Is this combination the "Holy Trinity" for landscape photographers??
Nikon D 800 / 800e (Which)
Nikon 14 - 24
Nikon 24 - 70
Nikon 70 - 200 F2.8 VR
If not, what is?? Thanks, Jim
Aug 04, 2012 at 06:22 AM
Andre Labonte Offline • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
I've been using the above lenses and to lug around those 3 with 2 cameras, were not fun. If I were you, for landscape better of with fix focal length like 24, 28, 35 or wider.
It is for me, pretty much (add a Zeiss 21 for wide angle shots that need a polarizer). However, I don't use the 70-200 nearly as often as the other two.
However, +1 to Andre's comment. You should get a kit that suites your needs.
Andre Labonte wrote:
Why worry about what other people use... what are your needs?
Andy, I am sorry my inquiry came across to you as one concerned about what other know / believe... It is a legitimate question, which you answered with a question, so what do you think I should be concerned with... Global warming, decline of the Rufus Beatles, What??
maxx9photo wrote:
I've been using the above lenses and to lug around those 3 with 2 cameras, were not fun. If I were you, for landscape better of with fix focal length like 24, 28, 35 or wider.
Steve Perry wrote:
It is for me, pretty much (add a Zeiss 21 for wide angle shots that need a polarizer). However, I don't use the 70-200 nearly as often as the other two.
However, +1 to Andre's comment. You should get a kit that suites your needs.
Thank you... I am researching the subject of Nikon / Canon cost / equivalence to determine future acquisitions... I know nothing of Nikon except what I read... I am considering the Nikon D800 / 800e and these lens for landscape... I like you suggestion on the zeiss as with Canon gear it is magical... thank you...
Those are the big three zooms and, in my reading, you didn't come across as "worried" about what others use.
In the last 4 or 5 years, Nikon has finally decided to produce fast primes, an area they have been sorely lacking. Sprinkle a few of these in to the zooms and you have a great kit.
probably...but they're all heavy as hell...I opted for a 16-35, nifty fifty and 70-200 VRII...get a break from the weight and expense and don't lack IQ or versatility
I went for a 17-35, 28 1.8(for stars), 50mm 1.8, and a 70-300mm. While the 70-300 is not as sharp as the 70-200 that I recently sold it weighs about 1/4 as much. That in itself makes a huge difference for landscapes. 14-24 is AWESOME! but the 17-35 isn't much worse and it takes filters.
Just my opinion... But if you are going to get the D800e, get the BEST lenses you can afford, as there is no point getting all that extra resolution and then tossing it away with the lens. I recently switched from Canon, and now have the 14-24 and the 24-70. The only one I've paused on buying is the 70-200 II. Reason being is strictly budget, and as a landscape only kind of guy, the 14-24 is mounted 95% of the time anyway.
My consideration is with getting a new 80-200 f2.8. From the research I've done, it's a very sharp lens. The AF improvements and VR are lost on me, as I'm only using it for landscapes. It's over $1000 cheaper than the 70-200 II. If I had extra money to burn, it would be an easy decision of getting the 70-200 to round out my kit.
I used Canon for several years and had the 16-35, 24-105, and 70-200. The only thing I might have changed up was the 14-24 with a converter for the 16-35 since it is wider and sharper. However, the 16-35 sunstar kept me coming back.
I did look at the Zeiss 15mm prime, but at that $$ level, I just couldn't justify it. From what I can tell, the Nikon zooms are good enough to make them more than adequate over trying to carry enough primes to cover the range between 14-200.
James R wrote:
Those are the big three zooms and, in my reading, you didn't come across as "worried" about what others use.
In the last 4 or 5 years, Nikon has finally decided to produce fast primes, an area they have been sorely lacking. Sprinkle a few of these in to the zooms and you have a great kit.
James, I am older than most and have seen my share of worry, complacency, anger, joy, etc.. I do not get too excited until I have the equipment in hand... The weight / size is no a deterrent as I seldom go more than a mile from the car... Similarly, I shoot 99% off a tripod... I will pickup primes as I find a need, should I go Nikon... Thank you, Jim
M635_Guy wrote:
Oldrattler - I think asking what kind of shooting you do is a fair question if you're looking for advice on lenses.
That said, all of those are the Nikon Pro f/2.8 zoom set, which are amazing lenses, though heavy and expensive.
Thank you so much... I also believe it would be a viable question, but the preceding comment was not a question... It, IMO, was written with an "implied condescension"... Could just be me, but that's how I read it...
Kell wrote:
probably...but they're all heavy as hell...I opted for a 16-35, nifty fifty and 70-200 VRII...get a break from the weight and expense and don't lack IQ or versatility
Thanks Kell... Just gathering information at this point in time... I will look into your suggestions...
