D7000 or D7100?

[Viridian]

So maybe I should just go for some glass that will future proof me for a long long long time, maybe even start on the "Holy Trinity" and get the 24-70 because that seems to be the most universal of the 3.

[Manfred M]

So maybe I should just go for some glass that will future proof me for a long long long time, maybe even start on the "Holy Trinity" and get the 24-70 because that seems to be the most universal of the 3.

I would agree; the 24 -70mm makes a great walk-about zoom on a DX camera, and is in fact really the only lens I usually shoot on the D90 and the D800.

[Viridian]

What about the Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8G lens, I mean it's the same zoom as my kit lens but it goes to 2.8, ED glass, and a SWM in it. Would that be worth the $1300, or should I just go for the 24-70mm for $1900?

[Manfred M]

What about the Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8G lens, I mean it's the same zoom as my kit lens but it goes to 2.8, ED glass, and a SWM in it. Would that be worth the $1300, or should I just go for the 24-70mm for $1900?

Actually, it is a 17-35mm, so very much a wide angle lens, touching on a normal focal length zoomed all the way out on a DX camera. Again; you have to know where you are going down the road equipment wise and what type of shooting you are planning to do. It was one of the lenses I had a hard look at before I went with the 14-24mm. The main advantage is that it takes filters easily, while mine does not (yes, I can get a Lee kit for a lot of money), but I just happen to like shooting with ultra wide angle lenses.

[Viridian]

So is there any other "pro grade" "general purpose" lenses out there besides the 24-70? $2000 dollars is sort of outrageous for me.

[Manfred M]

Any of the f/2.8 zooms, f/1.4 primes and the two f/2 DC lenses, plus the long and fast fixed lenses are aimed at the pro market.

It really depends on what you are after. My wife also has a D90 and only ever shoots two lenses, the 18-200mm is her "go to" lens and while it has its faults, she loves using it. She will shoot with the Sigma 150-500mm when she is out taking wildlife images. Even with the reasonable selection of glass, she has never shot anything else. As I have said before, you need to figure out your needs and then spend the money. Having a lens that sits around is not a good investment.

[Viridian]

I do a lot of portraits, like babys, models, I'm actually doing prom pictures next month. Basically that kind of stuff.

[Manfred M]

I do a lot of portraits, like babys, models, I'm actually doing prom pictures next month. Basically that kind of stuff.

The reason that both Canon and Nikon sell tons of the f/2.8 24-70mm and f/2.8 70-200mm is that they are in great demand by wedding and portrait photographers using full-frame cameras. The 24-70mm is used more for environmental / group shots, while the 70-200mm is more suited for individual shots. Divide these numbers by 1.5 to give you an idea as to where you might be looking at for lenses for the DX sie.

[Viridian]

Time to save for the 24-70 seems like the best bet for me.

[Manfred M]

One thing to remember is that the 24-70mm is not stabilized. This has no real impact on full-frame uses and minor impact on a DX camera.

[Viridian]

Thats something I can cope with.