Which all purpose lens for D810 ?
Discussion
Finally in a postion to buy the D810, ( I was waiting for the 5Ds to debut and it did 't impress me ) ....however the question that is perplexing me is which lens to get as the all purpose lens.
I currently use a 35mm 1.8 on DX almost exclusively.
I don't use my kit zoom, not because I have something against zooms, but because its a very disapointing lens unless its bright and I can stop down to f8.
I would really like a Nikon 28-70 2.8 pro zoom but I can't help feeling now is a really bad time to buy one..Nikon are rumoured to replace it with a phase fresnel, Tokina have announced a 28-70 2.8 . And I can't help feeling that the Nikon is 7 years old and not quite up to the D810.
So I am considering other options....
Nikon 1.8 prime kits - 20mm , 35mm, 50mm and 85mm . Cheapish, light, and sharpish.
Considering just buying a 50mm Nikon and waiting.
Sigma 1.4 prime kits, they will have a full set soon and will be the sharpest fastest glass available.
But then I keep coming back to the reason I want a zoom...my kids are getting mobile and a prime is getting very limiting...I keep getting badly framed shots.
The Tamron 24-70 is one current offering however I am really put off by the lack lustre VR ( which I dont need) and softness at 70mm.
I currently use a 35mm 1.8 on DX almost exclusively.
I don't use my kit zoom, not because I have something against zooms, but because its a very disapointing lens unless its bright and I can stop down to f8.
I would really like a Nikon 28-70 2.8 pro zoom but I can't help feeling now is a really bad time to buy one..Nikon are rumoured to replace it with a phase fresnel, Tokina have announced a 28-70 2.8 . And I can't help feeling that the Nikon is 7 years old and not quite up to the D810.
So I am considering other options....
Nikon 1.8 prime kits - 20mm , 35mm, 50mm and 85mm . Cheapish, light, and sharpish.
Considering just buying a 50mm Nikon and waiting.
Sigma 1.4 prime kits, they will have a full set soon and will be the sharpest fastest glass available.
But then I keep coming back to the reason I want a zoom...my kids are getting mobile and a prime is getting very limiting...I keep getting badly framed shots.
The Tamron 24-70 is one current offering however I am really put off by the lack lustre VR ( which I dont need) and softness at 70mm.
Well you have a HUGE choice!
What do you PRIME-arily want to achieve and what's your realistic budget?
I know what works for me on a D800, but it may not be your cup of Earl Grey.....
(A 50mm f/1,4 is a nice bit of kit, focuses fast and will give you a range of options beyond your 35mm f/1.8)
What do you PRIME-arily want to achieve and what's your realistic budget?
I know what works for me on a D800, but it may not be your cup of Earl Grey.....
(A 50mm f/1,4 is a nice bit of kit, focuses fast and will give you a range of options beyond your 35mm f/1.8)
Edited by K12beano on Tuesday 24th February 20:19
Budget is about 5000 pounds. I don't want to waste money, but if it is the right solution I will buy it. I am a patient man, but my kids are growing up fast and my current kit is missing too many shots due to lack of autofocus and ISO limitations. And I want a high pixel count for birding, macro and nature photography. Also D810 offers face recognition focus in viewfinder and exposes for the skin tones which for me are "killer" apps - I currently do a huge amount of manual work to get faces and eyes correctly exposed and would like to offload this to the camera.
I would dearly love the Canon Mk2 24-70 2.8 ......that is the lens that was tempting me over to the dark side. However Canon don't want to invest in their sensor fab technique or use Sony sensors, my Dad shoots a 5d Mk3 and I hate processing the RAW files compared to my Nikon, horrible banding in the shadows you can't automatically remove. The 5DS is just an upscaled 7Dmk2 sensor and for that reason I am oot.n
I would dearly love the Canon Mk2 24-70 2.8 ......that is the lens that was tempting me over to the dark side. However Canon don't want to invest in their sensor fab technique or use Sony sensors, my Dad shoots a 5d Mk3 and I hate processing the RAW files compared to my Nikon, horrible banding in the shadows you can't automatically remove. The 5DS is just an upscaled 7Dmk2 sensor and for that reason I am oot.n
if you have a budget of £5,000 you have more than you need...
I sold my top end Nikons (2 x D3s) and downgraded to 2x D7100 - primarily to save weight, but also because the quality on the lwoer cameras is now so good - the only missing factor is the fps rating - everything else is basically as good...
