Nikon users - looking for input (Page 2): I think you have a great package. You might want to consider adding the Nikon 16-35 f/4. It is an excellent lens. I would also add circular...

Jbat Loc: Charleston, SC

I think you have a great package. You might want to consider adding the Nikon 16-35 f/4. It is an excellent lens. I would also add circular polarizers to my package.

Blasthoff Loc: Life halved NY and IN

Shellback wrote:

I'm upgrading to full frame - this is the package I'm working on and am wondering if I'm on the right track...
My shooting is landscape, street, nature, animals, pets and sometimes family portraits...

Nikon D800
Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED AF Zoom Lens:
Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Lens:
Remote Switch
Speed Light SB-910
Hoya UV 77mm (x2)

Thanks,
Dave

I'll make just one note on being practical. The SB-910 is a fine wiz-bang expensive marvel that you will also find to be bulky, obtrusive, expensive and most likely, overkill for most of your needs. If your going with one or a first flash, definitely go with Nikon but make it a smaller unit then only add the big flash only IF the need arrives. Even if you do add an SB-910 you will find yourself preferring the smaller unit almost all of the time unless shooting a lot of stills or studio type settings.

Giugly01 Loc: Woodstock, NY

"Get the 800E. Moire is not a problem."

And, if it ever is, there is a moire adjustment on the Local Adustment Brush in ACR 8 and LR5.

joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois

Shellback wrote:

I'm upgrading to full frame - this is the package I'm working on and am wondering if I'm on the right track...
My shooting is landscape, street, nature, animals, pets and sometimes family portraits...

Nikon D800
Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED AF Zoom Lens:
Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Lens:
Remote Switch
Speed Light SB-910
Hoya UV 77mm (x2)

Thanks,
Dave

Excellent lens choices. If your nature includes birds it may be advisable to add a long lens. Here is where the costs go through the roof unless you settle for non-Nikon.

Also, I would add a Better Beamer for the flash. It narrows the light beam and provides an extra 2 stops on a 300mm or longer. The cost is under $40.

Alois

I would only change the Hoya filters for Kenko ( much easier to keep clean ) or B&W and Heliopan filters.

BillyDuds Loc: North Carolina

On the suggestion of a B&H rep, I recently sprang for the Nikkor 80-400 and am very pleased with it on my d800. It's in the same cost ballpark as the 70-200; maybe a freckle less IQ but plenty sharp for me and I do tend to be picky. And the extra range has produced some nice shore bird pics. Not sure how its IQ would compare with the 70-200 plus a 2x extender. Just a thought.

BobHartung Loc: Bettendorf, IA

traveler90712 wrote:

I would first suggest you check the Tamorn version of those lens and save over a thousand dollars. Those lens tested better when tested by DxO.

I have what you are considering. The one change I made, especially for travel, was to swap out the f/2.8 70-200 and purchase the f/4 70-200 by Nikon. I do not miss the faster, heavier lens and I suspect you won't either. Besides, many $ would be saved to take your wife to dinner - several times.

bersharbp Loc: Texas

Snappin053 wrote:

I like your choices but would suggest the D800e, also add a Nikkor wide angel for your landscapes (my next purchase). Consider a Hahnel RF remote. It triggers from 260 feet away a must have for wildlife.

Good recommendation. At less than $70 I will consider it at me next camera purchase.

Mark7829 Loc: Calfornia

traveler90712 wrote:

I would first suggest you check the Tamorn version of those lens and save over a thousand dollars. Those lens tested better when tested by DxO.

Not True.. absolutely not true. Find these lenses on a D800 and Nikon is superior in every way. DxO does not include auto focus, lens fares/lens coatings, weather proofing, or resale value which are other factors to consider.

Mark7829 Loc: Calfornia

BillyDuds wrote:

On the suggestion of a B&H rep, I recently sprang for the Nikkor 80-400 and am very pleased with it on my d800. It's in the same cost ballpark as the 70-200; maybe a freckle less IQ but plenty sharp for me and I do tend to be picky. And the extra range has produced some nice shore bird pics. Not sure how its IQ would compare with the 70-200 plus a 2x extender. Just a thought.

I believe after 1.4 TC, the 80-400 loses auto focus. But I could be wrong. With a 1.4 your minimum is f/8.

dcampbell52 Loc: Clearwater Fl

Gobuster wrote:

I like your choices, all top notch equipment. Only change I'd make is to get the D800E, those that have compared results think it's a tad sharper. That said, the D800/D800E are at the top of IQ choices.

I agree and also get a circular polarizing filter. possibly a step up ring from each filter size to a standard filter larger than your lenses.. this lets you use one filter for all lenses and also get lens caps to go on the step rings. . that way you are standardized.

BillyDuds Loc: North Carolina

Mark7829 wrote:

I believe after 1.4 TC, the 80-400 loses auto focus. But I could be wrong. With a 1.4 your minimum is f/8.

Guess I wasn't clear. I wasn't suggesting using a TC with the 80-400. It's got pretty decent IQ at 400 by itself, at least for my uses. What I was trying to say is that its IQ at 400mm may be comparable with the IQ of the 70-200 at 200 plus a 2x TC. I don't know for sure that's the case, just guessing. I did consider the 70-200 but decided against it because I wanted the extra range of the 80-400. The 80-400 doesn't seem to appear much in discussions and certainly wasn't on my radar screen until B&H recommended it. I just thought I'd mention it so the OP might consider it among his choices.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

traveler90712 wrote:

I would first suggest you check the Tamorn version of those lens and save over a thousand dollars. Those lens tested better when tested by DxO.

Right! And take a look at this review.

http://mattgranger.com/gear-talk/item/446-70-200-showdown-pt1-tamron-vs-canon-vs-nikon

Also, Google one lens vs another, and see what reviewers have to say.

Don't rule out the D800e.

Mark7829 Loc: Calfornia

BillyDuds wrote:

Guess I wasn't clear. I wasn't suggesting using a ... (show quote)

I looked at several studies on the 70-200 f/2.8 with a TC vs the 80-400 and in each case the 80-400 had better IQ. If it was equal, there would be no reason for Nikon to even produce a 80-400. I have them both and each has there uses. the 80-400 for me is when I know I am going to need distance. The 70-200 is almost for me a walk around lens, when I am in nature. I also put a 1.4 on my 80-400 and AF is fast and IQ is superb. If you purchase any Nikon professional series lenses, you would be hard pressed to make any complaints. At this level any issues with IQ is likely attributed to the photographer because the equipment is just too damn good.

RedArrow Loc: Coastal Louisiana

I got the D800e over the D800 and the Nikon 24-70 f/2.8g but I passed Nikon 14-24 F/2.8g I went with the Nikon 16-35 F/4g VR for the reason of the filter problem. The 16-35 is a 77mm like the 24-70. I keep the 24-70 on 90% of the time a great over all lens and 16-35 is just as sharp and with the VR I don't miss the extra stops.