D700 + which lens?

[kimazuru]

Evening ppl,
Thanks for sparing the extra time out to help me deciding which lens.. haha...
I just sold most of my canon equip and bought a D700, SB900 and a 50f1.8...
Seriously Nikon rocks to the max...
But now i'm wan to get a 24-70 f2.8...
Nikon 24-70 cost approx 2k plus minus which kinds of over my budget limit...
I'm deciding between tokina, tamron or sigma 24-70 f2.8...
Which one would you recommand personally

 

[sf_kang]

Since u already hv the 50mm/1.8, u should not buy the 24-70mm. Instead, u should consider either:
A) 17-35mm/2.8 ( u can buy a good condition used lens) or
B) 70-200/2.8 VR or 80-200/2.8.
U r better off using the 50mm/1.8 n walking a little forwards or backwards to cover distance between 35 and 70.
I hv a 24-70/2.8 Nikon lens, but end up hv the 50mm/1.4 on the D700 most of the time.
Fred

 

[nickzkcin]

have you considered the 24-120 f/4?

 

[wanomoto]

Well the 50mm's gd for portraits and low-light shooting.

Why not get a 18-200 to cover the whole range?

 

[sidloojl]

14-24mm F2.8. But I don't know the price. If it is over budget, don't blame me..haha. But anyway, why don't you save up for the 24-70 F2.8?

 

[Irvine]

Well the 50mm's gd for portraits and low-light shooting.

Why not get a 18-200 to cover the whole range?

he got a d700 n the 18-200 is a DX only lens -.-

 

[wanomoto]

he got a d700 n the 18-200 is a DX only lens -.-

Ouh sorry! Still i big noob.

 

[Irvine]

Evening ppl,
Thanks for sparing the extra time out to help me deciding which lens.. haha...
I just sold most of my canon equip and bought a D700, SB900 and a 50f1.8...
Seriously Nikon rocks to the max...
But now i'm wan to get a 24-70 f2.8...
Nikon 24-70 cost approx 2k plus minus which kinds of over my budget limit...
I'm deciding between tokina, tamron or sigma 24-70 f2.8...
Which one would you recommand personally

the tamron seems great, as proved by our fellow bro dd123.

http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/threads/865395-Sigma-24-70mm-F2.8-IF-EX-DG-HSM?p=7062728#post7062728

his test shots with the tamron were all taken on d700

btw TS, u can also consider nikon's own AF-S 28-70 f/2.8 as well. it's the predecessor of the current AF-S 24-70 f/2.8. only can be found 2nd hand though

 

[kimazuru]

Since u already hv the 50mm/1.8, u should not buy the 24-70mm. Instead, u should consider either:
A) 17-35mm/2.8 ( u can buy a good condition used lens) or
B) 70-200/2.8 VR or 80-200/2.8.
U r better off using the 50mm/1.8 n walking a little forwards or backwards to cover distance between 35 and 70.
I hv a 24-70/2.8 Nikon lens, but end up hv the 50mm/1.4 on the D700 most of the time.
Fred

u got a point bro, but if i'm shooting for some of my company event with a prime i would be stuck.
I'll take 17-35 f2/8 into consideration.. thanks alot man

 

[kimazuru]

Not yet...Now that you mention it.. I might.. haha...

 

[kimazuru]

the tamron seems great, as proved by our fellow bro dd123.

http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/threads/865395-Sigma-24-70mm-F2.8-IF-EX-DG-HSM?p=7062728#post7062728

his test shots with the tamron were all taken on d700

btw TS, u can also consider nikon's own AF-S 28-70 f/2.8 as well. it's the predecessor of the current AF-S 24-70 f/2.8. only can be found 2nd hand though

Thanks man i've consider that but 28-70 f2.8 like hard to find only.. hahaha..

 

[kimazuru]

Ouh sorry! Still i big noob.

