Recs for a great all-purpose lens - D700?

aislinnrehwinkel

I recently purchased a D700 and am researching the best all-purpose lens (lenses) for it. I currently shoot with the D300, and I leave my 18-200mm lens on 90% of the time. Can anyone recommend a good FX lens or two that might work equivalently to the 18-200DX? I shoot primarily weddings, and need a solid workhorse lens that lets me shoot without stopping to change lenses very 10 minutes... I am looking at the 70-200mm vrii - any feedback or other suggestions?

Thank you!

InsuredDisaster

I shoot with the 24-70 the most. With your 18-200, do you shoot more wide or more telephoto shots? Since you have the D300, I'd consider eventually getting both the 24-70 and the 70-200. Eventually you can have two cameras, one with each lens on it. THen there is no switching and you'll have to very good, fast lenses.

gowiththeflow

Are you looking for literally the FX version of the 18-200mm, or something to complement it shooting weddings with both bodies?

Nikon just released a 28-300mm and a new f/4 24-120mm, both would do well as an all-around lens. Personally, I don't like super-zooms, because I'm still going to need a real tele lens, and I don't need a walkaround that goes to 200mm and a tele that goes to 200mm.

I just got a 70-200mm VRII this week, and I love it! I spent a good bit of the day walking around with it on my F100, though, and it was still fairly long... and I was shooting outside. It might work for you paired with a wider prime like a 35mm or 50mm, though. Richy's suggestion of the 70-200mm on the D300 and a wider lens on the D700 sounds pretty solid, too!

TopCat

The 70-200mm VRII sounds perfect, doesn't it? I love this lens, and my experience has been absolutely positive. I don't even mind the weight!

Matthew Saville

aislinnrehwinkel wrote: »

I recently purchased a D700 and am researching the best all-purpose lens (lenses) for it. I currently shoot with the D300, and I leave my 18-200mm lens on 90% of the time. Can anyone recommend a good FX lens or two that might work equivalently to the 18-200DX? I shoot primarily weddings, and need a solid workhorse lens that lets me shoot without stopping to change lenses very 10 minutes... I am looking at the 70-200mm vrii - any feedback or other suggestions?

Thank you!

Honestly, in my opinion the two terms "FX" and "all-purpose lens" don't belong in the same sentence. Yes, Nikon did just announce a 28-300 FX lens that is equivalent to the 18-200. I'm sure you gain a stop or so in low-light performance, shallow depth, and maybe it's a bit sharper depending on the angle they can get light to hit the sensor etc.

However honestly I just can't bring myself to put such an "amateur" lens on such a professional body. Especially at a wedding! That's just too much of an uncle bob move for me.

Personally, as a wedding photographer what I'll recommend is a two-body setup. Get two D700's and then use a 24-70 on one and a 70-200 on the other. Or, my personal preference, a prime on one and a zoom on the other. I could shoot an entire wedding, heck I could shoot almost ANYTHING, with just a 24-70 on one D700 and then the new Sigma 150 2.8 OS Macro on another D700. Or if you need more versatility in the telephoto range, get a 70-200 2.8 (I can't stand the weight) for one D700 and then a 34 f/2 or f/1.4 on the other body.

Trust me, trust me, TRUST ME, your images will be far better than if you just slap a 28-300 on one body click away. Even if you don't consider the technical merits of a professional lens versus a hobbyist lens, the more limited zoom will AT LEAST force you to think more about composition before clicking. Again, TRUST ME on this one. It's not voodoo magic, your pictures really DO improve when you restrict yourself.

So, my personal recommendation is for a 2.8 zoom on the D300, and a couple 1.4 primes and/or a 2.8 zoom on the D700. Make the decision based on which range is the source of most of your best, trademark shots, (if you're certain of what your style is) Personally I use 2.8 zooms on crop sensor bodies, and 1.4 or 2.8 primes on full-frame bodies. That's just my style.

If you're going on vacation with the family, just get a D7000 and use the 18-200 plus maybe a 1.4 or 1.8 prime for low light. Don't try and make the D700 into a walk-around vacation camera, unless you specifically need the advantage in low-light or shallow depth. (And if you think you do, I would argue that you're just being a gearhead. But that's just me having "survived" with a D300 and 2.8 zooms in almost every casual situation I've EVER encountered... If I take a D700 into a casual situation, it's with a 35 f/2 or 85 1.8 for the specific use of super-dim lighting...


Good luck deciding! Sorry about the ramble
=Matt=

catspaw

the 24-70 on the D700 will give you a LOT of choices. not as much zoom, but you can sneaker it

Art Scott

aislinnrehwinkel wrote: »

I recently purchased a D700 and am researching the best all-purpose lens (lenses) for it. I currently shoot with the D300, and I leave my 18-200mm lens on 90% of the time. Can anyone recommend a good FX lens or two that might work equivalently to the 18-200DX? I shoot primarily weddings, and need a solid workhorse lens that lets me shoot without stopping to change lenses very 10 minutes... I am looking at the 70-200mm vrii - any feedback or other suggestions?

Thank you!

Cannot beat a team like a 24-70 and 70-200 especially for weddings...............or portraits.......they should be 2.8 lenses....if money is not available for Nikon lenses then I recommend Sigma...I have shot exclusively Sigma, for nearly 30 yrs, until I purchased my D300's.....................and I picked up Nikon lenses at really good pricing........I will be going back to Sigma when I go full frame in the future.....................

