FX lens on a DX camera..worth it?

[NikonShooter]

I have a D7000 and I'm looking to replace my 18-70mm 3.5-4.5 Nikon lens. I'm thinking that down the road I may upgrade to a full frame camera but not right now. For now I'm looking to get some faster glass in this range.

Should I spring for the 28-70mm 2.8 FX lens or just stick with the 18-55mm 2.8 DX lens?

Also are there any third party lenses anyone might suggest?

[nohoneythatsnotanewlens]

The 28-70 FX is going to be a world different than your current lens. The 18-55 DX (I'm guessing you meant 17-55DX) is nice but for me, not worth the upgrade. If you "need" 2.8 I would go with it but the quality of your 18-70 is very good and you might be disappointed after spending a lot of money.

Just my $.02.

[cyclohexane]

I bought a new 24-70 f/2.8 (so, a little more expensive) back when I was shooting a DX, in anticipation of eventually moving to full frame.

The lens literally collected dust for months until I added my D700 and D3. Just wasn't really a workable range for what I was shooting back then.

This was my experience; YMMV.

[Douglas]

Depends on what you shoot. I have the 28-70 and love it on my D90. But there are times that it annoys me because of the 150 crop factor. The fact it crops like its a 42-105 has been an issue.

[TheFantasticG]

The only DX lens I have is the 35mm 1.8G and I barely use it. The 24-120 F4 fits my needs 95% of the time (that's 95% of the 5% of the time I'm NOT shooting macro... So, 4% of the time?).

It really depends on what you should, intended use, funds available, and what you want to spend. Get those ironed out and come back to ask again.

[scoundrel1728]

Originally Posted by TheFantasticG

The only DX lens I have is the 35mm 1.8G and I barely use it. The 24-120 F4 fits my needs 95% of the time (that's 95% of the 5% of the time I'm NOT shooting macro... So, 4% of the time?).

More like 4.75% of the time if you do the full-dress calculation. However, if you are rounding to a full percentage point, as is most likely the case here, 95% of 5% is still 5% You would have to ask a math person a question like that!

It really depends on what you should, intended use, funds available, and what you want to spend. Get those ironed out and come back to ask again.[/QUOTE]

You're definitely right about that. My own usage varies from Michael's (cyclohexane). I do a lot of shooting indoors under ambient light where a flash would be too distracting. For this reason, all of my lenses except one open up to f/2.8 or bigger. (I expect to get another exception soon, but that is a telephoto too long for most indoor shooting.) My first lens for my kit was (and is) a Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8, which I use a lot for large indoor venues, such as auditoriums, social halls, and other locations where I can back far enough away from the subject or where I am shooting something "on stage" from a fixed location. I do this a lot. For smaller venues or landscapes where I am more likely to need the wide-angle capability, I use my Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 instead. I also have no plans to go to an FX imager in the foreseeable future.

[badpickev]

[QUOTE=NikonShooter;1652798Also are there any third party lenses anyone might suggest?[/QUOTE]

the only one who will know for sure is going to be you. i bought a tamron 28-75 f2.8, its now $500 new at bh, and keh has a bunch of sigma, tamron, and tokina 28-70 f2.8 lenses used starting at $250.


i do like the tamron its a great lens but on a dx body, its just to long. i am looking at moving to a 24-70 f2.8 and the fov will be equal 36-105 vice 42-105 for the 28-70.

but for 250-300 it could prove to be useful to you to try it out.

[Dirk]

why not ?

I have 3 FF lenses for nikon
28-80 AF
70-300 AF VR ED
and the tammy 28-200 xr

all these lenses are designed for film camera's (aka 35mm) with the exeption of the 70-300 vr that is a ff nikon lens .

i use them on any of my 3 digital nikons or my film body N65

[S_Porter]

My 24-70mm is on my D7000 most of the time, I like the extra reach. I have a 18-200mm and a 10-24mm, I use the 18-200mm when I'm taking snap shoots and the 10-24mm doesn't see the light of day much.

[Steven G Webb]

I bought a 28-70 2.8 and I absolutely love it. For my purposes the 70-200 2.8 is the bread and butter. There are many times when the long telephoto is just too much lens. It's nutty to try using it with a flash bracket. If I can cut the shooting distance in half and can also cut the flash output. Both the battery and the subject appreciate that. I'm real happy with the 28-70 for walking around and for candid photography. It ain't wide angle, but it is a great normal to semi telephoto zoom and it's razor sharp. I'm on a DX camera as well. I only had one DX lens and it came in a kit with another camera. In my opinion there aren't FX lenses, if it's not specifically made for the smaller sensor, DX then it is FX.