full frame on a budget

[kwanhan]

One of the nice things about an FX camera is the bigger viewfinder. To some, that alone is worth the difference in price compared with a DX cam.

Not sure what your budget is like, or how wide you really need to go.
I think 35mm is pretty wide for an FX cam. Probably if you're ok with 28-75/2.8 Tammy, that's also a good zoom to pair with. About the same angles of view as D300 + 17-50

oops i forgot its more than calculation of the crop factor but also angle of viewing.

hmmm i guess its a relief to hear its comparable.


thanks for all the advice so far everyone

i'm not considering d7000, prefer the more comfortable grip of d300 and above.

i guess at the very least now...

end of this year would be a sb700 and 85 1.8... next year d700 and the tamron 28-75.

whether i supplement it with a 20 or 24 or 35 prime depends on whether i see the need.

teleprime like the 80-200 would be further off... i'm only 25 but i'm not sure if i'll need the VR LOL

 

[Ben Ang]

thanks for all the advice so far everyone

teleprime like the 80-200 would be further off... i'm only 25 but i'm not sure if i'll need the VR LOL

with practice, you won't need VR. most of the time when you shoot with an 80-200, issues are the subject moving and you ll need 1/500-1/2000 to freeze the motion anyway. practice and a decent monopod will save you lots. i shoot a manual focus 100-300 f4 without much problem at all. of course if you just want the reach and ultimate IQ, the 180 f2.8 AF-D is getting pretty cheap now..

 

[mod101]

FF on budget...

1. D700
2. 35mm f2
3. 85mm f1.8

My 2 cents...

 

[ZerocoolAstra]

oops i forgot its more than calculation of the crop factor but also angle of viewing.

hmmm i guess its a relief to hear its comparable.


thanks for all the advice so far everyone

i'm not considering d7000, prefer the more comfortable grip of d300 and above.

i guess at the very least now...

end of this year would be a sb700 and 85 1.8... next year d700 and the tamron 28-75.

whether i supplement it with a 20 or 24 or 35 prime depends on whether i see the need.

teleprime like the 80-200 would be further off... i'm only 25 but i'm not sure if i'll need the VR LOL

Hope you didn't misunderstand my point about the 'angle of view'. I think I used the incorrect term as well Probably 'field of view' is more appropriate.
Basically I'm saying that D700 (FX) + 28-75 gives similar FOV through viewfinder as D300 (DX) + 17-50 (35mm equiv FOV = 25.5-75mm).

As you can see, we're talking about the same thing, so I don't think you forgot anything.

 

[nickzkcin]

the reviews must be lying =P haha. I ve used the 1 touch, 2 touch and AF-S(current) versions of the 80-200 and the AF-S beats the other 2 hands down. seriously. resolution and contrast wide open is really good on the long end, and holds up very well even with the TC 14E. AF speed is FAST huge diff compared to the AF-D. i got rid of the 2 touch cos i thought it was convenient and good for events, but IQ wouldnt stand up against my primes. the AF-S version does a v good job, but its quite the beast to lug around =\ never have any worries shooting with it though.

Not to say the AF-D version is lousy.. its certainly faster to focus than the 1 touch, and offers v nice IQ at f4. but it does lag behind the AF-S

If you can live with 9-shot bursts, you can use flash bracketing and bracketing burst to get 8fps without the battery grip. you ll just be limited to 9 frames per burst.

heh fair enough this was one of the lenses I didn't do much research into, as a friend was looking to upgrade to the 70-200VR2 and wanted to offload his 80-200D cheap. 600 USD got me the lens and has served me well thus far

 

[Ben Ang]

heh fair enough this was one of the lenses I didn't do much research into, as a friend was looking to upgrade to the 70-200VR2 and wanted to offload his 80-200D cheap. 600 USD got me the lens and has served me well thus far

thats a good deal! i was aiming to pick up the AF-D version when i started shooting events again. but then chanced upon the AF-S for US$150 more than what you got yrs for. guy was a photojournalist switching system cos his new work place din take nikon. couldn't resist. haha. the AF-D is no slouch. have fun with it =)

 

[yu jianzhi]

wrong again lol

Though Tamron 17-50 is FX lol

 

[Sgdevilzz]

resolution and contrast wide open is really good on the long end

Resolution and contrast only changes when you change your camera body, not lens.

 

[Ben Ang]

Resolution and contrast only changes when you change your camera body, not lens.

actually.. this kind of thing changes from lens to lens. each lens will out put different contrast, micro contrast, resolution(sharpness), CA, LOCA, colour cast, spherical abberation, the list goes on. and all those factors also change when you stop a lens down. thats why ppl bother to pay extra for good glass =)

 

[nickzkcin]

Resolution and contrast only changes when you change your camera body, not lens.

contrast definitely will change from lens to lens.

 

[kwanhan]

Hope you didn't misunderstand my point about the 'angle of view'. I think I used the incorrect term as well Probably 'field of view' is more appropriate.
Basically I'm saying that D700 (FX) + 28-75 gives similar FOV through viewfinder as D300 (DX) + 17-50 (35mm equiv FOV = 25.5-75mm).

As you can see, we're talking about the same thing, so I don't think you forgot anything.

i think i'm slightly confused... i think i understand similar FOV through viewfinder... but there will be a significant 2.5 difference between 25.5 and 28?

 

[Benji77]

I am a 'prime lens' guy. If you ask me, shoot with your current body kit now, start getting good glass. Body will always come and go. For a decent focal range, I would say -

• All prices 2nd hand market valuation.
• 24/2.8 AF-D $500
• 85/1.8 AF-D $450
• 180/2.8 AF-D $700

The 180/2.8 is a long forgotten lens, it really kicks a**.
Your bill for all of the above is $1,650. After using it for 3 years, its value will plus minus 20-40%, which to me, is extremely fair.

 

[ZerocoolAstra]

i think i'm slightly confused... i think i understand similar FOV through viewfinder... but there will be a significant 2.5 difference between 25.5 and 28?

So if you have the D300 + 17-50 side-by-side with the D700 + 28-75, both lens at their widest focal lengths (17 and 28 respectively), the D300 + 17-50 will give you a slightly wider view, though I think it's not so significant. At the tele end, both should give similar view.

 

[Sgdevilzz]

actually.. this kind of thing changes from lens to lens. each lens will out put different contrast, micro contrast, resolution(sharpness), CA, LOCA, colour cast, spherical abberation, the list goes on. and all those factors also change when you stop a lens down. thats why ppl bother to pay extra for good glass =)

Oh right, sharpness. It seems that every time the word "resolution" pops up, i think of MPs and the size.

 

[huggable]

Somehow the Nikon AF-S 24-85mm F/3.5-4.5 comes to mind when you mention budget. Can't get it new no more, but it's a good "normal" range lens that won't break the bank .

As for D700 replacement, don't think it'll be release this year even. The D3 replacement has to be out first. Doesn't make marketing sense to launch a new FX semi-pro body, but neglecting the pro segment. Just my 2cents.

 

[george671]

I think the Nik 180 F2.8 really rocks...and its built tough as well...just wish I could find a split mount ring so I could use it on a tripod with one of my M4/3 rigs...

Cheers

 

[kwanhan]

So if you have the D300 + 17-50 side-by-side with the D700 + 28-75, both lens at their widest focal lengths (17 and 28 respectively), the D300 + 17-50 will give you a slightly wider view, though I think it's not so significant. At the tele end, both should give similar view.

thanks for the clarification!

guess i'll have to do side by side comparison when the time comes.

btw i've never heard of the 180 f2.8 until now! neither have I seen any at peninsular... or maybe I didn't notice lol

 

[twisted illusion]

lens usage is really person dependent...
i saw ppl stick with 24-70 all the time, i also see ppl stick with just a 50mm all the way...
for me personally, i use 2 primes (24 & 50) for all my shots...
get i keep, miss i just forget it.. since i also a hobbyist..

hi all,

I know the words full frame and budget don't really go together and that threads like this may cause me to get seriously flamed by seniors one way or another

...but anyway, wanted to get some advice on upgrading to full frame.

currently i'm using a d300 and the only 2 lenses i own are a tamron 17-50 and a AI-D 50mm 1.4

at the end of this year I intend to get a sb700 and a 85 1.8.

probably when i have the money next year then a second hand d700, a battery grip and a tamron 28-75.

I'm a hobbyist, don't do any paid assignments, but I have need to shoot indoors and low light quite frequently. (and may not be able to use flash)

Personally I like to shoot human subjects as well, a bit of portraiture.


Do you guys feel that I should get a 35 f2 and a 50 1.8 as well?

Thinking in terms of focal length coverage and low light capability since there's the 28-75 already.


For all the seniors who rely heavily on a mid-range zoom, how often do you bother to switch to primes?

Or its mostly a 24-70 glued to the camera?


Budget wise its not that I must get all these by a certain time, but slow acquisition over time. (but as you can tell, i'm choosing to go on a tighter budget)

So feel free to let me know any alternatives or upgrade plans I might consider.

 

[Benji77]

thanks for the clarification!

guess i'll have to do side by side comparison when the time comes.

btw i've never heard of the 180 f2.8 until now! neither have I seen any at peninsular... or maybe I didn't notice lol

I dug out an old shot done with my D200 for your reference on what this lens is capable of with an amateur like myself.

 

[Ben Ang]

I want that lens... but, can't keep both that and the 80-200 together.. yet, cant get rid of the 80-200 cos i need the versatility.. =\

I dug out an old shot done with my D200 for your reference on what this lens is capable of with an amateur like myself.