First lenses for D750

autofocus

@Dhiraj, I think considering what you want to do and the choice of the D750 the lenses you are considering are a good choice. The 24-120mm f4G will make a great all around lens and 20mm should do you well as a astro/landscape lens. The D750 will more than make up the stop of light you lose with the constant f4 of 24-120mm. Yes, there are many other lenses to consider but it seems you've done your homework and chosen an adequate stable to get started. Happy shooting when you purchase! :-)

WestEndFoto

If you are thinking of using the prime for portraits, you might want to think about the 85 1.8G. If not, then the 50 and it is basically more bokeh for more money (a little extra weight, but it the 1.4G is already feather light). Some have also argued that the 1.8 is sharper, but if so, it is minor.

Well I would like to start off with landscape hence considering the 2 lenses mentioned. The 50mm i believe would be overall good lens for cliking family, friends, events, and general everyday activities - walks in gardens or places around. Am sure i could do that with the 24-120, but i guess IQ would be better with a 50mm compared to the 24-120.

well i am not sure about the 85mm( i know its good from reviews) but how it would fare for everyday activities, do you think it would help me get better pictures or a 50mm would do good. I know bokeh is good with 85mm, but is that a good enough reason to get it over the 50mm. I am more interested in landscape, astro and catching everyday activities around.

Anyways i am considering getting the 50mm after i've played aorund with the other two lenses, please do let me know what i could do with a 85mm. I definitely dont want to do sports or wildlife anytime soon.

cheers n thanks :-)

Then I think that you should get the 50 and use that for landscapes too. It is OK for portraits but if you like it, then invest in an 85 or even longer later.

My rule of thumb for portraits, use the longest lens that will fit in the space you have. This is about perspective, not bokeh, though that also improves.

And like all good photography rules, half the fun is breaking them.

WestEndFoto

Regarding landscapes, a 20, 28 and 50 would be a good choice. I use my 50 more than the 20 for landscapes. I consider the 28 to be the sweet spot.

Dhiraj

Regarding landscapes, a 20, 28 and 50 would be a good choice. I use my 50 more than the 20 for landscapes. I consider the 28 to be the sweet spot.

How much of a difference in IQ is apparent and visible when using a 28mm Prime and the same focal on a zoom lens(24-120mm). Sadly the 24-120mm is a f4G, while the 28mm is f1.8G, so is the difference easily noticeable to the eye or is it visible only to advanced experienced photographers or on PP software.

The reason i am choosing a 20mm over a 28mm is due to the overlap of the 24-120mm.

cheers n thanks,
Dhiraj

WestEndFoto

Hmmm......I forgot that you were looking at the zoom.

I cannot comment on that zoom as I don't have it. I generally prefer primes because of the generally better IQ and faster speeds at 50mm and longer where I may be trying to achieve a narrow depth of field. The only reason that I have my 14-24 is that it is better at 14mm than Nikon's 14mm prime. This is the only example of this that I know of in the Nikon lineup.

If you are a casual user, then you will likely not notice the difference. At landscapes, you are shooting stopped down to get a wide depth of field. There are few reasons to have a lens that shoots faster than about f/4 for landscapes. An important exception is if you are shooting astro - then you want as fast and coma free as possible and the 20mm 1.8 is an excellent choice.

If you decide that you want to focus on IQ and start looking for the difference than you will likely want primes or at least the top of the line zooms such as the 14-24 2.8 or 16-35 4.0. You will see a 28mm AIS in my signature. At f/5.6 - 8.0 which I use when I shoot landscapes with this lens, there is nothing better despite the fact that this is a 30 year old lens - and still in production, which says a lot about the lens' quality.

Perhaps you should:
-buy the 20mm 1.8 for astro and wide landscapes.
-buy the 24-120 for flexibility a wide variety of photography applications.
-buy the 50 1.4G as a decent portrait lens and low light lens. In interiors of buildings, the advantage over the zoom will be huge.
-then form your own opinions based on your experience with the above great set. You can then decide where you want to go next.

heartyfisher

@Dhiraj so you are indeed a DSLR first timer !! Reminds me of the librarian who only have read about kungfu, meeting a bunch of "people' in the back alley :-) However, you seem to be very well researched ! well done ! I agree with what @WestEndFoto says above. 20, 24-120, 50. You should also consider a good light tripod, a very under appreciated tool by the novice photographer and many wonder why it costs more than their camera !

For your trip I would also grab a nice point and shoot as a backup. in case something goes wrong with your main camera. Consider the AW130 or AW1. if you get the AW1 you can use your Nikkor lenses with it :-)

Finally try to play with your gear to get some familiarity before you go on your trip. You may find you need a few more bits of gear(like a remote trigger). And keep asking here .. there are lots of people here with good experience including travel to various locations including where you are going.

kanuck

. I'll be visiting Nepal, Tibet, India, Berma and Chiang Mai in Thailand from Oct 15th to March 15th. I am quitting my job and likely uprooting myself when I return

Wow! Sounds like you have itchy feet ok. I look forward to the pics.

Yes been a long time in the works. It all started around 2013 after seeing a few pics from Adamz actually

WestEndFoto

Hmmm......I forgot that you were looking at the zoom.

