Nikon FX lens: Since I will be selling my D7000, I'm looking into what would be the best lens for my D750. Old and cheap are usually what I pick. I shoot lots of macro stuff and I have...

Curve_in Loc: Virginia

Since I will be selling my D7000, I'm looking into what would be the best lens for my D750. Old and cheap are usually what I pick.

I shoot lots of macro stuff and I have that covered with a Nikon 105mm 2.8 AL-s. I also enjoy star trails/milkyway shots. For that I have a Sigma 24mm 1.8, which I'll also use for in the woods flowing water pictures.

Every once and a while I shoot something that I'll need some reach (FX 200mm / DX 300mm). With my D7000, I used the kit zoom 70-300 5.6. When indoors, I would wish I had something faster.

That brings me to my choices. I hardly used my DX 35mm 1.8, but when I did, I came up with some "keeper" images. I plan on getting a 50mm 1.8 or maybe a 1.4. Either one will be the AF version with a switch on the side of the lens.

For a longer lens, the 80-200mm f/2.8 FX seems to be a good fit. I'm not sure if a AF-s version would improve my images of someone singing inside a dimly lit church. If a old 2x teleconverter would work with this lens, I'd be very happy.

Please let me know what you think about these choices.

IDguy Loc: Idaho

The new FX AF-P 70-300 VR is very nice. If price is a big factor you might look to a refurb, used, or gray market.

This one: https://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/camera-lenses/af-p-nikkor-70-300mm-f%252f4.5-5.6e-ed-vr.html

It takes careful shopping as there are two DX versions with the same designation: VR and non VR. They are significantly cheaper and the VR one does not have an external switch. The non-vr is, IMHO, virtually useless but can be had very inexpensively.

There is also an AF-S version which isn’t as good.

Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga

I use the AF two ring 80-200 F2.8 on my D610 and love it. I also have both the F1.8 & the F1.4 versions of the 50mm. They don't get used as much but do deliver.... For a longer reach, I have the 1st 80-400 and several older MF primes...

Curve_in Loc: Virginia

IDguy wrote:

The new FX AF-P 70-300 VR is very nice. If price i... (show quote)

For me, I'd like faster than 5.6 so I don't think that will be a good fit.

Curve_in Loc: Virginia

Screamin Scott wrote:

I use the AF two ring 80-200 F2.8 on my D610 and love it. I also have both the F1.8 & the F1.4 versions of the 50mm. They don't get used as much but do deliver.... For a longer reach, I have the 1st 80-400 and several older MF primes...

That's nice that you like the 80-200. I think that is as long a lens as I will regularly use.

Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga

Curve_in wrote:

For me, I'd like faster than 5.6 so I don't think that will be a good fit.

That 80-400 I mentioned is an F4.5-5.6 but then again, it's a lens for outdoors...

Strodav Loc: Houston, Tx

You might want to think about the trinity as a wish list: 12-24mm f2.8, 24-70mm f2.8, 70-200mm f2.8. For now, pick up the 70-200mm f2.8 along with either or both a 1.4x and 2.0x teleconverter. That will give you a 400mm reach. It's a little short, but will do for wildlife and birding. I went with the Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 G2. That lens will not disappoint once it is tuned.

Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga

Did you read where he said “old and cheap” ? He doesn’t have the money for the Trinity.

Curve_in Loc: Virginia

Strodav wrote:

You might want to think about the trinity as a wish list: 12-24mm f2.8, 24-70mm f2.8, 70-200mm f2.8. For now, pick up the 70-200mm f2.8 along with either or both a 1.4x and 2.0x teleconverter. That will give you a 400mm reach. It's a little short, but will do for wildlife and birding. I went with the Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 G2. That lens will not disappoint once it is tuned.

Thanks for the input. I'm pretty focused on what will be a good lens match. For the last 5 years on my D7000, I used the 17mm part of the zoom for almost all of my non-macro shooting. I used the 300mm if my other zoom twice and my 35mm twice. That's why I'm looking to use mostly primes.

Screamin Scott wrote:

Did you read where he said “old and cheap” ? He doesn’t have the money for the Trinity.

Thanks Scott!

Thomas902 Loc: Washington DC

"...I'm looking to use mostly primes..." wise choice... for portraiture look at the AF 180mm f/2.8D... this vintage optic is still in production... why? it is simply amazing for what it's designed for... portraiture... there are so many copies out there... you can find excellent ones for a reasonable price... btw, there is absolutely nothing to go wrong with this optic... it's made to last forever... and you'll love the built in lens shade... After shooting with the newer 70-200mm f/2.8 heavy weights this optic is feather light... a dream to handle...

below is an example from this epic optic on a D3x...

All the best on your journey Curve_in

AF 180mm f/2.8D ED
AF 180mm f/2.8D ED...

(Download)

Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga

Thomas902 wrote:

"...I'm looking to use mostly primes..."... (show quote)

I have this lens and it is a winner as well

CO

I see that you are considering a 50mm f/1.8 or f/1.4 lens. If you look at prime lenses check out Tamron's new SP prime lenses. They all have vibration compensation. They also have a metal lens barrel and are fully weather sealed. Not many prime lenses have stabilization. I use the Tamron 45mm f/1.8 SP VC on my D750. The SP VC lenses are the 35mm f/1.8, 45mm f/1.8, 85mm f/1.8, and 90mm f/2.8.

Michael66 Loc: Queens, New York

Might I suggest renting two or three lenses from lensrental? If you like it, you can buy it from them or keh.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Curve_in wrote:

.....Every once and a while I shoot something that I'll need some reach (FX 200mm / DX 300mm). With my D7000, I used the kit zoom 70-300 5.6....

Your math is backward.

If you want the equivalent of 300mm on your DX camera, you will need a 450mm lens on the FX cameras. 200mm will come up WAAAAYYY short. This is one of the "problems" with FX... If you're looking for significant "reach", with FX cameras you need MUCH bigger & heavier and far more expensive telephotos.

Maybe you should keep your D7000 to use alongside your D750, for those times.

Curve_in Loc: Virginia

amfoto1 wrote:

Your math is backward.

If you want the equivalent of 300mm on your DX camera, you will need a 450mm lens on the FX cameras.

I understand what you are trying to say. If I shoot a tree with a 200mm lens on a FX camera and then shoot the same tree with a 300mm lens on a DX camera, I can crop the image from the FX camera and I'll end up with the same image. I do agree with you on the point of needing a 450mm lens on a FX to get the tree to fill up the same portion of the image as using a 300mm lens on the DX camera.