D750...with 24-120mm lens or without?
May 4, 2017 16:28:34 #
I was considering upgrading to a D7200 from a D5000, however, I just saw that B&H has a fantastic deal on a Nikon D750 right now so I'm REALLY considering upgrading to full frame. I am wondering if it is worth it to get the 24-120mm f4 lens with the D750 or not. I typically shoot pics of my kids with a 50mm f1.8 (the only FX lens I own). I am looking to start newborn and infant photography in the near future. My dream lens is the 24-70mm f2.8, but it's so expensive! Anyone own the 24-120 f4? Opinions on the lens? Opinions on the camera?
May 4, 2017 16:50:03 #
balletnurse wrote:
I was considering upgrading to a D7200 from a D500... (show quote)
I've used a 24-120mm f/4G VR lens since it was first released. Currently that is with a D810 and a D5. I shoot Street and Event photography with it.
I typically need the long end of the focal length range more than the short end, but really cannot live without both. (I had previously used a Nikkor 28-105mm and a Tamron 24-135mm.) Of the lenses available the Nikkor 24-120mm is easily the best.
Obviously my primary needs are different than your primary needs. The one catch is that the 24-70mm f/2.8 is over budget. That may put the 24-120mm at the top of your list. Another option might be a used 24-70mm or even one of the older models. I would not shy away from a Tamron or Tokina lens either.
May 4, 2017 16:59:51 #
Apaflo wrote:
I've used a 24-120mm f/4G VR lens since it was fir... (show quote)
My biggest fear is that I won't be able to have the nice bokeh effect that is so important in newborns even when shooting wide open.
May 4, 2017 17:04:08 #
I got a 24-120 with my 750 and use it at least 60% of the time. It is heavy and so is the 750, but my wife and I trade off carrying it because it is worth the extra lbs to get the versatility.
May 4, 2017 17:17:27 #
balletnurse wrote:
My biggest fear is that I won't be able to have the nice bokeh effect that is so important in newborns even when shooting wide open.
At f/4 the DOF is sufficiently shallow, even if not quite as shallow as the f/2.8 lens. At 70mm and a 4 foot focus distance the DOF is 2" in one case and 2.7" in the other.
But in either case you might end up using f/5.6 more often anyway. Note that selective editing with a blur tool can aide greatly with the bokeh.
May 4, 2017 21:02:19 #
Look at the Tamron equivalent. It filled the missing middle of my D810's holy trinity of lenses.
May 4, 2017 21:43:47 #
Probably the most versatile FX lens in the catalog.
May 4, 2017 22:35:43 #
balletnurse wrote:
...is worth it to get the 24-120mm f4 lens with the D750 or not. I typically shoot pics of my kids with a 50mm f1.8 (the only FX lens I own)...
I can't give a real world evaluation on the 24-120 since I don't own one. But, I will say, based on the DXOmark evaluation of the lens, and your intended use, I would pass on the lens, and buy only the camera.
If I wanted a lens to add to the 50mm 1.8, it would be the Nikon AFS-S 85mm 1.8g. It is probably Nikon's best rated lens for the price(still under $500 new).
I own the 24-70 2.8. It is a wonderful lens. And, it is a lens that spends a lot of time sitting inside my camera bag. The Nikon 85mm 1.8g, and the Sigma 50mm 1.4 Art, stay on my d750 more than my other lenses. Fast primes are very hard to beat for portraits.
And, as for my evaluation of the camera... buy it, you'll love it.
May 5, 2017 06:00:04 #
Rick36203 wrote:
I can't give a real world evaluation on the 24-120... (show quote)
Rick, I also own the D750 but with the 28-300 but I read that it is not nearly as sharp as the 24-70 VRII. I have been thinking of trading in my 28-300 and my 16-35 and getting the very heavy 24-70 VRII. I know the new 24-70 is a flagship lens but my concern is the weight factor when it is married to the D750 as my walk-around lens. Now attach a SB-70 flash and now it is really heavy. And I have a bad case of arthritis in both wrists.
So.......I may consider the slightly lighter-in-weight 24-120 VR/N (24 oz.) to replace my 28-300 VR (28 oz.). I do like the idea of primes but that involves removing and attaching lenses to the camera body. On a windy day I would be concerned with dust getting on the sensor.
May 5, 2017 06:10:11 #
balletnurse wrote:
I was considering upgrading to a D7200 from a D500... (show quote)
balletburse, I do own the D750 but I bought it with the 28-300 and I now realize I should have opted for the 24-120 VR/N as I rarely go past 120mm as the max focal length.
Yes, the 24-70 VRII/N is very expensive and very heavy when you match it up with the D750. It's not exactly a good walk-around lens because it is so heavy (38 oz. versus 25 oz. for the 24-120). You really should consider a top-of-the-line portrait lens for newborn & infant photography.
May 5, 2017 06:39:33 #
balletnurse wrote:
I was considering upgrading to a D7200 from a D500... (show quote)
I'm totally satisfied with the D750. The 24-120mm is a very nice lens at a reasonable price. Yes, the 24-70mm is very expensive. I got an older 35-70mm on ebay for a little over $300. Actually, I had a 24-70mm lens, but I wasn't comfortable walking around with $1,700 lens. I sold that and my 70-200mm and got an 80-200mm from KEH for a little over $600. So, I wound up with two similar lenses for about half the price of one of them.
May 5, 2017 06:43:51 #
jerryc41 wrote:
I'm totally satisfied with the D750. The 24-120mm is a very nice lens at a reasonable price. Yes, the 24-70mm is very expensive. I got an older 35-70mm on ebay for a little over $300. Actually, I had a 24-70mm lens, but I wasn't comfortable walking around with $1,700 lens. I sold that and my 70-200mm and got an 80-200mm from KEH for a little over $600. So, I wound up with two similar lenses for about half the price of one of them.
Jerry, is the image quality of the 24-70 VRII/N ($2,400) all that much better than the image quality of the 24-120 VR/N ?? Because of the size & weight factor I am leaning toward the 24-120 VR/N lens.
Thanks for any opinion, ~FiddleMaker
May 5, 2017 06:59:49 #
billnikon
Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
balletnurse wrote:
I was considering upgrading to a D7200 from a D500... (show quote)
My favorite lens is the 24-120 f4. With that said it is not a pussy lite lens, it is a manly heavy sucker of a lens. It's sharpness surprises me time and time again. I am buying the Nikon d500 with the 16-80 lens because it is the same lens for that camera, and they are giving me a vertical grip, camera bag, extra battery and a memory card to boot. Hash tag "push the order button".
May 5, 2017 07:45:23 #
My sister has one on her 810 and loves it. It has a great overall range and is a very sharp fast focusing lens. She uses it most of the time. I have the Canon 24-105 f4 and wish Canon made a lens with the extra 15mm.
Bill
Bill
May 5, 2017 07:45:48 #
balletnurse wrote:
I was considering upgrading to a D7200 from a D500... (show quote)
The 24-120mm f4 is a great lens. It's my walk around lens, along with a Zeiss 50mm. Get it!
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.