Free Shipping on ALL Products
camera reviewsbest cameraslens reviewsphotography tipscamera forumvideo toursphotography bookssupport me
It is currently Tue Sep 02, 2014 9:44 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Jun 21, 2011 7:07 pm 
Dear Friends,

To start with, I would like to thank Camera Lab for giving me the opportunity to become part of this community and also thank all the members in advance for their support and professionalism.

I have a question, it might sound stupid, yet I have to ask and hope that members will give me their best advise.

What is the basic difference between the following three lenses:

a - AF Zoom-Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED (2.5x)
b - AF-S VR 70-200mm f/2.8G IF-ED
c - AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II

AND, which one will be the best one to invest in? I already have my heart set on the AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II but advise from professionals out there WILL be considered and appreciated.

The camera I plan to use the lens with is Nikon D700 and hope to one day upgrade to D3X or if it comes out by then the new D4X.

The photography will be commercial photography, Models, Weddings, etc. Please note this is not my only lens, I also plan to get:

a - NIKKOR AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED
b - AF Zoom-Nikkor 24-85mm f/2.8-4D IF (3.5x).

This lens will be dedicated to Portrait Photography. Your suggestion here too would be highly appreciated.

Cheers,


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 21, 2011 7:51 pm 
Meh the lenses are better in order of price in this situation.

Id avoid the 70-200 version 1 as it vignettes quite heavily on a full size sensor. Im not normally fussy about vignetting, but I used to shoot one on an F5 and it was too much for my taste.

Id consider the 80-200 AF-S as well, same optics as the 80-200 you mention, but faster focussing.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 21, 2011 9:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 8:47 pm
Posts: 202
Location: Osijek
what i don't understand is why get 24-70 and 24-85 lenses?? i think 24-70 will suite you just enough..

_________________
nikon d90 --->af-s dx 18-105mm; tamron 90mm macro

add me up on:

flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bakica/

deviant art:
http://tbensic.deviantart.com/

----:>bakice ce vladati svjetom<:----


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 22, 2011 5:43 am 
the 70-200 vr I- was the old flagship lens of the Nikon Selection- fast focusing and extremely reliable, the only downside was the mentioned vignetting.

the 80-200 2.8D was also very reliable, very little vignetting, sharp but a tad slower than the 70-200 vr I.

the 70-200 2.8 VR II is the latest rendition of this popular zoom, with an even better VR system than its predecessors the VR II is heavier but does not have the same vignetting problem that the first VR model had.

any of these would serve you best, but remember that the Nano Crystal equipped lenses will render sharper photos are they're made for digital and not film. The microcontrast from the 70-200 models are amazing.

I would personally go for the 70-200 VR I or II, you can't go wrong.

the 24-70 and the 24-85.

the 24-70 is a staple lens used by many professional photographers. as sharp as the nikkor 70-200 this lens is highly regarded as the sharpest wide to mid zoom in the market. the only downsides i can think of is the weight.

the lightweight 24-85 is a great lens, but I don't believe it has the f-stop range you will need for low light photography. You'd have to keep in mind the the loss of light everytime you zoom into a subject.I normally shoot f4 or tighter anyways, so this might not be a problem, but it can be if you need the 2.8 region.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 22, 2011 3:40 pm 
Thanks for the suggestions Palakaboy,

Appreciate it.

Now correct me if I understood it right:

The 80-200 2.8D was also very reliable, very little vignetting, sharp but a tad slower than the 70-200 VR I and the 70-200 2.8 VR II is the latest rendition of this popular zoom but is heavier and does not have the same vignetting problem that the first VR model had.

Bottom line, in your opinion the AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II is the best choice?

What I still did not understand is your reply to the 24-70 and the 24-85. So, (in your opinion) which one should I go for?

I am also confused about the 50mm as there are 2 models, 500mm 1.4 & 50 mm 1.8 and the price between the 2 is almost double, is it worth going for the higher priced one?

What is the basic difference between DX & FX Formats and which one is better for a Nikon D700 Full Frame DSLR camera?

Thanks again for taking the time and suggestions.


Cheers,


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 15, 2011 9:02 pm 
The 70-200 VRII even as its predecessor before it, is regarded as one of the best zoom lenses out there, all but impossible to go wrong with it.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 15, 2011 10:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 8:57 am
Posts: 1551
Location: Winterpeg, Manisnowba, Canada
hello, Heartkwt,

I think that you're right for the most part, the 80-200 AF-S D is a good, sharp lens but it's a bit slower to focus and doesn't include VR image stabilization like the newer models do. If you're on a budget, that's probably the best lens. The 70-200 AF-S G VR is known to vignette on full frame DSLRs, but if you want to use it on a DX DSLR (cropped sensor) you shouldn't have any problems. The new 70-200 AF-S G VR II is the latest addition, and adds a bit of heft to the lens. However, it doesn't vignette like it's predecessor, it offers the newest VR stabilization and is super quick to focus. If you can afford it, the new 70-200 is definitely the way to go.

