>Well as an alternative to the king trinity you should also >have a look the F4's (as also suggested in this thread). > >16-35/F4 VR 77mm thread >24-120/F4 VR 77mm thread >70-200/F2.8 VRII 77mm thread - due the the overlap this might >not be very interesting, but if you need 140-400mm you could >add a TC2xIII, at "little" cost and little weight. > >They are very sharp, they will give you the same or shallower >DOF as you are used to if you have a F2.8 DX. > >In your age I would assume less (weight) is more So there >you go, don't we just make it easy on you. Decisions, >Decisions, Decisions
I see that there are choices for lenses that cost half as much as the best lenses. Can anyone tell me how much difference I am likely to see on a d800? Will I be able to see a difference in a 16 x 20 print? Also, will I be able to see a difference if I crop moderately.
I should explain what I mean by "crop". I routinely reduce the 35 mm format to 4:5 aspect ratio, so I lop off the ends. Also, in order to mimic the effect of view camera rise, I may cut off the bottom quarter in landscape orientation. Under those circumstances should I see a difference?
My inclination at present is to get the best 24-70 and 14-24 Nikon lenses and then consider a less expensive Nikon for a long zoom.
Finally, how good are third party choices, and which should I consider?
If I go ahead, I will start off with the d800 and the Nikon 24-70 mm lens, and add to the kit later. But anything I expect I will be stu ck with because of the cost, so I want to make as informed choices as I can.
Leonard Evens Professor Emeritus, Department of Mathematics, Northwestern University