I then have a 24-70 on one and a 70-200 on the other, and shoot both switching as required...
I have shot children professionally for years (not quite sure that sounds right!) and in my opinion the 24-200 range is needed, no one lens does it all - while keeping in the pro level of lenses...
think through what you want to do so that you get the range you really need - if you are doing photo-journalistic type shots then you need a longer range, if you can structure the shots more then you might get away with less...
ref. exposure - the Nikons have been getting auto-exposure correct in 98-99% of shots since the D300 years ago... so you shouldn't have to be working hard for that... if you are, check your lighting / WB as much as anything else
I sold my top end Nikons (2 x D3s) and downgraded to 2x D7100 - primarily to save weight, but also because the quality on the lwoer cameras is now so good - the only missing factor is the fps rating - everything else is basically as good...
I then have a 24-70 on one and a 70-200 on the other, and shoot both switching as required...
I have shot children professionally for years (not quite sure that sounds right!) and in my opinion the 24-200 range is needed, no one lens does it all - while keeping in the pro level of lenses...
think through what you want to do so that you get the range you really need - if you are doing photo-journalistic type shots then you need a longer range, if you can structure the shots more then you might get away with less...
ref. exposure - the Nikons have been getting auto-exposure correct in 98-99% of shots since the D300 years ago... so you shouldn't have to be working hard for that... if you are, check your lighting / WB as much as anything else
K12beano said:
Full frame - a reasonable sensor, but not the low light king - and that budget?
I'd forget about zoom, and hunt down a 200mm f/2, a 135mm f/2 DC and an 85mm f/1.4 (glorious lens) and add a couple of Speedlights
But that's what I'd do. YMMV etc...
I am guessing the OP's £5,000 budget includes the D810. Nice list of lenses you've picked though!I'd forget about zoom, and hunt down a 200mm f/2, a 135mm f/2 DC and an 85mm f/1.4 (glorious lens) and add a couple of Speedlights
But that's what I'd do. YMMV etc...
I have D750 and 24-70 and 70-200....not a professional but I invested in that kit because I wanted to be able to photograph my kids growing up and capture the memories. I'd agree that you need that focal range...outdoors you need the range of the 70-200 without a doubt and the 24-70 has just superb flexibility the rest of the time. I also have the 50 F1.4 but I don't think it's a patch on any either of the wider 1.4's or indeed the 85mm 1.4 as above!!
Another vote for the 24-70 if you want something with exceptional quality and versatility. I have the earlier 28-70, it's utterly superb.
I get the argument for a bag full of fast primes but frankly the D810 is heavy enough already without having a bag of lenses to carry around too, so for me the 28-70 is perfect. On a DX body though it wasn't such a great choice, which I lived with for 10 years before biting the bullet and going full frame.
I get the argument for a bag full of fast primes but frankly the D810 is heavy enough already without having a bag of lenses to carry around too, so for me the 28-70 is perfect. On a DX body though it wasn't such a great choice, which I lived with for 10 years before biting the bullet and going full frame.
RE: D7100 - I have pretty much the same sensor already, and I find I am often banging my head on upper levels of the acceptable ISO, - I find 3200 to be be borderline unacceptable even after DXO optics has worked its magic on noise reduction.
D810's sensor seems to be acceptable up to 6400 and borderline at 12,800, and I have tried test processing a few RAW files and once you downsample a 36mp file it gives another stop of noise reduction..so I think its going to be enough.. I worry about skin tones and eyes, I find there is very naturally little dynamic range in skin tones, and although eyes have good contrast they have little tonal range, so they are very sensitive to the dynamic range reduction a high ISO causes.
RE : those lens selections, 200mm, 135 DC, 85.
- great telephoto and portrait options, but I need something hand holdable, and something I can have in one hand and playing with my son with the other hand. I am already running into issues cutting faces off as I am too close with a 50mm equivalent lens, and when do I switch to a F4 12-24 Tokina, but it is quite soft at 24mm...it doesn't satisfy. I have 100mm 2.8 Tokina, it is probably my best quality lens ( stopped down to f4 + ) , but I just don't use it very much as at 135mm eqiv on my DX sensor its too long, and swapping over a lens mid play breaks the flow. It is a great wildlife and Macro lens, got some lovely bug and lizard shots from it.
