The Holy Trinity Of Lenses For The Nikon DX Camera?
Apr 3, 2017 23:07:17 #
mas24
Loc: Southern CA
Thanks everyone for your interesting comments regarding your personal Holy Trinity Of Lenses (favorites) for your Nikon DX camera. I knew about the Holy Trinity before I created this post. Since everyone cannot afford these lenses, you use of what makes you happy. And uhh members came through very well on this topic. Some of you own both FX and DX Bodies, which is even a greater advantage, because you can use your FX lenses on your DX body. I did not expect so many responses, which indicates that the Nikon DX DSLR is beloved. I learned a lot about lenses today. FX, DX, primes, and third party. Sigma has what they call their Art Lenses, which are selling well too. Matt Granger on another video, said the Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 was the best ever in its Class. And the Angry Photographer says nothing can compare to Nikon's 14-24mm in its Class. Two completely different personalities agreeing on the Trinity Lenses. Now that's interesting too. I'll have to review the replies I missed later.
Apr 4, 2017 08:06:57 #
bpulv wrote:
The attached two photos illustrate my point. Photo #1 is a full frame 36Mp image taken with my 24-70mm f2.8 VR II ED lens at the 70mm setting. Photo #2 is cropped from the same image.
It's a sharp shot. How does it apply to the OPs question?
Apr 4, 2017 10:44:00 #
whitewolfowner wrote:
I don't have one in DX; all my lenses are FX. I like good glass.
Your statement "I like good glass" implies you believe DX lenses are not good, or maybe even "bad".
Apr 4, 2017 11:54:04 #
My budget doesn't quite extend to the best of the Holy Trinity suggestions here, so hows about a Dynamic Duo of lenses?
I have the 16-85 already and will probably add the AF-P 70-300 DX. That'd be 24-450 in FF equiv. terms. The 16-80 would be nice but it's just a bit on the pricey side.
I have the 16-85 already and will probably add the AF-P 70-300 DX. That'd be 24-450 in FF equiv. terms. The 16-80 would be nice but it's just a bit on the pricey side.
Apr 4, 2017 11:59:36 #
R.G. wrote:
My budget doesn't quite extend to the best of the Holy Trinity suggestions here, so hows about a Dynamic Duo of lenses?
Love the Dynamic Duo moniker!
3 is sometimes a crowd.
Apr 4, 2017 12:05:18 #
GoofyNewfie wrote:
Love the Dynamic Duo moniker!
3 is sometimes a crowd....
3 is sometimes a crowd....
Thanks. 3 sounds pricier too. The 17-55 would be ideal for my landscape stuff but my wallet went into convulsions at the mere mention of it
.Apr 4, 2017 12:18:16 #
R.G. wrote:
Thanks. 3 sounds pricier too. The 17-55 would be ideal for my landscape stuff but my wallet went into convulsions at the mere mention of it .
.I've heard Tamron's 17-50 is as good and costs le$$.
Supposedly the non-VR version is better.
Apr 4, 2017 12:20:25 #
GoofyNewfie wrote:
I've heard Tamron's 17-50 is as good and costs le$$.
Supposedly the non-VR version is better.
Supposedly the non-VR version is better.
The Tamron 24-70 has also tested well!
Apr 4, 2017 12:21:13 #
I have that Tamron 17-50 (non VR iteration) & highly recommend it... Here is a link to some images from Amelia island taken with that lens (plus some with a 10-20mm Sigma)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/screaminscott/albums/72157636817811044/with/10414094396/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/screaminscott/albums/72157636817811044/with/10414094396/
GoofyNewfie wrote:
I've heard Tamron's 17-50 is as good and costs le$$.
Supposedly the non-VR version is better.
Supposedly the non-VR version is better.
Apr 4, 2017 12:23:28 #
GoofyNewfie wrote:
I've heard Tamron's 17-50 is as good and costs le$$.
Supposedly the non-VR version is better.
Supposedly the non-VR version is better.
Thanks for the info. I use a tripod for my landscapes so the VR isn't a must-have. I'll check it out.
Apr 4, 2017 12:26:26 #
DaveO wrote:
The Tamron 24-70 has also tested well!
I'm sure it did, but it's not very wide on a DX body. (approx. 35mm FF equivalent)
Apr 4, 2017 12:28:40 #
I just picked up a Tamron 20-40mm F2.7-3.3 to use on my D610...
Apr 4, 2017 12:32:12 #
GoofyNewfie wrote:
I'm sure it did, but it's not very wide on a DX body. (approx. 35mm FF equivalent)
Yeah, I know all the equivalents...same as the Nikon 24-70 of the Holy Trinity as far as I know. Works quite nicely on my D500 and D810!
Apr 4, 2017 12:35:28 #
DaveO wrote:
Yeah, I know all the equivalents...same as the Nikon 24-70 of the Holy Trinity as far as I know. Works quite nicely on my D500 and D810!
(I know you do, Dave.
)Borrowing a D500 next month. Can't wait to give it a go!
Apr 4, 2017 12:45:36 #
GoofyNewfie wrote:
(I know you do, Dave. )
Borrowing a D500 next month. Can't wait to give it a go!
)Borrowing a D500 next month. Can't wait to give it a go!
The real deal on the D500/D5000 is the focus system. Steve Perry released his book, "Secrets To The Nikon Autofocus System" and I've barely got into it,but if you have a Nikon D7100 or later model it should help to optimize wildlife photography in particular. I have spent much time the last few months working with the system and it is top shelf!
http://backcountrygallery.com/secrets-nikon-autofocus-system/
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.