|
VelociBacon posted:Is it normal for a camera to have issues focusing in live view mode but no issues focusing once live view mode is off? Nikon d7k, happened with a couple different lenses. I know the AI metering sensor is up by the pentaprism and as such is affected by the mirror being up in live-view mode, but is the AF hardware affected too? Its a product "Feature".
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2013 16:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 20:19 |
|
|
Jimmy Thief posted:Amazon and Best Buy currently have the 50mm 1.4G AFS for 349.99. Thanks to Nikon for the one lens on sale this holiday season.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2013 16:07
|
|
|
Delivery McGee posted:My coworkers at the newspaper have FX cameras and are still using DX lenses. The vignetting of the 17-35mm DX lens can be quite nice when used properly. Seconding the AIS love. I've been dealing with this guy who is K*Rock's BFF, and I could see his brain overload when I revealed that I use the 85mm 1.4 AIS and 135mm f/2 AIS for portraits. '...But Rockwell says the AFD is the greatest lens ever produced! And the Sigma 85mm is just as sharp! DANGER TO MANIFOLD!'
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2013 17:55
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:You should still buy the 1.8 instead. I'm with ya.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2013 20:58
|
|
|
Jimmy Thief posted:I'm with ya. Is the 1.8G better than the 1.4G? Wouldn't the 1.4 be better just so that you can shoot at f/1.8 outdoors?
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2013 21:01
|
|
|
They're exactly as good, but the 1,8 is cheaper lighter and smaller.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2013 21:22
|
|
|
Jimmy Thief posted:Amazon and Best Buy currently have the 50mm 1.4G AFS for 349.99. Thanks to Nikon for the one lens on sale this holiday season. I've been shooting with a friend's 85mm f/1.4 the past few days and it is amazing, so this will be somewhat close.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2013 23:20
|
|
|
First on my list of 50mm lenses to buy is the f/1.2 AI-S, but I never see anyone in this thread recommending it. Is there a reason for that?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 01:56
|
|
|
vote_no posted:First on my list of 50mm lenses to buy is the f/1.2 AI-S, but I never see anyone in this thread recommending it. Is there a reason for that? It's a niche lens. It's expensive and heavy and not sharp across the whole field wide open (which is why you own a f/1.2 lens). Not that it's a bad lens, but unless you really need that extra 1/2 - 1 stop the cost-benefit usually tips to the 50/1.8 or 50/1.4.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 02:14
|
|
|
vote_no posted:First on my list of 50mm lenses to buy is the f/1.2 AI-S, but I never see anyone in this thread recommending it. Is there a reason for that? I like mine. Don't expect high technical marks for wide-open performance, but it has some nice subtle visual characteristics and dramatic but pleasant flares that you won't find anywhere else in the Nikon lineup.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 02:32
|
|
|
Don't forget to check out the 50 f/2 AI('d), pretty awesome lens for a mere ~$50.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 06:38
|
|
|
vote_no posted:First on my list of 50mm lenses to buy is the f/1.2 AI-S, but I never see anyone in this thread recommending it. Is there a reason for that? Of all the 1.2 pieces of glass out there, this by far is the worst. Its practical use was more for astrophotography than anything. Its pretty meh at 1.2 and doesnt get "good" (and its not all that good either) until f2 (which the 50mm f2 AI already does at f2 and costs, 50-100bux)My 58mm 1.2 is just as sloppy as the 50 1.2 until roughly f5.6, and is frustrating seeing how costly of a lens they can be. I would really skip this lens in favor of a 1.4 or even the 50mm f2 Ai for sharpness. If the 1.2 is only to serve you for lowlight, you may also find the 50mm 1.4 AF-D better since LR5 can "fix" CA fairly well.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 16:37
|
|
|
nerd_of_prey posted:I shoot a lot of film currently but use Olympus OM mount stuff  .Speaking of which, the new old lens arrived yesterday. It's ... solid. Makes even the not-beat-to-poo poo new pro lenses at the paper seem shoddy by comparison, and the plastic kit lens feel like a toy. I'm half thinking the whole DX thing was like New Coke: get everybody used to a terrible imitation for a few years so they don't notice when you change the orignal formula when bringing back the old one.  Dammit, I need to get another DSLR to take glamour shots of the DSLR, the phone camera isn't cutting it. Actually, I have one (never did return that D1x) but the battery seems to be shot. Family portrait!  Huh, the grip on the D7000 with battery grip is taller than the D1x; from baseplate to hot shoe they're the same, but you can see how much more the D1 prism sticks up over the top plate. Also note how lenscaps have evolved. The vast majority of the tape on the D1x is functional -- the glue under the rubber isn't doing poo poo -- and I figured since it was going to be covered in tape anyway, may as well go all the way and black out the name to really confuse people (when it was my main body I had the Canon strap on it that's now on the D7000). I kinda want to preemptively tape the new body. Is there a serial number on the 75-300 lens and a way to look up the date it was made? I like to know. My Speed Graphic was made in March of '52.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 16:42
|
|
Bad Angus! Bad!
