Poll: Camera with one lens
Jan 12, 2015 15:10:58 #
cjc2 wrote:
And I still have 2 F5s and a 17-35/2.8. If I was limited to ONLY one lens, I'd still choose my 24-70/2.8.
I've never tried the 24~70 2.8, I thought about the 17~35 but ran into the 20~35 at a great price. I have that, a 28~105 D, 60 2.8 micro, a 50 1.4 D (late), a 105 2.8 D micro ans a 80~400 ED VR D lens (first version) as well as the TC20E II. That pretty much covers anything I'll need. For longer reach, I have my Meade 1000 f/11 mirror lens. That and a TC201 gives me 2000 mm. Sure it's f/22 but it's OK.
Jan 12, 2015 15:34:12 #
WereWolf1967 wrote:
I've never tried the 24~70 2.8, I thought about the 17~35 but ran into the 20~35 at a great price. I have that, a 28~105 D, 60 2.8 micro, a 50 1.4 D (late), a 105 2.8 D micro ans a 80~400 ED VR D lens (first version) as well as the TC20E II. That pretty much covers anything I'll need. For longer reach, I have my Meade 1000 f/11 mirror lens. That and a TC201 gives me 2000 mm. Sure it's f/22 but it's OK.
If I remember correctly the 20-35 preceded the 17-35 and was a very good lens in its time, and it still is. The 105 D micro, in my opinion, is one of Nikon's very best and I still use mine quite a bit for nature. I have both the 50/1.4D and the 50/1.4AFS and am considering the Sigma 50/1.4 ART. Never owned the 60 micro, as I prefered the extra distance to subject for lighting, nor the 80-400 you have, but I am considering the new version. As I age, I find myself doing less paid work (sports) and more birds, nature, etc. Just received a 150-600 so I do have another thing to spend some time learning. Might even take that to the sidelines this spring! Shoot, my friend. Of course, all this is a bit off the subject of one lens!!
Jan 14, 2015 13:37:11 #
Jan 14, 2015 13:42:51 #
Gildersleeve wrote:
Toyo 810-M, 155mm Rodenstock Grandagon, film holders and film.
Um...I thought 120 slide was tough to develop.
Jan 14, 2015 15:08:45 #
Not if you have a lab that can turnaround sheet film quickly. Depending on the mail, a week is reasonable.
Jan 14, 2015 15:28:02 #
Cdouthitt wrote:
Um...I thought 120 slide was tough to develop.
I have done 35 slide, but never 120, although I do still have the necessary equipment. Alas, I do not have any fresh E6 chemicals, but Freestyle does. Since I have now, officially, semi-retired, I was thinking of shooting some film and re-starting my processing. Am particularly interested in using my 645 for chromes which is something I always enjoyed and appreciated. Not to worry, I won't be unpacking my enlarger and making Black & White prints anytime soon, I'm fine with doing that on my Epson! I have now exposed my summer & fall plans.
Jan 14, 2015 17:26:06 #
Sharp One wrote:
The lens: 24-70 f2.8 or the likes.
Camera: Nikon, Canon Etc.
The glass is the key.
Camera: Nikon, Canon Etc.
The glass is the key.
My wife bought me the Ef 24-70 f2.8 L for Christmas. I have a 60D - what do I do now????????????????
Jan 14, 2015 17:41:59 #
Larryb wrote:
My wife bought me the Ef 24-70 f2.8 L for Christmas. I have a 60D - what do I do now????????????????
Buy a 5d3 as a stocking stuffer.
Jan 14, 2015 17:44:16 #
Cdouthitt wrote:
For landscape work, what combo (camera and lens) would you purchase? Max budget $3500-4000. Bridge cameras and superzooms need not apply.
Any brand, any focal length (zoom or prime).
Ready, go.
Any brand, any focal length (zoom or prime).
Ready, go.
I'd choose the Nikon D810, and the 24-70 F2.8. for landscape work. This would give much more range than the 14-24 would. D810 is supposed to be superb for landscapes, and as a landscape shooter myself, that focal range is the most used, and just as often at the zoom end as wide open.
looks like I am a wee tad over budget, ok, go refurbished or gently used, and should get in under budget
Jan 14, 2015 18:52:00 #
glgracephoto wrote:
I'd choose the Nikon D810, and the 24-70 F2.8. for landscape work. This would give much more range than the 14-24 would. D810 is supposed to be superb for landscapes
on the 810/800E body any of those 2.8 lenses would be great but out of budget.
Jan 14, 2015 23:20:21 #
oldtigger wrote:
on the 810/800E body any of those 2.8 lenses would be great but out of budget.
Would you consider either the f4 versions or used/reconditioned?
Jan 15, 2015 01:48:07 #
oldtigger wrote:
on the 810/800E body any of those 2.8 lenses would be great but out of budget.
Seems if one went with the D800e, then can squeak in right at 4000, and for sure with the Tamron 24-70 f2.8, which from reviews I have read, has performed just as well optically
I was just looking up the 24-85 f2.8 thru f4, and it was not scoring near as well for sharpness, but I have not yet found a thorough review on it.
Nikon also has refurbed models available, on both; but this was still over cost with the D810, or Nikon lens. Used might do better.
If it was me, I would make darn certain I was getting a USA model, and dealing with a reputable seller, but i would certainly consider used, or stepping "down" to the 810/810e. If the Tamron 24-70 is as good as the DX version 17-50 I have, I'd certainly be happy with that as well, am blown away by the image quality on my new Tamron 17-50 f2.8 DX lens.
I will sacrifice some fancy video ability, buffer speed, etc; but I do not wish to sacrifice image quality. I would certainly be able to live with the D800.
Jan 15, 2015 08:20:53 #
flatulence
Loc: Oahu, Hawaii
A used Nikon 810 and a used Nikon 14-24mm f2.8 should be within the budget.
Jan 15, 2015 13:52:14 #
wj cody
Loc: springfield illinois
Cdouthitt wrote:
Um...I thought 120 slide was tough to develop.
if you are speaking of black & white or colour transparencies, a hell of a lot easier than 35mm!
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.