Best setup for D7000

[007]

Hi, would like to check, what is the best setup for D7000?
I have read some threads, however no exact thread found.

My main concern are:
1) If possible, get a setup which is possible for future full frame upgrade (full frame proof?)

2) Brand doesn't matter, as long as it serves the purpose.

3) Unlikely to use 2.8 trinity lens because do not want to use high end full frame lens on cropped sensor.

Previously I have experience with the following, kindly comment:

1) Tokina 11-16
2) Tamron 17-50
3) Prime: Sigma 30 f1.4, 50mm f1.8

For 1) I know if now wrong there is a sigma 12-24?
2) There is Sigma 17-70 2.8? (With macro function)
3) Sigma 50 f1.4 better than Nikon 50 f1.4?

Wish to workout best and simple setup for D7000. Thanks!

Also, how is the D7000 iso department compare to D700?

 

[technoglitz87]

Hi, would like to check, what is the best setup for D7000?
I have read some threads, however no exact thread found.

My main concern are:
1) If possible, get a setup which is possible for future full frame upgrade (full frame proof?)

2) Brand doesn't matter, as long as it serves the purpose.

3) Unlikely to use 2.8 trinity lens because do not want to use high end full frame lens on cropped sensor.

Previously I have experience with the following, kindly comment:

1) Tokina 11-16
2) Tamron 17-50
3) Prime: Sigma 30 f1.4, 50mm f1.8

For 1) I know if now wrong there is a sigma 12-24?
2) There is Sigma 17-70 2.8? (With macro function)
3) Sigma 50 f1.4 better than Nikon 50 f1.4?

Wish to workout best and simple setup for D7000. Thanks!

Also, how is the D7000 iso department compare to D700?

First and foremost, u have to identify the type of photography ur going into.. landscape/macro/portraits etc etc? I don't think there's a best setup as it'd probably mean the most expensive lenses paired. For instance i like to shoot wide and more of landscapes, thus i traded off my 17-50 for a tokina 12-24 and appreciating it. i use primes to cover the rest of the focal length.

If u tinking of using ff lens to future proof..i tink no point. for eg 28-75 tamron will render ur wide angle gone unless u have a 11-16 to cover that...and 24-70 on a crop def wun be my choice for a walkabt lens on dx. I'd still like to tink 17-50 is a gd choice having used it. no comments for the sigma 17-70, nv used it. Cheers~
If u want a cover it all lens, then maybe 18-200 shld fit you..cheers!

 

[tehzeh]

If you want to do macro photography, get a proper macro lens like the 105mm f/2.8. This could be used for full frame as well.

I don't know whether the sigma 30mm has full frame coverage, but some people in this forum have posted some photos taken with the 35mm f/1.8G (DX lens) on a D700. You can consider this lens too.

Do you still need the mid-range zoom, since you are already considering two prime lenses in the normal to short telephoto range. You can consider getting a sigma 24mm instead of the 30mm, and get a 50mm, along with an 11-16mm.

IMO.

 

[daredevil123]

Hi, would like to check, what is the best setup for D7000?
I have read some threads, however no exact thread found.

My main concern are:
1) If possible, get a setup which is possible for future full frame upgrade (full frame proof?)

2) Brand doesn't matter, as long as it serves the purpose.

3) Unlikely to use 2.8 trinity lens because do not want to use high end full frame lens on cropped sensor.

Previously I have experience with the following, kindly comment:

1) Tokina 11-16
2) Tamron 17-50
3) Prime: Sigma 30 f1.4, 50mm f1.8

For 1) I know if now wrong there is a sigma 12-24?
2) There is Sigma 17-70 2.8? (With macro function)
3) Sigma 50 f1.4 better than Nikon 50 f1.4?

Wish to workout best and simple setup for D7000. Thanks!

Also, how is the D7000 iso department compare to D700?

Want the BEST, yet, don't want the BEST... Want to be FF proof, yet don't want to use the best FF lenses.

Might as well just get all the DX lenses for now, when go FF, then buy FF lenses and sell your DX lenses.

 

[catchlights]

you can't get the best of both worlds, even your pocket is deep enough.

you want to best lenses for DX body, get the best DX lenses, cos they ARE design for DX body.

get the best FX lenses when you are ready for FX, using cheap lenses on FX body doesn't make sense, cos you are not maximize the full potential of the camera.

 

[small pig]

you can't get the best of both worlds, even your pocket is deep enough.

you want to best lenses for DX body, get the best DX lenses, cos they ARE design for DX body.

get the best FX lenses when you are ready for FX, using cheap lenses on FX body doesn't make sense, cos you are not maximize the full potential of the camera.

agree with you.

 

[Blur Shadow]

If this is any reference, I started out with DX, and this setup served me well:

1. Sigma AF 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM
2. Tamron AF 17-50mm f/2.8 SP XR Di II LD Aspherical [IF]
3. Nikon Nikkor AF-S 55-200mm f/4-5.6 G ED DX

I did mainly landscapes and events.

 

[sonq9]

I'm shooting with a 12-24 f4 and a few prime lenses (28, 50 & 105mm). Works for me on my recent holiday, as i shot mostly landscapes, so shot mainly with my zoom.

I know zoom lenses are more convenient, but hard to beats the image quality, speed & bokeh on prime lenses.

 

[wuminlee]

maybe TS can consider primes (non DX) . and also 70-200 f2.8
works well with both DX and FX.

 

[Kit]

Also, how is the D7000 iso department compare to D700?

You probably have to call them on Monday to find out. They don't work on weekends I think. Their no. is 1800-nikon-iso.

 

[sense rain]

cheap less is more compact... which i like.. like 24 f2.8 against 24 f1.4... or 35 f2.0 against 35 f1.4...
its not a matter of can or cannot afford... but just the size is what i prefers...

you can't get the best of both worlds, even your pocket is deep enough.

you want to best lenses for DX body, get the best DX lenses, cos they ARE design for DX body.

get the best FX lenses when you are ready for FX, using cheap lenses on FX body doesn't make sense, cos you are not maximize the full potential of the camera.

 

[catchlights]

cheap less is more compact... which i like.. like 24 f2.8 against 24 f1.4... or 35 f2.0 against 35 f1.4...
its not a matter of can or cannot afford... but just the size is what i prefers...

FX Lenses are not compact compare to DX lenses, if size is an issue, than why considering upgrade to FX in the first place??

 

[daredevil123]

cheap less is more compact... which i like.. like 24 f2.8 against 24 f1.4... or 35 f2.0 against 35 f1.4...
its not a matter of can or cannot afford... but just the size is what i prefers...

I have one word for you... Mirrorless..

 

[UncleFai]

For my D7000,

if it is outdoors mainly (with some possibly indoor shots): Tamron 18-270 VC (I have the non-PZD version) and the 35mm f1.8G DX.

if it is indoors mainly: Sigma 17-50mm OS HSM and the 35mm or 50mm G (depending whether I think there is a good chance for a good bokeh shots or not).

For fun, sometimes I would bring a 10.5mm DX fisheye.