|
I have a D5100, and currently have the 18-55 kit lens, the 35/1.8, as well as two older manual primes (a 105/2.5 and 55/3.5 "micro"). I want an entry-level zoom that will give me more reach than the kit lens so I can take better pictures of the kids at school/sporting events. The 105 has decent reach on the D5100 body, but I think I really want a zoom so I can adjust depending on where I am in relation to the stage or whatever (if I didn't want a zoom I'd be looking at some other fast primes, I think). What I want is something so I can get decently close, or zoom out a bit, regardless of where I'm sitting at an event, and thereby avoid the scrum of parents rushing the stage, take flash photos with their iphones and what not. I'm also looking at entry-level lenses, rather than, say, the 2.8 zooms, which seem nice, but more than I can spend right now. At first I was thinking of the Tamron 70-300/4.0-5.6, which seems to be pretty well regarded as an entry-level zoom from what I can tell, and which is within my price range (particular the ln- graded ones that KEH had for about $250 last I checked). 300mm is probably more reach than I would need in most circumstances, so I figure on that end it's fine. Maybe the Nikon 55-200 would be an option I should consider along these lines, too. The problem, however, is that only going down to 70 (or 55), I'd probably need to carry a second lens around with me so I could take closer stuff of the kids, and that would be a little bit of a pain. So that led me to looking at the something like the Sigma 18-250/3.5-6.3 DC Macro OS HSM. That range from 18mm going all the way up to 250 would cover pretty much everything I might need at some event for the kids, so I wouldn't really need to carry around a second lens. That would be pretty convenient, and this lens is certainly in my price range as well. But I've also seen the advice, for instance in the Gear thread, that one should avoid the "super zooms" and just have 2 lens that cover the range you want (e.g., the 18-55 and a 70-200 or 300). So I guess two questions -- (1) any thoughts on the Sigma 18-250, and (2) should I just be thinking about a different strategy here (like two lenses) and avoid the super zooms? Maybe I'm better off using the 105/2.5 when I'm further away, and putting the same money towards replacing the kit lens with the Tamron 17-50/2.8? Anyway, any thoughts would be appreciated.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 02:27
|
|
|
If your main goal is memories for the family album then I suppose a super-zoom is okay, as long as you're aware of the limitations. They tend to have quite a lot of distortion, particularly at the ends of the zoom range, and it gets terribly slow at the far end of the zoom too. There's two big disadvantages to the small aperture at the far end, one is that you need more light for acceptable shutter speeds (i.e. bad for indoor sports events, night shooting and similar) and the other is that auto-focus suffers a lot when the aperture gets that small. Consider renting one for a while to see if it works for you. The other alternative is having two cameras, one with a long zoom on and one with a wider lens. Consider whether your phone can work for occasional close-up shots while you have a long zoom on the SLR.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 02:56
|
|
|
McCoy Pauley posted:I'm better off using the 105/2.5 when I'm further away, and putting the same money towards replacing the kit lens with the Tamron 17-50/2.8.  That^Get a used Tammy 17-50, get a used 55-200. The Tammy range will probably get more use for sake of family memories than the 55-200mm lens will just in general use.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 03:21
|
|
|
Thanks -- I appreciate the feedback. I'm going to re-evaluate my reluctance to carry a second lens (it's really not that big a deal). And see if I can just get by with the 105 for now, and instead think about upgrading the kit lens. Plus used 55-200 Nikon lenses seems pretty inexpensive so far as that goes -- that might work just fine for my purposes for now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 04:41
|
|
|
I think what you'll find after you try some of the consumer zooms is that, for anything indoor at least, you'd prefer trying to stand closer over using them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 14:31
|
|
|
Comedy option: sell the D5100, get a used D7000 and old screw-drive lens like in my post immediately before yours, should come out about even with buying a new self-motorized Tamron, and can be used a bludgeon if necessary. I was ready to pull the trigger on the Sigma you're looking at, but 1/10th of the Amazon reviews are "broken out of the box". Though Amazon doesn't have a checkbox for new/used, so the lemons may have been worn-out used ones. As has been said, superzooms are generally jack of all trades, master of none, with funhouse-mirror distortion throughout the range. Though if I could afford it, I'd totally get this one and make a Photoshop action for every 50mm step for one-click distortion correction. My kit as a staff photog at a decent-sized daily newspaper (back when newspapers could afford lenses) was a D1x, 17-35mm and 80-200mm, both f/2.8. That's a good range. Two lenses that cover most focal lengths, no overlap, and only requires a tiny manpurse to carry the other lens, flash, spare battery, etc. I would've killed for a 55-200mm -- I've probably shot as many out-of-focus closeups of helmets of football players being pushed out of bounds as I have publishable football photos. If our corporate masters could afford D4s, we'd be rocking 18-300 f/3.5-5.6 superzooms because getting the shot is more important than straight lines in the newspaper. Dren posted:I think what you'll find after you try some of the consumer zooms is that, for anything indoor at least, you'd prefer trying to stand closer over using them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 16:35
