D800 - best budget lenses?

Started Feb 8, 2012 | Discussions
Big Ga Forum Pro • Posts: 18,623
Re: D800 - best budget lenses?

dgrogers wrote:

Will the Nikon 50mm primes even be able to resolve 36mp without stopping down to f/8? That's the point.

Good god yes.

But anyway, what if they DO need f8, is that such a problem ??

The D800 will require some excellent lenses to flex its superiority.

And those lenses already exist ... and many of them have existed for literally decades.

I'd rather ask what budget camera is best for the Nikkor 24-70 f/2.8.

Well ask away then ... but this thread isn't about that.

Personally, I'm not a fan of the m4/3 lenses either and I think it's funny that you get so defensive about a legitimate statement.

I don't consider your statement legitimate. Who are you to say "You're doing it wrong". ?
Personally, I can totally understand where MFBernstein is coming from.

Big Ga wrote:

dgrogers wrote:

You're doing it wrong.

Now now ..... you're not on the oly forum any longer .... you don't have to spend $900 to get a 50mm f2.8 equivalent prime over here ....

EricLew Regular Member • Posts: 298
Re: D800 - best budget lenses?

the 28-300 would be the kit lens from Nikon.

Big Ga Forum Pro • Posts: 18,623
Re: D800 - best budget lenses?

bobn2 wrote:

Now, as a Nikon/Olympus dual system user, what are you getting, E-M5 or D800?

Hi Bob.

Em5 thingie kind of interests me, but only for some very limited and specific requirements, and at £1000 for the body ..... hmmm... - I already have a panny G3 if all I'm after is the IQ of the new Oly cam - its highly likely the IQ will be pretty much the same. So while I like the look of the EM5, I'm not particularly chomping at the bit as some are, as I can't see it offering anything particularly new, other than packaging a lot of nice features together into a small, robust body. If it was £500 ... then I'd probably sell the G3 and swap, but a grand ..... hmmm ... I'll see .. I have other things to buy first....

However the D800 was effectively pre-ordered back in Dec and the D700 given in as part ex back then, and now the leaked spec is firm, I've confirmed it with the dealer. He gave me a tentative delivery date as well, which I can't remember off the top of my head, but it was something like the last week of March.

Strange thing is, at this moment in time, I'm possibly even less 'excited' about the D800 than I am about the EM5. I've even been pondering why. I think its because I simply have faith that Nikon will deliver. There is no real mystery to me. Its going to be some strange hybrid of the D3, D700, D5100 ... and I already own those, so .... I just know its going to be a great, solid camera, and when it arrives, it arrives. And I'll start shooting with it. Job done.

With Oly .... you're always hoping against hope that they will finally pull off the miracle they need .... and praying that they don't screw something critical up, as they often do

pocketfulladoubles Senior Member • Posts: 1,986
Re: D800 - best budget lenses?

The 60G. Sharpest lens I have used personally, though the Zeiss 100 is right there.

OP mfbernstein Veteran Member • Posts: 6,518
Re: More thoughts

brunobarolo wrote:

mfbernstein wrote:

Nikon 35/1.8G - heard good things, but a DX lens ? Not sure about corners

35 mm f1.8 should work very well in 5:4 crop mode.

I guess... Not really a fan of these crop modes, but fair enough.

Sigma 150/2.8 - DX review was excellent, can't find FX review.

Highly recommended: http://www.photozone.de/nikon_ff/624-sigma15028ff

Thanks, not sure how I missed that.

Nikon 300/4 - not really 'budget' in my book, couldn't find 24MP FX reviews

not "budget" for a rather fast and sharp 300mm lens? Come on

$1400 isn't a 'budget' lens in my book. That doesn't mean it's not good value.

Cheers,

-- hide signature --

MFBernstein

'Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit.' - Ed Abbey

OP mfbernstein Veteran Member • Posts: 6,518
Re: D800 - best budget lenses?

dgrogers wrote:

Will the Nikon 50mm primes even be able to resolve 36mp without stopping down to f/8? That's the point. The D800 will require some excellent lenses to flex its superiority.

Sure. And the 50/1.4G and 1.8G are excellent. The reviews bear that out - on the D3X, both do great by f/2.8.

The nice thing about Nikon is that excellent lenses start at $150 or so. And spending more doesn't necessarily guarantee better optics...

I'd rather ask what budget camera is best for the Nikkor 24-70 f/2.8.

Feel free to start your own thread. Note that the 24-70 at 50mm is not better than the 50/1.8G.

-- hide signature --

MFBernstein

'Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit.' - Ed Abbey

Hawaii-geek
Hawaii-geek Veteran Member • Posts: 8,066
24-70 f2.8 is better than the 50 1.8

Let me be really clear on this .. I am NOT a huge fan of the Nikon 24-70 f2.8 ... but, it is my most used lens.

