With today's arrival of a Nikkor 17-35/2.8 D zoom I have completed my quest for my Trinity! Yea, I know.... most will consider the Trinity as being the 14-24, 24-70 and 70-200 2.8's. But I don't care for that combo, so I made up my own.
>With today's arrival of a Nikkor 17-35/2.8 D zoom I have >completed my quest for my Trinity! Yea, I know.... most will >consider the Trinity as being the 14-24, 24-70 and 70-200 >2.8's. But I don't care for that combo, so I made up my own.
>D600 with 17-35/2.8D, 50/1.8D and 105/2.8D Micro. That's MY >Trinity. Those three lenses will take care of 98% of my >shooting.
I like your idea of a "personalized Trinity". Incidentally, mine is pretty similar: Nikon 14-24/2.8, Zeiss 35/2, Zeiss 100/2 macro with a D700.
My trinity is the 17-35/2.8, 28-70/2.8 and 80-200/2.8, which preceded what the modern normal trinity is. Since I also have the three lenses (50.1.4 instead of 50/1.8) you call the trinity, that means I must have two different trinity sets in my lens family.
Shoot nature with respect and don't trample it or startle its inhabitants. :)
>>Does my 24-70 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8 VR1 and 16-35 f4 VR >qualify? > >That also is my trinity (except VR2). And because they form a >very stable core to my kit, that allows my camera NAS to >proceed unchecked > >Ken I really enjoyed the kit photos. But surely you need a >1.8G nestled in that first photo? > >And just curious what you use the mirror lenses on? IIRC I >had the little Tokina 500mm back in the day... > >Best regards, SteveK > >'A camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see >without a camera.' -- Dorothea Lange >My >Nikonians gallery> >My Nikonians Blog
That was my version until now. I have added the AFS 80-400 VR. I just did an quick fine tune and did some unscientific experiements. The new VR is amazing and the optics are very good, see my other post on the 80-400 thread.
I've yet to be convinced that good though they are, the modern versions are so much better that they justify the outlay. At the moment my clients are happy with the results and so am I. Therefore I stick to my 1998 version...
I've always found the Nikkor constant-aperture "pro lenses" to be excellent performers in all situations. That's why I've always saved up for these (more-expensive, heavier, larger) zooms instead of the less expensive (I'd never call a Nikkor "cheap"!) variable-ap zooms that are such excellent performers in most circumstances.
My current trinity is the 17-35 f/2.8, the 28-70 f/2.8 and the 70-200 f/2.8 v1. I have considered the 16-35 f/4 for the VR and have also considered the 24-70 and the 70-200 V2 but decided to stick with what I have. I love my 105 f/2.8 AFD Micro and my 50 f/1.8 AFD.