I cannot comment on that zoom as I don't have it. I generally prefer primes because of the generally better IQ and faster speeds at 50mm and longer where I may be trying to achieve a narrow depth of field. The only reason that I have my 14-24 is that it is better at 14mm than Nikon's 14mm prime. This is the only example of this that I know of in the Nikon lineup.

If you are a casual user, then you will likely not notice the difference. At landscapes, you are shooting stopped down to get a wide depth of field. There are few reasons to have a lens that shoots faster than about f/4 for landscapes. An important exception is if you are shooting astro - then you want as fast and coma free as possible and the 20mm 1.8 is an excellent choice.

If you decide that you want to focus on IQ and start looking for the difference than you will likely want primes or at least the top of the line zooms such as the 14-24 2.8 or 16-35 4.0. You will see a 28mm AIS in my signature. At f/5.6 - 8.0 which I use when I shoot landscapes with this lens, there is nothing better despite the fact that this is a 30 year old lens - and still in production, which says a lot about the lens' quality.

Perhaps you should:
-buy the 20mm 1.8 for astro and wide landscapes.
-buy the 24-120 for flexibility a wide variety of photography applications.
-buy the 50 1.4G as a decent portrait lens and low light lens. In interiors of buildings, the advantage over the zoom will be huge.
-then form your own opinions based on your experience with the above great set. You can then decide where you want to go next.

protik

Thanks guys!

kennychick

You're doing what I like to do too.

Just an example I own

50mm art
50mm 1.8g
85mm 1.8g
105mm VR
24-70mm 2.8g

I loved the 50mm so much that I have 2 50mm focal lengths lol the Sigma art lens has amazing quality, I have just noticed that I have been shooting 50mm so much and so long that I think it has hindered my ability to keep improving or otherwise mastered 50mm focal length or just plain bored of it now.

I use 24-70mm for weddings and landscapes and have tried Astro with it, the outcomes were pleasing but I am sure ultra wide lenses will produce better results.

I was thinking of changing my set up to

18-35mm 3.5-4.5g
35mm art / Tamron 35mm 1.8 VR
50mm 1.8g
85mm 1.8g
24-70mm

I don't know if these will cover what you need but I believe these would be perfect for me, I still haven't found a need for a 70-200mm though, maybe a good thing because these beasts makes my bank savings bleed.

kanuck

If you made that change kennychick it would be pretty solid it looks like. Those are some pretty decent pieces of glass I still prefer 35mm to a 50mm, but it seems to be 50/50 with people. I tried to love the 50mm Summicron or Summilux lenses for my Leica, but have always made my way back to a 35 or crazy wides like 15, 18 and 21s.

esquilo

I have been shooting with a D3100 for past 4 years and currently own 10-24, 35 and 55-200 lenses. As an amateur I shoot mainly landscape, travel, candid portraits, astro and street. No birds, no sport.

I would like to sell my DX gears soon and transition to D750 and currently considering to purchase the following 5 lenses within the next 12 to 18 months period:

Prime: 20 f/1.8, 50 f/1.8, 85 f/1.8 (about $1500 @ Amazon)
Zoom: 16-35 f/4, 70-200 f/4 (about $2650 @ Amazon)

You don't have a normal-zoom for your D3100 and it looks like you don't want one for your D750 either. It's a bit odd, but fine if it works for you.

Concerning primes, I've learned that a gap of more than double/half the focal lenght will sooner or later make you want a lens to fill that gap. So, with a 20 and a 50 you are soon going to miss a 28 or 35.

WestEndFoto

I have been shooting with a D3100 for past 4 years and currently own 10-24, 35 and 55-200 lenses. As an amateur I shoot mainly landscape, travel, candid portraits, astro and street. No birds, no sport.

I would like to sell my DX gears soon and transition to D750 and currently considering to purchase the following 5 lenses within the next 12 to 18 months period:

Prime: 20 f/1.8, 50 f/1.8, 85 f/1.8 (about $1500 @ Amazon)
Zoom: 16-35 f/4, 70-200 f/4 (about $2650 @ Amazon)

You don't have a normal-zoom for your D3100 and it looks like you don't want one for your D750 either. It's a bit odd, but fine if it works for you.

Concerning primes, I've learned that a gap of more than double/half the focal lenght will sooner or later make you want a lens to fill that gap. So, with a 20 and a 50 you are soon going to miss a 28 or 35.

Geez. My gap between 20 and 28 is bugging me.

WestEndFoto

I have been shooting with a D3100 for past 4 years and currently own 10-24, 35 and 55-200 lenses. As an amateur I shoot mainly landscape, travel, candid portraits, astro and street. No birds, no sport.

I would like to sell my DX gears soon and transition to D750 and currently considering to purchase the following 5 lenses within the next 12 to 18 months period:

Prime: 20 f/1.8, 50 f/1.8, 85 f/1.8 (about $1500 @ Amazon)
Zoom: 16-35 f/4, 70-200 f/4 (about $2650 @ Amazon)

You don't have a normal-zoom for your D3100 and it looks like you don't want one for your D750 either. It's a bit odd, but fine if it works for you.

Concerning primes, I've learned that a gap of more than double/half the focal lenght will sooner or later make you want a lens to fill that gap. So, with a 20 and a 50 you are soon going to miss a 28 or 35.

Geez. My gap between 20 and 28 is bugging me.

kanuck

That would bug me as well! 20-28mm range is critical for my type of shooting. I don't use anything over 40mm much I find, but again preferences vary wildly from person to person clearly...

WestEndFoto

Yes, 28 is my sweet spot for landscapes. My 40 covered one shoulder. I want to cover the other.

protik

Concerning primes, I've learned that a gap of more than double/half the focal lenght will sooner or later make you want a lens to fill that gap. So, with a 20 and a 50 you are soon going to miss a 28 or 35.

You are correct, I did end up getting the 35mm f1.8 My follow up to this initial post here: http://forum.nikonrumors.com/discussion/4730/wide-angle-and-telephoto-zoom-lenses-for-d750

Thanks!

Ironheart

>

Geez. My gap between 20 and 28 is bugging me.

Me too!

See:
http://forum.nikonrumors.com/discussion/4422/nikon-24mm-f1-8-lens-on-the-horizon/

kanuck

Yes, 28 is my sweet spot for landscapes. My 40 covered one shoulder. I want to cover the other.

A nice solid 28mm prime is wonderful to have. The 28 AIS or current versions are truely excellent! The wider the better for my tastes. I love the 20mm prime and of course the 14-24. However, switching primes back and forth is ultra annoying though don't you guys think? Especially with FX bodies the spots that get on the sensors so quickly after switching out a lens say even 2-3 times....

WestEndFoto

I am not really bothered changing lenses. Spots are a little annoying, but they can fixed fairly easily in post and the only real option, trading in all my lenses for a superzoom, is not an option

kanuck

I am not really bothered changing lenses. Spots are a little annoying, but they can fixed fairly easily in post and the only real option, trading in all my lenses for a superzoom, is not an option

Fair enough. Just out of curiosity, what would you do if you were taking say a 1-2 month trip to a developing country (like India) with things constantly going around you. Would you still bring all your primes like your 20, 28, 40 and 50s? The 14-24 would be heavy, but a must bring I would imagine and your 85 and 135 for portraits?

WestEndFoto

The closest that I have been to a developing country is Xian in China. I used this:

http://www.billingham.co.uk/photovest.html

Everything is tucked in the pockets, which are countless and will fit all of my lenses and basic accessories (though in practice that is a bit much). This vest is my single most important photo accessory when travelling. I pack it in my carry on with all the lenses and accessories inside. If screening complains about the weight of the carry on (it is always way over), then I take it out and wear it. I have not had this issue yet though.

In practice, I don't bring my 14-28 when I travel but my 20. I only miss the 14-20 range on very occasional tight interior shots. Less than 1% of my photos. I don't bring the 50 1.2 as it is manual focus which I find less practical for street photography than my favorite street photography lens, my 50 1.4G. Here is my favorite street photography shot:



I find that most of my street photography is in the 50 - 85 range. When I shoot wider, my subject is usually a street, for which manual focus is fine. However, I don't mind focusing when I have to.

On occasions I leave either the 85, 135 or 200 in the hotel room.

If street photography was my main thing, which it isn't, I would have a 17-35 2.8D, 50 1.4G and 70-200 2.8. I would also have a 24 1.4G and 35 1.4G which I would bring out at night.

If I was worried about dirt enough not to want to change lens, then I would use a 24-70 2.8E in the day and a 50 1.4G at night. If I am worried about criminals, I make it clear to any suspicious characters that my RRS tripod with a BH-54 ballhead serves double duty as a club.

You have probably noticed that I am biased towards a longer focal length, whether it is for landscape, street or portraits. Not sure why this is. I just like tighter shots.

protik

Having picked up 35mm and 85mm f1.8 recently, I am really starting to enjoy these two lenses. I have been still going for the 50mm though when unsure between these two focal lengths.

kanuck

Ahh yes the old vest idea, they can be great except they stick out in poorer places. Billingham makes some nice stuff. I have gone through a few of their cases with my Leica gear over the years.

I wish I could use primes more, but with my work I need to rely on zooms in order to make sure I get the shot at events and while travelling around sadly. When I get a chance to relax and just shoot for landscape fun for myself then I can crack out the old 20mm, 14-24, and maybe the odd 50mm friends of mine Lol

Another 6 weeks and I will be quitting after 14 years of service to begin my epic trip of course though:)

WestEndFoto

Ahh yes the old vest idea, they can be great except they stick out in poorer places. Billingham makes some nice stuff. I have gone through a few of their cases with my Leica gear over the years.

I wish I could use primes more, but with my work I need to rely on zooms in order to make sure I get the shot at events and while travelling around sadly. When I get a chance to relax and just shoot for landscape fun for myself then I can crack out the old 20mm, 14-24, and maybe the odd 50mm friends of mine Lol

Another 6 weeks and I will be quitting after 14 years of service to begin my epic trip of course though:)

If I was shooting events, I would have zooms, but also a couple of fast primes handy.