where there’s smoke there’s forum fire
kyoshinikon said:
You are right.. I explained my maths wrong... 9-17mm is what the Dx equiv range of the 14-24mm would cover. However if you were to put a 14-24mm on a Dx body it has a range of 21-36mm due to crop factor. In other words a 14-24mm on Dx has a similar field of view as the 24-70mm on an Fx body. The Dx equivalent of the 24-70mm would probably be a 17-47mm...I use my 14-24mmm on dx frequently
Oh no I thought you were going to start talking about equivalences ;)
Ahhh....thank you curiousnomad.... and a new suggestion. Again, I am a wide freak, so, the first two lenses I might recommend are:
17-35mm f/2.8 and 70-200mm f/2.8VRII.
And this is based on this argument. The horizontal angle of view is shown for the 35mm and the 70mm. Not a lot of difference and with the 17mm you have wide covered well. This in a rough manner, shows the angle of coverage with the 35mm end of the short zoom and the 70mm end of the long zoom.
And the reason for all of this is the fact the wind is not blowing enough on Hatteras Island so as to have the kite boarders in the air, so I am just sitting around trying to spend everyone's money. And I think I just spent your $4400!
curiousnomad said:
Thanks for the fantastic responses so far! My budget is up to ~ $4400 US. A lot of money, but then again I don't do this every year, even every several years. Based on how good the images from the 50 1.4 have been, "you get what you pay for".Then again, if I become infected with NAS, I hear there is no cure....
That can be the case, but isn't necessarily always true. If you have lurked the forum or checked out the PAD thread you can see pictures from just about every Nikon body and just about every lens from the kit lenses on up and most are indistinguishable.
And as $4400 is a lot of money it can easily be spent with the you get what you pay for mentality...or asking NR members how we should spend your money ;)
Anyway with that budget and already have the 50 F1.4 I would go (If are are a smart shopper):
24-70 F2.8
70-200 F2.8
300 F4 or 105 F2.8 or 85 F1.8 & 60 F2.8 (depending on need/want)
Or just stick with the lenses you already have, and take tons of pictures until your interests become more defined.
For example, as you take more pictures, you might develop an interest in macro photography, and you'd be glad you hadn't blown your budget on two zooms you wont really use.
For $4400, you could get:
24mm f/1.4G + 70-200 VR II + something else you might want/need
I would start with that setup, can´t go wrong..
Godless said:
For $4400, you could get:24mm f/1.4G + 70-200 VR II + something else you might want/need
I would start with that setup, can´t go wrong..
Since you're shooting primes now I think this might be the best option. You can add the 85mm f1.8 down the line too. After looking at the reviews for that lens, it might be a better option than the f1.4 and it's about 1/3 the price.
Well, I have a different take on the matter! If at some stage you decide that you prefer macro or whatever, it doesn't mean that you will never take pictures of anything else or that you will happily accept the IQ of a lesser lens than you have in other lengths so my advice is go for the holy trinity then if, IF, you want to specialise on macro get the 105VR and you're done. Barring NAS.
Ooooer, I think I blew the budget a bit...
curiousnomad said:
Thanks for the fantastic responses so far! My budget is up to ~ $4400 US. A lot of money, but then again I don't do this every year, even every several years. Based on how good the images from the 50 1.4 have been, "you get what you pay for".Then again, if I become infected with NAS, I hear there is no cure....
Hi,
Everyone has given good advice, but keep in mind that it is largely biased to their vision of what they enjoy shooting, and what they think covers day-to-day photography - again from their point of view.
Mine would be the same. I've gravitated to shooting portraits and would suggest longish, fast lenses, perhaps one of them a macro.
One thing I would recommend for you to do is look at a lot of pictures and see what you really like and would like to try to mimic in your personal work and see what focal length (and f-stop, shutter speed, etc.) was used to make the photograph. That would help you in developing your vision, too (while it might seem like copying - painters learn by copying masters ;-) ).
My best,
Mike
You must log in to post.
