All the lenses you have will work with the D800 as there is a setting on the camera which detects which lenses are full frame (FX) and which are 1.5 crop(DX). This being said, you will need to buy the best lenses to get the best results. Because the D800 has such a high megapixel rate if you use cheap lenses it will show every flaw in your images. PM me if you need more help. theoldnikonian

For me I like the overlap of the 120mm with the 70-200. There are many times when I do event photography that I don't have time to swap lenses, and that extra reach can grab something that I would miss. To me, overlap is wonderful and when I didn't have it, I always felt stuck.

sevencrossing said:
+1

life is the wrong way round , buy the time you can afford all the gear, you are too old to carry it

Yes but buy the time you can afford it you can afford to pay someone to carry it for you.

park 1953 said:
You must be young. ......do it while you can and enjoy.

+1

life is the wrong way round , buy the time you can afford all the gear, you are too old to carry it

aquarian_light said:
Well thanks for the input! Weight isn't much of an issue, certainly won't be taking all my lenses everywhere for everything, but even if I had to I've got a very nice backpack bag that I frequently carry bottles of water in on my hikes. Sooooo I'm not too worried about that aspect.

You must be young. Weight is not a problem. Wish I could say that. It's not only the camera gear I have to carry but my own butt too. aquarian_light do it while you can and enjoy.

sevencrossing said:
a nice set of lenses, if you do not mind carrying a fairly heavy bag
but if you only want to travel light and still get stunning hi res shots, the 24 -120 is hard ( impossible) to beat

Well thanks for the input! Weight isn't much of an issue, certainly won't be taking all my lenses everywhere for everything, but even if I had to I've got a very nice backpack bag that I frequently carry bottles of water in on my hikes. Sooooo I'm not too worried about that aspect.

aquarium light said:
....a lens set up of a 50, and a 16-35 and in the future a 70-200.

a nice set of lenses, if you do not mind carrying a fairly heavy bag
but if you only want to travel light and still get stunning hi res shots, the 24 -120 is hard ( impossible) to beat

sevencrossing said:
another vote for Nikon 24 -120 very useful range.

vignettes and distortion can be easily and automatically corrected in lightroom

what other lenses do you have ?

70mm is a big short for portraiture; so if you do not have something like a 70 -200; I would go for the Nikon

The one or the other of the lenses in question will be complimenting a lens set up of a 50, and a 16-35 and in the future a 70-200. Basically a gap filler between the 16-35 and the future ownership of a 70-200. So I'm not entirely worried about the extra length of the nikon, because it will eventually get covered in my lens set up. But in the time between now and the glorious day i become a 70-200 owner the 120mm will be nice, but not entirely necessary.

TaoTeJared said:
I'm not sure if either lens would take advantage of the "E" below F/8 so I'm not sure it would make much difference between the two.

This lens is not intended to be taking full advantage of the resolution power here, for a portrait lens I intend to use higher apertures to make it just a hair softer. For my work where I want absolute sharpness, I have the 50mm 1.8g for stuff like architecture and still lifes, and the 16-35 for landscapes.

another vote for Nikon 24 -120 very useful range.

vignettes and distortion can be easily and automatically corrected in lightroom

what other lenses do you have ?

70mm is a big short for portraiture; so if you do not have something like a 70 -200; I would go for the Nikon

I love the 24-120 f/4, AF is quick, good range, sharp wide open, can easily get 3 stops of VR.

I have not used the Tamron 24-70 but the other Tamron lenses I have tried the VC takes a second to start/work which I found slow enough to miss shots. They may have updated it though but I haven't researched it enough.

I'm not sure if either lens would take advantage of the "E" below F/8 so I'm not sure it would make much difference between the two.

Wish I could give you feedback on the Tamron, but have never used. I do have the 24-120/4.0 though, and use it on my D800. It's a nice lens. Pretty sharp I'd say, and VERY USEFUL range! There are a few drawback: it vignettes at widest setting and distortion is, well, bad at widest FL. I never shoot at either end of any zoom for these reasons.

I think I paid $950 used, and have never looked back. It's very good and problems I mentioned can easily be fixed in post. Check out my flickr pages...almost all of the beach shots were taken with it. You can check the EXIF info. good luck

http://www.flickr.com/photos/45249503@N02/

Stabilized standard zoom... tamron is faster @ 2.8, nikon is longer @ 120mm, both have the image stabilization, both are pretty darn sharp according to online reviews, both are exactly the same price on amazon.

Thoughts?

P.S. Will be putting the lens on an 800E and will be used for studio/portraits/random-walk-around-the-woods lens.

