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!
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.Nothing wrong with Porridge. Go for the D850
Jørgen, I can only just strongly recommend the 70-200/4 !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.
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.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...)
Cameralab and Dustin Abbot cant find out why Tamron came out with this 17-35, lens tip is a bit more possitive.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.
You are right. I had forgotten about that one.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 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.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)
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
Yes perhaps one should rely on the competent and mature summery at lenstip considering the tamron 17-35..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.