jolahern Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
p.2 #2 · Do you travel with the 14-24 & 24-70? | |
I moved from the 5D MKI and used lenses like the 17-40, 24-105, 16-35 MKII and 70-200 f/2.8. Now have a Nikon kit that includes the D700, D3, 14-24, 24-70 and 70-200.
If I was looking for a lightweight kit for travel photography, I would go with the Canon gear, the f/4 lenses are great, the 17-40mm is great value and the new 70-200mm f/4 is reported to be sharper than the f/2.8 version which I found to be a great lens and better than the Nikon MKi version for landscape (can resolve finer details).
I had the 24-105mm, however a 5x zoom is going to have to suffer in some department and it is at the wide end, it has horrible barrel distortion and it was a lens I never loved, just used because it was handy. One problem with the 5Ds is they have no built in flash, the D700 is useful as you can use it for a bit of pop up flash, okay never going to be as good as hotshoe flash but still means you can leave the flash behind but with the Canon you have to hope you don't need it.
As the for the Nikon, one reason to go for it is the better build of the body and high ISO quality. If you tend to get your gear wet or shot without a tripod then the D700 might be a better camera for you. As for the 14-24mm and 24-70mm, yes they are stella lenes, but put them in a bag with a 70-200mm and you have quite a bit of weight, not too bad if in a backpack, but a shoulder bag you start to feel it. I went round Venice with the above kit, and to be honest I gave up after a day carrying it around, instead I scouted the area first, and then went back later with specific lenses to get the shot.
If you want the Nikon body, then you could look at either the 14-24mm with the 50mm, or if you want a broder focal range and cut down on the weight the 17-35mm and 70-180mm macro zoom might be worth looking at.
|