@ Gitzo

The answer is in the forum rules posted by {NR} admin:

"I changed the edit post function - now you can edit your posts up to 24 hr after posting it, after that the edit button will disappear."

.

It's phine. Don't wurry about it.

Here's a question for anyone understanding how this website "works".............how long does one have, after making a post, to go back and edit the post in order to fix a "typo" ?

I just now noticed, in the next to last paragraph of my reply to the OP, I mistakenly referred to his "percent" camera, when I SHOULD have typed, his "present" camera.........also, in the last paragraph, the seventh word from the end should be "thorough", rather than "through".......(ugghh !)

(Maybe I should fire my proofreader ?)

@ bydavidrosen

Are you still with us? Maybe you can shoot some photos and post on Photo-A-Day....We always like to see what folks are shooting.

bydavidrosen asks / says........

I'm a little confused though about something. I was thinking about possibly at some point upgrading to a Nikon D800. Which if any of these lenses will be compatible? From what I understand there are two types of mounts, DX and FX, and the D800 is an FX mount, but I can't seem to get a grasp of which kind my 3 current lenses are (i believe the Sigma is a DX though). And if they are DX, will they work and if there are any shortcomings.

Hi David;
You're getting a lot of advice, but before you even think about buying another camera, something you said in that statement tells me that you are a bit mixed up about "something"........Quote: "I understand there are two types of mounts"............
The "mount" refers to the physical "attachment" on the small end of the lens which enables it to "mate" (and physically "attach" to ANY Nikon camera body; (and it hasn't changed "physically" for years and years now, although newer Nikon bodies have various electrical contacts that were lacking on older film bodies.

The "DX" and "FX" simply refers to the size of the sensor used in a particular camera; The FX sensor is called "full frame", as it presents approximately the same size "format" as used in 35mm film cameras. The DX ( or "APS-C") size sensor is about 3/4 as big as the FX sensor. Now..........

All lenses are designed to collect light from a "subject", then bring that light "to focus" on the sensor; this was a bit easier to grasp in the days of 35mm film cameras, because regardless of how much the particular camera cost, they ALL had the same 35mm "format" (of 36mm X 24mm), because they ALL used the same 35mm film. With digital cameras, the sensors come in a "bunch" of sizes, (the inexpensive "point & shoot" cameras have sensors much smaller even than the so=called" DX bodies; but because they don't have interchangeable lenses, we can forget about them for the moment.

A so-called DX lens produces a "light cone" which is just ample to cover the smaller DX sensor; If you put it on an FX body, the cone of light would be too small to cover the larger FX format; however.......as FX lenses are designed to produce a somewhat bigger cone of light, it WILL cover the smaller DX sensor; however.........if the FX lens is say, 50mm in focal length, when you bring that size cone of light to focus on the smaller size DX sensor, the same lens nows has an "effective focal length" of 75mm. ( This is all very confusing unless you happen to be an optical engineer / lens designer, which I definitely AM NOT !)

As "confusing" as it may seem, until you throughly understand it all, I would advise sticking with your percent camera, take a lot of pictures, read everything you can get your hands on, and you may "be ready" to "upgrade" to FX surprisingly soon; ( in the meantime, you can take excellent photographs with your present camera, assuming you throughly understand it's capabilities and know how to operate it.) (and GOOD LUCK !)

The goal of any photographer should be to take "great pictures". Using expensive, "high end" cameras DOES make taking great pictures easier, but ONLY if the photographer has progressed in his / her "knowledge" of the basics of photography to a point where they have a through understanding of the equipment being used.

@ Gitzo Grat story... getting the last bid in on eBay and such is always a game...

Interestingly enough I am in the process of thinking about changing from Manfrotto quick release to Arca-Swiss....but the cost for four tripod heads is a bit high at present so I might have to look at eBay...

Inasmuch as I shoot from a tripod much of the time, (and I never could stand "screwing" the camera to the tripod, then "unscrewing" it when I finished, I have become a firm believer in quick release plates; as I usually use my tripod with an Arca-Swiss ball head, I have Arca style QR plates on everything; the one plate I have always wanted, but never have been able to find a bargain on, is an "L" plate designed to fit my D-300s; I've had a regular "bottom" plate on the 300s ever since I've had it, (which is just great when you're shooting in landscape format, but when you need to shoot in portrait format, you have to rotate the ball head all the way over to the side, putting the camera body off to the side of the tripod, and it's a "pain in the butt"; the best way to solve this problem, is by having an "L" plate on the camera, rather than a "bottom plate"; the only problem with "L" plates is.........they cost like $150 ! So......I have been trying for months now to buy a "like new" "L" plate on eBay.