I would be better off shooting a whole wedding or anything actually with a 70-200...but that is how I started out......I never was into using wide angle lenses...if I needed more people in the shot I just foot zoomed farther back.....worked great for me for many many years..............

Qarik

one lens solution would be the 24-70mm. you can shoot 90% of most weddings with this lens.

2 lens solutions...whether you like to shoot wide or telephoto: 24-70mm and 14-24mm, or 24-70mm and 70-200mm vr2.

100% agree with matt..don't slap a 28-300 type lens on the d700 if you are doing pro work.

insanefred

Qarik wrote: »

100% agree with matt..don't slap a 28-300 type lens on the d700 if you are doing pro work.

QFT...
You can get either the 24-120 VR f/4 lens or the the 24-70mm lenses, and a 70-200mm f/2.8 or even a 70-300 VR.
As long as you work within their limitations the above lenses I'd recommend for weddings.

Matthew Saville

Art Scott wrote: »

Cannot beat a team like a 24-70 and 70-200 especially for weddings...............or portraits.......they should be 2.8 lenses....if money is not available for Nikon lenses then I recommend Sigma...I have shot exclusively Sigma, for nearly 30 yrs, until I purchased my D300's.....................and I picked up Nikon lenses at really good pricing........I will be going back to Sigma when I go full frame in the future.....................

I would be better off shooting a whole wedding or anything actually with a 70-200...but that is how I started out......I never was into using wide angle lenses...if I needed more people in the shot I just foot zoomed farther back.....worked great for me for many many years..............

Just a quick word of caution, from a fellow Sigma lover- Not all Sigma lenses are created equal, and if you get a D700 some day you'll definitely wanna stick with the Nikon 24-70 instead of the Sigma 24-70's (They've got two versions out now)

I know it's not exactly apples to apples, but you can check out their comparative reviews on SLRGear:

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1236/cat/31f

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1121/cat/13

Now I'm certainly not one to dismiss a lens based simply on test charts, but that looks pretty bad if you ask me. So, buy at your own risk, and definitely test before you buy. All in all, as a workhorse lens I can just highly recommend the Nikon. It freaking rocks.


I do however see that the reviews of the new Sigma 70-200 OS are amazing, and the 50 1.4 and 85 1.4 are turning out beautifully as well. I do currently own more Sigma lenses than Nikon lenses. :-)

=Matt=

T-Rider

Take a look at the new Nikon 24-120 f/4. It provides an excellent walk-about range, good low-light capacity with top gun IQ. For one lens, everyday use on FX it's great...fine complement for the D700.

InsuredDisaster

Matthew Saville wrote: »

. I do currently own more Sigma lenses than Nikon lenses. :-)

=Matt=

How is the quality control? I've read in the past that you have to test and pick the best sample of whatever you are trying to buy. I feel that one shouldn't have to do that, and I've had several lenses from Sigma that had problems. I stopped buying them when I realized that Nikon seemed to produce lenses that were perfect everytime and functioned fully on my cameras. Granted, most of my Sigmas were fairly low end models.

Has Sigma reworked their quality control in the last year or two or is it still hit and miss?

Matthew Saville

InsuredDisaster wrote: »

How is the quality control? I've read in the past that you have to test and pick the best sample of whatever you are trying to buy. I feel that one shouldn't have to do that, and I've had several lenses from Sigma that had problems. I stopped buying them when I realized that Nikon seemed to produce lenses that were perfect everytime and functioned fully on my cameras. Granted, most of my Sigmas were fairly low end models.

Has Sigma reworked their quality control in the last year or two or is it still hit and miss?

Yeah the first Sigma I bought was a $140 ebay special, a 70-300 plastic paperweight. It literally fell apart in my hands after about 11 months.

But then again, I've also completely demolished two Nikon kit lenses in my day as well. Plastic paperweights that eventually just fell to pieces.

The few Sigma lenses that I do own, or have shot with and recommend in general, are all of the highest quality and very rugged / reliable. IF, of course, you get a good copy to begin with. And no, QC at Sigma was not perfect 4-5 years ago when I bought my Sigma lenses. Heck, I had one of the lens pouches get delivered with the logo patch sewn on upside down! Nice touch.

The one lens I bought and love, the 50-150, had a sticky aperture right out of the box, so I had to send it back for service or replacement, I don't know which they gave me. But all I know is that since then, I've only sent in my Sigma lenses once for a tune-up and cleaning, and they've run smoothly ever since. And I'm ROUGH on my gear, seriously.

I think all gear needs regular service, so just count on sending your stuff in every 1-2 years depending on how heavily you use it. Nikon, Sigma, lenses, bodies, it's all precision equipment and they just don't make it like they used to in the 80's, ya know...

All in all, I wouldn't let Sigma's bad reputation for QC deter you from buying a Sigma lens. It would be a very regrettable mistake to miss out on some of the amazing lenses they've made that Nikon may simply never get around to competing with. (Such as the 50-150 2.8, which unfortunately I don't think Nikon will ever bother making at this point... And now Sigma is on the mk2 version of their 150 2.8 Macro, while Nikon has only updated their 105 macro, but not their legendary 200...)

=Matt=