Abinoone

I'm looking for a top quality Nikon lens for landscape photography. Currently I use the D5600 with the standard kit lenses (18-55 and 70-300) but eventually plan to upgrade the camera body to the D850 once my skills improve. In the meanwhile I want to buy better lenses that I can use now on the D5600 but that also will work well on the D850 later. I shoot mostly nature and wildlife photography (I have a Nikon 200-500 telephoto for wildlife) and am looking for an excellent lens to use for landscape shots. What lenses would you recommend? The Nikon AF-S 24-70 F2.8 ED VR looks good but it's expensive! Is it worth it or are there equally good, more affordable lenses?

tradio Loc: Oxford, Ohio

You should be able to find the older version of the 24-70, the ones that do not have vibration compensation cheaper than the current model. Also, check out the 14-24, it is a very good lens.

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

The 24-70mm F2.8 lenses are all very nice. I use the Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 ART lens on my D850 and love it. Every bit as good as the Nikon (which I used to have) and half the price. Beautiful color richness too.
The 14-24mm F2.8 from either Nikon or Sigma will also give wonderful results at wider shots, neither is to be scoffed at, but the 24-70 range will get used much more.

f8lee Loc: New Mexico

What about one of Nikon’s perspective control lenses, like the 19MM PC or the 24MM PC?

Sure they’re a bit pricier but you can tilt and shift to get more flexibility!

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

If you want "best" then it will cost ya.

What are the kit lenses not delivering for you? Can you post a sample image or two? What is your budget? Do you know how to stitch a pano? Do you realize that if you stitch panos, you probably can put off spending a lot of money on new lenses. It's worth a try.

https://petapixel.com/2016/10/27/stitching-panorama-forget-wide-angle-lens-home/

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

The 24 - 70mm zooms are landscape workhorses. And you will want a lens of high quality when you get your D850.

I have the 14-24mm f2.8 and use it a lot. I got it to support assignments at a workshop and became very familiar with the lens and how to use it. But a little searching will reveal tons of these for sale used. If you don't have a strategy for using it, you'll probably not.

My 24-70 is a non-VR version. It's noticeably smaller and lighter than the VR version and also uses smaller filters. I do not miss the VR at these focal lengths.

I also use a 24-120mm f4 VR quite a bit. Many here do not like this lens. I bought it used as an all-day lens for my D500, and it is great for that. It covers a full frame equivalent of about 35-180mm. Turns out that it is also very handy on a D810 or D850. My experience has not revealed any of the shortcomings that are sometimes mentioned. It even served very well at a recent class.

luvmypets Loc: Born & raised Texan living in Fayetteville NC

I started photography back in the 70's (yes, film). Over the years I've taken many (hobby type) photography classes from instructors that were professionals, newspaper photographers and even one from the military. The one piece of advice that all of them gave was to put your money into your lenses.

Think about this....you will change cameras over the years but your lenses (should) be usable with all the cameras. I have lenses from my film days that work on my D750. They don't have the electronic autofocus but they work fine in manual mode. I don't use them because I really like the autofocus but if I needed them, they would work.

When I purchased my first Nikon dslr I didn't understand the difference between crop sensor and full frame so I purchased the D7000 and a couple of kit lenses. They were fine for what I was doing at the time but as I improved my digital knowledge I realized that a full frame camera was what I wanted and I knew I wanted better lenses. The FX lenses can be used on both full frame and crop sensor cameras so that's what I started buying. I did some research and learned that the Tamron and Sigma lenses were very close in quality to the Nikon lenses but less expensive so that is the route I have taken.

The lenses I use now are:
Tamron- 24-70, 70-200, 150-600
Sigma- 50 Art

My next purchase will be the Tamron 15-30. These lenses should cover anything I need. When I look for lenses and there are several of the same focal lengths but they are different prices I start studying the most expensive because that is where the best glass and best features should be. I do a lot of research on a lens before I buy it. I have a limited income so I have to be sure I'm getting the best for my money.

Also, if you have a top quality camera like the 850 putting low quality glass on it would not give you the great results you will expect from that camera. It would be like taking a Ferrari and putting a restricter (sorry, can't think of the correct term) on it so it won't go over 30mph.

I wish you the best in your photographic journey and I hope I have given you some things to think about.

Abinoone

Thank you very much for your (excellent) advice! It makes perfect sense to me to invest in high quality glass before moving on to a full-frame camera like the D850. I'm inclined to buy the Nikon 24-70 f/2.8 without autofocus since I will use it primarily for landscape photography on a good tripod. Not getting AF will save me about $600 although even so the lens will set me back almost $1700!

Thanks again

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

Nobody makes a 24-70mm F2.8 that is NOT AF, they are all autofocus from every manufacturer.

Abinoone

Oops, sorry. I meant to say VR, not AF.

Bill_de Loc: US

Maybe a broken one from Craig's list?

---

Strodav Loc: Houston, Tx

I ended up with a Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 for landscapes and it is performing well. There is a Nikon version 14-24mm f/2.8 as well. If you are going to be doing a lot of hiking in to your shooting spot you might want to look at is the Sigma 14-24mm f/4, which is lighter with excellent image quality and it costs less than the faster versions.

Most of the time you don't need a faster lens for landscapes, but it does help with those twilight shots.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Adding to my earlier post -after looking at my stats for landscape in my Lightroom catalog, my 45mm PC-E and 85 PC-E are in a dead heat, followed by the 24-70, 80-200. My least used lens is my 14-24, which I use only in fairly close quarters, like standing on a rock outcropping next to a waterfall, or when I want to use the forced perspective to put some emphasis on something in the foreground, but that has become such a cliché I find myself using less and less. I never use it for wide sweeping landscapes. I literally use it for less than 50 pictures a year. The 45 and 85 I use for many hundreds more.

CamB Loc: Juneau, Alaska

There is no “landscape” lens. Different landscapes need different lenses. I shoot half my “landscapes” at 200 and 300mm. I like the compression and that slightly gritty in your face feel to them. Now, if you need a lens that snaps into focus and feels good in your hand, that 24-70 is the one for you. Generally you don’t need speed for landscapes.
...Cam

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

The two landscape Nikon lenses I use with my D850 are the Nikon 16-35 f4 (sharp as a tack) and the Nikon 24-120 f4. One of the reasons I use these two is because they both take 77 mm filters and they are the same speed. I shoot in manual with ND, Polarizing, Enhancing, and Warming filters especially for fall colors.
Below is a shot of a waterfall in Vermont with an old mill in the background. I used the D810 with the 16-35 f4 on a tripod with an ten stop ND filter. 30 second exposure.