Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear => Topic started by: mikeodial on July 15, 2015, 09:20:57 am
-
I am just about to sell all my Pentax (K3 digital) and Hasselblad (film) gear and make the move to a D810.
I owned one Nikon film camera donkeys years ago, so my knowledge about the platform is limited at this point. I am looking to shoot landscapes and flowers (macro) for the most part; would also like a longer telephoto for longer shots and the occasional wildlife or sports opportunity that comes up.
My budget is around $3200-$3500 for lenses, I don't have a problem with buying used, as I have collected a lot of my equipment that way over the years.
Here are a few things I have heard by looking at reviews/forums:
1. The 24MM Nikkor f1.4 seems to be a wonderful lens with a lot of character and accuracy. I really like well rendered rich color in a landscape lens.
2. The Nikkor 50mm f1.2 also has some interesting rendering which could be a good second prime?
3. I would like the Macro to double as a portrait lens, but that may be asking too much with the sharpness of the 105 Nikkor.
Thoughts and suggestions welcome.
Mike
-
It seems you prefer prime lenses, so I would suggest the recent line up of f1.8 lenses: 20, 28, 50, 85. They are not expensive, and seem to be good performers.
Even though I not a Nikon user, I have recently investigated their prime lenses as potential candidates to shoot on my Sony A7's. I have actually landed on the Nikon 20 f1.8 G for landscapes and night sky photos, it is very good indeed.
Some years ago I somehow ended up having to shoot a bunch of portraits with Nikon gear. Two great portrait lenses come to mind: AIS 85 f1.4 and AFD 105 f2 defocus control.
-
This is almost impossible to answer for someone else. Each person has their own style and working preferences. You are mentioning primes and I work mostly with zooms. I shoot the 24-70mm f/2.8 and the 16-35 f/4 VR. The 24-120mm f/4 VR and 24-85mm (newest only) are also decent options. The 17-35mm f/3.5-4.5 is a great little lens for the money. 20mm is as wide I typically can control well, but some folks really like to go super wide. Depends on the user.
When you say macro, I want more working distance than the 105mm provides. The old micro zoom is great and the micro 200mm. I also use the 5T and 6T diopters (62mm) on the 70-200mm f/2.8 (77mm thread so need a step ring).
As to primes, there are some old primes and some new ones that are really good. You don't usually need flat field corrected or super fast lenses for landscape.
I shoot the D810 for landscape and it is a great camera.
I am just about to sell all my Pentax (K3 digital) and Hasselblad (film) gear and make the move to a D810.
I owned one Nikon film camera donkeys years ago, so my knowledge about the platform is limited at this point. I am looking to shoot landscapes and flowers (macro) for the most part; would also like a longer telephoto for longer shots and the occasional wildlife or sports opportunity that comes up.
My budget is around $3200-$3500 for lenses, I don't have a problem with buying used, as I have collected a lot of my equipment that way over the years.
Here are a few things I have heard by looking at reviews/forums:
1. The 24MM Nikkor f1.4 seems to be a wonderful lens with a lot of character and accuracy. I really like well rendered rich color in a landscape lens.
2. The Nikkor 50mm f1.2 also has some interesting rendering which could be a good second prime?
3. I would like the Macro to double as a portrait lens, but that may be asking too much with the sharpness of the 105 Nikkor.
Thoughts and suggestions welcome.
Mike
-
Judging by your selection of preferred lenses, I'd venture to say you are preparing for a photojournalism role, possibly civil unrest or war photography?
-
Judging by your selection of preferred lenses, I'd venture to say you are preparing for a photojournalism role, possibly civil unrest or war photography?
Darn it ... you broke the code. ;-)
-
My landscape lenses with the D810 are the following: Nikon 14-24 f/2.8, Nikon 24-70 f/2.8 and the Nikon 70-200 f/4 VR.
