d7200 w/ lens limitations OR d750 w/ Sigma 24-105 Art

Started 6 months ago | Questions thread
hoyasaxa
hoyasaxa Forum Member • Posts: 65
Re: d7200 w/ lens limitations OR d750 w/ Sigma 24-105 Art

bschmie wrote:

hoyasaxa wrote:

bschmie wrote:

I'm basing most of this off of Tony Northrup's buying guide. I don't know of anyone who'd say Sigma's 18-35 1.8 glass is worse than any Nikon glass. True the Sigma 24-105 isn't perfect, but it's pretty darn good, and also half the price of the Nikon equivalent

Don't come here asking the question if your mind is already made up because Ken Rockwell told you so. The classic advice which I and others have already given you is to buy better glass. Your 24mp D7200 is not the limiting factor. Your glass is.

Hoyasaxa,

I understand your frustration in thinking my mind is "made up", and I certainly don't want to waste anyone's time. The Title of the post probably should have left out the cameras all-together as it seems to be throwing people off the scent. The d7200 is superb, and people are understandably concerned that I'm talking of switching. The question was simply meant to look at the problem "glass", in reverse. i.e. if there is a lens or two that are much better suited for my needs that are (designed for) a FF camera, is it worth the pain/cost/weight of switching.

As you can see from the thread to date, advice is pretty evenly split. So I agree that there's classic advice, but it's not the only perspective. You could certainly make a case for:
--Buy FF glass and upgrade body at a future date (though it's advice given mostly at camera stores:)
---Hold tight, maybe Nikon or Canon will intro a badass Mirrorless body in a year or so
---Throw $400 at a used DX _____ lens and see if you're still unhappy (classic)
--etc.

And, yes, I did plenty of homework (reading lens reviews) before posting the question, but was still on the fence. Thus, when someone essentially says "just buy Nikon glass, ignore 3rd party lenses"------that may be safe advice, but I don't think it's foolproof (and it's limiting). The last ten or so years have produced many solid performing third party lenses. So I give a little pushback to test the poster's assertions. I think that's what forums are for, hashing out the details and sharing learned experiences.

Fair enough.

(1) I don't agree with the advice given to enthusiasts to buy DX glass. If you're an enthusiast, one day you're going to go FX and having an expensive inventory of useless DX glass on that day is going to be frustrating. The only FL where that advice will cause a problem is in UWA and, in that one specific instance, go ahead and buy a 10/11/12mm DX lens so that you can get a good UWA FL on your crop sensor. Elsewhere, I think people should be buying FX glass.

(2) I am not actually against third-party lenses as a general matter. For instance, I tend to think that, on DX, the Tokina 11-20 2.8 is an outstanding lens and, as it turns out, provides 16-30 FL which is perfect for a UWA zoom.

(3) In your specific situation, a lot of the discussion in this thread seems to surround consumer-grade superzooms (or all-in-one zooms). Many of those happen to be third-party, but I don't frankly think the Nikkor superzoom/all-in-one lenses are very good either. My bottom-line point is that if your goal is to improve the quality of the photos you're taking from a technical standpoint, you're much better off buying high quality (read: expensive) FX glass, than you are buying a D750 and then throwing consumer-grade lenses on it.

 hoyasaxa's gear list:hoyasaxa's gear list
Nikon D850 Nikon 24-70mm F2.8E ED VR Nikon AF-S 70-200mm F2.8E FL ED VR Nikon D7200 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G +1 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow