Decisions Decisions

[davewolfs]

So now what do we do? I must say that this D700 is tempting.

For those who already made the jump to the D3, what are you using to cover the wide end?

I already own a 24-70, I know most would say that the 14-24 is a no brainer...but I'm not sure about the whole no filter thing. That is a tough. Especially for sea scapes.

Thoughts?

 

[MikeMcA²]

I'm probably not a good reference, but I rarely use anything wider than the 24-70 on the D3. I have a 20mm f/2.8, but for my interests nowadays the 24-70 is wide enough.

 

[Harry Lavo]

So now what do we do? I must say that this D700 is tempting.

For those who already made the jump to the D3, what are you using to cover the wide end?

I already own a 24-70, I know most would say that the 14-24 is a no brainer...but I'm not sure about the whole no filter thing. That is a tough. Especially for sea scapes.

Thoughts?

Are you aware that the 12-24mm is wholly FX compatible from 18mm-24mm? That might be a good option. On a FF camera, that is a truly wide angle even if not quite as wide as 14mm. But then you don't have the bulging front element as well.

 

[racefan]

24 is wide enough for a lot of situations on FX, but I use a 17-35/2.8 Nikkor a good bit and it's wonderful to my eye on the D3 (and takes filters).

 

[davewolfs]

Are you aware that the 12-24mm is wholly FX compatible from 18mm-24mm? That might be a good option. On a FF camera, that is a truly wide angle even if not quite as wide as 14mm. But then you don't have the bulging front element as well.

I had no idea about that. 18mm on FX is more then enough, I guess that would be the equivalent of 12mm on DX. Looks like I could wait things out.

I'd like to wait to see how Zeiss's new offering is also but that wont be for a few months.

 

[this is me]

24-70mm is wide enough for me on FX.

 

[spalding12]

So now what do we do? I must say that this D700 is tempting.

For those who already made the jump to the D3, what are you using to cover the wide end?

I already own a 24-70, I know most would say that the 14-24 is a no brainer...but I'm not sure about the whole no filter thing. That is a tough. Especially for sea scapes.

Thoughts?

the 14-24 has such impeccable glass
the NO FILTER thing... i can see your point, if you wanted a polarizer
the sigma 10-20 is a well-thought of lens.... will work well on an FX camera

i think you can use a filter on it... not sure

 

[jemaerca]

the sigma 10-20 is a well-thought of lens.... will work well on an FX camera

i think you can use a filter on it... not sure

The Sig 10-20 is a DC lens, meaning it was designed for DX cameras. Is there a focal length this will work for FX cameras?