Of these the 14-24 is ok, but not really as great as I expected, but the best in that range anyway from Nikon. The 24-70 is so and so, sharp in the center but so and so at the edges. The 70-200 f/4 as absolutely excellent. The latter one is a must have for landscapes, if you favour to pick out parts of the landscapes as I do.
-
New Nikkor 20mm f/1.8, good WA, does not cost a fortune
Sigma Art 35mm f/1.4, truly a great lens
Sigma Art 50mm f/1.4, ditto, also for portraits
Nikkor 85mm f/1.8, just as good as the f/1.4 Nikkor, but much cheaper and lighter
Nikkor 105mm Micro, just a great short tele for everything
If you want to squeeze everything out of the great sensor of D810, go prime! While zooms are practical and "good enough", sometimes the faster apertures are a bonus also, specially for portraits.
-
I am a Canon user but can second the recommendation of Sigma Art 35 f/1.4 for landscape - this is a gorgeous lens. But I really like this focal length. Its only drawback is that it is a little long and a little heavy, if you are trying to be inconspicuous or need to save on weight.
The Sigma Art 50mm f/1.4 also has wonderful image quality, and is heavy and long (I don't have it yet but have tried it). I do have the old manual-focus, manual-aperture AIS Nikkor 50mm f/1.2 (film era design), works nicely on the Canon with an adapter and extra-fine focusing screen. It is pretty darn sharp stopped down (f/2.8 to f/8) on a 20MP camera, and is relatively compact and lightweight - but you have to like manual focus. Lots of good Zeiss lenses out there, but again, manual focus. I can recommend the Zeiss Distagon 21mm f/2.8 as lovely for landscape, but there is a newer design 25 f/2.
Lenses aside - do you have a good tripod that you like and use? You might get more use out of a good tripod that you actually carry and use, plus medium priced lens, than in a marginally better but much more expensive lens and the old tripod that stays in the closet at home.
-
I would just advise against testing recent Zeiss top lenses if you have limited budget. They make very good Nikon lenses (such as the 70-200 f4 that I own too), feel average on the D810.
The 24mm f1.4 is excellent stopped down and has a wonderful look wide open. It is a master piece of a lens design. It is just very hard to AF accurately and realiably on the bodies I own.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Exactly now are those high-speed lenses (1.2, 1.4 or even 1.8 ) relevant for landscape photography (apart, perhaps, for astro photography, which the OP did not mention among his interests)?
-
New Nikkor 20mm f/1.8, good WA, does not cost a fortune
Sigma Art 35mm f/1.4, truly a great lens
Sigma Art 50mm f/1.4, ditto, also for portraits
Nikkor 85mm f/1.8, just as good as the f/1.4 Nikkor, but much cheaper and lighter
Nikkor 105mm Micro, just a great short tele for everything
If you want to squeeze everything out of the great sensor of D810, go prime! While zooms are practical and "good enough", sometimes the faster apertures are a bonus also, specially for portraits.
I'd second the majority of this list. Sigma ART primes are some of the best lenses in the format, the 50mm even being in the same discussion as the zeiss otus. If the OP wants a 24mm, add the 24mm ART to it. Sigma are also due to release a 24-50mm f/2 zoom promising prime performance which should be interesting.
Nikon mount struggles for a great 100/105mm macro (and even more for a good af 135mm portrait lens.)
If you want a brilliant manual focus macro lens look at the Voigtlander Lanthar 125mm (pricey)
If you want a brilliant Zeiss Apo matching manual focus 135mm (not macro) look at Samyang 135 mm f/2 (yes, seriously!)
Otherwise go for the Nikon 105mm. Sigma are likely to make a 135mm f/2 art but unlikely to be a macro.
-
Exactly now are those high-speed lenses (1.2, 1.4 or even 1.8 ) relevant for landscape photography (apart, perhaps, for astro photography, which the OP did not mention among his interests)?
