Jump to content

Welcome to NikonForums.com
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Switching to Nikon and need some help with lenses...


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1
Jayson1121

Jayson1121

    New Member

  • Forum Member
  • Pip
  • 5 posts
  • Country Flag

So I have been shooting for about 13 years now and the whole time with a canon, most of the time with a T2i... way out dated. I have been on a budget for a long time but finally can afford to get something decent in my hands. After some research and debating I am looking to buy a D810 (This or the 5Diii... Think the D810 breaks down to a better camera at almost the same price) and a couple of lenses. The biggest rub is I am not familiar with the lenses and the research I have done really hasn't been a lot of help. I shoot landscapes and run down, dilapidated buildings mostly (not a people person). I'm looking for a nice wide/ultra wide angle, a good walk around lens for my aimless wandering days, and maybe a telephoto or macro lens, both of which i have used in the past but not a lot of. I am looking at a budget of 5-7K... I know that is a big gap but gonna try to keep it on the lower side if I can and that will include the memory cards, a speed light or two, maybe a new bag. 

 

Thank you for your time,

Jayson



#2
Merco_61

Merco_61

    Nikonian

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,589 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationUppsala, Sweden

Site Supporter

I would go with the D810 in a kit with a 24-120 lens, either the Tamron 15-30/2.8 or the Nikon 16-35/4 wide zoom and either the Tamron 150-600 or the Nikon 200-500 tele zoom. If you don't need the rather extreme tele, the 70-200/4 rounds out a f/4 trinity quite well The 70-300 VR is nice, but like the Canon 70-300 L IS it gets a bit soft at the tele end. The Nikon 14-24/2.8 is very good for architecture but it is more prone to flare and much more expensive than the Tamron or the less bulbous Nikkor.



#3
dcbear78

dcbear78

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 701 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationGladstone, Queensland

The Tamron 15-30mm f2.8 VC would be the best Urbex lens you could get. Imagine shooting at 15mm and hand holding down to something like 1/4s because of the vibration compensation. There is simply no other lens, by any manufacturer you could do this with. On top of that the image quality is 99% as good as the significantly more expensive Nikon 14-24mm. 

 

Another lens worthy of consideration is the Sigma Art 20mm f1.4. Actually any lens starting with "Sigma Art" is worthy of consideration depending on your prefered focal length.

 

For a walk-around I agree with the Nikon 24-120mm (you will most likely find a camera and lens deal here). Another worth considering is the Sigma Art 24-105mm which has slightly improved image quality at the trade off of some reach. But can't really go wrong with either.

 

OK... Just spent your money at Adorama

 

$3297 - Nikon D810 DSLR with AF-S 24-120mm f/4G ED VR Lens

$1199Tamron SP 15-30mm F/2.8 DI VC USD For Nikon DSLR Cameras W/Accessory Bundle

$4496

 

Plus your choice any/all of:

 

$1010 - Tamron SP 150-600mm F/5-6.3 Di VC USD AF lens for Nikon AF W/ Accessory Bundle or

$1397 - Nikon 200-500mm f/5.6E ED AF-S VR Zoom Nikkor Lens <--- Would be my choice

$  649 - Tamron SP 90mm f/2.8 Di VC USD 1:1 AF Macro Lens for Nikon DSLR

 

Whatever leftover for a good bag.

 

Don't be afraid of third party lenses. Tamron and Sigma are making excellent lenses now for exceptionally good prices.



#4
Jayson1121

Jayson1121

    New Member

  • Forum Member
  • Pip
  • 5 posts
  • Country Flag

Thank you Merco_61 and dcbear78, I truly appreciate you input and will be looking into to all of your suggestions. I am currently on deployment so it will be some time before I buy but I will definitely be keeping my eyes open for any deals in the meantime. Thank you again!



#5
Jayson1121

Jayson1121

    New Member

  • Forum Member
  • Pip
  • 5 posts
  • Country Flag

Nikon D810 w/ Nikon 24-120 ($3300) ($2800 body only $3000 b+h battery pack kit)
Tamron 15-30mm ($1200) over Nikon 14-24mm ($1900). Everything I've read points to the 15-30.
Sigma 105mm Macro ($620) over Tamron SP 90mm Macro ($649) 
Nikon SB 700 ($326)... will be used for portraits, some indoor shooting, but mostly off camera stuff. Could find something cheaper here.

