Reading mode: Light Dark

My D700 is arrived, and I need some advice

Go to last post
Mauro.B

Mauro.B

Senior Member
Messages
2,520
Solutions
1
Reaction score
241
Location
Rome, NY, US
It was a quick decision after some tests. And I really do not care if next year there will be a successor sporting 16 or 24 mpix and sensor VR.

In a few days I will leave for a three weeks trip to New England, Maine, SE Canada coast and some islands and - you know - I consider any trip as the last one in any particular area.

My plan was to leave with the D300, 16-85 VR, 50 1.8, 70-200 VR, TC, SB800 and buy a Tokina 11-16 in NY (having sold an underperforming 12-24 dx).

Then the D700 came out and quickly convinced me.

What I would ask to more experienced people is:

1) is it worth getting the 24-120 VR kit ? I tried it with the D700 and was not impressed. But I am not available to buy the 24-70 2.8 for the time being, and as a next best I would buy the 24-85 2.8-4. But I would thank any view on D700 + 24-120 from someone having bought and used the "kit".

2) Should I carry also the D300 + 16-85 ? Mine had focus calibrated by Nikon service, and could be perfect to use for bird photos. But I confess to have sometimes regretted buying it: I do not like very much its exposure strategy, probably driven by the technical need to minimise shadow noise. Actually, the D700 seems to expose half stop lower in matrix, resulting in less o/x on average. It is also a fact that I had to send to service all the Nikon DSLR's I bought to correct misfocus, and I am scared to leave Rome with a backfocusing D700 (already happened in 2006 with a backfocusing D200). Is anyone suffering from a back/fron focusing D700 out there ?

Thanks to all for any feedback.

Mauro

--

Mauro

http://www.pbase.com/m_ben/
 
Advice is cheap. Take it for what it's worth. You say you tried the 24-120 Nikkor and were not impressed. What about the lens did you find not to your liking? The 24-120 is a compromise lens in my view. It does a lot of things, trouble is it does not do any of them as well as other faster, less compromised lenses do. Yet it has some decided advantages in my view. It covers a nice range, moderate wide to short tele. It is not fast but then it is not heavy either. It has VR which may in some fashion offset the lack of bigger apertures. It also focuses pretty close.

If you are a pixel peeper, and all of us tend to be a bit, then you will find the lens less sharp than many others especially wide open. IF you are traveling, and weight is a issue, then it beats lots of other glass in that respect. If you intend to make mural size photos of you vacation pics then don't consider this lens. IF your vacation shots are going to be no more than letter size and maybe not that, then it will probably serve you pretty well. My wife uses this lens almost excusively and she does things that please her. I use it from time to time. It is less sharp than my 24-70 but it is much lighter and reaches farther. Right now it is about your only choice for an all round lens on FX if you stay with Nikon. When a better one comes along I will buy it but right now I use what I have. John
--
http://www.pbase.com/dahlstetphoto
 
--I have the Tamron 28-75 for my everyday carry. mine is very sharp even wide open, you should be able to find a good used one for about $250, much better than 24-120.

Roger.
 
Good luck on your trip. I know it's out of the way but if you get a chance visit Stonington, Me on Deer Island. A beautiful fishing village with wonderfiul picture opportunities.
Gordon
 
Thanks for your view, which I partly share.

I know I need a walkaround lens, like the 16-85 I owned until just one hour ago - it is a difficult-to-replace lens, but it was also time to move on.

Size and weight considerations rule out the 24-70; if I factor VR in, I believe only two FX lenses are available: the 24-120 and the Tamron 28-300. As you point out, probably the Nikkor is the way to go.

I'll test it in my forthcoming visit at BH.

Kind regards,

Mauro

--

Mauro

http://www.pbase.com/m_ben/
 
Too many years in DX...

Definitely something I will check out.

Thanks for reminding,

Mauro
200mm said:
--I have the Tamron 28-75 for my everyday carry. mine is very sharp
even wide open, you should be able to find a good used one for
about $250, much better than 24-120.

Roger.
Click to expand...
--

Mauro

http://www.pbase.com/m_ben/
 
I will put Deer Island on the list. During the next weekend I will devise a route - I know very little about what's north of Boston.

Thanks for the welcomed input.

M
Gordon Ripley said:
Good luck on your trip. I know it's out of the way but if you get a
chance visit Stonington, Me on Deer Island. A beautiful fishing
village with wonderfiul picture opportunities.
Gordon
Click to expand...
--

Mauro

http://www.pbase.com/m_ben/
 
Mauro would you or could you post a dx cropped image from your D700. I am curious as to how they look. I would much appreciate it. Thanks Steve P
 
Recently discontinued, might be in stock somewhere. Very low barrel/pincushion in whole range, did sell for pretty low $ recently. Performs pretty well and suits my needs. You might find one cheap somewhere, but the setback is likely the successor to be announced soon (e.g. 24-105 f/4 VR if we get lucky;-). But you will not loose much money if you find one and upgrade later, and OTOH I have used that lens since 1999 for 1/3 of my captures. See Bjorns short review here:
http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_zoom_02.html#AF28-105IF

No knowledge how it performs with D700 but since it was introduced in 1999 it does have quite new coatings and might perform pretty well. You need to buy the HB-18 separately (not bundled).

(I might also consider a few fast primes with the D700, but most of those I would choose will be upgraded in the next 2 months too)
Mauro.B said:
It was a quick decision after some tests. And I really do not care if
next year there will be a successor sporting 16 or 24 mpix and sensor
VR.

In a few days I will leave for a three weeks trip to New England,
Maine, SE Canada coast and some islands and - you know - I consider
any trip as the last one in any particular area.

My plan was to leave with the D300, 16-85 VR, 50 1.8, 70-200 VR, TC,
SB800 and buy a Tokina 11-16 in NY (having sold an underperforming
12-24 dx).

Then the D700 came out and quickly convinced me.

What I would ask to more experienced people is:

1) is it worth getting the 24-120 VR kit ? I tried it with the D700
and was not impressed. But I am not available to buy the 24-70 2.8
for the time being, and as a next best I would buy the 24-85 2.8-4.
But I would thank any view on D700 + 24-120 from someone having
bought and used the "kit".

2) Should I carry also the D300 + 16-85 ? Mine had focus calibrated
by Nikon service, and could be perfect to use for bird photos. But I
confess to have sometimes regretted buying it: I do not like very
much its exposure strategy, probably driven by the technical need to
minimise shadow noise. Actually, the D700 seems to expose half stop
lower in matrix, resulting in less o/x on average. It is also a fact
that I had to send to service all the Nikon DSLR's I bought to
correct misfocus, and I am scared to leave Rome with a backfocusing
D700 (already happened in 2006 with a backfocusing D200). Is anyone
suffering from a back/fron focusing D700 out there ?

Thanks to all for any feedback.

Mauro

--

Mauro

http://www.pbase.com/m_ben/
Click to expand...
--
Osku
 
I just got my D700 2 days ago and am still familiarizing myself with it. However, as regards to back focusing, I have never seen it on any of my nikon or Kodak SLRn camera bodies. But more importantly, one of the D700 menu items seems to provide for back/front focusing adjustments, rather than having to send the camrea back to Nikon.

I am heading to France in about a week and have been rigorously testing my new D700 before taking it. I don't want to come back with hundreds of bad shots.
 
particularly after having seen a pic posted in this forum which looked incredibly sharp and detailed. No luck so far ...

M
--

Mauro

http://www.pbase.com/m_ben/
 
johnchap2 said:
I just got my D700 2 days ago and am still familiarizing myself with
it. However, as regards to back focusing, I have never seen it on
any of my nikon or Kodak SLRn camera bodies. But more importantly,
one of the D700 menu items seems to provide for back/front focusing
adjustments, rather than having to send the camrea back to Nikon.

I am heading to France in about a week and have been rigorously
testing my new D700 before taking it. I don't want to come back with
hundreds of bad shots.
Click to expand...
In 1996 I had a 3 weeks trip in sw US with a backfocusing D200 - Nikon being unable or unavailable to fix it - coupled with a non-collimating 18-200. What a mess. I returned with 4000 landscape photos (less than 10% were keepers), none of them tack sharp.

I already experimented the AF fine tune menu with the D300 and I found i tricky, given that it messed with minimum or infinity focusing. Moreover, zoom lenses required different adjustments according to focal length.

In practical terms, + - 5 has no effect. Setting to -10 has scary effects trying to focus at minimum range (lens noise while trying to get closer...).

Have a nice and entertaining trip to France.

M

--

Mauro

http://www.pbase.com/m_ben/
 
Not sure where you are headed in Maine, but drop me a line or stop by, if you are in the Central Maine area (Auburn), maybe I can find sometime to go out shooting with you.

I knw Maine well, so let me know if you'd like some tips on great places to go.

Skip
 
I used the 24-120 for several years on a Kodak slr/n and I got spectacular results considering the range etc. My first test with the D700 are very positive. I definitely suggest to use this lens although check it out when you buy it because the early days many of these lenses were soft. Also, don't be tempted by the older 24-120D (that I have as well) since it is a real dog.

My 24-120 is VERY sharp up to 70-80mm after that it becomes a little softer but nothing you can't cure stopping down to F8-F11. I wouldn't go higher than that in order to control diffraction.

Gabriele

Mauro.B wrote:
What I would ask to more experienced people is:
Mauro.B said:
1) is it worth getting the 24-120 VR kit ? I tried it with the D700
and was not impressed. But I am not available to buy the 24-70 2.8
for the time being, and as a next best I would buy the 24-85 2.8-4.
But I would thank any view on D700 + 24-120 from someone having
bought and used the "kit".
Click to expand...
--
Regards
Gabriele
California, CA
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top