I would include the 85 in a Nikon f1.8 prime set, I am thinking AFS 20mm 1.8, 35mm, 50mm, and 85mm, would cost less than £1500......wouldn't weigh very much and balance nicely on the camera...I am very tempted.
RE: Lighting I have a pair of Youngnuo 568 speedlights ( supports TTL and High speed sync ) and mini softboxes, and a Rayflash adapter and a 622 wireless controller, however flash is not appropriate for all situations.
I would be ok if I could use my tripod (Gitzo Systemic 3 carbon- I am in the odd postion where my tripod is worth more than my camera and lens combined..) and take a static scene, but kids move a lot and I need 1/200 to 1/500 shutter minimum.
Maybe I should just get the holy trinity, 14-24, 24-70, 70-200 and be done with it.......but I suspect I will be using the 24-70 most and I think its the weakest link and I will have to replace it soon........and its irking me to think that I will spend 1k on a lens that isn't up the d810's sensor and is due to be outclassed ( IF Tokina have their act together...) or replaced by Nikon with a lighter sharper phase Fresnel design in the next year.....the 24-70 seems to be following the trajectory of the 300f4 regarding discounts which makes me very suspicous.
D810's sensor seems to be acceptable up to 6400 and borderline at 12,800, and I have tried test processing a few RAW files and once you downsample a 36mp file it gives another stop of noise reduction..so I think its going to be enough.. I worry about skin tones and eyes, I find there is very naturally little dynamic range in skin tones, and although eyes have good contrast they have little tonal range, so they are very sensitive to the dynamic range reduction a high ISO causes.
RE : those lens selections, 200mm, 135 DC, 85.
- great telephoto and portrait options, but I need something hand holdable, and something I can have in one hand and playing with my son with the other hand. I am already running into issues cutting faces off as I am too close with a 50mm equivalent lens, and when do I switch to a F4 12-24 Tokina, but it is quite soft at 24mm...it doesn't satisfy. I have 100mm 2.8 Tokina, it is probably my best quality lens ( stopped down to f4 + ) , but I just don't use it very much as at 135mm eqiv on my DX sensor its too long, and swapping over a lens mid play breaks the flow. It is a great wildlife and Macro lens, got some lovely bug and lizard shots from it.
I would include the 85 in a Nikon f1.8 prime set, I am thinking AFS 20mm 1.8, 35mm, 50mm, and 85mm, would cost less than £1500......wouldn't weigh very much and balance nicely on the camera...I am very tempted.
RE: Lighting I have a pair of Youngnuo 568 speedlights ( supports TTL and High speed sync ) and mini softboxes, and a Rayflash adapter and a 622 wireless controller, however flash is not appropriate for all situations.
I would be ok if I could use my tripod (Gitzo Systemic 3 carbon- I am in the odd postion where my tripod is worth more than my camera and lens combined..) and take a static scene, but kids move a lot and I need 1/200 to 1/500 shutter minimum.
Maybe I should just get the holy trinity, 14-24, 24-70, 70-200 and be done with it.......but I suspect I will be using the 24-70 most and I think its the weakest link and I will have to replace it soon........and its irking me to think that I will spend 1k on a lens that isn't up the d810's sensor and is due to be outclassed ( IF Tokina have their act together...) or replaced by Nikon with a lighter sharper phase Fresnel design in the next year.....the 24-70 seems to be following the trajectory of the 300f4 regarding discounts which makes me very suspicous.
Slightly more seriously than before, why not buy one you're doubtful on secondhand and if after a good test run you can Fleabay it. Probably won't lose much.
Only one of my current lenses (six, plus a couple of TCs) was bought new, and only one of my bodies. If you buy from somewhere like Grays, the slight premium price gets you 14 days no-quibble return and upwards from 12 month warranty. That's been peace of mind on a recent body purchase plus the 17-35mm - which has really grown on me. Otherwise, I've been careful or lucky with Fleabay and camera forum purchases (I think a 50mm f/1.4D cost £130, boxed and with a hood and caps - 14mm was from another PHer, although via EBay etc). Sold many lenses on over last eight years, to get the "right" ones.
Only a long-term test drive really shows you the good and bad in the real world.
Only one of my current lenses (six, plus a couple of TCs) was bought new, and only one of my bodies. If you buy from somewhere like Grays, the slight premium price gets you 14 days no-quibble return and upwards from 12 month warranty. That's been peace of mind on a recent body purchase plus the 17-35mm - which has really grown on me. Otherwise, I've been careful or lucky with Fleabay and camera forum purchases (I think a 50mm f/1.4D cost £130, boxed and with a hood and caps - 14mm was from another PHer, although via EBay etc). Sold many lenses on over last eight years, to get the "right" ones.