That is the base of what I'm looking at but I need help with a few more pieces. Total so far $5446.

Nikon 35mm 1.8 ($527) or Sigma 35mm 1.4 ($869)
Nikon 85mm 1.8 ($477) or Sigma 85mm 1.4 ($899)
I can buy 1 of the 35 and of the 85 but I am not really sure which way to go. I shoot more landscapes than portraits so I am thinking the Sigma 35 and the Nik 85, but I could be swayed. Would the Sigma 105 work as a suitable replacement for the 85mm?

Would it be better to buy the 810 body and get a Tamron 24-70mm ($1,299) or another walk around instead of the 24-120? The Tamron (good reviews and cheaper than the Nikon) is better than the 24-120 IQ wise but I would only be able to afford 1 of the 35 or 85s (can get both Nik 35/85 if i can find a military discount somewhere). 

I feel like things are a little short at 120mm but the Nikon 28-300 didn't seem like a great option and the Sigma 150-600S or C and Nikon 200-500 just seem like too situation and not something I'd have a regular need for to make it worth it. 

I feel with the research I have done covers my needs pretty well and I appreciate the help I have gotten to get this ball rolling in the right direction. 



#6
TBonz

TBonz

    Sportz Guy

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,652 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationOn A Field Somewhere...

Site Supporter

I had an older version of a Nikon 85 and was quite happy with it.  Personally, I prefer the 105 range over the 85 range but that is just my opinion - both are excellent portrait lenses.  I also had a Tammy 24-70 before selling it and picking up the Nikon version.  It was a nice lens but I do prefer the Nikon version.  I certainly wouldn't try to talk you out of the Tammy and I'm sure you would enjoy the lens...you do give up some on the long end though so if you go with a 15-30 and a 24-70, then you might be wanting for some extra reach...the 105 I would think would be your best choice in that situation...



#7
Ron

Ron

    Nikonian

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,255 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationMagic City

I have both the Nikon AFS 35mm F/1.8G and AFS 85mm F/1.8G lenses and they are among my best lenses in terms of both sharpness and bokeh. The 85mm is, hands down, my favorite lens. And, I don't shoot a lot of portraits either. I can easily recommend both of these lenses.

 

My current walk around kit consists of a Nikkor AFS 18-35F/3.5-4.5IF-ED, a Nikkor 24-120F/3.5-5.6D (yes, D) and a Nikkor AFS 70-300F/4.5-5.6G VR. They're all great, and inexpensive lenses.

 

I have an SB-700 flash that I'm becoming very fond of. Recycle times are negligible and it works great off camera with either Nikon's IR system or a third party iTTL RF system. I use an inexpensive RF system with my SB-700 and my older SB-28 for two light off camera work and the system works great. However, because the SB-28 doesn't support iTTL, I do my two flash work in manual. If I were just using the SB-700 I'd probably opt for iTTL.

 

Others may recommend the SB-910 or even newer SB-5000 but for casual work the SB-700 should be fine... and a lot less expensive.

 

I can't comment on the other stuff but I'm not putting down any of the other lenses. I'm sure they'll be fine,as well, on your D810.

 

--Ron



#8
dcbear78

dcbear78

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 701 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationGladstone, Queensland

Yongnuo has finally released a TTL capable Nikon flash the 568EX which is only $100 plus the 622 transmitter gives you a much better off camera flash experience for quite a lot less money. Even if they aren't as durable you could buy 3 of them for the same money.

If TTL isn't important I am more fond of the Godox V860 (Adorama sell a rebadged version of Godox items).

Nikon 1.8G lenses are all excellent choices. In many cases better than the more expensive 1.4 versions.

If you are in the market for an 85mm lens do consider the brand new Tamron 85mm lens. It has received excellent reviews, surpassing both Nikon 85mm lenses. I have a contact who is a diehard Nikon user and would never consider using a 3rd party lens, until they tried that one (and they tried quite a lot of lenses). Also notable Matt "That Nikon Guy" Granger has chosen it as his 85mm lens of choice.

