• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter
Photo

Suggestion for best all around lens for D7000???


  • Please log in to reply
37 replies to this topic

#21 IanCD

IanCD

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 249 posts
  • LocationUK

Posted 09 March 2011 - 06:58 PM

Hi Hassiman,
Lots of good advice here. I agree re the 16-85mm if only one lens (but I don't know the Sigma).

I bought a D7000 at end of December. I'd read reviews of lenses here and other sites, and been browsing forums for quite some time.
I settled on the 16-85mm ED VR DX and the Tamron SP Di USD 70-300mm.

Buying the Tamron was based on several reviews and LOTS of feedback in forums that it was better than the Nikon 70-300 VR2. I wondered if I'd made the right decision when I read the review here, but Klaus, Marcus and Brightcolours reassured me on that one.

I'm really pleased with the D7000 and the 16-85. :) Seems really sharp (as review suggests). Haven't used the Tamron a lot yet.

I've also now bought a couple of fast primes for gigs - low light performance was one of the things I bought the D7000 for. The D7000 is good at high ISO, but I didn't realise just how low the available light is sometimes, and that I'd still need fast(er) lenses.

As others have said, you probably do need to work out what you'll be using the camera and lens(es) for, how much you can afford or want to spend, and what compromises you're prepared to make.

I've pulled together a summary of quite a lot of Nikon and some other recommended lenses: data and reviews, and links to the reviews, from Photozone and some other sites. Happy to send that to you if you wanted. I tried to attach it but it's an excel file, so can't do that.
Ian

#22 genotypewriter

genotypewriter

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 382 posts
  • LocationAustralia

Posted 10 March 2011 - 01:18 AM

Yeah, and take a look:
http://www.google.co... "I am a troll"

The OP asked how the D7000 is and I suggested that he used the great search engine technologies we have today. And you have to make it a personal thing and a joke. Well done, contributor!


Sometimes there is a smell... a bad smell coming from your replies. Sometimes nauseating.

Considering how I'm not actually in front of you, it's probably your own smell that you're getting a whiff of while sitting alone in front of your computer. Maybe the heat from your screen is causing those gases to heat up and rise, making you feel nauseous.


OMG, what is this? Linking own Google search with terms "D7000" and "problem" to answer the question what is D7000 like... You are a real Canon brand fundamentalist, indeed.

Yes, your replies stink more and more, true point.

Well isn't it quite prejudiced of you to think that I didn't want the OP (or anyone else) to change the camera model or the other word and do another search?


That's odd, GTW... I think you forgot to address the links for 60D, 600D, 550D, 7D (your specific google search of course)... What happened to this forum, really....

Sorry, I completely missed the part where the OP asked how the D7000 compares to those cameras you listed above.

GTW
  • Brightcolours likes this

#23 hassiman

hassiman

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts

Posted 10 March 2011 - 01:31 AM

Thanks guys... Lots of good-advice here.

I am in a good spot as I am not tied to any system now
I was considering an M9 as all of my M4 lenses will work fine on it but payingthat kind of $$$$$ for an already obsolete sensor is insane.
I like the D7000 size, dual card slots and layout... I like the 60D articulated screen but not the lack of micro adust.
Zoom because I do street photography and I am now too old to carry around what I once did....

#24 mst

mst

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 2,095 posts
  • LocationWesterwald, Germany

Posted 10 March 2011 - 09:53 AM

The OP asked how the D7000 is and I suggested that he used the great search engine technologies we have today.


No. He asked about how the D7000 is an you gave a biased answer by pointing to problems only. That's not how the D7000 is, you can search and find problems for any other camera (or any product in general) this way.

-- Markus
  • BG_Home, Lomskij, Martin_MM and 1 other like this
Editor
photozone.de

#25 Lomskij

Lomskij

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 222 posts

Posted 10 March 2011 - 11:25 AM

The OP asked how the D7000 is and I suggested that he used the great search engine technologies we have today.

Someone asked a question and you pointed to google, such a good example of rude trolling. Well done at proving that.
SLR Camera, Zoom lens #1, Zoom lens #2, Zoom lens #3, Prime lens #1, Prime lens #2, Prime lens #3, Prime Lens #4, Prime Lens #5, Flash gun.

#26 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,896 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 10 March 2011 - 11:56 AM

Thanks guys... Lots of good-advice here.

I am in a good spot as I am not tied to any system now
I was considering an M9 as all of my M4 lenses will work fine on it but payingthat kind of $$$$$ for an already obsolete sensor is insane.
I like the D7000 size, dual card slots and layout... I like the 60D articulated screen but not the lack of micro adust.
Zoom because I do street photography and I am now too old to carry around what I once did....

Well, the M9 has a sensor that still works. But of course, if you want a sensor that performs better at low light, other cameras (like the by you mentioned 60D and D7000, and the K5) do a better job.

I would not worry too much about micro adjust, the 60D appears to focus accurately for their owners. I would suggest to go and handle both cameras in a store.

About the street photography.. A superzoom is heavier than a standard zoom lens. And the ability to go to f2.8 I would value more.
So.. I would rather get a 17-50 f2.8 from Sigma than one of those superzooms. Less barrel distortion at the wide end, the ability to go to f2.8 when wanted/needed, better optics.
If you feel you want to have a longer tele with it, a Tamron 70-300 is nor all that heavy, and if weight really is an issue, the APS-C only Nikon 55-300mm VR, or even lighter, the 55-200 VR.

Or, alternatively (and my favorite due to the side hinged swivel screen and live view implementation, and the lens line up) a Canon 60D with that Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 with Canon/Tamron 70-300, or alternatively the APS-C only 55-250mm IS.

I take it that your M4 kit did not offer 300-400mm+ focal ;lengths? So... are you sure you want superzoom compromised optics?

Of course, depending on your idea/style of photography, full frame 135 format does offer advantages for street photography, even in the very expensive guise of the Leica M9. Ability to use wider apertures creatively, and the compact size of fixed focal length lenses does have its charm.
So... that would bring alternatives like the Canon EOS 5D mk II with for instance a 24mm, a 35mm f2, a 50mm 1,4 and a 85mm f1.8. Or a Nikon D700 with a similar setup. Note, though, that all these do not offer a side swivel screen.

On that screen wish on particular, I am not totally sure yet of its value in street photography, but you might have different ideas. For me personally, it would be of great value, for my very low standpoint (mouse/frog view) photos. But those usually are nature related.

Oh, and one last thing: If you can stand the smaller view finder, the very compact Canon EOS 600D/T3i can actually compete well feature wise with the bigger and higher positioned 60D/7D/D7000/K5. It does offer that swivel screen, and its main attraction is the smaller form factor and lower weight.

#27 PuxaVida

PuxaVida

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 757 posts
  • LocationIstanbul

Posted 10 March 2011 - 01:02 PM

Sorry, I completely missed the part where the OP asked how the D7000 compares to those cameras you listed above.

GTW


Sorry, I thought you completely missed the part the OP did not ask "can you please specify the problems in D7000". It's not the problem the OP sees/reads that D7000 claimed to have problems (like many other DSLRs do have), it's just the way and timing you show yourself as a brand-fan... You have two simple ways to do it:

1) Canon is the best... or,
2) Nikon is not good at all

I think you've chosen the second alternative this time. At least other fan boys have a consistent practice in this context, but you have your own ways.

Serkan
  • Lomskij likes this

#28 deroppi

deroppi

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 50 posts

Posted 10 March 2011 - 01:07 PM

For street pictures I would use a good zoom for daylight shots and a good prime for night shots.
e.g. AF-S 16-85 and AF-S 50 or 35 (or any similar combination like the 17-50/2.8 Sigma and the 30)

I found that in daylight the ability to shot at wide angle and then zoom in a bit without changing lens is very helpful. At night nothing helps you more like a nice prime lens and it produces a beautiful, colorful, lit background.

If you buy another brand then I would still look for a similar combination, unless you get a nice zoom that is f2.0 all the way.
One Zoom and one prime fit well in a small bag and you need a bag for the DSLR anyway.

P.S.
System choice:
Go into a shop, look at all brands, touch them, feel them. Take the one that feels best in your hands.
They all have advantages and disadvantages. But all can take good pictures with the right person behind the VF.
"I am a Nikon" but who cares? I still would recommend Nikon because I liked them the best. But I recently handled one of the new Canons and must admit it impressed we as well. Same with Pentax. What they have right now promises a lot of fun too. Can't say much about Olympus, because I didn't like the way the feel in my hand.

#29 Claus

Claus

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 47 posts

Posted 10 March 2011 - 03:39 PM

Considering how I'm not actually in front of you, it's probably your own smell that you're getting a whiff of while sitting alone in front of your computer. Maybe the heat from your screen is causing those gases to heat up and rise, making you feel nauseous.

GTW


And that's all you can reply? Poor, very poor...
  • Martin_MM likes this

#30 genotypewriter

genotypewriter

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 382 posts
  • LocationAustralia

Posted 11 March 2011 - 12:55 AM

No. He asked about how the D7000 is an you gave a biased answer by pointing to problems only. That's not how the D7000 is, you can search and find problems for any other camera (or any product in general) this way.

1. The OP asked for opinions. Can't I give mine?

2. What that google search showed wasn't what I wrote. It's what people out there think and have experienced. Why are they not valid for backing up my opinion?

3. When such questions have been asked about things in the past, not everyone who replied wrote both pros and cons in way that's fit for an A-grade scientific journal. So why are you picking on me then? Are you biased? ;)


Someone asked a question and you pointed to google, such a good example of rude trolling. Well done at proving that.

I guess you just haven't learned how search engines work...


