Which to buy?
Mar 23, 2012 21:17:59 #
I am in a quandary and needing a bit of input from all you experts. I just ordered a refurbished D7000 body for $1095. I would like a general shooting lens for this body. My Nikon refurb choices are all FF-S, in wishing order:
1) 24-120mm f4 ED VR G $1170
2) 24-120mm f3.5-5.6 IF ED VR $602
3) 16-85mm f3.5-5.6 DX ED VR $629
4) 18-70mm f3.5-4.5 DX IF ED $414
5) 17-55mm f2.8 DX IF ED G 1$1385
I could stretch for any but have some Scotch in my ancestry. I do want quality and shoot a lot of raw. I'm not sure of the advantage of #1 over #2 so maybe #2 is my better choice.
My main camera is a D300s with 3 zooms (10-300mm range) and 3 primes. I have a big photo trip with my British friend to see Carlsbad Caverns, Las Vegas, Grand Canyon, Durango NG RR and the Indy 500. She has press passes for us at Indy and I presume well be all over the place for several days. You have to admit that presents a huge variety of subjects!
1) 24-120mm f4 ED VR G $1170
2) 24-120mm f3.5-5.6 IF ED VR $602
3) 16-85mm f3.5-5.6 DX ED VR $629
4) 18-70mm f3.5-4.5 DX IF ED $414
5) 17-55mm f2.8 DX IF ED G 1$1385
I could stretch for any but have some Scotch in my ancestry. I do want quality and shoot a lot of raw. I'm not sure of the advantage of #1 over #2 so maybe #2 is my better choice.
My main camera is a D300s with 3 zooms (10-300mm range) and 3 primes. I have a big photo trip with my British friend to see Carlsbad Caverns, Las Vegas, Grand Canyon, Durango NG RR and the Indy 500. She has press passes for us at Indy and I presume well be all over the place for several days. You have to admit that presents a huge variety of subjects!
Mar 23, 2012 23:18:57 #
I have the Nikkor AF-S 24-120mm f3.5-5.6 IF ED VR and have had excellent results with it for the last 1 1/2 years, very nice walk-around lens. But I just recently bought the Nikkor 28-300mm VR II and it will be taking the place of the 24-120. I am selling mine in mint condition for $325 if you might be interested.
Add a Nikon 10-24mm to it and you would have a wonderful set of glass for either body. As well as for future FF upgrading.
Add a Nikon 10-24mm to it and you would have a wonderful set of glass for either body. As well as for future FF upgrading.
Mar 24, 2012 01:36:01 #
An affirmative pm was sent to you MT, thanks.
I do have the 10-24mm Nikor lens. It was bought for my Thailand where it was an absolute God send for getting in tight areas.
Im still wondering if the #1 lens is REALLY worth the difference in cost over the #2 lens. Any thoughts anyone?
I do have the 10-24mm Nikor lens. It was bought for my Thailand where it was an absolute God send for getting in tight areas.
Im still wondering if the #1 lens is REALLY worth the difference in cost over the #2 lens. Any thoughts anyone?
Mar 24, 2012 08:48:21 #
sirlensalot
Loc: Arizona
Have you considered the newer Tamron 18-270? Pretty good reviews as a travel lens. Met a photographer that was using one on his d90. He said he was very please with the results. He also said not as good as a prime which only makes sense.
Mar 24, 2012 09:06:19 #
lnhaynie
Loc: Southwest Colorado
Be sure to stop by Canyon DeChelly, AZ and Mesa Verde, CO since you're trip will take you near these beautiful places.
Mar 24, 2012 09:10:30 #
I think that you should purchase the one you feel most comfortable with. I think, in general, when you are spending that kind of money, the differences of performance are minuscule. Like sneakers, some fit well, some do not. lenses are like sneakers some fit well, some do not. Whatever, do not buy into all the marketing minutia that the camera companies release. Personally, I don't like carrying a bunch of lenses out with me. If you don't mind lugging that backpack with a bunch of gear, then go with a specialized lens for the scene you are shooting.
What I am saying is stay out of the mindset of which manufacturer is better. But that's only me. I'm sure you will get many opinions.
What I am saying is stay out of the mindset of which manufacturer is better. But that's only me. I'm sure you will get many opinions.
Mar 24, 2012 09:10:38 #
Johanna wrote:
An affirmative pm was sent to you MT, thanks.
I do have the 10-24mm Nikor lens. It was bought for my Thailand where it was an absolute God send for getting in tight areas.
Im still wondering if the #1 lens is REALLY worth the difference in cost over the #2 lens. Any thoughts anyone?
I do have the 10-24mm Nikor lens. It was bought for my Thailand where it was an absolute God send for getting in tight areas.
Im still wondering if the #1 lens is REALLY worth the difference in cost over the #2 lens. Any thoughts anyone?
The #1 lens has the VR II, it has tripod detection in it. It is also a "G" lens which means no aperture ring. And you lose 1/2 stop with it. I never thought it was worth the almost double asking price.
Mar 24, 2012 09:27:20 #
Mar 24, 2012 10:26:08 #
#1 has a fixed aperture so that it will be faster when zoomed out. This is important if you are doing low light shooting or want to go for bokeh in your pictures. If this is the case go for it. For what I do it is worth it.
#2 Will give just as sharp of pictures at the same f stop and will be lighter to haul around. If you don't need the extra lens speed soomed out you will be spending extra for nothing that is useful for you. - Dave
#2 Will give just as sharp of pictures at the same f stop and will be lighter to haul around. If you don't need the extra lens speed soomed out you will be spending extra for nothing that is useful for you. - Dave
Mar 24, 2012 10:50:42 #
I have both the 300 and 7000. I do a lot of shooting in the type of areas that you mentioned. I have found the best single lens for my purposes is the 18-200. It has VRII and with the 18mm bottom should be wide enough for most of your landscapes.
Mar 24, 2012 11:56:51 #
Lucian
Loc: From Wales, living in Ohio
Johanna...
You have Scotch in your ancestry??? You do understand that Scotch is drink right??
If you want to brag about being Scottish then you'll need to learn the English word for them as well. You have Scots in your ancestry or Scottish blood etc. if you are wanting to say they come from Scotland some where far back, but if you have Scotch then your family have been heavy drinkers.
Then again the Scots do like their little tipple.
You have Scotch in your ancestry??? You do understand that Scotch is drink right??
If you want to brag about being Scottish then you'll need to learn the English word for them as well. You have Scots in your ancestry or Scottish blood etc. if you are wanting to say they come from Scotland some where far back, but if you have Scotch then your family have been heavy drinkers.
Then again the Scots do like their little tipple.
Mar 24, 2012 12:24:05 #
Mar 24, 2012 17:09:04 #
Mar 24, 2012 21:22:19 #
See kenrockwell.com - he claims the F4 version of the 24-120 is well worth the extra $ and is a big improvement over the earlier !
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.