quintana
Leading Member
I have my D800E since May and as lenses I currently use Zeiss 21/2.8, Samyang 35/1.4, Zeiss 50/2 Macro and Nikon 105/2.8 VR Micro.
In the last two months I did a lot of hiking in the alps, sometimes spending the whole day hiking and having 8 Kg of gear on my back (including the rucksack itself, tripod, food and water) becomes very uncomfortable after a few hours. So I am seeking for ways to reduce the weight while maintaining a high image quality of course.
My first thoughts were to buy a Nikon 24-70/2.8 and a Nikon 20/2.8. The zoom lens would also have the additional benefits of easier use of filters because I would not have to change the filter everytime I change the focal length and the need of step-up-adapters would be greatly reduced. Using them is increasingly getting on my nerves! ;-) 24-70/2.8 + 20/2.8 would save me about 650 grams compared to my current gear (the Nikon 105/2.8 VR will definitely stay because I want to have a good Macro lens at that focal length). Does not sound too much but believe me: I am glad for anything that saves at least half a kilo because this already matters a lot when hiking the whole day.
However, I have read that the 24-70/2.8 is not quite the best performer on a D800E, especially when focused to infinity which I would do quite a lot as I love taking photos of landscapes. As this is probably the best standard zoom lens I am thinking of prime lenses again.
What is your opinion about this: Nikon 20/2.8, Zeiss 35/2 ZF.2, AF-S 50/1.4? This would even save me some more grams than the 20/2.8 + 24-70/2.8 solution and the image quality should definitely be better. I could even save another 200 grams if I would buy a Nikon 28/1.8 instead of a Zeiss 35/2 (which unfortunately is quite heavy) and the resolution of the Nikon should almost match the Zeiss or even perform on the same level. However, the abberations of the Zeiss lens are better corrected and I like the bokeh more, so I think I won't buy the Nikon 28/1.8.
The mentioned lenses also would have the advantage of having only two different filter sizes (including the filter size of the Nikon 105/2.8 VR).
What are your opinions about the three mentioned lenses regarding the demands of the 36 MP sensor of the D800E? I wonder if the Nikon 20/2.8 can match the performance of the famous Zeiss 21/2.8. At least stopped down to f/8 (better f/5.6 for shooting inside buildings) I'd like to have a good corner-to-corner sharpness. The same goes for the Nikon AF-S 50/1.4. Can it match the Zeiss 50/2 already at f/2 or f/2.8 since I would also like to use it for shallow DOF photography? Of course I am only talking about center sharpness and contrast when talking about shallow DOF photography. I don't need corner-to-corner sharpness at 50mm below f/5.6
Do you have any other great lightweight (!) alternatives in the mentioned focal length range (Ultra-wide can be from 17mm and above)?
I only need personal experiences with these lenses on high-resolution cameras (D3X, D600, D800/E) as I can read reviews at photozone, lenstip etc. myself ;-)
Thanks a lot for any advice and feedback!
In the last two months I did a lot of hiking in the alps, sometimes spending the whole day hiking and having 8 Kg of gear on my back (including the rucksack itself, tripod, food and water) becomes very uncomfortable after a few hours. So I am seeking for ways to reduce the weight while maintaining a high image quality of course.
My first thoughts were to buy a Nikon 24-70/2.8 and a Nikon 20/2.8. The zoom lens would also have the additional benefits of easier use of filters because I would not have to change the filter everytime I change the focal length and the need of step-up-adapters would be greatly reduced. Using them is increasingly getting on my nerves! ;-) 24-70/2.8 + 20/2.8 would save me about 650 grams compared to my current gear (the Nikon 105/2.8 VR will definitely stay because I want to have a good Macro lens at that focal length). Does not sound too much but believe me: I am glad for anything that saves at least half a kilo because this already matters a lot when hiking the whole day.
However, I have read that the 24-70/2.8 is not quite the best performer on a D800E, especially when focused to infinity which I would do quite a lot as I love taking photos of landscapes. As this is probably the best standard zoom lens I am thinking of prime lenses again.
What is your opinion about this: Nikon 20/2.8, Zeiss 35/2 ZF.2, AF-S 50/1.4? This would even save me some more grams than the 20/2.8 + 24-70/2.8 solution and the image quality should definitely be better. I could even save another 200 grams if I would buy a Nikon 28/1.8 instead of a Zeiss 35/2 (which unfortunately is quite heavy) and the resolution of the Nikon should almost match the Zeiss or even perform on the same level. However, the abberations of the Zeiss lens are better corrected and I like the bokeh more, so I think I won't buy the Nikon 28/1.8.
The mentioned lenses also would have the advantage of having only two different filter sizes (including the filter size of the Nikon 105/2.8 VR).
What are your opinions about the three mentioned lenses regarding the demands of the 36 MP sensor of the D800E? I wonder if the Nikon 20/2.8 can match the performance of the famous Zeiss 21/2.8. At least stopped down to f/8 (better f/5.6 for shooting inside buildings) I'd like to have a good corner-to-corner sharpness. The same goes for the Nikon AF-S 50/1.4. Can it match the Zeiss 50/2 already at f/2 or f/2.8 since I would also like to use it for shallow DOF photography? Of course I am only talking about center sharpness and contrast when talking about shallow DOF photography. I don't need corner-to-corner sharpness at 50mm below f/5.6
Do you have any other great lightweight (!) alternatives in the mentioned focal length range (Ultra-wide can be from 17mm and above)?
I only need personal experiences with these lenses on high-resolution cameras (D3X, D600, D800/E) as I can read reviews at photozone, lenstip etc. myself ;-)
Thanks a lot for any advice and feedback!
