DaveyDitzer Loc: Western PA

You people are great! Thank you. Lots to mull over. Buying DX lenses is almost an impulse purchase (well, not really, but not like a 35-70 f2.8!) But buying FX lenses is more of a long term investment. Thank you again.

ecurb1105

20mm f2.8
35mm f 1.8
200-500 zoom

DaveyDitzer Loc: Western PA

Nobody mentioned the Nikkor 24-85 f2.8 - f4. Is that because this lens is a "dog"?

cthahn

50mm prime f1.4 or f1.8. You will find this lens will be used more that any of your other lens. Small size, fast.

Bultaco Loc: Aiken, SC

You have several interests. Start with a lens that best covers what you shot most. The 28/300 is my carry around lens, for wildlife I use the Tamron 150/600 G2. Lens will be your largest investment. Just have fun with what ever lens you decide to purchase.

wapiti Loc: round rock, texas

First of all. You're going to love the DF. I would recommend a 24-120 ED f4.0.

wingclui44 Loc: CT USA

The post was asking first FX lens for his/her full frame Df, not crop DX lens!

dynaquest1 Loc: Austin, Texas

Nobody just gets one lens after buying a full frame Nikon. After you get your 50mm (F1.8 or 1.4), consider the 24-120 f4. That lens will do pretty well for everything you want to do. It's a bit heavy. If that is an issue, consider the lighter 24-85mm.

stevebein

Depending on your budget, you might consider the Sigma Sport 150-500. Not the widest, but quality, economy and versatility are great and also one of the best long zooms. Tamron has a new lens that I do not know about, but its quality might approach the Sigma. Worthwhile to check one against the other, if their price points and quality is of interest. Sigma has some new high quality lenses which approach and in some cases exceed those of Canon and Nikon.

shutterbob Loc: Tucson

Agree with the 24-120. It will cover most any shot you want to take. It is the lens that gets the most use on my 750.

William Royer Loc: Kansas

I just rented (from Lens Rental) the Df for a mini vacation because I've been fascinated by it as a potential second camera to my D810. Liked the camera very much. IMO, one of the nice things about the camera is its relatively small size combined with an excellent full frame sensor. Therefore, putting a large zoom lens on it seems to defeat one of its advantages; plus the camera does not have a large beefy grip to help control the resulting front weight. I would suggest that the first lens(es) purchased be smaller-sized, prime lenses. The ones I used most when I had it were the 50mm, 35mm and 20mm. If you don't mind manual focus (which is fairly easy with the camera's confirmation dot), I concur with a previous suggestion to try AIS lenses (this camera cries out for the 50mm f1.2). Enjoy!

caljr Loc: Indiana

Now that you have no money left after buying a FF camera this is a great cheap lens, I use mine all the time. Nikon AF Nikkor 28-80mm f/3.3-5.6G http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/28-80mm-g.htm

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

My eyes cannot discern details between a FX and a DX file using the same number of megapixels and the same lens. A good walk around lens according to tests I have read is the Nikon 24-105 f4 and there are many reports that claim that the same lens made by Sigma is better. I do not own any of those two lenses I am only making reference to what I have read. The 24-120 f4 is said to be also a good performer.
For wildlife and sports you need a longer lens, something like the Nikon 80-400 or the 200-500. I prefer my DX body for those subjects, not my full frame and I use the old 80-400-D lens or the 70-300 VR.
Tamron and Sigma make excellent 150-600 lenses and the Internet and photo forums are full with pictures from those lenses. The pictures I have seen from them appear to have excellent quality.
Good luck with your selection.

gregm Loc: Near Sacramento, CA

I bought the D-5300 because it was light weight and did everything I needed to do for vacation photography. I bought the Nikon 70-200 F4 lens for the same reason... light weight and gave me at least 90-95% of what I'd be able to get out of the 70-200 F2.8

SteveR Loc: Michigan

My list:
20mm
50mm f1.8D Save money by going with the D lens The advantage of the f1.8 is that it really sucks in the light, much more so than an f2.8
24-70 f2.8 non VR Save the money, you don't need VR on this short of a lens unless you're shooting a lot of lowlight situations.
80-400mm vrii This is where I differ. It rivals the Canon 100-400mm L vrii. Better range than the 200-500 and lighter. Better than the 28-300mm, although I've
enjoyed my 28-300 immensely. Don't buy down, however, buy up.

You will find that the 24-70 will stay on your camera most of the time. The 80-400mm will work great for wildlife, sports and other general use. I have the 24-70 and it never came off my D800 on a trip to Santa Fe and Taos. I have used my 28-300mm on my D7000 at birthday parties, soccer games and it's a great lens. I plan on replacing it with the 80-400mm (I'm also considering replacing the D7000 with the D500 and giving the D7000 to my daughter). Since I still have the D7000 I use a Tamron 10-24mm for my wide angle lens. When vacationing, it generally stays on the D7000 while another lens stays on the D800 and I never change lenses. This comes in handy when going through dusty places like Monument Valley. I also have the 70-200mm f2.8 but have not really used it as much as I should.

If I had money dripping out my ears I would also buy the 300mm f4 to have a telephoto prime that wouldn't actually cost a year's car payments.