I had the perfect opportunity about 10 days ago, as there was a "Really Right Stuff" L plate up for auction, (made to custom fit a 300 body), and it had no bids on it up to the day before the ending; the next day, I had to go to Terre Haute, didn't get home in time, the auction ended, and some lucky bidder snagged my L plate for $43 ! ( I had very seldom seen them fetch less than around a hundred bucks before) As they always say, "when you snooze you lose"! Damn! Now I had to start all over again; fortunately, there was another RRS plate up for auction, that ended in 3 days; some schmuck bid it up to $30, with 4 days to go; (which is clearly ignorant;) this time, I was ready ! as the auction was within a few hours of ending, the thing was already up to $55; (which made last week's winner look very lucky) this time I was DETERMINED........with 20m seconds to go, I confirmed my "max" bid......$ 101.59; when the clock ended, there was a few seconds of furious "back and forth" bidding, but I ended up winning, getting my plate for $81, + $10 shipping; not nearly as good as the previous auction, but still not bad.

What made it a little better, I had messaged the seller, asking him if he would "combine" shipping if I won two items, and he agreed to do so; (he was also selling a EN-EL3e Li-on battery for a D-300 ), ( $35 to $40 on Amazon) The battery had NO bids, right up to the last minute, and only a $1 opening bid; it looked like I was gonna score it for a buck, but not wishing to "lose a golden opportunity, I entered a "max bid" of $10.25 (just in case !) It was a good thing I did..........again.....last second, there must have been 2 or 3 bidders, but they set their "max" too low, and I got my battery for the very decent price of $6.26 (and no shipping ), thanks to my message to the seller. Nothing like winning an auction, after you have employed a bit of "strategy" !

Gitzo, Thanks very much. Make sense to me and I fully understand. Wow so much knowledge here. I will make some small (maybe bigger ones) sacrifices and save for a good longer lens. Thanks again.

Parke1953.........

The "reflex" lens you refer to is a "completely different animal" than a "regular" telephoto camera lens; here's what I mean by that.......

in 99.99% of camera lenses, the light from the "subject" enters the front end of the lens through a bunch of individual pieces of optical glass, known as "elements"; each individual "element", (or "group" of "elements") has a specific purpose........such as to make the "subject" look bigger than it would to the un-aided eye; ( just like binoculars and small telescopes do); such a lens is said to be "refractive"........in other words, each element "refracts" ( or bends ) the light rays, as they "pass through" the lens elements, on their way to the film. (or sensor)

In other optical systems, ( such as astronomical telescopes ), a much different "method" is used, ( mainly because telescopes that are designed to look at extremely distant, extremely "faint" sources of light, (such as stars and other astronomical objects), the "refractive" method of dealing with light becomes "not such a good idea" very quickly, as the telescope gets bigger. That's why almost all modern telescopes use mirrors, rather than "lenses" to collect the light. ( It would be completely impossible to build a 200 inch diameter glass lens ) (for a lot of reasons)

I'm sure you have noticed that great big telephoto camera lenses are VERY expensive; there are many reasons for this.......the main one being........they are very expensive to design and build; a good example, the last time I looked, Nikon's fine, 600mm, f4 tele goes for about $10K; (which is much more than almost all of the cameras that it's designed to work with)

Somewhere along the line, almost everyone gets the "urge" to "do something" a "different way", to "save money"..........or to "sell more" "units" ( of whatever ) That's why we have so-called "reflex" camera lenses; it sounds great to the "beginner" to be able to buy a 500mm "super-telephoto" camera lens, for a mere few hundred $$$$$; but as the old saying goes, you almost always "get what you pay for". A reflex camera lens is an extremely poor attempt to "get a lot" for very little $$; here's why..........

First.......telephoto lenses, (just like "normal" lenses and "wide angle" lenses), have to do a LOT more than just make things look bigger or smaller, or closer or farther away. They also must be capable of producing a "sharp", well defined image of "something" on the film, (or on the sensor in a digital camera) To do this, you need to be able to control "exposure".....(the correct amount of light for a given "subject" under a given amount of ambient light ); ( a bright, sunny day at noontime requires a very different "exposure" than, say, an airplane landing at 10 pm on an un-lighted runway.)