Their wide aperture is indeed not needed, but they happen to often also be some of the best corrected designs, at least speaking of Zeiss.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I am a Canon user but can second the recommendation of Sigma Art 35 f/1.4 for landscape - this is a gorgeous lens. But I really like this focal length. Its only drawback is that it is a little long and a little heavy, if you are trying to be inconspicuous or need to save on weight.
The Sigma Art 50mm f/1.4 also has wonderful image quality, and is heavy and long (I don't have it yet but have tried it). I do have the old manual-focus, manual-aperture AIS Nikkor 50mm f/1.2 (film era design), works nicely on the Canon with an adapter and extra-fine focusing screen. It is pretty darn sharp stopped down (f/2.8 to f/8) on a 20MP camera, and is relatively compact and lightweight - but you have to like manual focus. Lots of good Zeiss lenses out there, but again, manual focus. I can recommend the Zeiss Distagon 21mm f/2.8 as lovely for landscape, but there is a newer design 25 f/2.
Lenses aside - do you have a good tripod that you like and use? You might get more use out of a good tripod that you actually carry and use, plus medium priced lens, than in a marginally better but much more expensive lens and the old tripod that stays in the closet at home.
Thank you Nancy, very helpful. I do have a tripod I use a lot, but am thinking I may need to upgrade here as my MePhoto is very portable, but not so stable as something more substantial. Your point is well taken though. I am also not adverse to manual focus, being an old Pentaxian, that's all I knew for quite a while. I have some MF Zeiss lenses on a film Hasselblad which will also be going, but perhaps I should give them a try on the D810 first?
-
... they happen to often also be some of the best corrected designs...
Since everything in life is a trade-off, the real question is if the "best corrected" matters at f/8 enough to offset additional cost, size, weight and filter diameter?
-
Since everything in life is a trade-off, the real question is if the "best corrected" matters at f/8 enough to offset additional cost, size, weight and filter diameter?
Absolutely.
It also depends on whether you really want to tap in the full resolution sensor of your body or are just happy shooting with a high res body or selected the body for other reasons.
I personally feel that if you shoot with zoom lenses there is rather limited value in going above 24mp from a real world image quality standpoint (but I do of course know that detail is far from being the only differentiator of the D810). It is of course a bit better at 36mp, but you are not benefitting fully from your sensor's potential.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I don't know much about MF lenses, but since they have a bigger image circle and a bigger flange-to-sensor distance than the Nikon, they are candidates for potential tilt-shift conversion. Are any of these MF Zeiss lenses wide enough to be worth t/s? The MF and the compact subfora might have some info.
Trade-offs - I make them. I love the Sigma Art 35 and use it if I am going to be working primarily in landscape. But if I am working mostly in macro, and hiking a bit to get to it, I throw the pancake 40mm f/2.8 and a few extension rings in the bag (500 grams lighter) - landscape, and wide angle macro capability. Of course, maybe I ought to shave 500 grams off myself.... ;D
-
Thoughts and suggestions welcome.
I have three go to lenses for my D810. I like the 14-24mm lens, the 28-300mm and the 105mm Macro. Now, this is for "landscape" not street nor much studio (although the 28-300 is handy for portraits). Mostly on a tripod. A lot of my landscape work is stitched so long focal length comes in handy which is why I like the 28-300. Sure, it ain't "great' at 300mm but it's "useful".
It all depends on how much you are willing to carry and how particular you are on image detail. 2 or 3 D810 stitches has made me quite carrying my Phase One IQ 180 and all the heavy glass.
-
When shooting a fishing article and travelling light I bring the 28 1.8G, 60 2.8 macro and 85 1.8G.
All are light, sharp and good value IMHO.
The 28 is exceptional for it's corner to corner sharpness - I'm very impressed with it for what it cost.
I also have the 14-24 and 70-200 2.8's and both are very good lenses, but not much fun to pack around.
-
Well, after seeing some of the suggestions, it is interesting that nobody mentioned yet the elephant in the room: the upcoming Sony A7RII.
This camera seems the one to go for serious landscape photography in 35mm format: high res, great sensor, small, light, ticks all the boxes to be at the core of a small landscape system.
The other great benefit is the fact that you can mount top quality landscape lenses, like the TS lenses from Canon (EF 17 and EF 24). Plus, of course, all the wonderful Zeiss glass already mentioned (plus the upcoming Batis lenses). Or, if you prefer zooms, Canon's EF 16-35 f4 is arguably one of the best wide angle zooms these days.
So, a lot of options...
-
Don't be put off by the "Sharpness" of the 105 macro. It has beautiful out of focus rendering that bodes well with portraiture.
I do not have a portrait example from that lens (My go to lens on the Nikon for portraits is the 85 f/1.8G), but here is an image that demonstrates the bokeh.
(https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc3/v/t1.0-9/945653_10151560940259209_1921907539_n.jpg?oh=9c914bf6e84b9d08b5e283bc065c27cd&oe=56184471)
Other than that, I am very happy with the 16-35 as a landscape lens. It is very filter friendly, the distortion is easily corrected in post and so is the edge softness at the wide end.
The Zeiss manual primes (15, 18, 21)are also worth considering if you prefer something smaller and don't mind manual focusing (Which I do anyway with landscapes).
-
I use a Zeiss 21, Zeiss 55 and Nikon 85 1.4G. Thinking of adding a Zeiss 135. Occasionally I toss on my old 105 2.5 Ai - beautiful rendering and bokeh.
A friend uses the 16-35 with good effect.
-
As others have stated, the Sigma Art series 24, 35, and 50 are superior to the Nikons and if AF is not a priority, the Zeiss lenses are also superior.
-
As others have stated, the Sigma Art series 24, 35, and 50 are superior to the Nikons and if AF is not a priority, the Zeiss lenses are also superior.
The Sigmas are a bit sharper (by a fairly small margin), much cheaper but their look wide(er) open is IMHO significantly less pleasing. The Sigmas are also not weather proofed.
Don't get wrong, I like my copy of the Sigma 35mm f1.4, but it is not the perfect lens in my book.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
The Sigmas are a bit sharper (by a fairly small margin), much cheaper but their look wide(er) open is IMHO significantly less pleasing. The Sigmas are also not weather proofed.
Don't get wrong, I like my copy of the Sigma 35mm f1.4, but it is not the perfect lens in my book.
Cheers,
Bernard
Hi Bernard, what exactly do you mean by less pleasing when wider? Is that color rendition, bokeh, or something else. The color rendering of the combination of the lens and the sensor is something hard to nail down, but I seem to gravitate to lenses that have "interesting" characteristics. I have an SD1 with two Sigma lenses for example. Just wondering about your thoughts there.
-
The Sigmas are a bit sharper (by a fairly small margin), much cheaper but their look wide(er) open is IMHO significantly less pleasing. The Sigmas are also not weather proofed.
Don't get wrong, I like my copy of the Sigma 35mm f1.4, but it is not the perfect lens in my book.
Cheers,
Bernard
Didn't say they were perfect, just better ;) They are quite a bit sharper wide open than the Nikon equivalents which may also be why you don't like them as much wide open since the bokeh isn't quite as smooth as a result but the in-focus zone acuity is actually a lot better with the Sigma 35/1.4 than the Nikon 35/1.4 (had them both on the test bench about a year and a half ago and decided to keep the Sigma). But he was asking about landscape photography where, except for in night-time photography, you are almost always stopped down significantly and even there, the Sigma's have a slight edge in corner to corner sharpness. So do the Zeiss lenses but they tend to have a bit more light fall-off in the corners even stopped down. But quite frankly, at f/8ish or so, the differences do become small and by f/11, on a D810, diffraction starts to dictate the detail rendering in the photograph and by f/16 they are all pretty much equal due to diffraction being the limiter, rather than overall optical sharpness on the lenses that we are discussing.