So, I feel uncomfortable carring the flag for this ZOOM Nikon Lens when what I really want is for Nikon to UPdate it :).

I am just a little curious "How do you know" that the 50 f1.8G is better than the 24-70 f2.8 at 50mm ?

At "50mm" and 70mm the 24-70 f2.8 is pretty good ... and is not where I have a problem with it. (it's below 50mm).
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1121/cat/13

At 50mm f2.8 and more so "f4" the 50mm f1.8 is NOT "better than" the Nikon 24-70 f2.8 ZOOM ... "FULL FRAME" ... and that is pretty amazing imho. "ZOOM".

In fact , f4 is where I am mostly at at night. and at 50mm f4 the 24-70mm f2.8 might be better.

imho, just to say that a prime is "just as good" as a ZOOM ... that says something about the Zoom to me ... not the other way around. Even if it is cheaper.

Might even go so far as saying the 24-70 f2.8 at 50mm is "as good" as the 50 f1.4 prime ... AND it AF faster TOO ! (you will not have to take out a stop watch for that one ... but sharpness?)

That's just me,

HG

mfbernstein wrote:
Note that the 24-70 at 50mm is not better than the 50/1.8G.

-- hide signature --

http://tourist-of-light.blogspot.com/

Please feel free to criticize, make suggestions, and edit any of my photos & re-post, to help show me 'the way'. * I am trying to Elevate the Level of my 'Snap Shots'

 Hawaii-geek's gear list:Hawaii-geek's gear list
Sony RX1 Nikon D700 Nikon D800 Sony Alpha a99 Sony a7R +20 more
ewelch Senior Member • Posts: 1,023
Re: D800 - best budget lenses?

Don't bother getting a D800 if you don't buy top-quality lenses. It will be a waste of money.

-- hide signature --

Eric

All cats are mortal.
Socrates died.
Therefore, Socrates was a cat.

 ewelch's gear list:ewelch's gear list
Canon EOS-1D X
Big Ga Forum Pro • Posts: 18,623
Re: D800 - best budget lenses?

ewelch wrote:

Don't bother getting a D800 if you don't buy top-quality lenses.

Define 'top quality lenses'

Leok Regular Member • Posts: 190
Re: D800 - best budget lenses?

There are plenty of sharp primes around, but I prefer zooms for my portrait work so this is what I ended up with for the D700:

Tamron 28-75 2.8 - nice and sharp, very close to the Nikon 24-70 2.8 but much smaller and cheaper.

Nikon 24-120 f4 VR - the only currently available short sharp VR zoom

The new Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC is one to watch out for... VR in a short bright lens is something I've missed since swapping from Pentax. I hate tripods, and VR works well enough that I rarely miss having one. The question is will it be sharp?

Nikon 70-200 VRii - not budget, but none of the 3rd party zooms come close to it for sharpness. The Nikon 80-200 is worth a look if you don't need / want VR

28-200 / 300 etc - slow AF, poor brightness, not sharp. Waste of time IMHO.

Jon Rty Veteran Member • Posts: 3,838
Re: 24-70 f2.8 is better than the 50 1.8

The 24-70mm is nano-coated though.

But so is the 60mm F/2.8.

Hawaii-geek wrote:

Let me be really clear on this .. I am NOT a huge fan of the Nikon 24-70 f2.8 ... but, it is my most used lens.

So, I feel uncomfortable carring the flag for this ZOOM Nikon Lens when what I really want is for Nikon to UPdate it :).

I am just a little curious "How do you know" that the 50 f1.8G is better than the 24-70 f2.8 at 50mm ?

At "50mm" and 70mm the 24-70 f2.8 is pretty good ... and is not where I have a problem with it. (it's below 50mm).
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1121/cat/13

At 50mm f2.8 and more so "f4" the 50mm f1.8 is NOT "better than" the Nikon 24-70 f2.8 ZOOM ... "FULL FRAME" ... and that is pretty amazing imho. "ZOOM".

In fact , f4 is where I am mostly at at night. and at 50mm f4 the 24-70mm f2.8 might be better.

imho, just to say that a prime is "just as good" as a ZOOM ... that says something about the Zoom to me ... not the other way around. Even if it is cheaper.

Might even go so far as saying the 24-70 f2.8 at 50mm is "as good" as the 50 f1.4 prime ... AND it AF faster TOO ! (you will not have to take out a stop watch for that one ... but sharpness?)

That's just me,

HG

mfbernstein wrote:
Note that the 24-70 at 50mm is not better than the 50/1.8G.

mlewan Senior Member • Posts: 1,350
Re: D800 - best budget lenses?

ewelch wrote:

Don't bother getting a D800 if you don't buy top-quality lenses. It will be a waste of money.