Reflex lenses use a mirror to ":collect the light", which is "reflected" FORWARD, where it then is "reflected" BACKWARDS, ( by a small "secondary" mirror, and is brought to focus on either the film plane, (or a sensor). To accomplish this, if you take a close look at a mirror lens, you'll see that there is a large "opening" (or "hole") in the main mirror.......that's so the light can pass through the "main" mirror, on it's way to the film. What you WON'T see, (which is very necessary to control exposure), is an iris diaphragm, ( which ALL "regular" camera lens have ), together with a means of changing the shutter speed, in order to control exposure. So the only way the mirror lens has to control exposure, is to increase (or decrease) the shutter speed. Without going into a "long discussion", this just isn't a very good way to control exposure. ( which is probably the "under-statement" of the year ! )

Look through about 10 years worth of National Geographis magazines, ( or back issues of "Outdoor Photographer" ), and you'll see thousands of bright, very "colorful", very sharp images of wildlife (and other things)...........and not ONE of those photographs was taken, using a mirror lens ! Yes, you can take a picture of a car six blocks away, and have it look like it's one block away.........but it will be a VERY POOR picture ! (which is the only kind of picture you can take with a mirror (or "reflex") lens !

Please note........while I AM a very "opinionated" person, I'm NOT just discussing MY opinions here; I'm discussing the laws of physics, (as they pertain to optics and camera lenses); (and unlike "speed laws", you just can't break them !)

If you really have the need for a 500mm telephoto lens, and you lack the necessary "big" $$$$ to buy one, there are STILL about a dozen ways to "do it on the cheap"; ( but this post is already way too long ! )

Can anyone tell me about this lens. Nikon Nikkor-C Reflex 500mm Super Telephoto f/8. says the glass is flawless $245.

Niclovin1..........

Any time you find an older Nikkor lens that you're not sure about, get on Nikon's website, go to their "tech help", and send them an email, describing the lens with all numbers, and especially the serial number; they will email you back and tell you if it is compatible for use on a particular camera body.

There are any number of lenses that WILL mount to the body of most newer cameras, but very often, just as others have mentioned here, there are lots of older lenses that "have things" (or sometimes LACK things ), which can damage cameras newer than the ones they were designed to work with.

That's the one area that all of the "Canon Lovers" seem to be totally oblivious about; the compatibility of today's digital camera bodies to actually WORK with lenses made "way back when" for old film cameras. If you "shoot Canon", there is NO compatibility.

At the time Canon started "switching" from making film bodies, to digital bodies, they introduced the new "EOS" digital cameras,(with a totally different mount, and just like that, all of the marvelous Canon "FD" lenses became completely obsolete, overnight ! ( I know, I had a whole bunch of them ! ( And Canon's fine FD lenses hadn't "been around" all that long.

Canon had what they called, "the breach-lock mount", (which was arguably the best mounting mechanism ever), but they made absolutely NO attempt to carry it over to the digital camera line; it seriously "pissed" a lot of people off, and many of them went to Nikon, and never looked back ! ( And I'm one of them ) Their whole "strategy" being, "screw 'em all" ! This way, they'll all have to buy NEW LENSES too ! (Yeah, we DID have to buy all new lenses, but NONE of them came from Canon !) It amazes me how quickly people forget all about things like this ! Yeah, Canon sure does make some great lenses; but I'll never need one of them, because there are some things about Nikon's bodies that I like better than Canon's, (and I also just have this LONG memory ), ( of getting screwed ! )
And I can't think of a single thing that I'll ever need that Nikon doesn't make that Canon does.

Is this thread just for bodies and lenses, or can we "brag" about accessories too ? I just found something on eBay last week that "sounded" EXACTLY like something I have been wanting for a very long time........a rock solid camera window mount; I remembered seeing one that Kirk makes, 3 or 4 years ago, but the thing sells for like $ 275- $300; ( I didn't want one quite that bad ) anyway, last week, while I was looking through "window mounts", I saw this "thing".......the fellow had one photo of it taken by the company that makes it, (which made most cell phone photos look good by comparison) then he had taken 3 photos himself, and they were all TERRIBLE !

You couldn't even tell what the "thing" looked like, or how it worked; his "description" wasn't much better; anyway, he had listed it as "Buy Now", $80, +$12 shipping; so I send him a message......"will you take $75 NOW, and pay the shipping?" his reply....NO! It's well worth what I'm asking! It's hard to explain this, but somehow, I thought it was too, so I sent him his $92, via paypal; a week goes by, (while I was out of town mostly), then it's at my post office when I get back;

I should mention, in his "description", he referred to it as a "Groofwin" ! (his only decent photo was of the riveted on metal name tag, "Made by: L.L. Rue Enterprises" I had actually emailed L.L. Rue Enterprises, and the reply was......"Sorry, the website is down for revision while we're on safari in Kenya" ! (I'm thinking, "I hope your photos from safari in Kenya are better than your advertisement shot of your hi-tech window mount"! )

