Check out Bridge Camera Show Case section of our forum.
New Lens Choice
Oct 6, 2016 22:33:53 #
I own a Nikon 7100 and a Nikon P900 (for my wildlife zoom). I own two lenses for my 7100 and am shopping for a third. I have a Tokina 11-16, and a Nikon 70-300. I had another lens which dropped and needs to be replaced. At present I am choosing between a Nikon 16-80, Nikon 24-120, and a Nikon 24-70. This new lens should serve as a portrait lens, and possible a walk around lens. I'd appreciate any feedback, and even alternative suggestions for my third lens. I was hoping to spend less than $1000, but may stretch it for the 24-70 which is a straight 2.8
Oct 6, 2016 23:23:24 #
Oct 7, 2016 00:43:14 #
The 16-80 is a fantastic lens. This lens is so good, it's the kit lens on the D500. It has great auto focus and amazing vibration reduction. You can handhold this lens down to 1/4 second and still get good images.
Check out True Macro-Photography Forum section of our forum.
Oct 7, 2016 01:23:54 #
Kmgw9v wrote:
Save for the Nikon 24-70 2.8. You need it first.
Fantastic lens. On our trip to Santa Fe and Taos last year, I never took it off my D800.
Oct 7, 2016 05:43:43 #
You don't need the full frame lenses for the D7100. It's just more weight. The 16-80mm DX f/2.8-4 will be balanced much better on the D7100. I had the !6-80mm, It had a severe back focusing issue. A review I read in a photography magazine mentioned the back focusing also. I had to set -15 AF fine tuning and that still wasn't enough to correct it. That's usually due to manufacturing tolerances and may not affect all lenses. I now have two of the Nikon 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6 lenses. I think they're just as good as the 16-80mm f/2.8-4 but with a slightly slower maximum aperture. If you get the 16-80mm f/2.8-4 check it for front/back focusing issues right away in case you have to exchange it.
Oct 7, 2016 05:52:26 #
Of the 3 choices I would opt for the 16-80. I wouldn't want to use FX lenses of moderate focal length on a DX camera. Long lenses are OK.
Oct 7, 2016 05:59:41 #
I got the 24-120 for use on a FF body...wonderful lens....but for the D7100.....maybe have a look at the 18-140. I got both used from B&H at a descent savings.
Oct 7, 2016 06:57:46 #
FX lenses on DX bodies do have one advantage.....you lose any aberration from the edge of the lens. A second advantage is that should you ever go full frame, you would already have an FX lens or two.
Weight? I never noticed that FX lenses were that particularly heavy until I purchased the 70-200mm f2.8. Even the 28-300mm is not particularly heavy in my opinion. I def. felt the difference in weight, though, when I took the 28-300mm off the D7000 and put it on the D800.
Weight? I never noticed that FX lenses were that particularly heavy until I purchased the 70-200mm f2.8. Even the 28-300mm is not particularly heavy in my opinion. I def. felt the difference in weight, though, when I took the 28-300mm off the D7000 and put it on the D800.
Oct 7, 2016 07:48:25 #
billnikon
Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
Michael652 wrote:
I own a Nikon 7100 and a Nikon P900 (for my wildli... (show quote)
You can get the very good, very sharp, Non VR version of the 24-70 mint in the box off ebay from a 100% seller for just about that 1K budget. That's where I got mine and I am very happy with that lens. I checked the reviews of the seller and will not buy from anyone who is not 100% and at least 25-30 very positives reviews. Mine came from a 100% fellow with over 500 positive reviews AND money back on my purchase if not happy from ebay.
Oct 7, 2016 08:05:03 #
mas24
Loc: Southern CA
Yep. You just can't go wrong owning a quality 24-70mm Nikon lens. Nothing but praise for that lens. The Canon 24-70mm is excellent too. I've been wishing for a Nikon 24-70mm for several months. Price is out of my budget. I'm looking at the Tamron version for about $1300 from B&H. Less expensive than the Nikon. Pro Photographer Matt Granger says the Nikon 24-70mm is untouchable for sharpness. I've read good reviews too on the Tokina 24-70mm. It may be in your $1000 budget range?
Oct 7, 2016 08:24:10 #
I would not recommend the 24-70 for use with a DX camera. The 24mm end will become 36mm with your D7100 and it could not be enough for your wide angle needs. It is a FX lens and works best with FX bodies.
For your wide angle needs the Tokina will do a much better job.
Nikon manufactures several zooms starting at 18mm for DX bodies and perhaps you would like to look into those. All of those lenses can be used to shoot portraits.
Good luck with your choice.
For your wide angle needs the Tokina will do a much better job.
Nikon manufactures several zooms starting at 18mm for DX bodies and perhaps you would like to look into those. All of those lenses can be used to shoot portraits.
Good luck with your choice.
Check out True Macro-Photography Forum section of our forum.
Oct 7, 2016 08:46:39 #
Michael652 wrote:
I own a Nikon 7100 and a Nikon P900 (for my wildli... (show quote)
If you are looking for a 24-70 lens, consider the Tokina 24-70 2.8. I own this lens, and it has very good image quality that rivals prime lenses. It does not have vibration reduction, but at these focal lengths I consider that of minimal value. This lens stays on my D7200 most of the time. B&H currently has the lens for $1079 with a $60 rebate for a final price of $1019. Check reviews on the lens. DXO had it rated as the sharpest 24-70 2.8 lenses for Nikon, and other reviewers give it good marks. Here is the DXO Mark comment on the lens:
"Its headline score of 32 points puts the Tokina 24-70mm f/2.8 in first place for all fast-aperture standard zooms that we’ve tested on the D800E, ahead of the Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 at 31 points and Nikon’s own 24-70mm f/2.8G at 30 points. While all three boast comparable scores for distortion, vignetting, and transmission, the Tokina is ahead for sharpness, with a superior score of 27 P-Mpix, compared to 23 P-Mpix for the Tamron, and 21 P-Mpix for the Nikon G."
I love the lens. Good luck in finding what meets your needs.
Oct 7, 2016 08:49:53 #
I have a D5300 and have a Tokina 11-20, Nikkor 70-300 and just got the Tamron 24-70. I love this new lens. It is sharp and has been my primary lens since I got it a month and a half ago. It is just above your price range but is worth it and if you ever go full frame it will work.
Oct 7, 2016 09:01:50 #
Check out the Sigma 18-250 macro. I have a d7100 and it almost never come off. At 350 bucks it is hard to beat.
Oct 7, 2016 09:53:14 #
paulrph1
Loc: Washington, Utah
Michael652 wrote:
I own a Nikon 7100 and a Nikon P900 (for my wildli... (show quote)
I used a FF lens of a Dx camera for years and had not problems as long as I allowed for the compensation factor. Remember to magnify by 1.5 for focal length. In other words 28mm becomes 42mm and 200 becomes 300mm which works great on the top end but works against you on the other end. But since you are going for wildlife you should be OK but for landscapes you lose.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Check out Photo Critique Section section of our forum.