Reading mode: Light Dark

In the market for a new lens

Go to last post
M

Michel Beaupre

Member
Messages
36
Reaction score
0
Location
Montreal, CA
Hi,

I'm new to SLR photography. I just treated myself with a D300 and a 17-55 f/2.8 lens for Christmas. However, I'm planning to go in France next summer and take lots of pictures. I'm in dilemma since I'm not shure if I should acquire a 14-24mm f/2.8 or a 70-200mm f/2.8 VR. I know that those 2 lenses have not the same purpose but I can not purchase both right now. I was attracted to the 70-200 at first (until Nikon released its 14-24mm) for nature (and was thinking that a TC 1.7 should help to get a better range (if needed)). But I know that my trip in France will be mainly landscapes, Eifel tower, arche de triomphe etc. My 17-55 might be limited for this particular trip...

Please help

Michel
 
I'd go wide. I went to Italy a few years ago and used a Tokina 12-24 almost all of the time. (I also brought my Nikon 18-70, a borrowed 50 for low light, and a Tamron 28-200 which I bought used for cheap.)
--
Ed
 
between the two, for your purpose, I'd go wide. yep, tokina 12-24 is very good for reasonable price. $450 maybe cheaper. 14-24mm is full frame, a waste for D300. 18-200mm is still the best travel lens. maybe 18-200 vr + 12-24 tokina.

--
D70
sb-800 (amazing flash)
18-70mm f3.5-4.5g (snap lens, still good)
70-200mm f2.8 VR (wow! unbelievable speed, sharpness, color, bokeh)
50mm f1.8 (my indoor low light king)
Tokina 12-24mm f4 (fun, fun and more fun)

d300 on order, yeah!
 
The 17-55mm is plenty wide enough with the D300. If you want wider just take a few shots and join them to make a panorama in photoshop or ptgui, its easy to do. So I would definitely get the 70-200mm or smaller 70-300mm vr with the 1.4 tc.
 
From my experience in Paris, while it would be a shame to not have a long lens like the 70-200VR available (in addition to the 17-55) ...

D40 using 70-200mm f2.8 at 135.0mm 1/1600s f/5.6 ISO 200



there were many more instances where I used the 12-24 at 12 ...











It all depends on where you look, and what you see. Here's my Paris set:

http://tinius-photo.com/Paris2007

--
Roger

http://tinius-photo.com/Roger
 
of course everyone's style is different, but I think the 17-55 would rarely come off. I really wish I knew about ptgui when I was in Europe. There were times when my 15mm was not wide enough. Personally I would often prefer to stitch than use a wide sometimes, I even do it on weddings sometimes. Using a wide angle just to fit it all in can result in very boring photos, using it to emphasise a close element or for the perspective will result in more interesting photos.
 
Michel Beaupre said:
Hi,

I'm new to SLR photography. I just treated myself with a D300 and a
17-55 f/2.8 lens for Christmas. However, I'm planning to go in France
next summer and take lots of pictures. I'm in dilemma since I'm not
shure if I should acquire a 14-24mm f/2.8 or a 70-200mm f/2.8 VR. I
know that those 2 lenses have not the same purpose but I can not
purchase both right now. I was attracted to the 70-200 at first
(until Nikon released its 14-24mm) for nature (and was thinking that
a TC 1.7 should help to get a better range (if needed)). But I know
that my trip in France will be mainly landscapes, Eifel tower, arche
de triomphe etc. My 17-55 might be limited for this particular trip...
Michel
Click to expand...
Nice setup.

An effective compromise/solution might be the Tokina 12 - 24mm f4 (or the 11 - 16mm f2.8 Tokina if it's available) & the Nikon 70 - 300mm VRII.

That would answer virtually any situation you may encounter - & . . . . at a lower cost than you expected.