|
|
|
Is the D600 really as good as it sounds on paper? I have a Canon 60D now but I'm considering going full frame and it sounds like a hell of a deal for the price... I would go with a 5D MKII or a 6D but the autofocus is lacking and I do a lot of automotive/track stuff, so I'd likely have to buy a 7D as well if I went that route (which wouldn't be a bad idea regardless to have the extra reach). I'm a little concerned having never shot Nikon and I'd have to sell all of my canon lenses, but it may be worthwhile if it's really THAT good.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 17:32
|
|
|
emotive posted:Is the D600 really as good as it sounds on paper? I have a Canon 60D now but I'm considering going full frame and it sounds like a hell of a deal for the price... I would go with a 5D MKII or a 6D but the autofocus is lacking and I do a lot of automotive/track stuff, so I'd likely have to buy a 7D as well if I went that route (which wouldn't be a bad idea regardless to have the extra reach). Is it worth it to you to swap? Thats the real question. Maybe rent a D600 + 24-702.8 and see? Sounds like the 7D is a better fit and the D600 is just a GAS situation.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 17:35
|
|
|
If you can't afford the mk3 stick to a 7D. Don't switch to FF to shoot race stills.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 17:52
|
|
|
Being a Canon user, I think I finally understand why my girlfriend's mom still thinks crop factor is a thing with her D800: because it can be.  I was asked to tag along to take photos for their holiday greeting cards and to shoot with her D800. Having basically never used, troubleshooted, or shopped for Nikon gear, I didn't even realize you could still use crop glass on a full-frame Nikon body. She's still using the kit lens from like her old D90 or something so I was a bit confused at first by the massive vignetting and how to frame the shot in the viewfinder. I didn't bother to bring the topic up, or the $10 UV filter she had affixed to the front of the lens, or that she seems to shoot in JPEG all the time. If she's happy with her shots and making money off of her photography side-business, then more power to her.  At least now I understand why she keeps trying to apply crop factor math every time she looks at my Canon full-frame glass.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 18:08
|
|
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:Being a Canon user, I think I finally understand why my girlfriend's mom still thinks crop factor is a thing with her D800: because it can be. Heavy Vingetting on a D800 with a 18-55 G kitlens? Is it not automatically going into cropmode with that lens (cuz it should)? Also it sounds like your g/f mom is a terrible sucker. I have some swamp land on the moon id like to sell her. Remind her to apply the 1.6x formula, not the 1.5x that Nikon has.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 18:13
|
|
|
Musket posted:Heavy Vingetting on a D800 with a 18-55 G kitlens? I guess in her head all digital SLRs have a crop factor -- end of discussion. I suppose that was true of consumer bodies around 10 years ago, but times have changed. It's odd to me that she owns a D800 and doesn't understand sensor size. She was probably just drawn to 36 MEGAPIXELS!!! Star War Sex Parrot fucked around with this message at 18:31 on Dec 5, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 18:20
|
|
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:I think it was an 18-105, but I really can't say for sure. I see that more often than not. People who would benefit from a Dxxxx camera due to ease of use, less complicated feature sets, being sold on MP count being the only factor you should ever look at. Camera sales people are almost as bad as car salesmen. Any DX marked lens (and it will be stamped DX) should automatically force the D800 to activate its DX cropmode. She might be talking about how she forces the D800 to use a 1.2x crop mode feature it has built in. Shes partially right about them having a crop mode, cuz hers does have various crops. Actually I bet she is using the 1.2 crop feature if your seeing vignetting on the 18-105 DX lens.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 18:30
|
|
|
Musket posted:Heavy Vingetting on a D800 with a 18-55 G kitlens? Is it not automatically going into cropmode with that lens (cuz it should)? Also it sounds like your g/f mom is a terrible sucker. I have some swamp land on the moon id like to sell her. Remind her to apply the 1.6x formula, not the 1.5x that Nikon has. I think it was doing automatic crop, but the optical viewfinder would still be showing the full frame.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 18:31
|
|
|