-
When shooting a fishing article and travelling light I bring the 28 1.8G, 60 2.8 macro and 85 1.8G.
All are light, sharp and good value IMHO.
The 28 is exceptional for it's corner to corner sharpness - I'm very impressed with it for what it cost.
I also have the 14-24 and 70-200 2.8's and both are very good lenses, but not much fun to pack around.
For landscape the Nikon 70-200 f/4 VR is a better choice than the f/2.8 and weighs much less.
-
For landscape the Nikon 70-200 f/4 VR is a better choice than the f/2.8 and weighs much less.
I agree. It is a very sharp, beautifully rendering lens and only really gives away that bullet proof build to the 2.8.
Works great for portraits too:
http://www.sandeepmurali.com/p356709065/h73f3c959#h73f3c959
-
I also use the AIS Nikkor 105 f/2.5 (via adapter) on my 20 MP Canon, and I like the rendering a lot - meaning, the aberrations are pleasingly balanced and are slightly recognizable, 1970s coating also recognizable. I recently acquired the Voigtlander Apo-Lanthar 125mm f/2.5 macro, a fabulous 1:1 manual-focus macro, but don't think that it totally replaces the Nikkor - rendering is quite a bit different, due to the apochromatic nature. The Voigtlander has a "transparent" rendering suitable for nature photography (which is most of what I do), but maybe a little "clinical" for portraiture. I am keeping my inherited lenses around as "special effects" and also occasionally as compact lenses - and I smile when I manually focus on a real long-throw helicoid - nostalgia - it isn't all about pixel-peeping, your frame of mind when shooting counts too (assuming you photo for esthetics and not for technical representation).
-
I also use the AIS Nikkor 105 f/2.5 (via adapter) on my 20 MP Canon, and I like the rendering a lot - meaning, the aberrations are pleasingly balanced and are slightly recognizable, 1970s coating also recognizable. I recently acquired the Voigtlander Apo-Lanthar 125mm f/2.5 macro, a fabulous 1:1 manual-focus macro, but don't think that it totally replaces the Nikkor - rendering is quite a bit different, due to the apochromatic nature. The Voigtlander has a "transparent" rendering suitable for nature photography (which is most of what I do), but maybe a little "clinical" for portraiture. I am keeping my inherited lenses around as "special effects" and also occasionally as compact lenses - and I smile when I manually focus on a real long-throw helicoid - nostalgia - it isn't all about pixel-peeping, your frame of mind when shooting counts too (assuming you photo for esthetics and not for technical representation).
Hi Nancy, I understand what you are saying. One reason I really love the Sigma SD1 and one or two old lenses I still hung onto. I am interested to see how my Zeiss Medium format 80mm T* and 150 T* from my Hasselblad will play on the D810 for the same reason. I am not expecting technical glory but interesting rendering and colors I can put to use once I figure them out. The Sigma often produces images that look like KodaChrome 64, something which excites me.
-
I am interested to see how my Zeiss Medium format 80mm T* and 150 T* from my Hasselblad will play on the D810 for the same reason. I am not expecting technical glory but interesting rendering and colors I can put to use once I figure them out.
I am using those V lenses on the D810 also. The color rendering is indeed different from modern Zeiss *T lenses.
The modern Zeiss feel totally transparent while the older ones, probably in part because they are less well corrected, have more personality.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
The newer Sigma ART primes use an outsized image circle in order to achieve superior performance on the edges and in the corners. [You can actually buy versions of the ART primes that are joined to tilt-shift mounts, allowing 12-15mm of shift.] This explains why they are larger and heavier. The very clean edges/corners should make them very good for landscape.
-
The newer Sigma ART primes use an outsized image circle in order to achieve superior performance on the edges and in the corners. [You can actually buy versions of the ART primes that are joined to tilt-shift mounts, allowing 12-15mm of shift.] This explains why they are larger and heavier. The very clean edges/corners should make them very good for landscape.
Can you point me to where these are available? I am interested in the Art Series lens from Sigma.
-
Can you point me to where these are available? I am interested in the Art Series lens from Sigma.
That's from Stefan Steib at Hartblei, and it's called the Hcam-Master TS. www.hcam.de
He's here, discussing tests on the new Canon ultrawide and the Sigma ARTs:
http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=99985.0
Check out the amount of shift he gets from the ART 35 and 50!
I don't know that these are available /just yet/, but if you get in touch with Stefan, he'll tell you. Keep in mind that these lenses are sold with modified mounts. They are not adapters for stock lenses.
-
I am using those V lenses on the D810 also. The color rendering is indeed different from modern Zeiss *T lenses.
The modern Zeiss feel totally transparent while the older ones, probably in part because they are less well corrected, have more personality.
Cheers,
Bernard
Hi Bernard, do you have any examples of your work on the V lenses on the D810? I would be very interested in your take on the rendering. Right now I am considering selling those lenses with my film gear, but might hold off if I am going to regret it.
Thanks,
Mike
-
For Landscape work:
the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 HSM DG Art lens
Either the Zeiss ZF 100mm Makro (manual focus or the Nikon AFS 105mm f/2.8G Micro-Nikkor (manual and auto focus
Add to this:
Either the Really Right Stuff Pano Elements Package with Lever-Release package http://www.reallyrightstuff.com/Shop/Panorama-Packages-for-Single-Multi-Row/Pano-Elements-Package-with-Lever-Release.html if you are only interested in Single row panos
or the , LR http://www.reallyrightstuff.com/Shop/Panorama-Packages-for-Single-Multi-Row/Multi-Row-Pano-Elements-Package.html for doing multi-row work as well.
for macro work, add the FAS-Clamp http://www.reallyrightstuff.com/Shop/Sliding-Clamps/FAS-Clamp.html . Using this in combination with the CB-10 camera bar that is part of the Multi-Row Pano Elements Package makes positioning the camera for macro-work much easier.
You'll also want the BD810-L: L-Plate for the D810 http://www.reallyrightstuff.com/Shop/D810/BD810-L-L-Plate-for-Nikon-D810.html
-
For landscape the Nikon 70-200 f/4 VR is a better choice than the f/2.8 and weighs much less.
I concur, however, there are 3 valid choices from Nikon in this range:
AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII - $2400
AF-S 70-200mm f/4 VR -$1400
AF-D 80-200mm f/2.8 EDIF -$1200
I shot with the last lens for 17 years and the first one for the last 2. While VR is helpful for handholding in low light for stationary subjects, it doesn't help with moving subjects. Also, the f/4 has 67mm filter threads as opposed to 77mm of the other 2. These are not trivial points for those of us that shoot more than landscapes.
In addition these lenses make great portrait lenses and the f/2.8 aperture is helpful for popping the subject. If I had the money, I would probably own both the 1st and 2nd as well as the 24-70mm f/2.8 and the 24-120mm f/4 VR!
-
For landscape the Nikon 70-200 f/4 VR is a better choice than the f/2.8 and weighs much less.
True that. I've shot with both for landscape/travel sort of stuff and the f4 wins on handling, but for my music/portraits stuff, the 2.8 is better IMHO.
I wish that like Canon, there was an f4 version without the IS to further reduce cost and weight - I think I would get one for sure.
-
I use my D810 primarily with a 24-70 and 14-24 f2.8...this for landscape and arch. work...both superb. The 70-200 f2.8 is a fantastic lens for cam as well...longer focals especially for "stitching panos" as J. Schewe mentioned...very very useful. Your lens list of primes looks like it is for reportage work? I think you might need to reconsider your list if it is indeed for "landscape" /B
-
For Landscape work:
the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 HSM DG Art lens
Either the Zeiss ZF 100mm Makro (manual focus or the Nikon AFS 105mm f/2.8G Micro-Nikkor (manual and auto focus
Add to this:
Either the Really Right Stuff Pano Elements Package with Lever-Release package http://www.reallyrightstuff.com/Shop/Panorama-Packages-for-Single-Multi-Row/Pano-Elements-Package-with-Lever-Release.html if you are only interested in Single row panos
or the , LR http://www.reallyrightstuff.com/Shop/Panorama-Packages-for-Single-Multi-Row/Multi-Row-Pano-Elements-Package.html for doing multi-row work as well.
for macro work, add the FAS-Clamp http://www.reallyrightstuff.com/Shop/Sliding-Clamps/FAS-Clamp.html . Using this in combination with the CB-10 camera bar that is part of the Multi-Row Pano Elements Package makes positioning the camera for macro-work much easier.
You'll also want the BD810-L: L-Plate for the D810 http://www.reallyrightstuff.com/Shop/D810/BD810-L-L-Plate-for-Nikon-D810.html
Hi Ellis,
Very helpful information. You recommend the 50mm Sigma, is there a reason you would not use the 35mm Sigma or the 24mm Sigma?
Thanks
Mike
-
Thank you all for the great input here on this forum. I have placed the order for the D810 and have started out with a 50mm f1.2 and an adapter for my Hasselblad lenses.
I have sold my Hasselblad film camera and almost all my Pentax stuff (just a few items left on eBay). It is a time of change.
Anyway, I am going to continue to muse over the options and advice in this thread. For me I am very interested in quality, but also the "character" of the lens and this sensor. It is at that intersection I find things most interesting.
Here is a recent one (https://monasterydotme2.files.wordpress.com/2015/07/barley-stalks-desktop-background.jpg)from the SD1 which represents some of pictures in nature that excite me.
Any further thoughts and suggestions are most welcome I still have most the budget to go, but right now am leaning in the direction of:
105 Nikon Macro G
70-200mm zoom G f.4 (smaller one)
Perhaps a 35mm Nikkor or Sigma (not sure what to do here)
Maybe the 24mm Sigma?
Zeiss is still very inticing.
But I need to learn the camera each lens well.
Thanks again.
Mike
-
Hi Ellis,
Very helpful information. You recommend the 50mm Sigma, is there a reason you would not use the 35mm Sigma or the 24mm Sigma?
Thanks
Mike
Only because I've never shot with the Sigma 24mm Art lens and had forgotten that I'd shot with the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 art lens. based critically looking at what I shot (mostly people and architecture) using the 35mm Sigma Art o na D800 I can also recommend that as well.
-
I use the 14-24mm f2.8, 24-70mm f2.8, 70-200mm f2.8, and the 18-35mm f3.5G lenses for landscape photography along with the three Nikon tilt-shift PC-E lens in 24mm, 45mm, and 85mm focal lengths.
Most often used of late when traveling has been the 18-35mm as it has the focal length range I need, accepts screw in filters or filter holders, and is half the size and half the weight of the 14-24mm lens. For astrophotography the 14-24mm f2.8 is hard to beat but a viable alternative is the Nikon 20mm f1.8 lens.
When I did test shots with the 14-24mm, 18-35mm f3.5G, and 16-35mm f4 lenses the image quality went in the order that I listed them. I like the 16-35mm range but I was not impressed with the IQ when I compared the pictures taken with those from the other two lenses taken of the same scenes and closeup subjects on the same camera.
-
Thom Hogan recently posted an article that may be just the thing for you, a Nikon D8XX user:
http://www.dslrbodies.com/lenses/lens-databases-for-nikon/thoms-recommended-lenses-2.html
-
Thank you. Very helpful.
Mike
-
So I ended up going with:
Nikon 50mm f1.2 (Manual)
Nikon 20mm f1.8 G
Zeiss 85mm f1.4 Planar
BW CPL Filters
Fotodiox adapter for 80mm f2.8 T* and 150 f4 T* Hasselblad lenses
Thank you all for your input on this journey.
-
Have fun, and post a sample sometime!