Best.
--
imo
(c) fastglass
 
amazing pictures very nice lens im thinking of picking up a wide angle lens after some of your pictures a little worried about distortion though

btw whats all this talk about crop factor and all that pro glass with pro lens and link to readings to help me
 
Michel Beaupre said:
Hi,

I'm new to SLR photography. I just treated myself with a D300 and a
17-55 f/2.8 lens for Christmas. However, I'm planning to go in France
next summer and take lots of pictures. I'm in dilemma since I'm not
shure if I should acquire a 14-24mm f/2.8 or a 70-200mm f/2.8 VR. I
know that those 2 lenses have not the same purpose but I can not
purchase both right now. I was attracted to the 70-200 at first
(until Nikon released its 14-24mm) for nature (and was thinking that
a TC 1.7 should help to get a better range (if needed)). But I know
that my trip in France will be mainly landscapes, Eifel tower, arche
de triomphe etc. My 17-55 might be limited for this particular trip...

Please help
Click to expand...
Hi Michel

as others suggested, instead of taking the overly expensive 14-24 (it would be a little widening from 17 to 14 for a huge price), I'd go for whatever else wide lens (10-20, 12-24, 11-18...) since you will SURELY need it. Rather, with money saved, I'd take a short tele prime (85 - 105) since you could enjoy it for longer shots. Both macro lenses (Nikon, Sigma, Tokina, Tamron) and the excellent (for the price) 85 F1.8 are suitable to your needings. you could also get some prime around 30-35mm (Sigma 28 F1.8, 30 F1,4, Nikon 35 F/2) for a reasonable price (at least always compared with the two lenses mentioned above.

--
All the best
I'm on the NIK side of photography.
 
Thank you all for your input and picture examples. This weekend I'm heading to my local camera store to pick up a 70-200mm f/2.8. I think that my 17-55mm f/2.8 will be OK for my trip to France. However, I have a feeling that if my store has the 24-70mm in stock , I might be trading in the 17-55mm. Am I crazy, since I don't plan in getting a FX body in the next two year(god those FX body are expensive), but who knows.... The 14-24mm would wait until next year. This way it would make a killer trio of lense, what do you think?
 
you'll want a wide angle. If you go to Paris with a 24-70, a 70-200, and a DX body, you'll go crazy because you can't back up far enough. 17's not bad, but you will probably want something even wider. You can't take pictures this year with lenses you plan to buy next year.

Good luck!

--
Roger

http://tinius-photo.com/Roger
 
After a good reflexion I have decided to keep my 17-55mm. I have tried the 14-24mm f/2.8 and the 70-200mm f/2.8. The 14-24 is totally awesome and would be nice to have it for wide angle purpose however with the 70-200mm i wil be able able to shoot fast sport such as Downhill mountain bike racing. I'm now thorn between those two.
 
Michel Beaupre said:
After a good reflexion I have decided to keep my 17-55mm. I have
tried the 14-24mm f/2.8 and the 70-200mm f/2.8. The 14-24 is totally
awesome and would be nice to have it for wide angle purpose however
with the 70-200mm i wil be able able to shoot fast sport such as
Downhill mountain bike racing. I'm now thorn between those two.
Click to expand...
Glad to hear that you tried and appreciated both Nikon Pro lenses.

If you have the money, you should always buy the best lens that you can afford. Third party companies (Sigma, Tokina, Tamron, etc...) may come close and at a substantial savings to Nikon Pro lenses, but why cut corners on the quality of the pictures of your precious moments if you can afford the better lenses?

The 14-24 is a jewel and is in no way a waste on a D300. Nikon itself promotes these lenses as being excellent on both FX and DX bodies. Good luck on your choice.
 
Welcome! I sense the early symptoms of lens lust and predict that you will eventually end up with all these lenses. Quality-wise we are splitting hairs here. The only way you can decide which one(s) is(are) best for you is by how much you use that particular lens's focal length and only you can work that out.

I would, however, suggest that currently the wide angle has many more "third party" options in my opinion and I think the 14-24 is way overpriced as it is spaning new. The 70-200VR is unmatched by any other zoom within its focal range , there is quite a few super wide angles on offer if you are using DX, not least the up-coming Tokina 11-16 f2.8, existing 12-24 if you can live with f4, and Sigma's 10-20 and Tamron's 11-18 if you want to go wider (but not as fast).
 
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