I've heard good things about the Sigma 105mm but don't know much about it.

The Sigma Art 35mm is better but I don't think the gap is as huge as it is for the 50mm. I'd probably go the cheaper one. Saying that I do own the Sigma Art 35mm.



#9
Jayson1121

Jayson1121

    New Member

  • Forum Member
  • Pip
  • 5 posts
  • Country Flag

If you are in the market for an 85mm lens do consider the brand new Tamron 85mm lens. It has received excellent reviews, surpassing both Nikon 85mm lenses. I have a contact who is a diehard Nikon user and would never consider using a 3rd party lens, until they tried that one (and they tried quite a lot of lenses). Also notable Matt "That Nikon Guy" Granger has chosen it as his 85mm lens of choice.

 

I have been trying to find info on this but haven't had much luck as far as performance and comparison to the Nikon 85mm. There is about a $250-300 difference, not substantial but hoping to find something that can show/tell/explain to me why its worth the extra money.

 

And thank you for the info on the flashes, I will look into those.



#10
Merco_61

Merco_61

    Nikonian

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,589 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationUppsala, Sweden

Site Supporter

The Tamron is stabilized, has 9 instead of 7 blades in the aperture, has 13 elements in 9 groups instead of the Nikon's 9 in 9. It has less CA and vignetting than the Sigma 85/1.4 and is more or less weather sealed. I haven't tried the 85-s side by side as it isn't one of my favourite focal lengths, but the Nikkor is a solid performer like all the f/1.8 lenses. If you feel that you need the VC, the Tamron is worth the price difference, otherwise maybe not. 



#11
Kenafein

Kenafein

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 425 posts
  • Country Flag

Most people have already chimed in, but I have to say, I really like the Sigma 150-600 Contemporary better than the Tamron.  At 600mm, the Sigma is pretty good across the whole lens and the Tamron is super soft in the mids and corners.  I also got my Nikkor 85/1.8 for $400, on one of their periodic sales.   



#12
OTRTexan

OTRTexan

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 421 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationAll over the USA

Most people have already chimed in, but I have to say, I really like the Sigma 150-600 Contemporary better than the Tamron. At 600mm, the Sigma is pretty good across the whole lens and the Tamron is super soft in the mids and corners. I also got my Nikkor 85/1.8 for $400, on one of their periodic sales.


I've never shot the Sigma, however I've owned and shot thousands of frames through the Tamron for awhile now, and have to disagree with it being soft anywhere. Now, admittedly I shoot mainly wildlife with it and usually crop pretty tight so that the edges are a non factor. But I went back and looked at full images and didn't find this to be the case. I've also not had any issues shooting at 600mm. I think that most people getting soft images at 600 are trying to shoot hand held on a DX body. This lens focal length, be it Sigma or Tamron, takes some getting used to.

#13
Kenafein

Kenafein

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 425 posts
  • Country Flag

I've never shot the Sigma, however I've owned and shot thousands of frames through the Tamron for awhile now, and have to disagree with it being soft anywhere. Now, admittedly I shoot mainly wildlife with it and usually crop pretty tight so that the edges are a non factor. But I went back and looked at full images and didn't find this to be the case. I've also not had any issues shooting at 600mm. I think that most people getting soft images at 600 are trying to shoot hand held on a DX body. This lens focal length, be it Sigma or Tamron, takes some getting used to.

 

It was not my intention to insult the lens.  I'm sure it produces excellent results.

 

http://www.the-digit...omp=7&APIComp=2

 

The mids weren't as bad as I remembered.  I checked out these charts before I bought my Sigma, and I played with a friend's Tamron, but not side by side.  The Tamron is as good as the Sigma in the center, but the difference is noticeable in the mids and corners.  Considering you'll heavily crop most of these photos it may not matter much, but I think the difference is worth considering the Sigma.  I believe reviews say that the Sigma is quicker focusing, but I can't remember the difference from when I tried the Tamron.