emotive posted:Is the D600 really as good as it sounds on paper? I have a Canon 60D now but I'm considering going full frame and it sounds like a hell of a deal for the price... I would go with a 5D MKII or a 6D but the autofocus is lacking and I do a lot of automotive/track stuff, so I'd likely have to buy a 7D as well if I went that route (which wouldn't be a bad idea regardless to have the extra reach). The D600/610 is the best DSLR short of a MK3, and even that has some give and take. Yup I said it. The AF points are kinda frustratingly tight in the center of the viewfinder, but if you're shooting racing you can take advantage of a very cool 3d tracking mode that will help you keep the car in focus after locking into it with the center point. I was 100% convinced I was going to switch to Nikon, but when the time came I ended up staying with Canon because of the fantastic video, low light, and AF (for field sports) of the Mk3. Don't get a (new) 7D. It's a seriously old camera and while the AF is pretty good, the sensor is outdated, and you will be looking to upgrade to full frame eventually anyways.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 18:40
|
|
|
nielsm posted:I think it was doing automatic crop, but the optical viewfinder would still be showing the full frame. When you put a DX lens on (example, the 10.5mm AF-G DX lens) it shows the correct DX frame lines automatically. Shes using the 1.2 crop mode which will in short, still give DX lenses vignetting issues because the DX lenses require the camera to be in a 1.5 crop mode.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 18:45
|
|
|
Musket posted:When you put a DX lens on (example, the 10.5mm AF-G DX lens) it shows the correct DX frame lines automatically.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 18:47
|
|
|
Also she wants to switch to Leica now, so that should be interesting.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 18:48
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:If you can't afford the mk3 stick to a 7D. Don't switch to FF to shoot race stills. That's the thing. I shoot track/drift events but I do a lot more still car photoshoots than races and I'd like to get more into portraiture stuff so I think it'd be a worthwhile investment in the long run. If really necessary I could buy a lower end FF camera AND a 7D for far less than the cost of a 5D3 but if I went that route I'd definitely want to keep everything Canon for lens reasons. I'd also like to sell prints at some point, so there's that. I know I don't NEED full frame, just weighing my options.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 18:50
|
|
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:Also she wants to switch to Leica now, so that should be interesting. She wants that glow? Just point out she can adapt Leitz R glass to Fmount and get that glow cheaper than dropping 10k just for a body and 50mm lens. http://leitax.com/leica-lens-for-nikon-cameras.html
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 18:52
|
|
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:Also she wants to switch to Leica now, so that should be interesting. Let her know that there is someone in the world that hates her guts on principle. The D800 is wasted on her. emotive posted:That's the thing. I shoot track/drift events but I do a lot more still car photoshoots than races and I'd like to get more into portraiture stuff so I think it'd be a worthwhile investment in the long run. If really necessary I could buy a lower end FF camera AND a 7D for far less than the cost of a 5D3 but if I went that route I'd definitely want to keep everything Canon for lens reasons. I'd also like to sell prints at some point, so there's that. I know I don't NEED full frame, just weighing my options. Is the 7d Canon's sports camera, or is that the 1d? I think you're right to go 5d2 for still cars/portraits and 7d for fast movers/long distance.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 18:58
|
|
|
emotive posted:That's the thing. I shoot track/drift events but I do a lot more still car photoshoots than races and I'd like to get more into portraiture stuff so I think it'd be a worthwhile investment in the long run. If really necessary I could buy a lower end FF camera AND a 7D for far less than the cost of a 5D3 but if I went that route I'd definitely want to keep everything Canon for lens reasons. I'd also like to sell prints at some point, so there's that. I know I don't NEED full frame, just weighing my options. I think you might do better with a 1d3 rather than a 7d if you end up going that route but honestly, just save up for what you really want rather than trying to cobble together a half measure. I mean you can spend 2500 on a 5dII/6d + 7d or 3000 on a 5dIII. e: actually canon has 5dIII refurbished for $2719 800peepee51doodoo fucked around with this message at 19:55 on Dec 5, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 19:51
|
|
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:Also she wants to switch to Leica now, so that should be interesting. Please keep us updated on her adventures.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 20:29
|
|
|
I'm hoping for a price drop on the Df soon, or for them to hit the used market. Then I'll have all matching cameras :3 x100, df, fm2.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 05:19
|
|
|
red19fire posted:I'm hoping for a price drop on the Df soon I'm willing to pay top dollar for an ounce whatever the hell you're smoking.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 01:34
|
|
|
No way Nikon Df is getting a price drop. It has to be competitive with the Leica M Monochrom, you know.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 01:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 20:19 |
|
|
red19fire posted:I'm hoping for a price drop on the Df soon, or for them to hit the used market. Then I'll have all matching cameras :3 x100, df, fm2. Lfucking OHL. Maybe you can find a few unhappy users on craigslist who cant return em after the 30days? Both local shops have sold out due to rich guys xmas presents.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 16:46
|
|