yray

Just realized the thread is from 2017, oh well…

Hi there. I think the problem is exactly as you described and I experienced it as well with this lens, except my observation was between f/2.8 and f/8, as this is how I happened to shoot when the ...

I have a D700 and the closest to it still fairly modern camera that I also have is D810. Your question is a fairly loaded question, so I can give you a short answer and a long answer. The short ...

Can’t agree more, in every respect.

Yep, the main or only reason.

I know from experience that 24-120/4 is a warm lens. In general Nikon shifted toward warmer glass with many more recent lenses. Whether it is only the lens or WB was also computed differently I ...

I think you answered your own question, 24-120/4 is warmer. Matter of personal preference. Which one do you like better? Of course since WB was on auto you may also wanna check if it is really ...

Not really, it is the exact same class. I have D700 and D810 and in controls and build quality there is not a lot between them. The main difference is a more modern sensor, and other, mostly not ...

The irony isn’t lost on me that the D7xx line was actually started with the D700, which is the most direct ancestor of the D8xx line. But hey, who remembers that now.

I think 300 mm is too short for wildlife, particularly with a D3 where you don't have much latitude to crop. Generally, if going that far back, I would go for the D3S which has significantly ...

I believe this probably has more to do with how some people post-process their images and less with the modern sensors. D700 was and is a fine camera, but so are many models which came after it. ...

it would be lighter, but better IQ is probably entirely sample dependent. I have 24-85 for my Df because it is the largest lens IMO that still handles half way decently with Df, and while it is a ...

A very good price for a very good lens! Not sure you'll need the warranty, that era lenses were well-nigh unbreakable. Enjoy! :-)

I enjoy 28-105 for close-ups of my cats ;-) Otherwise 24-120/4 is better in almost every way. It has some warts, particularly distortion and vignetting, but it is a sharp lens with good contrast, ...

OVF aside, this is probably the main point for those of us with non-trivial investment in F-mount. The cost/benefit is simply not there, and there’s no sensible way around it that I can see. ...

You think she’ll change her mind? ;-)

Let me help you recollect. It was 17-55/2.8, a lens comparable to 24-70/2.8, but with the zoom range much better suited for DX. Sure, for long lenses FX glass works just fine. It is with the ...

Right, D500 is a solid body with a good grip, and you can attach a vertical grip to it, so sure it handles well with large lenses, like D300 before it, DX though it may be. But a large lens on a ...

I still haven’t heard a single argument why a “sophisticated advanced shooter” who understands the difference between APS-C and FF, and between fast lenses and slow lenses would choose Zfc over Fuji. ...

About the same weight, but f/2.8-4: Why can't Nikon do that? My guess is because they don't take DX seriously, and assume that most potential buyers in this segment can't tell f/4 from f/6.3. No ...