Roni Rk Good collection. Mine is not as extensive. 1. 28-300mm f3.5-5.6 2. 24mm f1.4 3. 50mm f1.4 4. 10.5mm f2.8 (DX) used on my D750 and D80 5. 18-200mm f3.5-5.6 (DX) Used on my D80 6. A Celestron 1000mm f11 lens. I bought this years ago when I was shooting film. I worked at Kennedy Space center and bought this to take shots of the rocket launches. I used a 2x and was shooting almost full frame shots of the shuttle blasting off from 5 miles away. There was plenty of light, but the shots did come out pretty flat. But it was tons of fun to play with. I'd sell it if someone were to want it. I really like the 24mm instead of the 12-24mm zoom, because it is lighter and smaller. I also like shooting with primaries when I am walking around. But I fully understand why many prefer the zoom over the primary.
I just wanted to say that your channel is a MUCH better resource with MUCH better real-world advice than certain others that have websites with reviews of cameras they haven't even tried yet. Any chance you'll do reviews on films remaining on the market today?
Though I'm not a Nikon user I enjoyed this video. The best line of the video is your summation of a professional photographer - master of light and master of composition. I'm currently working on those two areas.
kinachahue ~~~!!! well, nikon user or not, i have LOTS of videos on composition, etc etc, also opening up NIKONFOCUS.COM , its open now, but i just started building it!!!
I love the 35-70mm 2.8 lens! Bought it from a friend for £170.00. The rest of the video is very handy, given me some ideas. Some brilliant suggestions.
I am a beginner photographer living in NY originally from Tokyo Japan. I recently got D5500 and 50mm 1.8g. As soon as I saw a couple of your videos and realized that I would have to spend more money on lenses if I keep my D5500, I returned my 5500 and 1.8g and bought D750 and a pancake 50mm! Absolutely amazing. I'm still practicing MF but it's already so much more fun! I'm planning to get other lenses and flashes that you recommended too! Before I found your videos, I didn't know anything and was watching fro, tony and digi rev videos on you tube wondering about their photo quality. It was mind blowing to hear what you said and I am really thankful for your help!!
Your rude and in your face. Your advice is great and no BS. I'm on a budget and have bought a new 1.8 50mm Nikon, and a 2nd hand 35-70 2.8. I use them on a Nikon D5300. These cover my needs in video production. Results are super sharp!
Watched this video a couple of months ago, and immediately went to a danish used sales page, where i found one 28-85 (only one for sale. Can't be found anymore) for sale for about $60. Ad had been inactive for some time, so i randomly bid $35 + postage and seller was in. Lens is awesome, dropped it a few times (whoops) still works perfectly, can't complain lol. Thanks Ken
I recently went to Seattle to help take care of my father. I had a couple of weeks when he was inpatient in the hospital and I went out lens shopping. I bought a few lenses. One of them being the AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm 1:4.5-5.6 G (in IMMACULATE condition). The lady I purchased it from was supposed to sell me a Nikon SB-26 with the 70-300 for $150, however she couldn't find the SB-26 at the time. So she threw in a Sigma f=35~135mm 1:3.5~4.5 (with a dented lens barrel. The next week she found the SB-26 and she sold it to me for $25. Also on Superbowl Sunday, I picked up an older Nikkor 35-70 1:3.3~4.5 (the one with the metering fork (in good condition)) for $50. All of this equipment for $225. What do you think?
I bought the 80-200 upon your recommendation and I must say --you see to know what you are talking about. I shot my cousin's wedding "unofficially" and my pics wupped the hired the professional photogs' and he had the new 70-200 vrII!
Just to point out. Why would someone want a f1.4? Cause crop sensor. Say you have a Nikon crop sensor at 1.5C. 1.5*1.4=2.1. 1.5*1.8=2.7 Not a significant difference, but could be a difference for some people that is worth noting. Never forget to multiply your aperture by your crop factor as well as your focal length. I think there is a larger difference between a F2.1 and a F2.7 than a f1.4 and an f1.8. So on full frame it doesnt matter as much, but when it is 1.5 times larger of a difference, it may start meaning something.
In the commentary on the 12-24mm it appears, reading the lens label ring, at 12:05 minutes that it is actually a 14-24mm. Forgive my ignorance if I'm reading it wrong. But which lens is it that you find supreme the 12-24mm or the 14-24mm, considering a purchase so I need to know. BTW, this is a priceless video still 5 years later for us on a budget.
This was great! Straight to the point, great advice and I like your style too! Only downside is I can see the price of the 35-70 rising on ebay as a result.
It never rains!! Only today I won a 24-120D for £56!! (Postage et al!) And now this evening I've just spotted a 35-70 on EBay, going for $33 (+$20 postage to the UK)! That's £33.05! £33?? I can spend that in the pub; easy! Okay. No drinking for a couple of weeks! I'm gonna have two new lenses to deal with! Ken. You are the most factual and honest reviewer on You Tube; Bar none! I will keep watching and listening and learning! Cheers!
A few years back I bought a Nikon D5100 (with AF-S Nikkor 18-55 mm and a AF Nikkor 28-80 mm) from a resell store to shoot simple family vacations. Lately I've been trying to take nature photos, nothing really big like landscape, just mostly animal photos. My point mostly is, what would be the best lens for a sharp, portrait type picture for animals who are constantly moving? Preferably $300 or less. :) Thanks.
a fast VR nikkor prime, at $300 or less, get a 85mm F1.8 used minty on ebay for $200+ use a higher ISO and shutter and grab WONDERFUL moving critter shots!!
"I went to photography college and worked in camera shops" ... yeah, neither of these mean shit when it comes to out in the field experience, "all day long". None of these are secret, anyone truly into their photography will know every one of these. I know I do. The 85mm 1.8G is sharper than the 24-70 ... all day long ...
ive been in the field a looooong time, more weddings than i can count, a corporate shoot 2 days ago, and two shoots in 12 days in Key west Fl and a wedding in Naples. I never SAID photo school or cammy shots had a damn thing to do with being a shooter. well i KNOW the 85mm is WORLDS sharper than the 24-70, hell ive got 6 85mm lenses, 4 1.8, a 1.4 and an old F2. You sure did PRESUME a lot !
