Lens recommendations for D800 beginner

Nikon Rumors Forum » Nikon DSLR » [D800]

Lens recommendations for D800 beginner

(93 posts) (29 voices)

Started 11 months ago by Peter.Schmitz
Latest reply from itsnotmeyouknow
Related Topics:

12…4 Next »

Peter.Schmitz

new member
Joined: Jun '12
Posts: 2
offline

Hey everyone,

I just made up my mind to order the D800 from Nikon as my first FX camera - still, I will need some lenses. As my budget is somewhat limited for this (ca. 1000€) I thought about getting these two lenses:

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 50 mm 1:1,8G (about 190€)
Nikon AF-S 28-300mm 1:3.5-5.6G ED VR (about 900€)

What do you think? Would you suggest other lenses (e.g. from Tamron, Sigma etc.)? I don't really need the large zoom on the second lens, so another zoom up to >120mm would be fine also.

Any help is appreciated!

Thanks,

Peter

Posted 11 months ago #
Gabbb

preferred member
Joined: Dec '11
Posts: 251
offline

The 50 1.8g is great, I would suggest the 24-120F4 instead of that megazoom.

Posted 11 months ago #
sevencrossing

preferred member
Joined: Sep '10
Posts: 1,265
offline

Had my D800 for about 6 weeks it is a truly amazing camera

the 24 120 f4 VR and a D800 are a perfect combination

you are not going to get the most out of your D800 with the 28 -300
it has a fantastic zoom range but unlike the 24 -120 its not one of Nikon's sharpest lens it soon stops down to f 5.6

the 24 120 stays sharp at f4 for its full range

I can't see the need for the 50m f 1.8 if you get the 24 -120

the D800 is one the finest camera in the word, don't compromise its quality with a non Nikon lens ( This is a Nikon forum)

my other favorite lens with this camera is the Nikon 105 2.8 VR macro

Posted 11 months ago #
Gabbb

preferred member
Joined: Dec '11
Posts: 251
offline

The

sevencrossing said:
Had my D800 for about 6 weeks it is a truly amazing camera

the 24 120 f4 VR and a D800 are a perfect combination

you are not going to get the most out of your D800 with the 28 -300
it has a fantastic zoom range but unlike the 24 -120 its not one of Nikon's sharpest lens it soon stops down to f 5.6

the 24 120 stays sharp at f4 for its full range

I can't see the need for the 50m f 1.8 if you get the 24 -120

the D800 is one the finest camera in the word, don't compromise its quality with a non Nikon lens ( This is a Nikon forum)

my other favorite lens with this camera is the Nikon 105 2.8 VR macro

The 50 1.8 is a great light weight (sharper than than the 24-120) normal walk-around lens on FX and there is the speed too and it's pretty cheap, the best 50 Nikon has ever made (imo).

Posted 11 months ago #
msmoto

big gun cougar
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 2,736
offline

The 24-120mmf/4.0 VR Nikkor is my walk-around on my D4. This will do everything except the very low light. So, the 50mm f/1.8 would go nicely with it.

Posted 11 months ago #
donaldejose

preferred member
Joined: Mar '11
Posts: 1,043
offline

Let me ask a slightly different question. If you have purchased a D800 and you want to try to get the absolute best resolution out of that sensor, what lenses and f-stops should you try to use?

It is tempting to just team it with the current top of the line Nikon zooms but that may not yield the most sharpness.

I will suggest trying to always shoot above f-8 if you don't need additional depth of field because many sources say sharpness will be less at smaller f-stops.

I will suggest some unusual lenses, such as using macro lenses as primes for landscapes?, using the 40mm manual Voightlander?, some old Nikon manual focus primes?

What have been the experience of those who own a Nikon D800? I don't have mine yet and have not conducted tests so I don't know the answers to this question, just guessing and asking.

Posted 11 months ago #
Gabbb

preferred member
Joined: Dec '11
Posts: 251
offline

donaldejose said:
Let me ask a slightly different question. If you have purchased a D800 and you want to try to get the absolute best resolution out of that sensor, what lenses and f-stops should you try to use?

It is tempting to just team it with the current top of the line Nikon zooms but that may not yield the most sharpness.

I will suggest trying to always shoot above f-8 if you don't need additional depth of field because many sources say sharpness will be less at smaller f-stops.

I will suggest some unusual lenses, such as using macro lenses as primes for landscapes?, using the 40mm manual Voightlander?, some old Nikon manual focus primes?

What have been the experience of those who own a Nikon D800? I don't have mine yet and have not conducted tests so I don't know the answers to this question, just guessing and asking.

Old nikon primes are just not that good, newer Nikons are just more contrasty and they are more color neutral. There are some expensive Zeiss manual lenses that are sharper, sure. I don't think that voigtlander40 is a better option than the nikon 35mm 1.4g...
I really like the 16-35vr on my d7000 (same pixel density), I certainly wouldn't bother with any other wide angle for the d800, unless in the need for speed.

Posted 11 months ago #
donaldejose

preferred member
Joined: Mar '11
Posts: 1,043
offline

Let me ask the question this way.

A person buys a D800 body. They have a sturdy tripod and know how to shoot with mirror lockup to stop mirror vibration. They also purchase either the 24-70 f2.8 or the 24-120 f4 zoom and pair it with the 70-200 2.8 VRII zoom. Now are they completely prepared to obtain the sharpest images the D800 sensor is able to produce from a range of 24 to 200mm? Can it be just that simple: two zooms, a tripod and good technique?

Or are there primes which will be able to more fully utilize all the pixels in the sensor? I suggested macro lenses used as primes, I suggested the 40mm Voightlander, Let me add Nikon's DC lenses? Any old AFS or manual focus primes people which are sharper than the current top of the line zooms? What lenses will take full advantage of that D800 sensor?

Some people with D800 bodies are likely doing some of these comparisons now and should post their findings in this thread.

Posted 11 months ago #
Godless

preferred member
Joined: Oct '10
Posts: 241
offline

Peter.Schmitz said:
Hey everyone,

I just made up my mind to order the D800 from Nikon as my first FX camera - still, I will need some lenses. As my budget is somewhat limited for this (ca. 1000€) I thought about getting these two lenses:

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 50 mm 1:1,8G (about 190€)
Nikon AF-S 28-300mm 1:3.5-5.6G ED VR (about 900€)

What do you think?

IMHO neither is worth the d800.

Get a 85mm lens. The Sigma 85mm 1.4 HSM is really, extremely sharp and AF is the fastest of them all.
The Nikkor 85mm 1.8G is as sharp but focuses slower.

For the wide end you need a 24mm 1.4G for ultimate sharpness - or a Zeiss 21mm.
The AF-S 28mm 1.8G is a budget option, if 28mm on FX is wide enough for you.

---

If zooms are your cup of tea, I´d begin with AF-S 14-24mm or 16-35 VR for the wide end. Then skip the 24-70 zoom
and get a 70-200 VR II instead when finances allow. The combo of an ultrawide-wide and medium tele will serve you
for most occasions.

Posted 11 months ago #
donaldejose

preferred member
Joined: Mar '11
Posts: 1,043
offline

I have a 28-300 ready and waiting for whenever my D800 body arrives. It should be "do it all well, but none of it great" type of "walk around" lens. If it proves to be too unsharp for "ordinary" photographs, which I won't be using a tripod for anyway, I plan to replace it with a 24-120 f4 lens which I read is sharper.

Posted 11 months ago #
cyclekraft

preferred member
Joined: Mar '12
Posts: 101
offline

I haven't read all of the responses fully, so I apologize if I repeat what other have said.

What I do agree with is the Nikon 24-120 f/4. This is on my D800 80% of the time. It's beautiful and sharp.

I do however recommend getting the 50mm 1.4 over the 1.8. It's only a couple of hundred dollars more but is built better, produces sharper images (from what I've read) and is a little faster.

The glass you put in front of the camera (especially the D800) is more important than the camera itself, so don't skimp. If I were stuck with a limited budget (a few hundred $) then I'd go for the Nikon 50mm F/1.4 first and work your way up to the 24-120.

Posted 11 months ago #
Gabbb

preferred member
Joined: Dec '11
Posts: 251
offline

cyclekraft said:
I do however recommend getting the 50mm 1.4 over the 1.8. It's only a couple of hundred dollars more but is built better, produces sharper images (from what I've read) and is a little faster.

Well ofc a lot more ppl got the 1.4 and they need to justify their investment. and the reviews online only tell you half the story. In my experience (had both at the same time for a few days and tested them against each other the whole time) the 1.8g is wastly superior. Better bokeh quality, better center sharpness, better contrast and faster AF operation. The 1.4g may be a bit sharper in the extreme corners on FX, but I would not consider using the 1.4g again. My 1.4g copy wasn't a lemon, I asked for replacement once, before asking for a refund.