Define 'a waste of money'.

thomas2279f
thomas2279f Veteran Member • Posts: 3,203
Re: D800 - best budget lenses?

Choices would be to buy these good lenses (but on tight budget)

50 1.4 Afs
85 1.8 Afs
70-300 Afs Vr

Maybe later:-
105 Afs VR 2.8 Macro
24-120 Afs VR F/4

However you probably invest in a few good FF lenses before buying a $3000 Camera like the D800.

 thomas2279f's gear list:thomas2279f's gear list
Nikon D800 Nikon D7200 Nikon D850 Nikon Z6 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR +20 more
dominikov Senior Member • Posts: 1,175
Re: D800 - best budget lenses?

windsprite wrote:

Read the thread. You are wrong, and the OP knows what he is doing.

Julie

Julie, I wasn't specifically directing those comments at the OP. I'm talking about anyone who buys this camera and then compromises on glass.

It doesn't make sense.

If you're going to compromise anywhere, it should be with the camera body and not the lenses. Every optical defect will be apparent at 36mp, not to mention technique, lighting, etc. all has to be perfect to make use of it.

Otherwise all you've paid $3000 for is a camera that produces large files.

 dominikov's gear list:dominikov's gear list
Nikon D800E Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.4D +3 more
Jon Rty Veteran Member • Posts: 3,838
Re: D800 - best budget lenses?

Nobody is talkign about compromising quality, but about getting quality at the lowest possible price. You could pay a grand for the 24-120mm F/4, and compromise on quality. Or you could pay the couple hundred for the 50mm F/1.8G, and get as sharp a 50mm as money can buy. There's a big difference there. And please, for the love of christ, stop with the 36mp. The D800 won't be any harder on lenses than the D7000. And it will be less hard than the Canon 18mp APS-C cams, and much, much easier than Sonys 24mp APS-C cameras or Panasonics 16mp m43s. Sure, you need to have decent technique and lenses to get everything out of the D800, but it isn't witchcraft.

dominikov wrote:

Julie, I wasn't specifically directing those comments at the OP. I'm talking about anyone who buys this camera and then compromises on glass.

It doesn't make sense.

If you're going to compromise anywhere, it should be with the camera body and not the lenses. Every optical defect will be apparent at 36mp, not to mention technique, lighting, etc. all has to be perfect to make use of it.

Otherwise all you've paid $3000 for is a camera that produces large files.

bobn2
bobn2 Forum Pro • Posts: 61,439
Re: D800 - best budget lenses?

dominikov wrote:

windsprite wrote:

Read the thread. You are wrong, and the OP knows what he is doing.

Julie

Julie, I wasn't specifically directing those comments at the OP. I'm talking about anyone who buys this camera and then compromises on glass.

It doesn't make sense.

If you're going to compromise anywhere, it should be with the camera body and not the lenses. Every optical defect will be apparent at 36mp, not to mention technique, lighting, etc. all has to be perfect to make use of it.

Otherwise all you've paid $3000 for is a camera that produces large files.

Actually, you can make exactly the same argument about the lenses. Why buy top lenses without a 36MP camera to put behind them? Use less and every optical quality of the lens will be masked by the low resolution pixellation of the camera. So, if you just have a D700, just buy consumer lenses.

Both arguments are false, because the final optical quality is not either lens or camera, it is the combination of both. Putting a good lens in front of a low resolution camera improves its performance with respect to a worse lens, putting a high resolution camera behind a poor lens improves its resolution with respect to a low resolution camera.

Truth is, to get the absolute best you need high res camera and high res lens, but an average lens will perform better on a D800 than it will on a D700 (or D4). In a real sense, those need the best lens to get results, while the D800 doesn't.
--
Bob

bobn2
bobn2 Forum Pro • Posts: 61,439
Re: D800 - best budget lenses?

Big Ga wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

Now, as a Nikon/Olympus dual system user, what are you getting, E-M5 or D800?

Hi Bob.

Em5 thingie kind of interests me, but only for some very limited and specific requirements, and at £1000 for the body ..... hmmm... - I already have a panny G3 if all I'm after is the IQ of the new Oly cam - its highly likely the IQ will be pretty much the same. So while I like the look of the EM5, I'm not particularly chomping at the bit as some are, as I can't see it offering anything particularly new, other than packaging a lot of nice features together into a small, robust body. If it was £500 ... then I'd probably sell the G3 and swap, but a grand ..... hmmm ... I'll see .. I have other things to buy first....

That's the question really, what does it do that the G3 doesn't (IBIS is the answer, but of course Panasonic, going after the video market as a target for mFT, prefers lens stabilisation). I wouldn't mind hazarding a guess that when you look inside, there is a lot of common components between the two.

