Just Bought D700

[~WinGz~]

Well it's taken awhile and as some of you remember I was asking about camera gear to upgrade to.

I recently splurged heavily.

Nikon D700

MB-D10 BG

2 Spare Batterys.

Nikon SB-600 ( the 900 was out of stock so I saved money )

Nikon 105mm 2.8 ( Out of stock )

I have to wait awhile for the 105mm to be restocked.

But I am extremely excited that I got new gear after my D80 finally hit the deck.

[remus_lupin]

Nice, I have the 105 2.8, its a great lens!!

I am looking at buying the SB600 now that is discontinued (ONLY if I find a great deal - because some store just wants to get rid of it) if not I will just buy a 700

[~WinGz~]

How do you like the 105? I haven't gotten to play with one yet so I am extremely curious.

Any ghosting or distortion at all?

[remus_lupin]

Distortion is essentially zero... Before buying it I did do a bit of research, and I remember reading at like some macro focusing distances there is a TINY amount, but nothing serious.

I haven't noticed any serious ghosting, and I've been using it religiously for about a 8 months.

I love it, but I was upgrading from kit 18-105, 70-300 VR, and 35mm 1.8... so it is ages beyond anything else I have used... Focus is very fast (as long as you use the limiter which is from infinity to 0.5m

You have to keep in mind even though I find it to be amazing in every way, it is my only "pro" lens...

I do believe that the focusing speed is equivalent (more or less) to Nikon's 70-200 f/2.8... which if you have used one will give you an idea of its speed

I forgot how slow the focusing was of my 70-300 was until I used it two days ago, ever since I got my 105 2.8 I have decided the only new lenses I buy will be pro ones. Like the 24-70 f2.8 70-200 f/2.8 etc.

PS: did you buy any other lenses for it yet?

[Draconian Guppy]

Man why does it seem like every neowin member has serious dough to spend on camera gear, except for me :( /haters gonna hate :p

Now, seriously, let's get some pics in teh monthly gallery!

[remus_lupin]

Man why does it seem like every neowin member has serious dough to spend on camera gear, except for me :( /haters gonna hate :p

lol

[~WinGz~]

haha actually its the other way around. I saved every penny I made for 2 years Just for the D700, and finally had the money and drained my account for it.

:D so actually just the opposite. I will post photos soon as I get a new CF card. My current one doesnt work for some reason so have to return it and get a new one in the next day or so.

[crazzy88ss]

Man why does it seem like every neowin member has serious dough to spend on camera gear, except for me :( /haters gonna hate :p

haha actually its the other way around. I saved every penny I made for 2 years Just for the D700, and finally had the money and drained my account for it.

+1. It's just about saving money and what priorities are important to you.

[~WinGz~]

Thanks Crazy. Any suggestions for lenses I need to make top priority? I would like to make use of the FF on this beast but my current glass is all DX.

[Andre]

Welcome to the club! :D

As for the lenses, it's really all about what you want to shoot. But a 50/1.4 prime is a must. On FF it's perfect. If you want to go wide, 35/2D is a good fast semi-wide lens. If you feel like spending some more then 24-70/2.8 is the way to go. 24-120/4 is also said to be an ok option, but it suffers from really bad distortions. In case of ultra wide, 14-24/2.8 is the way to go. 17-35/2.8 and 16-35/4 are good alternatives, but the first one is old but good nevertheless and the latter one, just like 24-120 suffers from distortions. On the tele side, Nikkor 70-200 is obviously the king, but you always can get cheaper alternative from Sigma. Nikkor 70-300 is good, but slow. Nikon also has 28-300, similar to 18-200 on DX. But I would say, stay away from such lenses.

All in all, start investing in good glass. Having an expensive camera and cheap glass is just a no-no.

[crazzy88ss]

First lens I'll be getting with my D800 (lawl?) will be, as andre mentioned, the 17-35mm f2.8 (unless prices come down on the 14-24 in the next 18 months). Maybe the sigma 24-70 f2.8 2nd. (i already have a 70-200 and the 50mm f1.4).

[~WinGz~]

I actually have the 35mm 2.0.

I also have a 50mm 1.4 :D

I sold off one of my old 55-200mm to get the 105.

But thank you for all the suggestions :). Time for some new glass shopping next week.

[~WinGz~]

Just a little update, decided to splurge yet again so ive been working over 90+ hours a week just to bank the money I could for a new toy.

I just purchased the Coveted Nikkor 70-200mm 2.0 Telephoto. :D

[o0moonman0o]

Just a little update, decided to splurge yet again so ive been working over 90+ hours a week just to bank the money I could for a new toy.

I just purchased the Coveted Nikkor 70-200mm 2.0 Telephoto. :D

a 2.0 70-200, that must be a massive lens since my 200 f2 is massive already.

[crazzy88ss]

haha. Yea, it's seriously coveted, too :p

Is it the VRI or VRII?

[~WinGz~]

blah i just reread what i posted lastnight its the 70-200mm F/2.8 VR II.

I go pick it up tomorrow kind of excited to the point im half assing work just to get done and go get it haha :D.

[crazzy88ss]

where do you "pick it up" since you've bought it...? I didn't think that... those types of transactions still exist.

[Valerus]

I have been thinking about the 50mm 1.4. I have the 35mm 1.8, how much overlap would there be by owning these two lenses? I know that they serve different purposes but I just wanted to hear from owners/guys who know what they're talking about.

[~WinGz~]

There is a lonely old camera store here that does special orders, where you pay for half up front they order it you pay the rest when it comes in.

Its a mom and pop camera store I went to them over Best buy and the likes because it saved me close to 500 dollars.

Also I use my 35mm 1.8 more for landscapes when I don't have my 18-55 with me.

but I use the 50mm for portraits mostly cause of the sharpness.

[crazzy88ss]

wait, the mom n pop store was cheaper than best buy?

My best buy only stocks things like D3100, SB600 and 55-200mm.

Internet wasn't cheaper?

[~WinGz~]

yep the mom and pop was actually cheaper this time around I spent 2,350 on it. Brand new over best buy.

[HawkMan]

Nikon also has 28-300, similar to 18-200 on DX. But I would say, stay away from such lenses.

What's wrong with the 18-200, since my D90 was just stolen I'll probably be replacing it with a D7000 and was considering the one with the 18-200, since it covers a wide range and the glass speed is the standard 3.6-5.6, for faster glass I'll be replacing my lost 35mm and maybe a 50 and some longer stuff.

it seems that depending on who you ask some will tell you to go with shorter zoom lenses, while other say that it doesn't matter and you may as well go with one that covers more range so you don't have to change so often. most distortion will be at the close and far range anyway. that way a lens with longer zoom should have a longer span of area with less distortion. either way Lr takes care of any distortion easy nowadays :)

[crazzy88ss]

Glass that covers a large zoom range is usually lower quality the longer the zoom. Tamron's 18-270mm is super soft after ~100mm.

It's all about image quality, and what you care about.

"you may as well go with one that covers more range so you don't have to change so often." - People that say this are hobby photographers at best. There truly is a significant difference between fast, high quality zooms and the cheaper consumer lenses that are set up as "1 lens to cover it all."

Just find what works best for you, your budget, and your shooting habits.

[HawkMan]

Glass that covers a large zoom range is usually lower quality the longer the zoom. Tamron's 18-270mm is super soft after ~100mm.

It's all about image quality, and what you care about.

"you may as well go with one that covers more range so you don't have to change so often." - People that say this are hobby photographers at best. There truly is a significant difference between fast, high quality zooms and the cheaper consumer lenses that are set up as "1 lens to cover it all."

Just find what works best for you, your budget, and your shooting habits.

Actually I've seen it been said in some semi pro magazines.

personally before that I didn't really agree with it, but on the other hand, for me it sort of makes sense for the way I use the camera to, get one all round lens, and then complete over time with better lenses for narrower stuff.

[crazzy88ss]

I've read a lot of stupid things in photography magazines/websites. People there aren't always photographers, but they're always journalists.

But yea... just do what works best for you lol. I did a lot of photojournalism stuff, so I needed better gear. I went on assignments with 2 cameras with 1 lens each and 1 flash on each. I still shoot sports with 2 cameras, 2 lenses and strobes for the indoor games.

If you want portibility and ease of use, then my way is probably not gunna work so well :p