Sorry, I thought you completely missed the part the OP did not ask "can you please specify the problems in D7000".

Please refer to my points 1 and 2 in my reply to mst above.


And that's all you can reply? Poor, very poor...

Sorry, I didn't realise you understood anything else.

GTW

#31 henry42

henry42

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 6 posts

Posted 11 March 2011 - 05:42 AM

even the exes at canon know better than to use canon with all their problems

http://fakechuckwest...witch-to-nikon/

#32 mst

mst

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 2,095 posts
  • LocationWesterwald, Germany

Posted 11 March 2011 - 08:10 AM

1. The OP asked for opinions. Can't I give mine?


Sure. But ... where is it?

-- Markus
Editor
photozone.de

#33 mst

mst

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 2,095 posts
  • LocationWesterwald, Germany

Posted 11 March 2011 - 08:20 AM

I was considering an M9 as all of my M4 lenses will work fine on it but payingthat kind of $$$$$ for an already obsolete sensor is insane.


Well, it's the only full frame rangefinder out there. And, obsolete or not, the sensor is probably still better than almost any film you could load into a M4 ;)

I like the D7000 size, dual card slots and layout... I like the 60D articulated screen but not the lack of micro adust.
Zoom because I do street photography and I am now too old to carry around what I once did....


The D7000 is a very capable camera. Personally I just wish it had a little less resolution. The impression from the tests so far is that many lenses struggle on that sensor towards the borders.

Apart from that, you get lot's of features in a rather small (so:very portable) camera. The only real issue I found so far is that many third party lenses don't AF in live view. However, if you stick to Nikon glass, it's not an issue at all.

-- Markus
Editor
photozone.de

#34 Lomskij

Lomskij

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 222 posts

Posted 11 March 2011 - 09:56 AM

The only real issue I found so far is that many third party lenses don't AF in live view.

You mean they don't AF at all? I've tried a few sigmas and one tokina so far and they "sort of" AF in live view, but incredibly slow (like, over 3 seconds to lock in).
SLR Camera, Zoom lens #1, Zoom lens #2, Zoom lens #3, Prime lens #1, Prime lens #2, Prime lens #3, Prime Lens #4, Prime Lens #5, Flash gun.

#35 IanCD

IanCD

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 249 posts
  • LocationUK

Posted 11 March 2011 - 10:18 AM

The D7000 is a very capable camera. Personally I just wish it had a little less resolution. The impression from the tests so far is that many lenses struggle on that sensor towards the borders.
-- Markus


Does this issue affect high resolution FF sensor in the same way, e.g. 23 MP in D3X..? Or does sensor size as well as resolution - pixels per cm2 - play a part in whether lenses struggle? Does any 'sweet spot' effect counter that at all?
...and does this mean 'setting the bar higher' in lens resolution to use with the D7000 (compared to, e.g. D90 or D300)?
Ian

#36 genotypewriter

genotypewriter

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 382 posts
  • LocationAustralia

Posted 12 March 2011 - 03:46 AM

Sure. But ... where is it?

-- Markus

Sigh

#37 mst

mst

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 2,095 posts
  • LocationWesterwald, Germany

Posted 12 March 2011 - 12:40 PM

You mean they don't AF at all? I've tried a few sigmas and one tokina so far and they "sort of" AF in live view, but incredibly slow (like, over 3 seconds to lock in).


Ok, let me clarify: this seems to be an issue with older third party lenses only. And only for those who have an integrated motor. Anything screw-driven is not affected.

Obviously this is some sort of firmware issue, since I have lenses that did not AF when I got the camera, but now do after a trip to the manufacturer service (for other reasons). This happened for example with the Tamron 17-50 Di II.

Those lenses who are incompatible simply move a little bit in one direction each time they're supposed to AF and then simply stop.

But yes, AF in live view is slow in comparison.

Short list of lenses I tried:

Tamron 17-50 VC: no AF
Tamron 17-50 Di II: AF (after service)
Tamron 60/2.0 Di II: AF (has been to service, too, didn't try before)
Sigma 18-50/2.8-4.5 DC OS: working AF
Sigma 85/1.4 EX: working AF
Sigma 50/1.4 EX: no AF
Sigma 70-300 OS: no AF
Tamron 70-300 VC: working AF
Tamron 28-75/2.8: no AF

Any AF-S Nikkor I tried worked as expected.

-- Markus
Editor
photozone.de

#38 wojtt

wojtt

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 85 posts
  • LocationWarsaw, Poland

Posted 18 March 2011 - 10:39 PM

I'd second the choice of a nikkor 16-85 vr as a universal lens, although I can't quite bear the idea to have just one lens with me :) it's so tempting to have 1 or 2 more lenses in the bag :)

so it's worth to consider (aditionally) the 35mm 1.8 DX lens, for shallower DOF / low light applications..




3 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 3 guests, 0 anonymous users



© by photozone.de