OK Got another lens question

kgarrett11

I have a D3. My lens are the 80-400mm VR, 18-200mm VR, 60mm, and an older 70-210mm. I am going to Yellostone and Grand Teton in June. I have between $1500 and $2000 to spend on glass. I have been looking at the 24-70mm VR but I am not sure what glass the money can be spent on. Any ideas would be appreciated.

kini62

kgarrett11 wrote:

I have a D3. My lens are the 80-400mm VR, 18-200mm VR, 60mm, and an older 70-210mm. I am going to Yellostone and Grand Teton in June. I have between $1500 and $2000 to spend on glass. I have been looking at the 24-70mm VR but I am not sure what glass the money can be spent on. Any ideas would be appreciated.

24-70 does not have VR. This would fill in with the 80-400 very well.

the 14-24 would of course give you that really wide angle for landscapes.

So depending on your shooting preferences- ????

If it were me I would likely get the 24-70 (much broader usefullness when not doing landscape work) and a Sigma 12-24. That would put you at or just over your $2000 though.

Gene

kgarrett11

kini62 wrote:

24-70 does not have VR. This would fill in with the 80-400 very well.

the 14-24 would of course give you that really wide angle for landscapes.

So depending on your shooting preferences- ????

If it were me I would likely get the 24-70 (much broader usefullness when not doing landscape work) and a Sigma 12-24. That would put you at or just over your $2000 though.

Gene

Yea you're right, I didn't mean to put the VR in there. I thought about the 14-24 but like you said, as far as a wide angle is concerned, I think that the 24-70 would be more versatile.

Lovesong

The 24-70 lives on my 5D. If you're using a FF camera, then a 24-70 is an indispensable walk-around lens.

One thing you might want to check is whether the D3 will switch to DX mode if you attach a DX lens to it... not a Nikon shooter, but I remember hearing something about it.

muserato

Yo should probably go for the 24-70, if by any chance you need wider you can always stitch 2 or 3 captures in photoshop

kgarrett11

Lovesong wrote:

The 24-70 lives on my 5D. If you're using a FF camera, then a 24-70 is an indispensable walk-around lens.

One thing you might want to check is whether the D3 will switch to DX mode if you attach a DX lens to it... not a Nikon shooter, but I remember hearing something about it.

Yes it does so I'm going to keep my 18-200 on my D200 as much as possible. This is one reason that what ever lens I get I don't want a DX lens.

kgarrett11

muserato wrote:

Yo should probably go for the 24-70, if by any chance you need wider you can always stitch 2 or 3 captures in photoshop

This is something that I have thought about and have thought that it might be easier to stitch the 24-70 together than the 14-24. But I'm not sure about it and haven't seen anything on the web to confirm this.

Mitchell

You really need to decide why you are buying this lens. If it is primarily for your trip to Yellowstone, the 14-24mm is your best choice. This lens has received incredible accolades and is sharper than wide angle primes. On your full frame D3, your photos of Yellowstone should be superb.

The 24-70mm is a great lens. I own the 28-70mm lens that it is replacing. I shoot portraits with this lens with nice results. It is a nice all around lens, but not one I would immediately think of for landscapes.

You need to give some serious thought to your lens collection. Right now you have a flagship full frame camera coupled with some mediocre consumer level lenses. Why bother? Get some quality, pro level glass for your D3 and make that baby sing.

Tee Why

I'd say for landscapes, the 14-24 as well. For general purpose use, the 24-70.

kgarrett11

OK so you people have convinced me. I'll have to dip into my home equity. I am going to look into getting the 12-24 mm lens but also the 300mm VR. Along with the 300mm I am looking at the 1.7 TC but have been told that it is soft compared to the 1.4. Is this true? Which would be better?

ziggy53

kgarrett11 wrote:

OK so you people have convinced me. I'll have to dip into my home equity. I am going to look into getting the 12-24 mm lens but also the 300mm VR. Along with the 300mm I am looking at the 1.7 TC but have been told that it is soft compared to the 1.4. Is this true? Which would be better?

You might also consider rental if this is not something you need to purchase.

Mitchell

kgarrett11 wrote:

OK so you people have convinced me. I'll have to dip into my home equity. I am going to look into getting the 12-24 mm lens but also the 300mm VR. Along with the 300mm I am looking at the 1.7 TC but have been told that it is soft compared to the 1.4. Is this true? Which would be better?

I own the 300mmVR and use it quite successfully with the 1.7TC. Other than the loss of a stop, I see no reduction in IQ. I've been told the 2.0TC should be avoided and does impart a significant reduction in IQ.

Took this with the 300mmVR and 1.7tc behind my office the other day.

kgarrett11

Mitchell wrote:

I own the 300mmVR and use it quite successfully with the 1.7TC. Other than the loss of a stop, I see no reduction in IQ. I've been told the 2.0TC should be avoided and does impart a significant reduction in IQ.

Thanks Mitchell, I've gotten several responses now and all agree that there is no problem with the 1.7 TC so I think that I am going to place an order for the lens' that I want.