Posted 11 months ago #
Wataru

preferred member
Joined: Feb '12
Posts: 248
offline

I purchases a 60 mm macro for one of the D800s we used on a job recently. We are not taking portraits, but forensic photos. This lens is superb and rocket fast in focus. I'd go with that if I were starting out.

I'm thinking of getting the 24-120, but I'm waiting until I have a need for a walk around zoom. Perhaps this coming Winter I'll want one for my annual holidays. I walk around with the 50 mm 1.4 now and I like it, but I am used to primes. So I think cyclekraft is giving good advice.

If you want long telephoto zoom, save your money for the 70 - 200 2.8. Even hand held with a 2x teleconverter this is a great lens. I took it to the zoo today. There's a tiger picture on flickr (search for "symphotic") taken from a long ways back.

Posted 11 months ago #
earthsea

senior member
Joined: May '12
Posts: 69
offline

For general walk-around hand held shots I am surprised no one has recommended the 24-70mm f/2.8G ED AF-S NIKKOR. It would have to be my choice.

Posted 11 months ago #
Gabbb

preferred member
Joined: Dec '11
Posts: 251
offline

earthsea said:
For general walk-around hand held shots I am surprised no one has recommended the 24-70mm f/2.8G ED AF-S NIKKOR. It would have to be my choice.

He is on a budget :D

Peter.Schmitz said:
As my budget is somewhat limited for this (ca. 1000€)

Posted 11 months ago #
earthsea

senior member
Joined: May '12
Posts: 69
offline

I understand but you didn't state what sort of photography you do, so I assumed 'general' photography.
The D800 is not really a beginners camera. With respect, if your photography experience is not great enough to determine what lens you should purchase for this camera then I would suggest the D7000 with a 18-200mm thrown on for at least 20,000 shutter counts.
For such little extra, you will have a lens (24-70mm) that will far out last the D800. There will be an updated D800 soon enough you can be assured of that but the lens will last many cameras.
After all it's only another 500 EUR. ( lens cost 1,492.48 EUR. ) What percentage is this of your total budget?
Consider, you are now in the big league.

Posted 11 months ago #
adamz

The Predator
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 3,461
offline

please don't take it personal but d800 is not a walk around camera, there are better options on the market. however if You really want d800 than N24-120f4vr is a lens to go, don't put 28-300 on this baby, as it's like putting cheap chinese tires on your benz. it will go, but the performance will be very limited.
if You need go longer, and want to save, get N70-300vr as a companion.

as for 50/1.8 it is indeed a nice lens, though IMHO it doesn't deliver enough for d800 sensor - at least mine copy, but it's a very lightweight combination and stopped down to at least 2.8 delivers decent results.

Posted 11 months ago #
msmoto

big gun cougar
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 2,736
offline

In reviewing some of the comments, budget and D800 do not seem to fit together. Maybe consideration of a less expensive body, more expensive glass. And, as Adamz has stated the D800 is not a walk around in the idea of carrying it everywhere, as I understand a "walk around". But, if the idea of a convenience camera is primary, even a V1 or J1 is not bad or other manufacturers such as Fuji make excellent "walk around" cameras.

However, if the idea is to slowly build a camera system, then I would suggest beginning with a less expensive body, maybe the new D600, and a couple of lenses, dictated by what you would like to photograph. If you are wanting a 50mm...go the way of the 50mm f/1.4G. Then the 24-120mm f/4.0 VR is IMO a better choice than the 24-70 as it reaches farther and has VR. Body wise, maybe if this is your first camera, the D7000 may be a better choice than the D800. Although it is DX rather than FX, in a couple years when you have more budget, you can get the D800 or its replacement with more glass. It just seems like some additional thought would be useful here. And, in looking at photos on PAD, one can really not tell the DX from the FX cameras until they are greatly enlarged.

Posted 11 months ago #
Thomas88

member
Joined: Jun '12
Posts: 14
offline

Hi!

I happen to have both the D7000 and the D800. I fully agree to the comments of the previous posters. I would not go for the D800 if the budget limits the lens choice.

I was into analog photography about 20 years ago. Then that hobby fell asleep. I restarted with digital beginning of last year. Mostly to support my business (product photography for the website). I started with the D5000 and a kit lens. This was the right choice to start with. I quickly got a lot of interest for photography again. I got some prime lenses (35mm, 50mm 1.8 and 105mm macro). I then upgraded to D7000 by the end of the year and sold the D5000.

Being a Nikon owner I read this forum a lot and of course caught interest in the D800. Waited until a local store had one and bought it. I got the 24-70mm 2.8 and 14-24mm 2.8 zooms along with it.

Although this seems like an expensive path, I do not regret it. Had I started with the D800, that would probably have been too much and frustrating. When I started with the D5000 I used Auto settings a lot, only after I got acquainted with it I went away from that and did my own settings. The D7000 was the natural choice when I outgrew the D5000.

I got the D800 for the fun of it. Having a D7000 already, I would not really 'need' it. I will keep the D7000 as walk around camera.

So my recommendation would be as well: Get the D7000 and one or more good lenses. This will make much better photos than a D800 and a cheaper lens. The D7000 is also better for beginners to get into photography. When you have the budget available, buy the D800. Nikons keep their value so you can then sell the D7000 without a huge loss.

Best regards

Thomas

Posted 11 months ago #
sevencrossing

preferred member
Joined: Sep '10
Posts: 1,265
offline

Peter

could you give us some feed back to our comments

If you can afford it ,I can see nothing wrong is choosing a D800 as a Beginners camera

start off by setting it to P mode an enjoy a superb camera

one thing, the D800 does not have a fully automatic setting, so learn about the 2 button reset, which sets every thing back to default

Posted 11 months ago #
donaldejose

preferred member
Joined: Mar '11
Posts: 1,043
offline

"I just made up my mind to order the D800 from Nikon as my first FX camera -"

Notice the phrase "as my first FX camera" I think this means he has at least one DX body and many DX lenses. He is not talking about buying a D800 as his first camera or as his first digital camera. He is talking about it as his first FX camera. Thus, he is asking about which FX lenses to start with and he has chosen a wide range zoom plus an f1.8 prime for low light; reasonable choices. At least that is how I read it. I think the advice to start with a different body is off the mark, unless I am not reading his post accurately.

Second, the 24-70 vs the 28-300 zooms. DxOMark has not tested both of these lenses on the D800 but has tested them on the D4. On the D4 the 28-70 resolved 54 lines per millimeter while the 28-300 resolved 45 lines per millimeter. Clearly, the 24-70 is sharper and the 28-300 has more range. Peter was considering the 28-300. If sharpness is more important to him, the 24-70 would provide that. But, KenR bought both, shot both and sent the 24-70 back, keeping the 28-300 stating that shooting real objects in the real world, as opposed to shooting test targets in the lab, in his opinion the increased range of the 28-300 was more valuable than the increased resolution of the 24-70 and at certain settings the 28-300 was better than the 24-70. When DxOMark tests both lens on a D800 body it would seem the 24-70 will prove to be superior in resolution. So it most likely comes down to an issue of range vs. resolution; which is more important to the user. Does anyone have both of these lenses and can offer their experience with both?

Posted 11 months ago #
adamz

The Predator
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 3,461
offline

@donaldejose - I wouldn't put that name over here as his comments are most of the time out of blue and don't even come close to reality, moreover if someone wants to go with a one lens solution there's sigma 50-500 os, even better than 28-300:)

Posted 11 months ago #
sevencrossing

preferred member
Joined: Sep '10
Posts: 1,265
offline

adams said:
@donaldejose - I wouldn't put that name over here as his comments are most of the time out of blue .....

slight off topic but it was after reading his comparison 24 -120 vs 28-300 I went with the 24-120

I wanted a "pro" lens
On the wide side I wanted 24mm not 28mm
and I wanted f 4 @120mm not f5.6

Posted 11 months ago #
earthsea

senior member
Joined: May '12
Posts: 69
offline

What ever! I am still sticking with the 24-70mm. Consider also; Any more tele than 70 mm and it might pay to factor into the budget a good sturdy tripod VR or no VR. The D800 weighs in at just under a kilo body only and the 24-70mm at 900g is all metal and glass, over all a beast.
With management very strict about 'subject deviation' around this forum I wont digress into tripods for heavy kit...

Posted 11 months ago #
Gabbb

preferred member
Joined: Dec '11
Posts: 251
offline

adamz <a href="http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=6324#post-
as for 50/1.8 it is indeed a nice lens, though IMHO it doesn't deliver enough for d800 sensor - at least mine copy, but it's a very lightweight combination and stopped down to at least 2.8 delivers decent results.

Mine out-resolves the d7000 sensor stopped down to 5,6 except in the corners, on the d800 that should be the same except maybe fx corners are not that good, but no affordable lens in the current Nikon lineup (less than 5000$) out-resolves the d800 in the the extreme corners. There are some medium format lenses that do out-resolve the d800 across the whole frame, the adapter itself is not even expensive :D

Posted 11 months ago #