Anyway, I ran to the post office, get this BIG, very "rumpled" looking box (completely filled with foam "peanuts")........and right there, among all of the peanuts, is my new "Groofwin"! Damn ! I think they must have copied Kirk's window mount in detail !
But the thing is AWESOME ! it essentially consists of two 3/16 th in. thick X 3 in. wide anodized aluminum plates, with a VERY clever "hinge" fastening them together; the uppermost "plate" ( the one that sits level and holds the camera / lens via a 3/16 X 16 captive threaded stud, with a 10 in long, 1"X1" aluminum angle to "hook" over a partially opened window, and the longer plate, (about 12" long), rests solidly via two BIG rubber "feet", (also 6 to 8 inches apart, against the inside, lower part of the car door. The two plates are held rock solidly in position by a VERY sturdy aluminum rod, which has a marvelous "pivot" on both ends, and is tightened by a HUGE big hard rubber knob. This thing looks like it was designed to be sold to NASA !

I immediately ran home, got my Arca-Swiss B-1 ball head, screwed it on the stud, stuck my D-300s / with my old Nikkor 300 mm f4 with great big ":collar" mount on the lens barrel, attached it to the B-1 head with it's arca style QR plate, and it was like screwing the whole thing to a 600 lb block of granite ! I mean, with a gimbal mount, you could operate my Nikon F-5 with a 600mm Nikkor F-4.....(which lens, unfortunately, I still don't have just yet.)

Why am I so "ecstatic" with this "thing" ? I happen to live in a very rural area of western Indiana; almost every day of my life, on my 24 mile ride to Terre Haute, I see a dozen or more deer, wild turkeys all the time, turkey vultures too numerous to count, an occasional bobcat, (even an "escaped" elk once........and between "sometimes" and "now-and-then", my most favorite of all native birds,bird, a pileated woodpecker ! You can frequently stop the car and have time to get a "shot" (with a camera) (I don't kill wildlife), BUT if you try to open the door to get out..........off they go, into the woods ! I have been needing this marvelous "gadget" for 20 years now; (and the thing is in such "pristine" condition that I will probably need to buy me a new D-4 body to look "equal" to it in "design excellence" !

I hear people all the time asking, "how are you so "lucky" finding things that are "such a great deal", etc; here's the whole "secret" folks; you do like I do, you check out ebay at least 3 or 4 times a week, plus Amazon, Craig's List, you go to a lot of yard sales, garage sales, auction sales, etc, etc. etc. and over about 20 to 50 years, (if you are blessed with a fantastic memory like I am), you have a very good idea what "things" should sell for, to be considered a "bargain". I have bought a TON of camera equipment on eBay; I can only remember ONE big "gippo deal" that I bought; and old manual focus, f 4, 105mm Micro Nikkor, that I paid about $100 or maybe $120 for, supposedly in "like new" condition; (the front end of the thing was so dented up, it looked like it had been mounted to a "dodgem-car" at an amusement park ! The front objective element even has a slight "nick" in it ! I raised so much hell that eBay finally made the seller refund my money, threw to guy off of eBay, and I ended up keeping the dented up old lens; (I was shooting Fuji velvia back then in my Nikon F5; never even mounted the thing to a camera !...........until "a while back" when I bought my D 300s; it occurred to me one day........hey, it's digital ! maybe I should "try" the damned thing out ? Gess what....superficial dents and all, the thing works like a new one ! when I'm doing Macro, I always use manual focus, manual "everything".......let's face it.........I take pictures because I LIKE TO!

I enjoy making great prints......and when I exhibit prints that "look great" in a gallery, or a contest, no one gives a rat's "behind" if the lens used cost $10,000, or if I bought the thing at a flea market for $10 ! It's the PRINT that they "care about" ! Hell, anyone ever notice what kind of "gear" Ansel Adams used to make his "reputation" ? (He sure didn't have a new D 800, of a Hassleblad with a Phase One "back"..........he used mainly his brains and his unbelievable talent ! (Got pretty "well known" along the way, too !)

The first thing I did when I bought my new D 300s was to take the shoulder strap off, (with NIKON in big yellow letters every 3 inches), threw it away, and put a nice little "wrist collar/ strap" from "Clik Elite" on it; plus, I lug my BEAUTIFUL, powder coated Gitzo 340 around in a VERY nice bag (made in China by, I presume, an industrious little old Chinese lady), and all the "thugs and muggers" on Lake Shore Drive just "assume" it's a raggedy old el-cheapo tripod from Goodwill, so not even worth stealing.........you may be "impressed" by high dollar photography equipment; ( I enjoy using it, but I go to great lengths to "cover up" anything that says "Nikon".........I'm just "impressed" by great photography. (I couldn't care less where the equipment came from.)

Great thread, BTW !

No chance!