Regarding the 24-85 and 24-70, they're both good, sharp lenses. However, the 24-70 offers a consistent aperture of f/2.8, while the 24-85 is a variable aperture lens of f/2.8-4. The 24-70 is regarded as part of Nikon's "Holy Trinity", which consists of the Nikkor 14-24, the 24-70 and finally the 70-200, all f/2.8 lenses. While the 24-70 doesn't offer the extra 15mm on the telephoto end that the 24-85 offers, I don't think that you'll miss it too much. The 24-70 is overall a sharper lens than the 24-85, but remember that it's much more pricey. I'd just recommend getting something like the 85mm 1.4 to substitute it, an extremely sharp portrait prime. Overall, I'd recommend going for the 24-70 over the 24-85 for its consistent aperture, plus it's a sharper lens.

Quote:
I am also confused about the 50mm as there are 2 models, 500mm 1.4 & 50 mm 1.8


I think that you mean the 50mm 1.4, not the 500mm! A 500mm 1.4 would be an EXTREMELY large, expensive lens!
Anyways, the difference is mainly that the 50mm 1.4 gives you a wider aperture of 2/3 of a stop. The 1.8 model is a bit sharper, but you'll have to deal with the loss of that extra aperture that you get with the 50 1.4. It's up to you if it's worth the extra money, if you mainly will shoot indoors and in low light with it, I think that it would be a good choice to go for the 1.4, but the 1.8 is still a good choice.

To answer your final question, about the difference between DX and FX formats (I'm assuming that you mean DX and FX lenses), they're both designed for different types of cameras. DX lenses are designed for DX cameras, which are cameras with an imaging sensor inside that isn't the full size of a 35mm strip of film. FX lenses are designed for FX (full frame) cameras, meaning that the sensor inside the camera is the same size as a piece of 35mm film. DX lenses are smaller and lighter as they're designed for the smaller DX sensors, and they won't work with FX cameras very well. FX lenses however, are both compatible with DX and FX cameras.
One point to note is that because the DX sensors are smaller, when you put on an FX lens it "crops" the field of view, taking only the centre part of the image that the lens forms. That's called the equivalent focal length. For instance, if you mount a 50mm FX lens on a DX camera body, it will give an equivalent focal length of 75mm as the sensor of DX cameras are smaller. To find the equivalent focal length of a lens on a DX camera, multiply its focal length by 1.5.
Generally, DX lenses are smaller, lighter and cheaper because since the performance in the corners of the lens and vignetting doesn't really matter since it will be cropped. Why you can't mount these DX lenses onto full frame cameras (well you can, but the performance won't be were good) is because the corner performance and vignetting will show. Your camera, the D700 is an FX camera, so try to only use FX lenses.

I hope that I helped,
-Evan

_________________
-Evan

Gear: 7 Nikon Nikkor AI-S and AF-S lenses, SB-700 flash, Nikon D7000, Nikon FM, variety of accessories

"There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs."
- Ansel Adams


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 15, 2011 10:50 pm 
Dear Evans,

I sincerely and honestly appreciate your details and through response. You explanation was so thorough that even an "idiot" like me understood it very well and clearly.

When I had posted the question, I was relatively new to this business, although not that long ago-but I learned things very quickly as this was a hobby, then it became a passion then obsession and now it is a craze.

Now I understand what you are saying and had already found out this myself, but still am quite touched by the gesture and assistance and your professionalism.

I have already put the following equipment in my list:

- NIKON D700 body
- NIKKOR 70-200 AF-S G VR II
- NIKKOR AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.4G
- AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED (2.1x)
- AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II
- One Speedlight  SB-900
- One Speedlight  SB-700 (as back-up for when the SB 900 heats up)
- Battery Pack:MB-D10
- And finally, Lowepro Pro Runner 450 AW

I hope I have picked the right stuff and would like to get your opinion on it.


Cheers,

Mohummed (Heartkwt)


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 9:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 8:57 am
Posts: 1551
Location: Winterpeg, Manisnowba, Canada
Hey, Mohummed, I'm glad that you appreciated my post! If there's anything that you ever need to ask, I'd be glad to help you out.

Quote:
a hobby, then it became a passion then obsession and now it is a craze


That's just the way that photography works, eh? It starts small but then it grows on you and you just want more and more... :lol:

Anyways, your kit looks to be very nice. If I were to throw anything in there, you may want to look into getting a micro (macro) lens and maybe a portrait prime. Micro lenses can come in handy in many situations. Take the 105mm micro Nikkor for example, it comes in handy for wedding photography as a portrait lens, plus also it allows you to get good photos of wedding rings, bouquets etc. If you want a better dedicated portrait lens, a Nikkor 85mm 1.8 or 1.4 would suit you wonderfully, they're among some of the sharpest Nikkors ever made, I'd highly recommend them.

Hope that I helped,
-Evan

_________________
-Evan

Gear: 7 Nikon Nikkor AI-S and AF-S lenses, SB-700 flash, Nikon D7000, Nikon FM, variety of accessories

"There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs."
- Ansel Adams


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Once again, thanks
PostPosted: Fri Jul 22, 2011 2:09 pm 
Honestly appreciate it.

Quick question, I am planing to get a Nikkor 50mm 1.4 lens as my prime lens for portraits. Are you suggesting that instead I get 105mm micro Nikkor and it will substitute for a portrait AND Macro?

If the difference is "not a killer" sure but I do not wish to compromise on the quality.


Cheers,

Mohummed


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

All words, images, videos and layout, copyright 2005-2012 Gordon Laing. May not be used without permission.
/ How we test / Best Cameras / Advertising / Camera reviews / Supporting Camera Labs

Webdesign by Alphabase IT
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group