Hobbyist wide-normal prime lens advice

[Photofrankenstein]

Long story short I have recently picked up my photography hobby after a 10yr+gap. I got two Nikon bodies at the moment, namely d700 and d800. Both feel really really good on hand. I got a 70-200VR gen1 mounted on D700 and a 50/1.4G mounted on D800, while 105VR staying in the bag. The more I shoot lately the more I am tempted to acquire more gears.

I think I need a wider angle prime to be able to walk around with, either 24mm or 28mm. Meanwhile I am not a big fan of 50mm F1.4g. So I might need two primes 24-50 or 28-50. New Tamron 35f1.4 seems very nice but 805g is a bit too much for me. Manual focus is fine.

Years ago I used ais55 f2.8 on D70 body and was very impressed by the sharpness. Is it still a valid option on modern 36mp sensor? I also used ais28f2.8 and ais105f2.5 on my F801 film camera as a travel package. Are they any good on d800?

I don't think I have much opportunity to use super wide zoom or even 24-70F2.8 zoom. However on the longer end, telephoto zoom is needed.

Any suggestion would be appreciated.

 

[johnchap2]

For max IQ a prime is probably the way to go. But, for making sure you get the shot in most/any circumstances the zoom is much better. With today's better zooms you would unlikely be dissatisfied with the results. And with any IQ shortfall you can be comforted with the knowledge that you got the shot, rather than fumbling with lens changes, missing the shot and/or endangering a lens by dropping it. And every lens change risks more dust on the sensor.

I have four 36MP bodies and something like 14 DX and FX lenses. The only two primes I currently own are a 16/2.8 semi fisheye and an old 50/1.4 AF Nikon. My only real macro lens is the Nikon 70-180. Clearly, not all my shots are max IQ, but I post-process every image and it is very rare that any image falls below my quality threshold because of the optical quality of the lens.

Personally, on a serious outing I shoot with two bodies; one with a Nikon 28-300 and on the other either the Nikon 14-24 or an older Sigma 12-24. There are few scenes that I might encounter that I cannot frame the way I want. Is my 70-200/2.8 Nikon ver 1 optically better than the 28-300? Sure it is, but that would leave a lot of focal lengths unavailable.

I ended up with my controversial opinions which started in 1973 with my film bodies, and including the near universally despised Nikon 43-86. Despised maybe. But noted photo expert, the late Herb Keppler, long claimed that his most requested image was of the Ganges River Ghats in Varanasi India which was shot with that lens.

But you should consider that my views are outliers in this forum.

 

[anotherMike]

Threads like yours are really tough ones. It would be real easy for me (and a host of others) to just list my (or their) favorite lenses in the focal length range and hit the post button, but that completely and utterly ignores a pretty critical set of questions, which require honest answers before any of us can really offer even the slightest bit of sage advice, even though I'll attempt some general thoughts at the end, even if it might not be worth more than the dusty nickel in your left jeans pocket...

And those questions might be, but not limited to:

1. What is your intended output? And if the answer is "print", what's your regularly scheduled maximum size?
   1. Sub Answer 1: If you intend to print 13x19" with the occasional 16x20 or A2, that puts you into a more stringent category of image quality, potentially, than someone who doesn't print or prints small.
2. What's your self-evaluated level of technical proficiency? Not everyone is a grand master of shot discipline, nor does everyone need to be, nor does being one, or not being one, means they are in a general sense inferior or superior to anyone else, but it's a valid question because there is a point where the "slop" we all bring to the table at times is the mask, the filter, that ultimately prevents us from discerning between very good and excellent, or even excellent and amazing.
3. In a corollary to #2, what do you shoot primarily? Do you use a tripod?
   1. Thought Pattern here is: A lot of people want to chase "the sharpest" lens, but if one is shooting moving subjects, while handheld, and not being precisely and I mean incredibly precisely/accurately focused, one will never realize (in terms of extracting the most out of the situation/scenario) "the sharpest" and not even near it.
   2. A landscape shooter on tripod, who prints 16x20, and is gifted with clear atmosphere likely has different needs than a guy shooting travel snapshots for facebook or small prints for the office.

In terms of your other questions. In a very general sense, your D700 is going to far more forgiving of older AIS glass than your D800 will be, in a general way. I haven't shot the 28 AIS in too long to have an opinion on it any longer, but the 105/2.5 AIS was possibly "the" single most legendary lens in Nikons pre AF history, perhaps their entire history. I'd say it will mate better with the D700, stopped down a stop, than it will with the D800, but it's still worth exploring.

The better wide angles today are large, heavy designs. In the high resolution side of things - the D8xx bodies, the wide angle is by far the hardest design and the area where there aren't many truly "excellent" lenses if one is striving for max image quality and has very high image quality standards. So anything that is light and or reasonably priced, is going to compromise in the quality with respect to the upper echelons. That's why the Tamron 35/1.4 is so big. That's why the Sigma 40/1.4 Art is an utter monster. And on. But if you don't require such levels of excellence, a few suggestions would be: The Nikon 24/1.8G, the Tamron 35/1.8 (not 1.4) VC, or possibly something like the 24-85G zoom.

A lot of it depends on your answers to the above, as they tend to point you in the direction of what "level", so to speak, of what grade of lenses might satisfy you, and everyone is different in that regard.

-m

 

[Photofrankenstein]

I really appreciate your long input. And most of your points are spot on. I consider myself a casual shooter, enjoy playing with camera gears more than being artistically creative. I am pretty good at the tech side of things to get the most out of my gear in terms of image quality. I shoot landscapes, light travel, family and events. Maybe into school sports in the near future. The usual stuff.

The issue with prints is I want to print big but often not satisfied with the contents of my photos. Not artistic enough. Plain, normal, a bit dull. I find shooting telephoto is a good way to gain confidence in composition. Less elements in frame less background, only concentrate on the main subject and lighting.

That hasn't stopped me from chasing better optics and camera bodies. I might start with a used tamron 35VC, or sigma 50art. I know the perceived image quality difference compared to a modern 24-70zoom is not that great 99% of the time, but at least 35VC or usable f1.4 offers low light advantage over a f2.8

Thanks again.

 

[pluton]

I can vouch for the AiS 28/2.8 being quite good on the D800. If you go for a 24mm, it's probably best to avoid the old manual focus 24mm's and instead skip to the modern AF-S 24/1.8G or other newer design lens.

 

[morinor]

If you go the prime way I suggest you to think carefully on what focal lengths you may need. Some are close on the provided FoV, that in real use cases one of them is abandoned or used very less. Usually people go either 24/50/100 or 35/85/135. Some focal lengths can be substituted by a wider one. As an example, if I want to make quick switch or do not have any other portrait lens, I am not afraid to use APS-C mode on a 35mm f/1.4 lens and get an equivalent 52.5mm f/2.1.

On D700 I would not afraid to use a less sharp lens. I would recommend you to be the portrait camera as usually less crop is done and sharpness can be the "enemy" of the person that you shoot.

On the other had the D800 should be better used with a wide angle lens as it is can take sharper landscape images. You can easily crop easier as in my case when that it is need to.

 

[Photofrankenstein]

Make perfect sense. I am thinking the same. 35mm on D800, 70-200 on D700. If I need go wider, I might consider afs24G. Thanks for the input.