Recommended Lenses - Professional
Lenses are the make-or-break component in a camera system; you can have the best camera body, sensor and electronics in the business and it can all be wasted with the wrong lens choice. Here we discuss some of the best optics on offer, but we’ll be avoiding the real specialist “exotics” such as that 600mm monster
The “Professional” Choice
First things first - these lenses do not come cheap, nor for the most part are they small nor light. They do, however, represent the absolute pinnacle of Nikon’s current lens designs.
Standard Zoom: Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8G ED AF-S Nikkor
This really is the “bread and butter” lens of many a working pro; the right focal lengths for most jobs, combined with a fast f/2.8 maximum aperture. This new model improves on the older 28-70mm at the wide end (24mm is rather wider than 28mm, enough to make an important difference in many cases), and feature’s Nikons new Nano Crystal coating.
Alternatives: The Nikon AF-S 28-70mm f/2.8.
Wide Angle Zoom: Nikon AF-S Zoom Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED AF
It used to be difficult to find a truly high quality wide-angle lens. With the recent introduction of this, Nikon’s amazing 14-24 f/2.8 zoom, that all changed. This miracle of lens design is, quite simply, incredible - it’s as sharp (often sharper) than any prime lens that falls within it’s range. If you need to go wide without compromise, this is the lens to have.
It’s bulbous front element unfortunately precludes the use of any filters (there isn’t even space for a rear filter), which could be a problem for some. However, nothing comes close to this lens for results.
Alternatives: The Nikon AF-S 17-35mm f/2.8.
Telephoto Zoom: Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 ED-IF AF-S VR ZOOM-NIKKOR
Nikon’s most modern lens in this focal length, it was introduced when DX reigned supreme. It’s still a great lens, though some have found cause to complain about it’s resolution in the corners - not really a problem for portraits and sports, but a definite issue for landscape work. We feel this lens is likely to be updated soon (it’s a 5 year old design), but in the meantime there’s no other first-party lens in this range with AF-S and VR, which we think are must-haves. If you’re concerned about the possible corner quality, we’d recommend that you check this lens out in a store before buying.
Alternatives: The Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-D (no AF-S nor VR)
| <—— Nikon D700 vs. Canon 5D Mark II | Recommended Lenses - 3rd-Party ——> |
July 27th, 2008 at 12:24 am
I really miss the touch & feel of the focusing rings on the old Ai-s primes… How do Ai-s lenses perform on an FX sensor?
August 12th, 2008 at 11:47 am
Probably the best alternative for the 70-200 ƒ2.8 AF-S VR is the 80-200 ƒ2.8 AF-S. One might be able to find it, used, for under a grand.
Also, listing the 17-35 as an “alternative” to the 14-24 is a mistake. The 14-24 is specifically an ultra-wide angle zoom; it’s huge, heavy, and does not take filters. The 17-35, on the other hand, is a very-wide to -wide zoom, takes filters, and is quite a different beast.
September 6th, 2008 at 3:18 pm
AI-S lenses work great on FX, well they work well mechanically. Most do the same exceeding good job they did on film, but FX doesn’t improve lesser designs. Check out reviews for lenses you’d like to use.
October 10th, 2008 at 2:30 pm
For telephoto, why not the 70-300mm instead? In fact, Sigma’s lens may be better than Nikkor’s for that.
October 19th, 2008 at 4:00 pm
Nikon 24-70mm very super good!!!!
October 30th, 2008 at 1:22 pm
I have a D700 and a F5, as well as the 24-70 2.8 and the 70-200 2.8 VR, and have found both of the lenses perform very well indeed, the 24-70 is just stunning. Yes the 70-200 came out while Nikon was using the DX format, BUT the F5 was still also in production and the lens was clearly also intended for use with it.
I have read a lot of “reviews” of both lenses and have formed the opinion that by all means read them, but the only real way is to actually use them. As for Sigma products I do intend to buy one of their lenses soon as the Nikon alternative is way too expensive, nearly as much as I paid for all of my other Nikon kit. However I’m not too sure it will be used with the F5 which is quite brutal when it comes to focusing, also I’m really not expecting the performance to come close to the Nikkors, indeed all the “reviews” I’ve read suggest as much.
November 15th, 2008 at 6:19 am
how about 17-55mm f/2.8 ?