It's hard NOT to presume when you put emphasis on the 'fact that the 24-70 is the sharpest Nikon lens you can own ... numerous times. Watch your own video back there ... as you seem to have a touch of amnesia
Well, I agree on most of what you say so there's a positive! Just got a "if you don't do as I do you're thick" vibe. I had most of these lenses at one point or other, but stripped most away and now use 2 primes, until I can get more work at least. I agree there's some brilliant inexpensive lenses to be had, and people shouldn't be snobbish about them. I was carrying 6-7 lenses and 3 flashes to small shoots and only using one really for 90% of it. I was conflustering myself trying to make use of everything I had. Nowadays I use the D800E and sigma 35 1.4 for 90% of ALL shooting, got a 150 macro for eveything else. I don't really do wide angle, and don't shoot wildlife enough so just sold on a 300mm. If I ever feel i need that focal length again I will get something like the 70-300 you suggest ;)
No, peeps need what they need, i just make some recommendations. i never meant or implied "my way or else" at no time. what a wedding shooter needs isnt what a street shooter needs etc etc. Keep shooting and good talking to you man! winks
Would you recommend any of these? 17-35mm 2.8D, 18-35mm 3.5-4.5D, or 20-35mm 2.8D? Maybe in accordance to the 35-70 or the 28-85...? Looking for D lenses since I picked up an F4s body and need the aperture ring to shoot manual.
I call bullshit! I was with you, all the way to 9:36 where you stated that the 24-70 Nikkor is the sharpest lens, hands down, if money is no object. I've had the Nikkor 20-70. Shot it, and a replacement. Not sharp. Tamron 24-70 VC, Sigma 50mm HSM both sharper than the Nikon. And yes, I did fine tuning, with a spyder lens cal, on all lenses.
If you are a professional then you just go out and purchase the three main "trinity zooms" and a couple of primes to cover the work style. There are some excellent older lenses from Nikon and other cheaper brands. Samyang for one but there are others. With the advent of software images can be manipulated to compensate for any shortcomings on lenses that were not available years ago. We went for the 85mm 1.4mm because we like working with the glass, it is a just personal thing and gives a creamy background. It is interesting to see other photographer perspective on equipment but it is the images the count, a bit like a chef, you need kit to produce a decent meal but it is the meal that counts. Agree with all that is said in the video, he is talking sense. (Re the 14 - 24mm filters, try taping a cut out filter to the rear of the lens, there is space, it is an old technique from 5 x 4 days)
It is a personal perception Kris, not set in stone. To compliment our 5 x 4 and medium format systems this is what was done, other companies on consultation have done this, nothing new. An assignment came up so we covered it with new equipment mentioned as it covered focal lengths from 14mm - 500mm adding the Nikon 200 - 500mm. Most Nikon professional lenses meet expectation without scrutiny, it is about the user not the equipment. See a doctor about your balls if that's your problem, live long and prosper.
The Nikon 28-70 2.8 is an amazing buy. Got mine for £400 and is awesome. Super sharp, all metal lens. Not quite as wide as the 24-70 and not as new but man, what a lens for the money!
Theoria Apophasis I got a 80-200 2.8 ED pp for 350$(!) via a craigslist ad. awesome lens. granted it was not in perfect cosmetic condition but still works flawlessly.
I took your advice and bought the Nikon 28-85 f/3/5-4.5 Nikkor . Very happy with the purchase. I'd like a little more reach so what do you think of the Nikon 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 D AF Nikkor ??? I shoot with a D750.
I don't see how you can claim the 24-70 will "blow the shit off" of everything else. I find it to be very good, but also to have some very noticeable flaws compared to primes in the same focal range. It's particularly unimpressive at its close focus distance, even compared to lenses that it beats at longer focal distances.
too much hyperbole, the 24-70 2.8 (as i said in another video) is FRAGILE , and not extremely sharp. It has its range, but I recommend other lenses above it in MOST other videos ive already made.
Hi Ken. You were right! I just got my Nikkor 14-24 f2.8 and my wife has had to find a new place to sleep now! I love it! Can't wait for the rain to stop so I can get outside with it! What do you think about the Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/4G ED VR Lens? Ken Rothwell rates it on a par with with 70-200, but costs less and is lighter. Have you tried one? I was wondering if it was worth paying the extra to get the last of the 'Holy Trinity'. I have the 24-70 f2.8 and love that too.
+Mark Allen Rockwell you mean. the nikkor 70 200 F2.8 are losers your lens you just got is great the Tamron 70 200 2.8 beats the nikon 70 200 2.8 lenses.
+Mark Allen Rockwell you mean. the nikkor 70 200 F2.8 are losers your lens you just got is great the Tamron 70 200 2.8 beats the nikon 70 200 2.8 lenses.
What protective front filters do you recommend? I like the Nikon L37c, L1BC, but they are next to impossible to find new. I have a Heliopan UV 0, and its superb on a 17-35. Tried a B+W, XS Pro on an 85, but I think it may not be what I like. What do you think?
hello there, i have a nikon d5300 with the tokina 11-16 f2.8, nikon dx fisheye 10.5 mm f2.8, nikon dx 35mm f1.8 , nikon 18-200 dx f3.5-5.6. I want to change the 18-200 dx for the nikon 70-300 VR G. what do you think? any other recomendation? thanks
I just love that these are very affordable. I'm going to buy one of these every month starting from March until I have about 4 or 5 of these. I need a nice lovely set of primes and these classic lenses make the most sense as they are not only high quality but affordable.
Thanks for video. Just one question: I have an old (but perfect condition) Nikon 35-70 3.3 4.5 AF (no "D") and I'm thinking of buying Nikon 24-70 G or 24-70 VR for my Nikon D750. Obviously, price is around 2.200,00 USD, so, what do you recommend: buy VR, buy G or just keep what we have ? Thanks !
I didn't say I didn't like the 58mm Voightlander, however, my expectations perhaps were unrealistic and it's appears to be a toss up between the 45mm Tamron.
Jovan Beltran best cheap portrait is 85mm F2 AI lens. The Tokina 100mm 2.8 is an INCREDIBLE portrait, only $380 new! 85mm D 1.8 can be had for about $240 all day on ebay
Hey Man thanks for this. It's been a pain in the ass shopping for my D750. I picked up pretty much all of them for about what you said and a little cheaper on a couple. What a time saver this was. Thanks
Did this same thing over the course of about three years in both DX and FX and came up with the exact same analysis. Except for the Tokina (got a deal on a 105) I own all these lenses and the one you didn't take out too the 10.5. I'll also point out the 50mm 1.8 and 35mm 1.8 stay in my kit because for certain things there is nothing better, and for beginners the normal is the best for teaching good skills. Alot of people like Tokina 11-16 for DX and I'd agree for low light and then it's a trade off. The Fotoiox filter kit for the 14-24 is totally solid and doable, but yes a big beating, shows EVERYTHING if not perfectly clean because of how far away from the ft element it is. Also the CPL can be very uneven at 14mm.
the Tokina 11-16 is passable, but a used 12-24 Nikkor is only $400. Yes!!! hahahahah ive handled from a buddy that 14-14 "filter" , what a funny beast! I could make my own, but havent yet. Its still a dodgy piece. you buy a 135mm 2.8 or 3.5 yet? ....that should be your next buy for many reasons, that and the QUAD PURPOSE 60mm Micro Nikkor
Theoria Apophasis I'm probably not your regular photog. Mostly trek backpack stuff, also my buddy has a 135 DC he got for a song so I use that on rare occasions I need to. I did use a 105 2.0 for a while on the DX which is a good one too. Never had my hands on the 60mm, sounds like one I should keep an eye out for. Probably feeling the 16 FE next, really want that on the big sensor. Shot the AIS, never tried the D or sigma.
As a long time Chef, and Food guy, Food photography has is becoming a hobby. I really liked the dissection of these lenses, and your steering me towards the Tokina 100mm, is one Im looking forward to have hours of fun with Food photo work. As well the hidden gem, 35-70, I just picked up on Ebay for well under 300.00. I am at best an amature photographer and these videos help tremendously in purchasing smart. Thanks so much, Kevin
I received the Voightlander 58mm f/1.4 today and was somewhat disappointed. Maybe I was expecting too much or I'm not as skilled as I should be with manual focus, however, when I placed the Voightlander on a tripod I was not impressed with the results. My Tamron 45MM blew it out of the water even when handheld. Is the Voightlander 58mm a lens best for portraits and closeups 4-10 feet?
youre kidding? :) just the MF you didnt like? best for portraiture, and for its bokeh and incredible microcontrast. what camera did you use it with? take a bokeh or BW shot with it and see what is. countless 1000s bought it and youre on the 2nd to not like it :/
Just a topic that might fit this Video being about many lenses. I heard a while back that f8 is the sharpest -- is it right to apply that generally to all lenses. Because I always aim to shoot f8 and change shutter/iso to compensate that preference. Of course the circumstance doesn't always allow it, but is f8 a safe bet for lens clarity?
depends on the lens, thats generally accurate. to all lenses? NO. Its a "safe bet", bit if you take test shots on a new lens, youll find its sweet spots. There are many lenses sharper at f4 etc, than at F8, .....the 80-200 2.8 for example.
I have/had half of these lens listed. I dropped my 35-70mm 2.8 so hard it snapped the in half. So sad, love that lens.
Před 9 lety+1
Hey Thanks for the precious advices about Nikon lenses! I have just a 80-200mm beast. However it has got an Focus issue with D800. I did try AF tune it. Even in -20 AF tune It still not sharp at all.It does back focusing. It can only be freaking sharp at 135mm focal length. Do you have any tips about that issue too? Thanks again.
I have the Tokina 100mm f/2.8 that I got for $100 because the guy took it to a Color Run and the dust f'ed up the electronics. I use it on manual and WOW! Best lens in my bag for macro. Sharp!
Looking at finally upgrading to full frame (D7000 to D800) and am looking for advice on wide, zoom, and tele full frame lenses. At 36 megapixels I'm going to need something super sharp. What would you recommend for no more than ~$1000 per lens?
Another hidden gem is the Tokina AF 28-70mm f/2.6-2.8 AT-X Pro II - there's many variations of this but you must get the 2.6-2.8 Pro II version, superb lens for the money. I paid £120 (so about $180-ish) for mine. They're not super tack sharp but very, very good for the price. Suffers with CA's a bit but that can be fixed if you can live with it. It's obviously not as good as Nikon's 24-70 2.8 VR but I'd say it was as good as Sigma's 24-70 2.8 and about a quarter of the price.
THNX for the nice secrets!!! I like the Micro Nikkor 200mm F4 prime very much for macro photography because the bugs stay and it´s really sharp and has a nice long manual focus ring!!
Could you do a video on Older all manual lenses - would love to learn about them as I use them for video with my canon 5d 2 I own the 50mm 1.4 and love it for video looking to get an 85 mm manual but need some help deciding Tks !!!
We've been using the 24-70 Nikon for a few years, but sometimes its just too slow for wedding receptions and evenings. Not a Nikon lens i know, but the Sigma art series lenses are ridiculously good at the moment.
i saw a 80-200mm 2.8d for $614 and a 24-70mm 2.8 for $1022. witch should i get 1st on my d7000 as of now i only have 50mm 1.8d. thanks and God Bless...
Great to see. I have the 24-70mm f/2.8 and im am very happy with it. In your video youre recommend Nikon 12-24mm?? Looks like in the video is the great nikon 14-24mm 2.8 you have in your bag? Not 12-24?
Thank you so much for kindly answering my query so quickly. Does not the fact that the photosites (or whatever they are called) are so bunched up make any difference? I did have a try with a friends 7100 & I was blown away by the speed that it locked on to a subject.
I have that 35-70 lens and have not been able to use it on my D300. Not sure how to make this work on my camera. The lens works on my F5 but not digital.
I just got a sweet Nikon FE. I am looking for some good glass to use on it. I would like to us them on my Nikon d7100 too. what is are some good choices?!
For events. I need something close range but wide enough to shoot a small group less than a few feet away. Like for Red Carpet, fashion shows or nightclub settings where theirs a lot of traffic, need cheap yet appropriate, cant afford the 12-24 right now
I am new to photography and I have my first ever DSLR the Canon 700D it came with 2 kit lens I got a 50mm f.1.8 prime as well as my 3rd lens because a lot of my photographer friends said every beginner should start on one of those lens, I am doing a photography beginner course also, but I got my DSLR for when I go on holidays so I need to a wide angle lens for the shots I wanted to take I ended up getting a Tamron 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5 wide angle, mainly for its nice zoom range and it seemed like the best value than going for the Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 len but I am noticing it doesn't seem to get very sharp round the edges and to get really sharp images I need to up my aperture to f8 or f11 at 10mm to get all round sharper images in daylight shots it could be me because I am just a beginner my knowledge right not on dslr and lens is limited at best, I was just wondering your thought should have I gone for the Canon EF-S 10-22mm? or is this Tamron good enough for my level of skill being a beginner ?
Do those first few Nikkor/Nikon D lenses he was recommending use the autofocus on modern cameras like the Nikon 3400, 5500, or 7100? Or can you only manual focus with them?
Hi :) Thanks for your tips Could you please list all the recommend lens on this video Because on eBay there is few version to each one Thanks advance :)
Hey! I'm very new to DSLR photography - a few weeks ago I couldn't resist a Black Friday sale offer and have finally purchased a camera that I've been looking at for a while - a Nikon D5300 for about $899CAD (roughly $650USD). It came as a bundle, which included a body + AF-S Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 kit lens + AF-S Nikkor 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6 G ED DX zoom lens + a large DLSR bag + 64Gb U3 card. I have only came across your channel after I have received my camera about a week ago. After not having slept for a few days since (watching your videos & reading/learning about DSLRs & lenses), I am now questioning my life choices. :) And therefore I have quite a few questions.. 1) Did I make a mistake going for the D5300 instead of D7100 (they seem to be in a more-or-less similar price range)? I do like the tilt screen, since it allows me to take photos from difficult angles (and I like doing that), but your review of D7100 is very convincing.. 2) Do you think what I've got for the money was a good deal or did I buy a mediocre bundle? 3) Would it have been a better choice for me to simply buy the body alone and then go for the 2 "cat's ass" (or "the tits"?) secret lenses, which you have recommended here? I was thinking Nikon 35-70mm f/2.8 for most of my photo needs & Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 (VR) for zoom situations. 4) Also, I noticed that you have recommended Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 (VR) as a secret gem. I've got a Nikon 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6 (VR). Are they any different? Is the one you are recommending a far better lens than what I've got? 5) You said in the beginning of the video that Nikon 35-70mm f/2.8 is the best lens for the money. And then you said that Tokina 100mm f/2.8 is the best lens in the whole video. So which one is best? It seems like they are both relatively similar & both would be able to handle macro & portraits very well. So what would be the choice between the two? I understand that one is prime & one is a zoom lens. But seems like the Nikon 35-70mm f/2.8 can be more versatile and can do what Tokina can + more. Or am I wrong? I am now on the fence about the whole thing. I still have until Jan 31st to return everything back to the seller, get a full refund and re-invest my money in a different setup. And I am totally open to that idea. So I am really looking to get some advice from a person who knows their shit. :) Any help will be very much appreciated. Cheers, Alex
Also, just wanted to add that I mainly want to photograph nature, macro & night scenes. Maybe occasional portrait here and there. Don't think will be capturing many fast-moving objects. And I don't think I'll ever use a video mode in a DSLR camera.
Thanks for this! Gosh, I'm an idiot. For a couple years I've been bemoaning the fact that I just can't afford the 24-70 2.8G right now. After watching this I suddenly remembered I have the 35-70 2.8D sitting in the far back of my closet. It's been collecting dust for over a decade since my film days. I pulled it out and holy sh*t, it's perfectly sharp on my D800.
Yo Theoria! I got my 35-70mm in the mail today I must say I was surprise at the quality of the lens :) Took a shot at 70mm and was blown away at the color saturation on my D7100, then I compared shooting at 50mm against the Nikon 50mm E series lens. I thought the 50mm E produced a better image at 50mm but the 35-70mm at 70mm produces nice sharp images. I got lucky and got a copy so I am lucky so far with the lens. Paid around $379. I will say its a good lens to have around.. Thanks again! your the cats meooooowwwww
What do you think about the Nikon 105mm f/2.8 Micro AI-s? have been using it for more than 15 years and i think this is still a pretty solid macro lens.
I can vouch for the 70-300 - it's excellent. But what about the 16-35, Theoria Apophasis ? Would you go for that over the 24-70 for landscapes (using filters, so ruling out the 12-24 as it's ridonkulous to use with filters)?
It's SO refreshing to hear from someone who has experience in photography rave about lenses that are something other than the over priced "holy trinity"
Lenses list:
1.Nikon 35-70mm f/2.8 (2007)
2.Nikon 12-24mm f/4 (DX)
3.Nikon 28-85mm f/3.5-4.5 (Macro) (1999)
4.Nikon 180mm f/2.8
5.Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 (VR)
6.Nikon 85mm f/1.8 (G/D)
7.Tokina 100mm f/2.8 (Macro)
8.Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8
9.Nikon 12-24mm f/2.8
10.Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8
Roni Rk Good collection. Mine is not as extensive. 1. 28-300mm f3.5-5.6
2. 24mm f1.4
3. 50mm f1.4
4. 10.5mm f2.8 (DX) used on my D750 and D80
5. 18-200mm f3.5-5.6 (DX) Used on my D80
6. A Celestron 1000mm f11 lens. I bought this years ago when I was shooting film. I worked at Kennedy Space center and bought this to take shots of the rocket launches. I used a 2x and was shooting almost full frame shots of the shuttle blasting off from 5 miles away. There was plenty of light, but the shots did come out pretty flat. But it was tons of fun to play with. I'd sell it if someone were to want it.
I really like the 24mm instead of the 12-24mm zoom, because it is lighter and smaller. I also like shooting with primaries when I am walking around. But I fully understand why many prefer the zoom over the primary.
+Roni Rk Thanks. I was taking notes but still struggling. ;)
I’m confused, I can’t find the Nikon 12-24mm lens... did he mean 14-24mm ???
I just wanted to say that your channel is a MUCH better resource with MUCH better real-world advice than certain others that have websites with reviews of cameras they haven't even tried yet. Any chance you'll do reviews on films remaining on the market today?
ohhhhh no not film!!!! Grrrrrrr :P
lol well had to ask. Have a good one!
Just bought 35-70mm 2.8 for 20 bucks and this thing is a beast. Thanks you for guiding me to the right direction :)
+Lorcan O'Brien luckily had some connection with the guy selling it. He was replacing it with 24-70 so lucky me :)
Though I'm not a Nikon user I enjoyed this video. The best line of the video is your summation of a professional photographer - master of light and master of composition. I'm currently working on those two areas.
kinachahue ~~~!!! well, nikon user or not, i have LOTS of videos on composition, etc etc,
also opening up NIKONFOCUS.COM , its open now, but i just started building it!!!
I love the 35-70mm 2.8 lens! Bought it from a friend for £170.00. The rest of the video is very handy, given me some ideas. Some brilliant suggestions.
great lens, a fantastic 50-105mm on DX bodies!
I am a beginner photographer living in NY originally from Tokyo Japan.
I recently got D5500 and 50mm 1.8g.
As soon as I saw a couple of your videos and realized that I would have to spend more money on lenses if I keep my D5500, I returned my 5500 and 1.8g and bought D750 and a pancake 50mm! Absolutely amazing.
I'm still practicing MF but it's already so much more fun! I'm planning to get other lenses and flashes that you recommended too!
Before I found your videos, I didn't know anything and was watching fro, tony and digi rev videos on you tube wondering about their photo quality. It was mind blowing to hear what you said and I am really thankful for your help!!
Your rude and in your face. Your advice is great and no BS. I'm on a budget and have bought a new 1.8 50mm Nikon, and a 2nd hand 35-70 2.8. I use them on a Nikon D5300. These cover my needs in video production. Results are super sharp!
Watched this video a couple of months ago, and immediately went to a danish used sales page, where i found one 28-85 (only one for sale. Can't be found anymore) for sale for about $60. Ad had been inactive for some time, so i randomly bid $35 + postage and seller was in. Lens is awesome, dropped it a few times (whoops) still works perfectly, can't complain lol. Thanks Ken
+therallyfan dropped it a few times??? :/ DERP
+therallyfan dropped it a few times??? :/ DERP
I know lol!
Amazing Video! You should put a list of the lenses at the description!
I recently went to Seattle to help take care of my father. I had a couple of weeks when he was inpatient in the hospital and I went out lens shopping. I bought a few lenses. One of them being the AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm 1:4.5-5.6 G (in IMMACULATE condition). The lady I purchased it from was supposed to sell me a Nikon SB-26 with the 70-300 for $150, however she couldn't find the SB-26 at the time. So she threw in a Sigma f=35~135mm 1:3.5~4.5 (with a dented lens barrel. The next week she found the SB-26 and she sold it to me for $25. Also on Superbowl Sunday, I picked up an older Nikkor 35-70 1:3.3~4.5 (the one with the metering fork (in good condition)) for $50. All of this equipment for $225. What do you think?
thats a great pile of glass for cheap :)
So it was a great buy!
I bought the 80-200 upon your recommendation and I must say --you see to know what you are talking about. I shot my cousin's wedding "unofficially" and my pics wupped the hired the professional photogs' and he had the new 70-200 vrII!
Just to point out. Why would someone want a f1.4? Cause crop sensor. Say you have a Nikon crop sensor at 1.5C. 1.5*1.4=2.1. 1.5*1.8=2.7 Not a significant difference, but could be a difference for some people that is worth noting. Never forget to multiply your aperture by your crop factor as well as your focal length. I think there is a larger difference between a F2.1 and a F2.7 than a f1.4 and an f1.8. So on full frame it doesnt matter as much, but when it is 1.5 times larger of a difference, it may start meaning something.
"stfu, you don't know what you're talking about" - love it
In the commentary on the 12-24mm it appears, reading the lens label ring, at 12:05 minutes that it is actually a 14-24mm. Forgive my ignorance if I'm reading it wrong. But which lens is it that you find supreme the 12-24mm or the 14-24mm, considering a purchase so I need to know. BTW, this is a priceless video still 5 years later for us on a budget.
This was great! Straight to the point, great advice and I like your style too! Only downside is I can see the price of the 35-70 rising on ebay as a result.
Was thinking the same thing. Damn THEASE prices are going to jump. Glad it posted less than a month ago
I was a film shooter. Now because of your videos and no bullshit. I own a d700 , 105mm 2.5, voigtlander 40mm and now the voigtlander 58mm.
You are the best thing on anything photography. You provide insight yet make me laugh... a lot!
It never rains!! Only today I won a 24-120D for £56!! (Postage et al!)
And now this evening I've just spotted a 35-70 on EBay, going for $33 (+$20 postage to the UK)!
That's £33.05!
£33?? I can spend that in the pub; easy! Okay. No drinking for a couple of weeks!
I'm gonna have two new lenses to deal with!
Ken. You are the most factual and honest reviewer on You Tube; Bar none! I will keep watching and listening and learning!
Cheers!
Wwoooo, just bought a 24-70 it's amazing :)
A few years back I bought a Nikon D5100 (with AF-S Nikkor 18-55 mm and a AF Nikkor 28-80 mm) from a resell store to shoot simple family vacations. Lately I've been trying to take nature photos, nothing really big like landscape, just mostly animal photos.
My point mostly is, what would be the best lens for a sharp, portrait type picture for animals who are constantly moving?
Preferably $300 or less. :) Thanks.
a fast VR nikkor prime,
at $300 or less, get a 85mm F1.8 used minty on ebay for $200+
use a higher ISO and shutter and grab WONDERFUL moving critter shots!!
Thanks!
also, if your using a DX cammy then its a better crop fast portrait lens for the critters
"I went to photography college and worked in camera shops" ... yeah, neither of these mean shit when it comes to out in the field experience, "all day long". None of these are secret, anyone truly into their photography will know every one of these. I know I do. The 85mm 1.8G is sharper than the 24-70 ... all day long ...
ive been in the field a looooong time, more weddings than i can count, a corporate shoot 2 days ago, and two shoots in 12 days in Key west Fl and a wedding in Naples.
I never SAID photo school or cammy shots had a damn thing to do with being a shooter.
well i KNOW the 85mm is WORLDS sharper than the 24-70, hell ive got 6 85mm lenses, 4 1.8, a 1.4 and an old F2.
You sure did PRESUME a lot !
It's hard NOT to presume when you put emphasis on the 'fact that the 24-70 is the sharpest Nikon lens you can own ... numerous times. Watch your own video back there ... as you seem to have a touch of amnesia
either that or too much lack of sleep.
NO, i should have said MOST USEFUL or a qualified best.
Youre a picky one arent ya?
hehehehhe
Well, I agree on most of what you say so there's a positive! Just got a "if you don't do as I do you're thick" vibe. I had most of these lenses at one point or other, but stripped most away and now use 2 primes, until I can get more work at least. I agree there's some brilliant inexpensive lenses to be had, and people shouldn't be snobbish about them. I was carrying 6-7 lenses and 3 flashes to small shoots and only using one really for 90% of it. I was conflustering myself trying to make use of everything I had. Nowadays I use the D800E and sigma 35 1.4 for 90% of ALL shooting, got a 150 macro for eveything else. I don't really do wide angle, and don't shoot wildlife enough so just sold on a 300mm. If I ever feel i need that focal length again I will get something like the 70-300 you suggest ;)
No, peeps need what they need, i just make some recommendations.
i never meant or implied "my way or else"
at no time.
what a wedding shooter needs isnt what a street shooter needs etc etc.
Keep shooting and good talking to you man!
winks
Would you recommend any of these? 17-35mm 2.8D, 18-35mm 3.5-4.5D, or 20-35mm 2.8D? Maybe in accordance to the 35-70 or the 28-85...? Looking for D lenses since I picked up an F4s body and need the aperture ring to shoot manual.
I call bullshit! I was with you, all the way to 9:36 where you stated that the 24-70 Nikkor is the sharpest lens, hands down, if money is no object. I've had the Nikkor 20-70. Shot it, and a replacement. Not sharp. Tamron 24-70 VC, Sigma 50mm HSM both sharper than the Nikon. And yes, I did fine tuning, with a spyder lens cal, on all lenses.
24 70 Nikkor iS NOT the sharpest lens, that much is obvious. Im calling BS on your BS. The TAMPON 24-70 is a fucking turd with focus issues.
***** I call bullshit on your bullshit calling bullshit of calling bullshit!
heheheheh
Added to the above, the non VC-version is way sharper than the newer version
I had the Tamron 17-50 f 2,8 and it was the fuzziest lens I ever had, its just crap.
If you are a professional then you just go out and purchase the three main "trinity zooms" and a couple of primes to cover the work style. There are some excellent older lenses from Nikon and other cheaper brands. Samyang for one but there are others. With the advent of software images can be manipulated to compensate for any shortcomings on lenses that were not available years ago. We went for the 85mm 1.4mm because we like working with the glass, it is a just personal thing and gives a creamy background. It is interesting to see other photographer perspective on equipment but it is the images the count, a bit like a chef, you need kit to produce a decent meal but it is the meal that counts. Agree with all that is said in the video, he is talking sense. (Re the 14 - 24mm filters, try taping a cut out filter to the rear of the lens, there is space, it is an old technique from 5 x 4 days)
CSMedia Balls. You go out and buy what you personally need.
It is a personal perception Kris, not set in stone. To compliment our 5 x 4 and medium format systems this is what was done, other companies on consultation have done this, nothing new.
An assignment came up so we covered it with new equipment mentioned as it covered focal lengths from 14mm - 500mm adding the Nikon 200 - 500mm. Most Nikon professional lenses meet expectation without scrutiny, it is about the user not the equipment. See a doctor about your balls if that's your problem, live long and prosper.
OMG I'm having a cameragasim right now!
How does the 35-70 compare to the one that came afterwards? 28-70 AF?
my cat's ass and I both fucking love you!
The Nikon 28-70 2.8 is an amazing buy. Got mine for £400 and is awesome. Super sharp, all metal lens. Not quite as wide as the 24-70 and not as new but man, what a lens for the money!
Thanks for cutting through the shit. I did buy a used Nikkor AF 80-200mm F2.8 ED P/P lens for under $600. Also got a 50mm F1.8 Series E for $50.
$600 is awesome! I bet you love it eh? Got 2 of em' myself. Theyre the cats ass
nothing can TOUCH it for anything close to that price!! NOTHING!
Theoria Apophasis I got a 80-200 2.8 ED pp for 350$(!) via a craigslist ad. awesome lens. granted it was not in perfect cosmetic condition but still works flawlessly.
you stole it!!
I took your advice and bought the Nikon 28-85 f/3/5-4.5 Nikkor . Very happy with the purchase. I'd like a little more reach so what do you think of the Nikon 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 D AF Nikkor ??? I shoot with a D750.
I don't see how you can claim the 24-70 will "blow the shit off" of everything else. I find it to be very good, but also to have some very noticeable flaws compared to primes in the same focal range. It's particularly unimpressive at its close focus distance, even compared to lenses that it beats at longer focal distances.
too much hyperbole, the 24-70 2.8 (as i said in another video) is FRAGILE , and not extremely sharp.
It has its range, but I recommend other lenses above it in MOST other videos ive already made.
Would love to see an updated version of this video. Maybe some of your favourites haven’t changed
Good remark. Hey! I didn't know you're wearing silk underwear . . . They suit you. 😜 😂
Hi Ken. You were right!
I just got my Nikkor 14-24 f2.8 and my wife has had to find a new place to sleep now! I love it! Can't wait for the rain to stop so I can get outside with it!
What do you think about the Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/4G ED VR Lens?
Ken Rothwell rates it on a par with with 70-200, but costs less and is lighter. Have you tried one? I was wondering if it was worth paying the extra to get the last of the 'Holy Trinity'. I have the 24-70 f2.8 and love that too.
+Mark Allen Rockwell you mean. the nikkor 70 200 F2.8 are losers
your lens you just got is great
the Tamron 70 200 2.8 beats the nikon 70 200 2.8 lenses.
+Mark Allen Rockwell you mean. the nikkor 70 200 F2.8 are losers
your lens you just got is great
the Tamron 70 200 2.8 beats the nikon 70 200 2.8 lenses.
+Theoria Apophysis What about the f4 version? It's about £600 cheaper, plastic, but apparently pretty awesome.
I can't wait to get my own cats ass for $500 all day long!
What protective front filters do you recommend? I like the Nikon L37c, L1BC, but they are next to impossible to find new. I have a Heliopan UV 0, and its superb on a 17-35. Tried a B+W, XS Pro on an 85, but I think it may not be what I like. What do you think?
BW or Hoya HMC
lol the D8100
Optically, what is the difference between that 80-200f2.8 and the push-pull version?
I will sell you my 12-24 for 800 buckz yo!
hello there, i have a nikon d5300 with the tokina 11-16 f2.8, nikon dx fisheye 10.5 mm f2.8, nikon dx 35mm f1.8 , nikon 18-200 dx f3.5-5.6. I want to change the 18-200 dx for the nikon 70-300 VR G. what do you think? any other recomendation? thanks
thank you for this great video, despite the broken language , your advice is awesome.. Thanks alot
I just love that these are very affordable. I'm going to buy one of these every month starting from March until I have about 4 or 5 of these. I need a nice lovely set of primes and these classic lenses make the most sense as they are not only high quality but affordable.
Thanks for video. Just one question: I have an old (but perfect condition) Nikon 35-70 3.3 4.5 AF (no "D") and I'm thinking of buying Nikon 24-70 G or 24-70 VR for my Nikon D750. Obviously, price is around 2.200,00 USD, so, what do you recommend: buy VR, buy G or just keep what we have ? Thanks !
He keeps saying 12-24mm. But that's the 14-24mm. He even says "12 to 24" at 12:00, but the lens clearly shows "14-24".
Or... am I on drugs?
Couldn't agree more about the Tokina! I've used it for everything, and havn't regretted the purchase for a second!
I had a Sigma 10 20 which was amazing. I sold it to my son's girlfriend as she was studying architecture. I miss it.
I didn't say I didn't like the 58mm Voightlander, however, my expectations perhaps were unrealistic and it's appears to be a toss up between the 45mm Tamron.
Nikkor 35-70 is such a solid Lens. Still working flawlessly on my Nikon f4 ✊
Did you choose the Tokina 100 f/2.8 over the Nikon 105 f/2.8 and if so, why? Why are you keeping both the old and the new 85 f/1.8?
What are the best portrait lenses that are affordable?
Jovan Beltran best cheap portrait is 85mm F2 AI lens.
The Tokina 100mm 2.8 is an INCREDIBLE portrait, only $380 new!
85mm D 1.8 can be had for about $240 all day on ebay
Hey Man thanks for this. It's been a pain in the ass shopping for my D750. I picked up pretty much all of them for about what you said and a little cheaper on a couple. What a time saver this was. Thanks
Hi Theoria Apophosis ,
I've found Nikkor "P" 105mm 2.5 will it mount on my Nikon D7100.
Thank a lot Theoria Apophosis!
Did this same thing over the course of about three years in both DX and FX and came up with the exact same analysis. Except for the Tokina (got a deal on a 105) I own all these lenses and the one you didn't take out too the 10.5. I'll also point out the 50mm 1.8 and 35mm 1.8 stay in my kit because for certain things there is nothing better, and for beginners the normal is the best for teaching good skills. Alot of people like Tokina 11-16 for DX and I'd agree for low light and then it's a trade off. The Fotoiox filter kit for the 14-24 is totally solid and doable, but yes a big beating, shows EVERYTHING if not perfectly clean because of how far away from the ft element it is. Also the CPL can be very uneven at 14mm.
the Tokina 11-16 is passable, but a used 12-24 Nikkor is only $400. Yes!!! hahahahah ive handled from a buddy that 14-14 "filter" , what a funny beast! I could make my own, but havent yet. Its still a dodgy piece.
you buy a 135mm 2.8 or 3.5 yet? ....that should be your next buy for many reasons, that and the QUAD PURPOSE 60mm Micro Nikkor
Theoria Apophasis
I'm probably not your regular photog. Mostly trek backpack stuff, also my buddy has a 135 DC he got for a song so I use that on rare occasions I need to. I did use a 105 2.0 for a while on the DX which is a good one too. Never had my hands on the 60mm, sounds like one I should keep an eye out for. Probably feeling the 16 FE next, really want that on the big sensor. Shot the AIS, never tried the D or sigma.
60mm micro has a QUAD purpose on a DX, see my vid on same, likewise you can grab a great used one for $200
winks *
As a long time Chef, and Food guy, Food photography has is becoming a hobby. I really liked the dissection of these lenses, and your steering me towards the Tokina 100mm, is one Im looking forward to have hours of fun with Food photo work. As well the hidden gem, 35-70, I just picked up on Ebay for well under 300.00. I am at best an amature photographer and these videos help tremendously in purchasing smart. Thanks so much, Kevin
awesome!
Which 24-70mm 2.8 version is on the camera and which would you recommend?
the non VR version
i picked up the 35- 70 nikkor for $40 few months ago i agree wit you.... its an amazing lens!!! luv it so much
So so glad I found a no bullshit review of lenses. I've been through so many videos and reviews and they're all flakey af.
I received the Voightlander 58mm f/1.4 today and was somewhat disappointed. Maybe I was expecting too much or I'm not as skilled as I should be with manual focus, however, when I placed the Voightlander on a tripod I was not impressed with the results. My Tamron 45MM blew it out of the water even when handheld. Is the Voightlander 58mm a lens best for portraits and closeups 4-10 feet?
youre kidding? :) just the MF you didnt like? best for portraiture, and for its bokeh and incredible microcontrast. what camera did you use it with? take a bokeh or BW shot with it and see what is.
countless 1000s bought it and youre on the 2nd to not like it :/
Just a topic that might fit this Video being about many lenses. I heard a while back that f8 is the sharpest -- is it right to apply that generally to all lenses. Because I always aim to shoot f8 and change shutter/iso to compensate that preference.
Of course the circumstance doesn't always allow it, but is f8 a safe bet for lens clarity?
depends on the lens, thats generally accurate. to all lenses? NO. Its a "safe bet", bit if you take test shots on a new lens, youll find its sweet spots.
There are many lenses sharper at f4 etc, than at F8, .....the 80-200 2.8 for example.
master of light and composition....that, my friend is a very good 5 word description of a photographer
Absofrigginglutely !
I was expecting the 58mm Voightlander to surpass the Tamron 45mm, however, I do not see a significant difference.
I have/had half of these lens listed. I dropped my 35-70mm 2.8 so hard it snapped the in half. So sad, love that lens.
Hey Thanks for the precious advices about Nikon lenses! I have just a 80-200mm beast. However it has got an Focus issue with D800. I did try AF tune it. Even in -20 AF tune It still not sharp at all.It does back focusing. It can only be freaking sharp at 135mm focal length. Do you have any tips about that issue too? Thanks again.
Evran Öztürk Can you please give me an advice?
He misspoke regarding the 2nd to last lens. He said 12-24 but the lens "name plate" clearly says 14-24. Hope this helps.
I have the Tokina 100mm f/2.8 that I got for $100 because the guy took it to a Color Run and the dust f'ed up the electronics. I use it on manual and WOW! Best lens in my bag for macro. Sharp!
$100? you STOLE IT.!!
hell yes its sharp
Have you used the 28-50mm Nikon f3.5? If so, do you think it would be work picking up for mostly video use?
Looking at finally upgrading to full frame (D7000 to D800) and am looking for advice on wide, zoom, and tele full frame lenses. At 36 megapixels I'm going to need something super sharp. What would you recommend for no more than ~$1000 per lens?
Im a big fan of tamrons 24-70 2.8 I also love my tamron 70-200 2.8, I got the 610. What are your thoughts on the Nikon 16mm 2.8 or the 20mm 2.8D?
Another hidden gem is the Tokina AF 28-70mm f/2.6-2.8 AT-X Pro II - there's many variations of this but you must get the 2.6-2.8 Pro II version, superb lens for the money. I paid £120 (so about $180-ish) for mine. They're not super tack sharp but very, very good for the price. Suffers with CA's a bit but that can be fixed if you can live with it. It's obviously not as good as Nikon's 24-70 2.8 VR but I'd say it was as good as Sigma's 24-70 2.8 and about a quarter of the price.
I like very much my
Nikon
105mm f/2.5 Ai-S Manual
Thanks for the bluntness. Could u recommend D500 super focus? Tamron 600 I like so far. Thanks
THNX for the nice secrets!!! I like the Micro Nikkor 200mm F4 prime very much for macro photography because the bugs stay and it´s really sharp and has a nice long manual focus ring!!
thanks man! check out the other videos here for more secret tips and neat stuff!
Im all about saving people $$$$
Could you do a video on Older all manual lenses - would love to learn about them as I use them for video with my canon 5d 2
I own the 50mm 1.4 and love it for video looking to get an 85 mm manual but need some help deciding
Tks !!!
define "older" , which series?
We've been using the 24-70 Nikon for a few years, but sometimes its just too slow for wedding receptions and evenings. Not a Nikon lens i know, but the Sigma art series lenses are ridiculously good at the moment.
JC Cross-Jones its also a fragile lens, as in very :)
i saw a 80-200mm 2.8d for $614 and a 24-70mm 2.8 for $1022. witch should i get 1st on my d7000 as of now i only have 50mm 1.8d. thanks and God Bless...
Great to see. I have the 24-70mm f/2.8 and im am very happy with it. In your video youre recommend Nikon 12-24mm?? Looks like in the video is the great nikon 14-24mm 2.8 you have in your bag? Not 12-24?
Definitely the 14-24mm.
Thank you so much for kindly answering my query so quickly. Does not the fact that the photosites (or whatever they are called) are so bunched up make any difference? I did have a try with a friends 7100 & I was blown away by the speed that it locked on to a subject.
the pixel density you mean? no, its the AF sensor.
D7100 is a pro camera, despite how Nikon advertises it.
Theoria Apophasis Thank you.
great videos! For Nikon FE2 what are holy trinity lenses? money not object
I have that 35-70 lens and have not been able to use it on my D300. Not sure how to make this work on my camera. The lens works on my F5 but not digital.
I just got a sweet Nikon FE. I am looking for some good glass to use on it. I would like to us them on my Nikon d7100 too. what is are some good choices?!
What about Wide, Extreme wide D lenses for Nikon D610
for what use? archi or lands?
For events. I need something close range but wide enough to shoot a small group less than a few feet away. Like for Red Carpet, fashion shows or nightclub settings where theirs a lot of traffic, need cheap yet appropriate, cant afford the 12-24 right now
Hi. The 70-300 this Version or the newer one? Thanks
I am new to photography and I have my first ever DSLR the Canon 700D it came with 2 kit lens I got a 50mm f.1.8 prime as well as my 3rd lens because a lot of my photographer friends said every beginner should start on one of those lens, I am doing a photography beginner course also, but I got my DSLR for when I go on holidays so I need to a wide angle lens for the shots I wanted to take I ended up getting a Tamron 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5 wide angle, mainly for its nice zoom range and it seemed like the best value than going for the Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 len but I am noticing it doesn't seem to get very sharp round the edges and to get really sharp images I need to up my aperture to f8 or f11 at 10mm to get all round sharper images in daylight shots it could be me because I am just a beginner my knowledge right not on dslr and lens is limited at best, I was just wondering your thought should have I gone for the Canon EF-S 10-22mm? or is this Tamron good enough for my level of skill being a beginner ?
Ive been OUT of Canon for so long i cannot make any recommendation to you, sorry :(
MikedieONE yeah I wanted a higher zoom range and lower aperture but I did look at that one already thanks.
Hey Ken, The 135mm 2.8 Ai lens have a Ai marking on it. I ordered one from Japan and I didn't see Ai marking on it. thx
So I just ordered the Nikkor 28-85mm AF 3.5-4.5 lens on ebay for $88 as my 2nd lens for my D7100! I hope it comes before Easter.
apparently the price went up a WEEE bit since i recommended it ! usually it was going for about $55
None the less It was still cheap! Cant wait to get the Tokina 100mm next!
$370 , its on sale !
Do those first few Nikkor/Nikon D lenses he was recommending use the autofocus on modern cameras like the Nikon 3400, 5500, or 7100? Or can you only manual focus with them?
Hi :)
Thanks for your tips
Could you please list all the recommend lens on this video
Because on eBay there is few version to each one
Thanks advance :)
a "secret" lens on dx would be also tokina 50-135 f2.8. 350e if you're lucky (like me) on ebay. EXCELLENT value.
Hey!
I'm very new to DSLR photography - a few weeks ago I couldn't resist a Black Friday sale offer and have finally purchased a camera that I've been looking at for a while - a Nikon D5300 for about $899CAD (roughly $650USD). It came as a bundle, which included a body + AF-S Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 kit lens + AF-S Nikkor 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6 G ED DX zoom lens + a large DLSR bag + 64Gb U3 card.
I have only came across your channel after I have received my camera about a week ago. After not having slept for a few days since (watching your videos & reading/learning about DSLRs & lenses), I am now questioning my life choices. :) And therefore I have quite a few questions..
1) Did I make a mistake going for the D5300 instead of D7100 (they seem to be in a more-or-less similar price range)? I do like the tilt screen, since it allows me to take photos from difficult angles (and I like doing that), but your review of D7100 is very convincing..
2) Do you think what I've got for the money was a good deal or did I buy a mediocre bundle?
3) Would it have been a better choice for me to simply buy the body alone and then go for the 2 "cat's ass" (or "the tits"?) secret lenses, which you have recommended here? I was thinking Nikon 35-70mm f/2.8 for most of my photo needs & Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 (VR) for zoom situations.
4) Also, I noticed that you have recommended Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 (VR) as a secret gem. I've got a Nikon 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6 (VR). Are they any different? Is the one you are recommending a far better lens than what I've got?
5) You said in the beginning of the video that Nikon 35-70mm f/2.8 is the best lens for the money. And then you said that Tokina 100mm f/2.8 is the best lens in the whole video. So which one is best? It seems like they are both relatively similar & both would be able to handle macro & portraits very well. So what would be the choice between the two? I understand that one is prime & one is a zoom lens. But seems like the Nikon 35-70mm f/2.8 can be more versatile and can do what Tokina can + more. Or am I wrong?
I am now on the fence about the whole thing. I still have until Jan 31st to return everything back to the seller, get a full refund and re-invest my money in a different setup. And I am totally open to that idea. So I am really looking to get some advice from a person who knows their shit. :)
Any help will be very much appreciated.
Cheers,
Alex
Also, just wanted to add that I mainly want to photograph nature, macro & night scenes. Maybe occasional portrait here and there. Don't think will be capturing many fast-moving objects. And I don't think I'll ever use a video mode in a DSLR camera.
Thanks for this! Gosh, I'm an idiot. For a couple years I've been bemoaning the fact that I just can't afford the 24-70 2.8G right now. After watching this I suddenly remembered I have the 35-70 2.8D sitting in the far back of my closet. It's been collecting dust for over a decade since my film days. I pulled it out and holy sh*t, it's perfectly sharp on my D800.
hiya!!!!!!!!!!! yes indeedy on that 35 70 !!!
Hi... what do u think about Nikon 28-80mm F/3.3-5.6 G? please advise me
Yo Theoria!
I got my 35-70mm in the mail today I must say I was surprise at the quality of the lens :) Took a shot at 70mm and was blown away at the color saturation on my D7100, then I compared shooting at 50mm against the Nikon 50mm E series lens. I thought the 50mm E produced a better image at 50mm but the 35-70mm at 70mm produces nice sharp images. I got lucky and got a copy so I am lucky so far with the lens. Paid around $379. I will say its a good lens to have around.. Thanks again! your the cats meooooowwwww
well, the 50mm E will, because its less glass to pass thru!! but thats the case across the board on lenses!!
AWESOME MAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What's a good wide angle lens and what do you think about the 16-35
for what camera???? FX tamron 15-30
Your definition of a real photographer is spot on lol great video this helped me out a lot as I am about to buy lenses, thank you!
What do you think about the Nikon 105mm f/2.8 Micro AI-s? have been using it for more than 15 years and i think this is still a pretty solid macro lens.
I own that lens and think its very sharp, but I saw reports of it having focus breathing issues. I however, don't have those issues when I use it.
I like to listen to these videos in the background while culling photos in Lightroom... I'm going to dream of Sonnars and Xenotars at this rate
What are your thoughts on the Nikon 13mm 5.6? The 14-24mm 2.8 looks like cousins.
"Cat's ass," has officially been added to my vocabulary.
I can vouch for the 70-300 - it's excellent.
But what about the 16-35, Theoria Apophasis ? Would you go for that over the 24-70 for landscapes (using filters, so ruling out the 12-24 as it's ridonkulous to use with filters)?
It's SO refreshing to hear from someone who has experience in photography rave about lenses that are something other than the over priced "holy trinity"