However the D800 was effectively pre-ordered back in Dec and the D700 given in as part ex back then, and now the leaked spec is firm, I've confirmed it with the dealer. He gave me a tentative delivery date as well, which I can't remember off the top of my head, but it was something like the last week of March.

Bummer, if you ordered that early and got end of March, it means mine isn't coming for a few months.

Strange thing is, at this moment in time, I'm possibly even less 'excited' about the D800 than I am about the EM5. I've even been pondering why. I think its because I simply have faith that Nikon will deliver. There is no real mystery to me. Its going to be some strange hybrid of the D3, D700, D5100 ... and I already own those, so .... I just know its going to be a great, solid camera, and when it arrives, it arrives. And I'll start shooting with it. Job done.

I understand that totally. We know what it will do. The thing tha was my clincher for the D800, and the delight factor, if you like, is that they have built a FL dependent minimum shutter speed into the auto-ISO function. I hope they've got it right, if so it's such a wonderful bit of design. Haven't seen anyone else going on about what a good idea it is, though.

With Oly .... you're always hoping against hope that they will finally pull off the miracle they need .... and praying that they don't screw something critical up, as they often do

The E-M5 is just more of the same. Instead of putting much into real R&D (after all, most everything in that camera duplicates Panasonic) they just make faux versions of cameras from their glory years. It's like if Nikon had, instead of making the D7000, just repackaged the D90 in a case that looks like the FM2. Doubtless it would be very popular, but hardly moves things forward.

-- hide signature --

Bob

mlewan Senior Member • Posts: 1,350
Re: D800 - best budget lenses?

bobn2 wrote:

dominikov wrote:

windsprite wrote:

Read the thread. You are wrong, and the OP knows what he is doing.

Julie

Julie, I wasn't specifically directing those comments at the OP. I'm talking about anyone who buys this camera and then compromises on glass.

It doesn't make sense.

If you're going to compromise anywhere, it should be with the camera body and not the lenses. Every optical defect will be apparent at 36mp, not to mention technique, lighting, etc. all has to be perfect to make use of it.

Otherwise all you've paid $3000 for is a camera that produces large files.

Actually, you can make exactly the same argument about the lenses. Why buy top lenses without a 36MP camera to put behind them? Use less and every optical quality of the lens will be masked by the low resolution pixellation of the camera. So, if you just have a D700, just buy consumer lenses.

Or indeed, if you only have a D4, just buy consumer lenses.

noirdesir Forum Pro • Posts: 13,586
Re: D800 - best budget lenses?

bobn2 wrote:

dominikov wrote:

windsprite wrote:

Read the thread. You are wrong, and the OP knows what he is doing.

Julie

Julie, I wasn't specifically directing those comments at the OP. I'm talking about anyone who buys this camera and then compromises on glass.

It doesn't make sense.

If you're going to compromise anywhere, it should be with the camera body and not the lenses. Every optical defect will be apparent at 36mp, not to mention technique, lighting, etc. all has to be perfect to make use of it.

Otherwise all you've paid $3000 for is a camera that produces large files.

Actually, you can make exactly the same argument about the lenses. Why buy top lenses without a 36MP camera to put behind them? Use less and every optical quality of the lens will be masked by the low resolution pixellation of the camera. So, if you just have a D700, just buy consumer lenses.

Both arguments are false, because the final optical quality is not either lens or camera, it is the combination of both. Putting a good lens in front of a low resolution camera improves its performance with respect to a worse lens, putting a high resolution camera behind a poor lens improves its resolution with respect to a low resolution camera.

As I said recently, a lot of people carry the notion that resolution is a purely serial phenomena and that the weakest link in the chain determines the overal performance. But that would require resolution (of lenses or sensors) to be a purely on/off behaviour, ie, zero information above a certain resolution and full information below a certain resolution. But the moment you first see a full MTF curve of a lens which plots 'information' (contrast) against resolution, you'll realize that lens performance is far from on/off.

For more on this see this post of mine on serial vs. parallel vs. more complex 'systems':
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=40583334

John Motts Veteran Member • Posts: 5,654
Re: D800 - best budget lenses?

mfbernstein wrote:

One of the great things about the D700 has been that it makes even modest lenses look acceptable, by virtue of its large pixels. The D800 though, will be far more demanding when viewed at 100%.

Why do you need to look at 100%?

Why is everyone so obsessed with looking at files, in effect, through a microscope? It's what they they look like in actual use that matters.

When they're to be looked at on screen they don't need to be zoomed in to such an extreme degree.

When they're to be printed they don't need to be zoomed in to such an extreme degree. So what's the point?

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads