Reading mode: Light Dark

The missing link in the Nikon Lens lineup

Go to last post
Yidahoo

Yidahoo

Forum Enthusiast
Messages
469
Reaction score
212
Location
Odesa, UA
I work as a travel photographer and my main camera is the D3. I have the 14-24, 24-70 and 800-200 2.8's but can't get rid of the feeling that Nikon are missing something. In my opinion what they need is a high quality, pro lens in the 24-120 24-150 range at f4. I believe they would be onto a winner with this. My 24-70 is beautiful but just too short sometimes. Its also heavy and after a day in the field you really begin to feel it. A longer range with a slight trade off in aperture not necessarily with VR would be a perfect travel lens.

I did have the 24-120 on my D2X but its not a constant aperture and was really quite soft under some circumstances. It certainly was no a pro level lens
--
http://www.jasonrow.co.uk
http://www.jasonrow.wordpress.com
'Travel is the antidote to racism, bigotry and prejudice' Mark Twain
 
I'm not a travel photographer, I shoot people though, portraits, and events occasionally. I seldom sell photos but I make paintings from A2 prints. I find that the capacity to crop coupled with the great ISO of the D700 make an f4 zoom starting anywhere from 28mm and finishing up at 200mm a tempting prospect. DOF at f4 is already very thin. Even with the D700s fast AF I get considerably more keepers at f4 than I do at f2.8, DOF and overall sharpness being easier on the glass at that aperture anyway.

Walking around with an E Series 70-210 f4 gave me the distinct impression that all I was missing was AF.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/8189967@N04/
 
It can be done, because the 75-150mm E-series is a stunning lens. Unfortunately, its difficult to use, not just because its manual focus (which tends to be unreliable on dx), but because of the dreadful zoom creep. Because of this, I sold mine on, and will now only use AIS primes - namely the 135mm f3.5 and the E-Series 100mm f2.8.

Were Nikon to put an AF-S motor plus VR on the 75-150mm optics, I would be first in the queue. Such a lens would complement my 17-55mm very nicely indeed.

I have tried the Sigma 50-150mm. If it was made well enough and had VR, this would be worth considering. Unfortunately Sigma's QC is still not up to the job. Then on top of that, you have the tendency of Sigma lenses not to work well with certain Nikon cameras. Its all far too unreliable to be worth considering.

S.
--
Wait, watch, listen, then pounce !
 
I agree. I shoot a lot of events now and my shots range from 28mm to about 150mm. I shoot DX. The 18-135 is a good range for me, but no VR and is too slow. The Sigma 50-150 is a contender as is the Tokina 50-135. Trouble is that I can zoom with my feet, but I really need that 28-50mm range for group shots and I don't want to mess with a second body.

It would be awesome to have a 24-150 f/2.8 VR. It would be the ultimate event lens for DX.

--
Catallaxy
 
FF isn't really a great travel format, and now you see why nikon produced DX. Until a FF general purpose zoom equaling the nikon name is produced, DX seems to me to be a far better choice for the travel photog, both for weight reasons, and the ultimate travel lens, the 16-85, is only made for that format.

If you take travel seriously then minimizing size should be your number one concern. I can take 3 DX bodies with complementary lenses and cover a much larger range in the space of your single D3 and two pro lenses.

The lens you think is missing exists, just not in your format Good luck.
 
It depends on what you are doing, if you need an ultra wide angle shot in an Arabic Souk in extreme low light, then DX format is not going to cut it. From December to February I was in Antarctica, shooting upto 6 hours a day in snow and freezing conditions. I certainly would not have like to have used a D90 or D300. The nine frames a second were extremely helpful in capturing sequences of whales diving.

I bought the D3 before the D700 was announced, the D700 is an FX camera but with a DX size. Great as it is, I would still have bought the D3
yunfat said:
FF isn't really a great travel format, and now you see why nikon
produced DX. Until a FF general purpose zoom equaling the nikon name
is produced, DX seems to me to be a far better choice for the travel
photog, both for weight reasons, and the ultimate travel lens, the
16-85, is only made for that format.

If you take travel seriously then minimizing size should be your
number one concern. I can take 3 DX bodies with complementary lenses
and cover a much larger range in the space of your single D3 and two
pro lenses.

The lens you think is missing exists, just not in your format Good
luck.
Click to expand...
--
http://www.jasonrow.co.uk
http://www.jasonrow.wordpress.com
'Travel is the antidote to racism, bigotry and prejudice' Mark Twain
 
And heavy!
--
'The value of something is the price someone is willing to pay for it'

D50, 18-70/3.5-4.5, 50/1.8, 80-200/2.8, Sigma 10-20/4-5.6, SB400
 
I enjoyed looking at your pics. Some beautiful work there.

S.
--
Wait, watch, listen, then pounce !
 
and the vast majority of pro zooms are less than 3X. You start getting compromises beyond that which take the lenses out of the pro range while still being useful in some applications.

Your 80-400mm is one example of that. The variable aperture is just one compromise that helps other elements of image quality at the expense of brightness.

--
EXIF is embedded in photos
Zenfolio site - http://www.puntagordanaturally.com
RF Stock Portfolio - http://www.dreamstime.com/resp129611
 
--

I have a superb mint 75-150mm I grabbed off ebay for $AU150 and it's one of my favs. The copy I have doesn'tr really suffer creep, but of course it's an issue you need to be one top of.

It's such a lightweight "modestly" sized package. Of course it's a very different propostion from my 80-200 2.8D but in many ways it's a more usable lens.
 
What camera are you using the 75-150mm out of interest. I think i am like many people and have not opened my mind to using older Nikon lenses on my D3. Maybe its an aesthetic thing. I need to get over it and get down to the local Camera store and have a look at the used line up.
nudibranches said:
--
I have a superb mint 75-150mm I grabbed off ebay for $AU150 and it's
one of my favs. The copy I have doesn'tr really suffer creep, but of
course it's an issue you need to be one top of.
Click to expand...
--
http://www.jasonrow.co.uk
http://www.jasonrow.wordpress.com
'Travel is the antidote to racism, bigotry and prejudice' Mark Twain
 
Yidahoo said:
What camera are you using the 75-150mm out of interest.
Click to expand...
I used it on my Fuji S5 (uses D200 body). But all high end Nikon cameras will meter with manual lenses.
Yidahoo said:
I think i am like many people and have not opened my mind to using older Nikon
lenses on my D3.
Click to expand...
I am not sure I agree with you there, as there are plenty of people on these boards who have discovered that old manual lenses perform as well or better than the current lineup and yet can be had for as little as 1/10 of the price.

You can see what I use in my profile, but I have tried many others. The only problem is the difficulty of accurate focussing. Its a bit too hit and miss, I am thinking of getting a split screen, but the good ones are expensive. So I dream of getting a D700 instead. I expect if I did the sums, then the max image quality for the least expenditure would probably involve a D700 and a handful of sharp AIS lenses. They do slow you down, but on the other hand, this makes for better and more thoughtful photography.

S.
--
Wait, watch, listen, then pounce !
 
Canon's 24-105 f/4 equivalent lens is what we need, the Canon version has a constant aperture, pro grade L build quality and it really delivers. Such a lens would be good for both DX and FX.
--
http://haf.cc
 
The advantage of the FX format is that you get a much bigger and brighter viewfinder so that kind of negates the focusing problems to a certain extent. Also, correct me if I am wrong but the focus indicators should still work in the viewfinder shouldn't they?
Stoker98 said:
I

You can see what I use in my profile, but I have tried many others.
The only problem is the difficulty of accurate focussing. Its a bit
too hit and miss, I am thinking of getting a split screen, but the
good ones are expensive. So I dream of getting a D700 instead. I
expect if I did the sums, then the max image quality for the least
expenditure would probably involve a D700 and a handful of sharp AIS
lenses. They do slow you down, but on the other hand, this makes for
better and more thoughtful photography.

S.
--
Wait, watch, listen, then pounce !
Click to expand...
--
http://www.jasonrow.co.uk
http://www.jasonrow.wordpress.com
'Travel is the antidote to racism, bigotry and prejudice' Mark Twain
 
Yidahoo said:
The advantage of the FX format is that you get a much bigger and
brighter viewfinder so that kind of negates the focusing problems to
a certain extent. Also, correct me if I am wrong but the focus
indicators should still work in the viewfinder shouldn't they?
Click to expand...
Yes, the green light comes on. But it can be quite difficult to use, and with a bigger split screen, its much easier to check the focus is where you want it to be exactly. This is the only reason I would move back to FF.

S.
--
Wait, watch, listen, then pounce !
 
I just used the Black Rapid strap to cart my D3 with a 70-200 or 28-70 extensively on vacation. I carried a camera and lens all day for five days and it was pretty easy. In the past using a regular strap it was a misery after just a few hours. Just thought I'd mention it.
 
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