it
btw. Thanks for your reasoned response.

The second part..thanks again for taking the trouble to respond, but should
it not be then compared more to the M9? A 35mm FF camera without an AA filter?

Please do not misunderstand me. I just felt that comparing the Nikon D800 to a MF was somehow not doing justice to the MF and its complement of lenses for the situations it is geared towards. Concurrently, the D800/D800E is expected to perform better in situations playing to its strengths. Of course,
one can take a picture of anything with anything ( well almost!!:D)

Each camera has an advantage...be it weight/price/low light etc...and its
disadvantages. Some people use both an MF and a 35mm dslr and play each camera to its strengths.
I just feel that with the current technology, if those who put food on the table for their families using their cameras, were convinced that a 35mm FF could get a job done equally well in lieu of a MF; they would use the one that saved them money and provided the same quality to their clients as an MF.

I am hesitant, my ignorance to blame here, to compare my D-Lux 4 to my
Leica M8. Both have roughly the same number of pixels. Leica glass. F/2
aperture. The D-Lux4 has ventured where the M8 would fear to tread..in a
sandstorm. It really is unfair to compare these two. Unfair to both.
Some really excellent and pertinent comments. I expressed similar thoughts in a post I made earlier today in this thread. It's not so much that some should compare how close the D800e comes to a 40MP MF back or camera) as it really is comparing apples and oranges. Yet for those that would rather not make the investment in medium format digital for say landscape work, they want to know what they gain or lose out on, by using the D800e as opposed to 40MP medium format. Put another way, how close for their purposes does the D800e come to these medium format cameras...whether it is for the look of the file, and/or for its capability in producing large format prints.

Dave (D&A)
 
Last edited:

Aaron

New member
None of PC-E Tilt & Shift have made the list of recommended lenses :confused:

I wonder if this is an oversight or intentional?
 

Lars

Active member
It may have been sold, but not for the 26k on ebay - reserve not met.
Nor did it meet the $36K asking price on ebay, so a qualified guess is that selling price was around $30-33K. Still ouch. It was marked as sold on the GetDPI thread.
 

Lars

Active member
None of PC-E Tilt & Shift have made the list of recommended lenses :confused:

I wonder if this is an oversight or intentional?
Once again, read the text in the brochure:

"Below are some of the lenses you can use for enhanced sharpness."

It might as well have said:

"We'd like to sell you some new lenses. The following lenses have high margins for us."

or:

"Here is a non-complete list of good lenses. Period."

I wouldn't read anything into that list WRT quality of lenses that are not listed.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Okay folks it's been awhile but I'm coming back. Lol

Never count me out. D 800 on order maybe the E but will see.

Here is what I am think 14-24, 35 ???, 85 1.8 the new one and 180 2.8. Okay why not the 70 -200 well I shoot it right at 200 so kind of a waste. Rather shoot the sweet old lady in the 180. Than the 85 which one is the new 1.8 a winner or go new 1.4. Than the 35 I know your all going to say the 1.4 what else is there. I'm just starting this process but the 85 and 35 I could use some expert opinion. The old 85 1.4D was nice how's the G or the new 1.8. Btw speed is not the issue here
 

Lars

Active member
I feel that the old 85/1.4D was close to class-leading when it arrived some almost 20 years ago, but today's standards are higher, WRT resolution as well as bokeh. Some people say very nice things about the new 1.4G, it seems like a big step up. Improvements across the board including res, bokeh, coma.

Of course, the 1.8G is an even bigger step but that's partly because the old 1.8D was such a dog.

BTW I met Jack for coffee this morning. Nice car.
 

Lars

Active member
Hehe sorry about that, let's be a bit more frugal then.

When I sell my D700 and order a D800, my initial setup for image quality will be 20/2.8D, 50/1.4 Sigma, 85/1.4D, 180/2.8D. Also, since I have it and it's sharp, the 16/2.8D Fisheye is great with a thin stepring for extreme near/far flower closeups that include the horizon. Not quite like a T/S but fun anyway. Might sell the 85/1.4D to finance a Sigma 85 instead for the bokeh - the 1.4G is a bit expensive.

I really like the 85 focal length but for resolution I think any 100/105 macro would be fantastic - and less costly than a 85/1.4.

Like you say the 180/2.8 hits a sweet spot in many aspects.

Nikon needs to bring out a 20/24/28/35 f/2.0-2.8. That gap is like a huge chasm.

Whatever you do, don't forget a 50/1.8. Dirt cheap so you can shoot in the rain or sand/saltstorm without worrying. I think I have five iterations lying around.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Sounds good yea the 85 is the question . Sounds like the Sigma is also something to look at. I kind of need a good fashion lens in the 85. The 180 is a given. The 14-24 I would like to have as I know that is really good . I guess I can't escape the 35 1.4 than
 
Top