d700 lens

Joined
Dec 9, 2008
Messages
238
Location
Dallas, TX
Hey All

I use a 300mm f4 with my d700 for my kids soccer and and an 85mm 1.8 for basketball. I need a general purpose lens for shooting family gatherings, or taking on vacation etc... Since that's about all the use I have for it and funds are limited should I look more toward the 28-105 or do you think a 50 1.4 or 35mm 1.8 would be fine?
 
Joined
Dec 17, 2008
Messages
538
Location
Boise, ID
I'd look for 35 f/2 if on a budget. The 35 f/1.8 is a great little lens, and does well on FX, but only at closer distances and wide open.
 
Joined
Feb 19, 2006
Messages
8,391
Location
LA (Lower Arkansas)
The 28-105 is a great lens - It's the FX equivalent of the 18-70...and it's got a handydandy, superfuzzydeluxe macro mode. The price tag isn't bad either. The only problem is the limited focal range. I decided to go with the 28-200G instead. I sacrificed a little bit of IQ (but not a lot - and I can recoup some of that in photoshop) for more range and smaller size and weight. I'm satisfied, but that's just my opinion...I could be wrong.
 

IsamuM

Not-quite-
Moderator
Joined
Jan 11, 2009
Messages
3,409
Location
Tokyo, Japan
The 28-105 is a great lens - It's the FX equivalent of the 18-70...and it's got a handydandy, superfuzzydeluxe macro mode. The price tag isn't bad either. The only problem is the limited focal range. I decided to go with the 28-200G instead. I sacrificed a little bit of IQ (but not a lot - and I can recoup some of that in photoshop) for more range and smaller size and weight. I'm satisfied, but that's just my opinion...I could be wrong.
+1

The 28-200G is an overlooked gem that will work very nicely with the D700.
 
Joined
Mar 15, 2009
Messages
7,495
Location
Los Angeles, CA
The 28-105 is great for general purpose family-gathering type of shooting. That is exactly the lens I use when I don't want to lug the 70-200 and the 16-35 is not long enough.
 
Joined
Nov 10, 2008
Messages
3,937
Location
Chicago
50 1.8 AFD is a really nice lens for the price. Not perfect, but neither are the zooms which by their nature are larger,more expensive, slower, more complex, and have more optical defects.

35 1.8 is for DX, not a D700 FX. Feel free to use it in DX mode though. It pops a new DX frame and you can set it to block the perimeter of the VF. 6 MP is just fine for lots of things.

If you want a 35, get a 35 2.0.

While the new 50 1.4 G is a more than decent lens, it is not world class.

I did a few comparison shots with the 105 2.8 G against the 85 1.8 at F4. They produced very similar images. That also tells me I do not need to invest in the new 1.4 G lenses.

I really think 50 mm lenses are under appreciated today. Millions of really nice pic were made with them before the zoom fad.
 
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
3,749
Location
Durham, NC
If cost wasn't a limitation, the ultimate lens for your D700 would be the 24 70mm f/2.8.

However, since cost is a factor, I would go with the Nikon 24 85mm instead of the Tamron. If you can live with a few more $$, and variable aperture.
As you can see from the resolution graphs below from DXoMark, the Nikon
is MUCH sharper than the Tamron 28 75mm:

Tamron 28 75mm:

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)




Nikon 24 85mm:

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Joined
Mar 20, 2011
Messages
1,959
Location
Australia
try picking up a second hand 35-70/2.8D.

my one is 16 years old and is still in daily service. i feel no need to get a 24-70.
 
Joined
Nov 13, 2009
Messages
4,380
Location
Toronto
35 1.8 is for DX, not a D700 FX. Feel free to use it in DX mode though. It pops a new DX frame and you can set it to block the perimeter of the VF. 6 MP is just fine for lots of things.
I wouldn't go so far as using the 35mm 1.8 in DX mode on a D700. The vignetting from this lens on FX is minimal and sometimes non-existent - it depends on your focus point. You'd be much better off to use it in full frame mode and then crop out the vignetting when required.

Although...I think you're right in saying that the 35mm F2 might be a better choice...I sold my 35mm1.8 and replaced it with the 35mm F2 when I got the D700.

The jury is out on the 28-105 for me. I bought this lens as a make do when I got the D700. I really haven't used it much and will say that I don't love the "feel" of it . However, after seeing Uncle Frank's tribute thread to the lens, I've decided that I need to give it a fair shake.
 
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
3,033
Location
Mohawk Valley, New York , USA
As you can see from my signature I have both the 28-105 and the 28-200G ...
some might think it's overkill but for times I want or think I'll need just abit more reach it's nice to have a choice ...
and both are very nice lenses and neither cost me more than $ 220 used ....

ron
 
Joined
Mar 5, 2011
Messages
523
Location
Tokyo
My advice for general shooting would be the 50mm. It`s an "as the eye sees it" lens, and a good standard for people and general use.
 
Top Bottom