Only a long-term test drive really shows you the good and bad in the real world.
The problem is Beano, the 24-70 holds its value so well second hand. Good condition ones go for very nearly the same price as new ones.......
For example Grays have one-
24-70mm f/2.8G ED AF-S IF-ED Nikkor
Boxed with hood, case and manual. MINT- £1025.00
Amazon yesterday had it for 1135 ( although its gained 100 and back up to 1230 pounds overnight )
Slightly foxed ones are going on ebay for 900 pounds...down to 700 for damaged ones...
You do have a point though..
For example Grays have one-
24-70mm f/2.8G ED AF-S IF-ED Nikkor
Boxed with hood, case and manual. MINT- £1025.00
Amazon yesterday had it for 1135 ( although its gained 100 and back up to 1230 pounds overnight )
Slightly foxed ones are going on ebay for 900 pounds...down to 700 for damaged ones...
You do have a point though..
GetCarter said:
I have the D800. Apart from primes, I use 24-70 f2.8 and 70-200 f2.8 with a .7 teleconverter. They are both very fine lenses. Apparently some of the 24-70s can be soft at the edges so be careful if you go that route. (Mine isn't).
Do you find that much real world image quality is lost between the primes vs the pro zooms ? Is the Cromatic abberation on the 24-70 actually a problem in the real world ? My current 35mm has quite a lot of CA at F1.8 and I find fringing on the transition between pupil and the whites of the eyes, it really annoys me and doesn't automatically correct well, so I rarely shoot at 1.8 and tend to stop down to 2.8....
Buy grey market lenses....Nikon lenses unlike bodies have a worldwide manufacturers warranty so there is absolutely no advantage to buying UK lenses and certainly not UK second hand lenses.
HDEW are pretty good and you are dealing with a UK based company
http://www.hdewcameras.co.uk/nikon-24-70mm-f28-g-a...
24-70 is £999 brand new.
I bought my 70-200 from them and have no affiliation! There are also the likes of Panamoz or Digital Rev.
My 70-200 was cheaper than I could buy one second hand on Talkphotography let alone the prices Gray's charge (as excellent as their service is).
I checked out the warranty issue with a couple of Nikon approved UK repairers (Johnsons and Fixation) they both confirmed that as long as you have a receipt in your name from a retailer the warranty is covered. What you cannot do is buy lenses off eBay and expect the warranty to be covered. Separately companies like HDEW offer their own warranties over and above the manufacturers.
HDEW are pretty good and you are dealing with a UK based company
http://www.hdewcameras.co.uk/nikon-24-70mm-f28-g-a...
24-70 is £999 brand new.
I bought my 70-200 from them and have no affiliation! There are also the likes of Panamoz or Digital Rev.
My 70-200 was cheaper than I could buy one second hand on Talkphotography let alone the prices Gray's charge (as excellent as their service is).
I checked out the warranty issue with a couple of Nikon approved UK repairers (Johnsons and Fixation) they both confirmed that as long as you have a receipt in your name from a retailer the warranty is covered. What you cannot do is buy lenses off eBay and expect the warranty to be covered. Separately companies like HDEW offer their own warranties over and above the manufacturers.
ExPat2B said:
Do you find that much real world image quality is lost between the primes vs the pro zooms ?
Is the Cromatic abberation on the 24-70 actually a problem in the real world ? My current 35mm has quite a lot of CA at F1.8 and I find fringing on the transition between pupil and the whites of the eyes, it really annoys me and doesn't automatically correct well, so I rarely shoot at 1.8 and tend to stop down to 2.8....
This review is pretty much spot on http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product...Is the Cromatic abberation on the 24-70 actually a problem in the real world ? My current 35mm has quite a lot of CA at F1.8 and I find fringing on the transition between pupil and the whites of the eyes, it really annoys me and doesn't automatically correct well, so I rarely shoot at 1.8 and tend to stop down to 2.8....
ExPat2B said:
.and its irking me to think that I will spend 1k on a lens that isn't up the d810's sensor and is due to be outclassed ( IF Tokina have their act together...) or replaced by Nikon with a lighter sharper phase Fresnel design in the next year.....the 24-70 seems to be following the trajectory of the 300f4 regarding discounts which makes me very suspicous.
