What's better than the 14-24mm, 24-70mm, 70-200mm combo?

For FX shooters, literally nothing if we're talking about zooms. The only complaint you'll usually hear from those that have the most recent versions of these three lenses is that the 14-24mm doesn't take filters. That's pretty incredible when you think about it. One missing feature complaint, but no real performance complaints. That said, some FX shooters probably would be better served by primes (or at least mixing in a few primes). The f/2.8 aperture of the lens trinity removes some ability to isolate backgrounds.

DX shooters can't quite match this, but I'd suggest the Tokina 11-16mm or 11-20mm f/2.8, the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8, and either the Sigma 50-100mm f/1.8 or the Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8 as a pretty good imitation.

Looking for gear-specific information? Check out our other Web sites:
mirrorless: sansmirror.com | general: bythom.com| Z System: zsystemuser.com | film SLR: filmbodies.com

dslrbodies: all text and original images © 2024 Thom Hogan
portions Copyright 1999-2023 Thom Hogan
All Rights Reserved — the contents of this site, including but not limited to its text, illustrations, and concepts, 
may not be utilized, directly or indirectly, to inform, train, or improve any artificial intelligence program or system.