The 70-300mm VR is very, very similar to the Canon version, from performance down to the size/weight and the price. It is a prosumer zoom, fairly slow and decently built. Until Nikon comes up with a 70-200 VR that is designed for FX, this zoom will do.
EOS20 wrote:
How good is the 70-300 VR On the D700?
...a LOT better than I thought it would be. The dynamic range and raw headroom with the D700 help a lot. I feel like the lens "woke up" when I moved it from the D300 to the D700. I personally don't think you can do better for the money.
kjcramer wrote:
...a LOT better than I thought it would be. The dynamic range and raw headroom with the D700 help a lot. I feel like the lens "woke up" when I moved it from the D300 to the D700. I personally don't think you can do better for the money.
Remember that the D700 is somewhat less demanding of lenses than the D300, as it is lower in resolution. If you spread D300 pixel density across an FX sensor, you'd probably hear about the 70-300 being slightly soft at 300mm and such. Which is not to knock the 70-300 - I very much like mine.
That makes total sense Doug. It does get just a touch softer at 300, but totally usable. Much better in fact than my Canon 100-400L ever was at full zoom for a lot less weight and $$.
kjcramer wrote:
Much better in fact than my Canon 100-400L ever was at full zoom for a lot less weight and $$.
I agree on the weight and $$ but the performance of my 100-400L was absolutely stellar. You must have had a sub-par copy then. Sorry guys, I have to make that comment, I know it is somewhat OT but since the thread relates to both brands....
I agree with Joshua. IQ-wise the 70-300VR is between the 70-300IS and the 100-400IS. There's a lot of difference between the 100-400 copies. I had mine serviced/calibrated and after that is was superb.
I think I will go with the 70-300 VR, Or possibly a 3rd party telephoto zoom like A Sigma 100-300 f/4, 70-200 f/2.8 or even the Tamron 70-200.
I'm still not sure what normal zoom I want though. 24-70 is a fantastic lens, But if I get that, I'm not going to have much more to spend on something longer.
I can get A 28-70 And 70-300 for about the price of the 24-70. What third party brand normal zoom would you all recommend for the D700?
And also, What would be better, A D300 + 18-200 VR Or A D700 + Tamron 28-300 VC? (Thinking I might start off with A walkabout zoom to start off with).
I'm hoping to make my final decision next week in which camera I go with, So any help would be appreciated.
Wow, all you guys that have jumped ship... kind of inspiring
We will miss you over on the "light" side. But I can't blame you all. The way Canon is boosting MP's all over the place but at the same time falls short on the essentials as AF doesn't boost confidence...
It is that I like my 1Ds3 so much (and don't want to part with it), but otherwise I would have joined ranks already
EOS20 wrote:
I think I will go with the 70-300 VR, Or possibly a 3rd party telephoto zoom like A Sigma 100-300 f/4, 70-200 f/2.8 or even the Tamron 70-200.
I'm still not sure what normal zoom I want though. 24-70 is a fantastic lens, But if I get that, I'm not going to have much more to spend on something longer.
I can get A 28-70 And 70-300 for about the price of the 24-70. What third party brand normal zoom would you all recommend for the D700?
And also, What would be better, A D300 + 18-200 VR Or A D700 + Tamron 28-300 VC? (Thinking I might start off with A walkabout zoom to start off with).
I'm hoping to make my final decision next week in which camera I go with, So any help would be appreciated. ...Show more →
What exactly is your budget? There is Nikon 28-200 3.5-5.6 to consider if you want a walkaround but I don't know if it's any good... Nikon 28-105 2.5-4.5 is another one. I would go for the D700... IMO it's a better camera, unless you really want to shoot wildlife right now and need to have the 1.5 crop factor. Tamron 28-300 is well liked by some and hated by some... it's convenient and light, but apparently slow (although you can't really expect it to be fast) and not so hot on the long end
You could also buy a Tamron 28-75 2.8 (but go into a store and test to make sure you don't get a bad copy!) and a Sigma 70-200 2.8 ( latest version... AF on Tamron supposedly 70-200 isn't great?)... I think those two would be a good start... and get a low light prime. The new Sigma 50 1.4 is great, albeit expensive for a prime, so if that's too expensive, get a cheaper Nikon 50 1.8 or something.
P.S. I've only actually owned the Sigma 70-200 and Sigma 50, so my recommendations are only based on the stuff I've read about all of these lens on the net while trying to decide what to buy..
I'm more than half way through my conversion and the D700 came today but I'm not there to get it. I'm starting with the 50 f/1.4, 17-35 f/2.8 and the 70-300 VR and will add the 24-70 when I sell the Mark III .... although I had zero problems with my Canon gear I just love full frame and modern auto-focus and so.....soon to be a Nikonian!
At this moment your widest option is about 17mm (40D+17-40). If this is no problem for you then get the 28-70. What I read is the 24-70 is marginal better. For me it's the extra 4mm that I use a lott.
According to Bjorn Rorslett the 28-70 was the best mid-range zoom lens before the 24-70
I had the 28-70 during my Nikon-days... My most used lens back then. Very sharp, smooth bokeh, low distortion, low CA's, wonderfull colors and AF was fast and reliable.
Avi B wrote:
How about AFD 35-70 f/2.8 on the D700? It is a stellar lens... Although screwdriver driven (noisy).
I recently switched from Canon (1DMKIIN) to the D700 and couldn't be happier. As I was trying to build my new Nikon kit within the $$$ from the Canon sell off, I couldn't swing the 28 or 24-70, so I went with the 35-70 (only available used). I think it was around $350 and has performed much better than my Canon 24-70L did. Extremely sharp with great color and contrast. Build is rock solid. There is a little focus noise, but I find it barely noticeable. You can't go wrong with this lens.
fastglass wrote:
I recently switched from Canon (1DMKIIN) to the D700 and couldn't be happier. As I was trying to build my new Nikon kit within the $$$ from the Canon sell off, I couldn't swing the 28 or 24-70, so I went with the 35-70 (only available used). I think it was around $350 and has performed much better than my Canon 24-70L did. Extremely sharp with great color and contrast. Build is rock solid. There is a little focus noise, but I find it barely noticeable. You can't go wrong with this lens.
Indeed, a friend of mine uses 17-35, 35-70, 80-200 all f/2.8 zooms to get to the 200mm mark I think that this is an inexpensive yet high IQ way to go.... I will dub it the "old three kings" method
EOS20 wrote:
Ok I went to look today at the D700 and I'm thinking of the following Kit:
D700 Body + Sigma 15-30 + Nikon 24-70 + Nikon 70-300 VR. And I will pick up a 50 f/1.4 AF-S when it becomes available.
What do you all think?
I am not sure about the Sigma; is that lens designed for FX bodies? Keep in mind that 24mm on the 24-70mm on FX is plenty wide. I would just get the two Nikkor lenses first with a D700 and play with them for awhile before you decide on a third lens. Just my opinion, of course.
The Sigma comes as a special deal with the D700, It's only $100 (AU$) more then just the Body only (The lens alone is worth about $950 AU$!), And also includes a bonus 8gb Extreme III Card! (This is at a local B&M camera chain store BTW). I did try it out today on a D700, And the lens does work on a FX camera.
I'm starting with the 50 f/1.4, 17-35 f/2.8 and the 70-300 VR and will add the 24-70 when I sell the Mark III .... although I had zero problems with my Canon gear I just love full frame and modern auto-focus and so.....soon to be a Nikonian!