What is making you worry that the 24-70 isn't up to the sensor? It's widely regarded as one of the best zooms ever made by Nikon. I can't imagine any circumstance where you'll take a photo and think the lens had let you down, the D810 sensor is amazing but not that amazing!The idea that the lens will be replaced - it will, of course it will - it happened to me, and I don't care, because I also have one of the best zooms ever made by Nikon, just a slightly older model. If you care, and you have the money (which it appears you do), when it gets replaced, sell and upgrade.
Or wait, never have the thing you want, but always know when the next thing comes out you can have it then...
Simpo Two said:
_dobbo_ said:
What is making you worry that the 24-70 isn't up to the sensor? It's widely regarded as one of the best zooms ever made by Nikon.
Because it's seven years old, and therefore out of date... Glass v8.4 is out now you know!I have been staring at test charts, sample images etc all day and I think I can draw a few conclusions.
It is sharper than my current 35mm 1.8 DX and 24 mpix sensor combo by some considerable margin. Since I am reasonably satisfied with that, it follows that I should be happy with the D810 and the 24-70.
However, it doesn't make full use of the 36mpix sensor. It is very sharp in the middle, but has a lot of chromatic aberration at the corners, particularly at 24mm / f2.8, and does not give its best performance wide open at any aperture. I have viewed a number of full size pics taken with the d810 and it is visible in normal pictures not just confined to test charts. You don't have to pixel peep to see the problems, you can see them clearly on a normal computer screen resolution. 70mm is much better.
The Tamron 24-70 is better at the 24 mm end and worse at 70mm unless you stop it down to f5.6. Much less CA visible, but still some present. I did some lightroom analysis, and with my kit lens I take about 60% of my pictures at 70mm equiv, so this performance is very disappointing for the Tamron but very positive for the Nikon.. however the same analysis showed I did about 10% of shooting at 24mm, I seem to go from one extreme of the lens to the other, so I am a little concerned about the Nikkor.
It is handily beaten by the Canon 24-70 USM II. In fact the 5D MK3 and 24-70 USM II produce a better sharper image, with less distortion than the D810 and Nikkor lens over wider aperture range....despite the Nikon's Mpix advantage ....which does make me question the wisdom of buying a D810 in the first place if I am going to use the 24-70 as its primary lens. Of course, I would have a shadow recovery advantage with the Exmoor sensor, but I would still have that on a D750, the lens is very much the limiting factor not the sensor. When knows what the Canon 5DS-R with the 24-70 will perform like...I suspect, very, very well indeed.
The Sigma 50mm ART makes mincemeat of it, good wide open, vastly better at f2.8 and stopped down to f8 it is sharper, over the entire image, than the Nikkor is in the centre 30%, and has virtually no CA. Not really an apples to apples comparison, but again you don't need to pixel peep to see the difference.
Both Tokina and Sigma are due to produce competitive lenses this year. However, based on Sigma's rather lacklustre 24-100 f4 ART ( cheaper than Nikon or Canon, but no competition on image quality ) it does not seem the same genius they are applying to their primes follows into their zooms...
Hmmmm. I have talked myself into and out of the purchase twice already today. Maybe the best option is to get both the Nikon, and get the Sigma 50mm art as well in order to take advantage of the D810, then sell the 24-70 when the updated Nikkor arrives.
Maybe I am being very fussy, but dammit, I work hard for my money and it took me a long time to save up, and I don't like accepting compromises when I am buying at the top of the market.
ExPat2B said:
Maybe I am being very fussy, but dammit, I work hard for my money and it took me a long time to save up, and I don't like accepting compromises when I am buying at the top of the market.
Perhaps you've answered your own question - zooms are always going to be a compromise compared to a comparable prime lens when it comes to image quality. Primes compromise convenience. So you have to accept one or the other, and buy according to your preference.What you're really saying is that the D810 sensor shows up the shortcomings of most lenses more than many other cameras - however it also (more significantly) shows up shortcomings in technique, and the the most perfect lens in the history of the universe won't fix that!
I have to say I just went hunting for images with CA taken wide open, and I see little or none on most of my images. Mind you I had to dig a bit, seems I mostly shoot at 70mm too.
With 5k in budget, I'd be shopping for a used Leica M9 and a couple of primes...
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff