D800, totally silly?

[JoelM]

Nothing wrong with Porridge. Go for the D850

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Well I did buy the D800, and in a way, it was like coming home. I was planning to take off the vertical grip that came with the camera, but it feels great with it mounted, so I'll just keep it there for now.


I was planning to just buy a couple of primes for this camera, but now I see that there's a mint 70-200 f/4 and a mint Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 for sale at the same shop... hmmm :ROTFL:

Then there's the new Tamron 35-150mm f/2.8-4, which would convert this camera into a great alternative for travel too. The disadvantage with that lens is that it won't work on the F80 (elecronic aperture). The 70-200 will.

As for the D810 being better, yes, particularly the group AF and the shutter sound, but who says that a man can't have two... bodies? I'll see what becomes available locally the next few months/years/decades. I'm in no hurry. I prefer to buy locally though, since that saves me shipping costs and import duties.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Nothing wrong with Porridge. Go for the D850

I was actually rather close to that, but I also needed a new, larger, more practical camera bag for travelling. That set me back another $350. I'll come back to my choice, the Lowepro Whistler 450 II, later.

 

[GrahamWelland]

If you want the Nikon go for the D850.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

A second hand, mint 16-35mm f/4 has appeared also. Does anybody have experience with that lens?

 

[Thorkil]

Well I did buy the D800, and in a way, it was like coming home. I was planning to take off the vertical grip that came with the camera, but it feels great with it mounted, so I'll just keep it there for now.


I was planning to just buy a couple of primes for this camera, but now I see that there's a mint 70-200 f/4 and a mint Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 for sale at the same shop... hmmm :ROTFL:

Then there's the new Tamron 35-150mm f/2.8-4, which would convert this camera into a great alternative for travel too. The disadvantage with that lens is that it won't work on the F80 (elecronic aperture). The 70-200 will.

As for the D810 being better, yes, particularly the group AF and the shutter sound, but who says that a man can't have two... bodies? I'll see what becomes available locally the next few months/years/decades. I'm in no hurry. I prefer to buy locally though, since that saves me shipping costs and import duties.

Jørgen, I can only just strongly recommend the 70-200/4 !
But perhaps, while the Tamron 15-30 is extremely stellar (go for it if you dont care about size and weight, and go for the VC the last years model), or the lighter Nikkor 16-36/4
And for the 24-70 region, perhaps the Nikkor 24-120, and don't use it above 70mm while its gets softer at the longer end, and its almost useless there.
(and while you are not in Z-land, you can't have the stellar Z24-70/4S...)

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Jørgen, I can only just strongly recommend the 70-200/4 !
But perhaps, while the Tamron 15-30 is extremely stellar (go for it if you dont care about size and weight, and go for the VC the last years model), or the lighter Nikkor 16-36/4
And for the 24-70 region, perhaps the Nikkor 24-120, and don't use it above 70mm while its gets softer at the longer end, and its almost useless there.
(and while you are not in Z-land, you can't have the stellar Z24-70/4S...)

If I go for Nikon zoom lenses, the 70-200 is first priority. The Tamron 15-30 is too much. They have a smaller 17-35 f/2.8-4 though. I'm a bit sceptical to the Nikon 16-35. Had the Nikon 24-120. I liked everything about it except the fringing. It's also a bit too short. They sell for peanuts though.

 

[Thorkil]

If I go for Nikon zoom lenses, the 70-200 is first priority. The Tamron 15-30 is too much. They have a smaller 17-35 f/2.8-4 though. I'm a bit sceptical to the Nikon 16-35. Had the Nikon 24-120. I liked everything about it except the fringing. It's also a bit too short. They sell for peanuts though.

Cameralab and Dustin Abbot cant find out why Tamron came out with this 17-35, lens tip is a bit more possitive.
But Nasim at Photographylife seems to like the nikkor 16-35/4 VR very much... is it too big?
Else you have to turn around to get a Z, while the 14-30/4 is without competition compared to size and weight (I just have to check the weak left side at 14mm and complain to the dealer), so a rather rather nice travel-and-walkaround-combo together with the 24-70/S, but the FX 70-200/4 does not AF that good at the Z's - but there will be an 70-200/4 S in a 1½ year or so I guess. But I know its a heavy investment...(but a rather nice one - nice to hold - nice to use)

 

[JoelM]

If you don't need the VR and can live without 2mm, I think the 18-35 is the little gem to look at.

Joel

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

If you don't need the VR and can live without 2mm, I think the 18-35 is the little gem to look at.

Joel

You are right. I had forgotten about that one.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Cameralab and Dustin Abbot cant find out why Tamron came out with this 17-35, lens tip is a bit more possitive.
But Nasim at Photographylife seems to like the nikkor 16-35/4 VR very much... is it too big?
Else you have to turn around to get a Z, while the 14-30/4 is without competition compared to size and weight (I just have to check the weak left side at 14mm and complain to the dealer), so a rather rather nice travel-and-walkaround-combo together with the 24-70/S, but the FX 70-200/4 does not AF that good at the Z's - but there will be an 70-200/4 S in a 1½ year or so I guess. But I know its a heavy investment...(but a rather nice one - nice to hold - nice to use)

I believe the Tamron 17-35mm is meant to be paired with the 35-150mm. They are both relatively compact and cover pretty much everything most photographers need for everyday use. Opinions have always been devided about the Nikkor 16-35mm, and it is rather big.

 

[Thorkil]

If you don't need the VR and can live without 2mm, I think the 18-35 is the little gem to look at.

Joel

I had to leave that lens, while taking pictures of houses and other straight lines unveiled some heavy moustache-distortion, so I had to return to the old nikkor 20/2.8D at that time, which in comparison did things perfect ...

 

[Thorkil]

I believe the Tamron 17-35mm is meant to be paired with the 35-150mm. They are both relatively compact and cover pretty much everything most photographers need for everyday use. Opinions have always been devided about the Nikkor 16-35mm, and it is rather big.

Yes perhaps one should rely on the competent and mature summery at lenstip considering the tamron 17-35..

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

There is probably something seriously wrong with my brain :loco: Since I don't have many lenses for the D800 yet, I brought MFT gear (GX8) with me on my current journey. I miss the Nikon OVF alfready. I miss it in contrasty light and I miss it when shooting bursts. I rarely do the latter, but sometimes I have to. Optical viewfinders give more control, period :lecture:

I'm not giving up on mirrorless (I think), but I'm more attached to optical viewfinders than I thought.