Hey no worries man... C= there's a 28-300 for fx if i'm not wrong but i'm looking for a more f2.8 constant... haha unless they have like 28-300 f2.8 vc or something would worth the money man

 

[Ben Ang]

I m currently using a 17-35, 50, 85, 135, 180. before that had the 17 35, 50, 80-200. I find that the 17-35 has more creative potential than the 28-70 range, and i ve found it indispensable when it comes to fulll body portraits and involving the landscape. I would suggest getting that lens first.

if i were to get a 28-70 range, i ll definitely go with the tokina 28-70 2.6-2.8. i ve used it a couple of times, and its quite impressive. the only issue is it flares a little so would be best to get it with original hood. the 28-80 2.8 is decent too, but quite soft at 80 so no realy gain. DO NOT get the 'AT-X pro SV' version. the 'sv' is a budget version and doesnt perform as well.

 

[kimazuru]

I m currently using a 17-35, 50, 85, 135, 180. before that had the 17 35, 50, 80-200. I find that the 17-35 has more creative potential than the 28-70 range, and i ve found it indispensable when it comes to fulll body portraits and involving the landscape. I would suggest getting that lens first.

if i were to get a 28-70 range, i ll definitely go with the tokina 28-70 2.6-2.8. i ve used it a couple of times, and its quite impressive. the only issue is it flares a little so would be best to get it with original hood. the 28-80 2.8 is decent too, but quite soft at 80 so no realy gain. DO NOT get the 'AT-X pro SV' version. the 'sv' is a budget version and doesnt perform as well.

Cool.. kind of make sense as well.. anyway i saw your site, great pictures you have there...
Anyway i just bought a SB900... the dial for the on and off to remote and master... on and off is smooth and easy to turn but it turns very tight when i need to switch to remote and master mode... is it normal?

 

[Fragment]

Anyway i just bought a SB900... the dial for the on and off to remote and master... on and off is smooth and easy to turn but it turns very tight when i need to switch to remote and master mode... is it normal?

Yes, it's normal. You'll have to press the button and turn the switch simultaneously to access remote and master modes.

 

[mod101]

If you get either 16-35 or 17-35 and 85 1.4 should be a good start, my 2 cents... Really it depends on what you shoot... do you need to get close etc... figure that out and it will help you to decide.

 

[Big Kahuna]

Tamron....cheap and good

 

[daredevil123]

I m currently using a 17-35, 50, 85, 135, 180. before that had the 17 35, 50, 80-200. I find that the 17-35 has more creative potential than the 28-70 range, and i ve found it indispensable when it comes to fulll body portraits and involving the landscape. I would suggest getting that lens first.

if i were to get a 28-70 range, i ll definitely go with the tokina 28-70 2.6-2.8. i ve used it a couple of times, and its quite impressive. the only issue is it flares a little so would be best to get it with original hood. the 28-80 2.8 is decent too, but quite soft at 80 so no realy gain. DO NOT get the 'AT-X pro SV' version. the 'sv' is a budget version and doesnt perform as well.

Yes, for the Tokina 28-70/2.6-2.8 only the Pro I and Pro II versions (2nd and 3rd versions) are worth looking at. How to differentiate the models? This site will show you how: http://nikonglass.blogspot.com/2009/11/tokina-at-x-pro-28-70mm-f26-28.html

Seriously, the tokina is very hard to come by now. I see a copy or two once in a while, and they usually have some issues. Most of the time they are overpriced. Fair price on these lenses, in good to mint condition with hood, are around $300-400. If you pay over 400 for one, you have paid too much.

Thanks man i've consider that but 28-70 f2.8 like hard to find only.. hahaha..

As for Tamron 28-75/2.8, it is actually sharper than the Tokina (any version). And they are readily available since they are still being produced and sold new. You can pretty much grab a brand new copy in most shops for slightly under $600. Be sure to test the lens with your camera body before you pay for it, when buying new or used. And do note that front or back focusing does not necessarily mean bad QC. It depends on your camera body a lot. My copy of the 2875 is tack sharp on the D700. But when mounted to the D300s, it front focuses. Downsides to the Tamron are slightly slower AF speed.

A fellow CSer just did a comparison of the sigma HSM and the Tamron. You can see it here: http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/threads/928921-Comparison-of-Sigma-24-70mm-F2.8-IF-EX-DG-HSM-and-Tamron-SP-AF-28-75mm-F2.8-XR-Di-LD

Hope this helps!

 

[mogwai]

if in your shoes, i'd go with the tamron.

 

[baggiolee]

none of the above..lol