|
I might be wrong but the DX 50 mm is stupid expensive. The 35 mm 1.8 is a amazing lens that is worth every penny and anyone with a nikon DX camera should own one (this part I know I am right) Also KEH is amazing, bought a bunch of things from them and it all has been in great shape. Customer service is amazing too, bought a sigma 50-500 from them recently that didn't work on my camera. Contacts for the electronics were crushed. Called them and they said "we'll fix it no charge" then sent me instructions for sending it back free of charge. I've never had that kind of service online almost feels weird to me. Also has any anyone risked ug rated items? Not sure how those would be.
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2014 13:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 18:14 |
|
|
Ezekiel_980 posted:I might be wrong but the DX 50 mm is stupid expensive.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2014 14:17
|
|
|
p sure the 50's are all FX. There is a cheap one, about $100, with no AF motor. Mine rarely leaves the shelf.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2014 14:47
|
|
|
Like I said I'm still rather novice with this profession... I read a thing. http://photographylife.com/nikon-35mm-f1-8g-vs-50mm-f1-4g Crop vs full frame sensors have got to be the most misunderstood aspect if digital photography. I regularly shoot with a full frame (D700), but lately I've been using a crop sensor (D200) while a couple of our D700s are out for repair. I also learned on crop sensors (D300s and D7000). I never really noticed the difference in practice... but I also never had both on me at the same time. I really don't understand why it matters. EDIT - I do understand the technical meaning of the terms however... Interestingly, I don't think the people who trained me know the difference either... My D7000 kit included a 50mm. That may explain why I love the 50mm with my D700, but didn't really dig it on the D7000. EDIT - quote:There are much bigger things to worry about, like actually making a good photograph. I like this sentence. JesusDoesVegas fucked around with this message at 16:27 on Apr 26, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2014 16:12
|
|
|
If you're not worried about 1) enormous print sizes or 2) lots of bokeh being key to your composition, then crop/full frame is academic, and crop results in more affordable lenses anyway. The viewfinder isn't going to be as pleasant on a crop sensor. There are much bigger things to worry about, like actually making a good photograph.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2014 16:26
|
|
|
50mm on DX (crop) is a bit tight. To compare focal lengths on crop and full frame you need to multiply the focal length by the crop factor. On Nikons the crop factor is 1.5 (on Canons it's 1.6). So the 50mm lens on crop will give the same field of view as a 75mm lens on a full frame camera. The full frame effective length is called the effective focal length (efl). The effect is that 50mm on crop is a little tight for shots of people (I assume this is what you take the most pictures of as a photojournalist). You'll probably find that you have to back up a bit more than you like or that it's not really usable at all indoors (where there's not room to back up). 35mm, on the other hand, is ~50mm full frame equivalent. So if you like 50 on FX you'll dig 35 on DX. The 35mm ƒ/1.8G is a balls awesome lens for the price, to boot. If you're gonna be working on FX cameras then by all means use the 50. fwiw, I actually prefer something a little wider than the 50mm efl, something like 35mm or 40mm efl. On DX that is served fairly well by a 24mm. Dren fucked around with this message at 16:46 on Apr 26, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2014 16:42
|
|
|
Dren posted:p sure the 50's are all FX. There is a cheap one, about $100, with no AF motor. Mine rarely leaves the shelf. Nah, the 50/1.4 is FX and pretty expensive. The 50/1.8G is DX, cheap, and awesome - AF motor included.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2014 16:48
|
|
|
JesusDoesVegas posted:Crop vs full frame sensors have got to be the most misunderstood aspect if digital photography. I regularly shoot with a full frame (D700), but lately I've been using a crop sensor (D200) while a couple of our D700s are out for repair. I also learned on crop sensors (D300s and D7000). I never really noticed the difference in practice... but I also never had both on me at the same time. I really don't understand why it matters. EDIT - I do understand the technical meaning of the terms however... The practical differences are relatively straightforward. Full frame sensors are higher-resolution and 2-ish stops better in noise than an equivalent crop sensor and have shallower depth of field. Less noticeable at a glance, they also provide a couple bits of extra color depth, and they are much less subject to the diffraction limit than crop sensors (eg 24mp crop like a D5200 is diffraction-limited at f/5.6). There's also lots of assorted fringe benefits like better viewfinders. It's not a must-have if you can't afford it, but there are very straightforward advantages. Yeah "hurf durf no one NEEDS anything more than a Pentax Q to take a picture  " but there's pretty obvious and noticeable benefits to shooting full frame and that's only going to get more pronounced as time goes on. Our display resolutions have stagnated at 1080p for a long time now and that's finally about to break loose with affordable 4K displays, and it's much more difficult and expensive for smaller sensors to keep up due to diffraction limit issues.
Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 19:33 on Apr 26, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2014 17:01
|
|
|
a foolish pianist posted:Nah, the 50/1.4 is FX and pretty expensive. The 50/1.8G is DX, cheap, and awesome - AF motor included. Ah, forgot they made that one.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2014 17:04
|
|
|
a foolish pianist posted:Nah, the 50/1.4 is FX and pretty expensive. The 50/1.8G is DX, cheap, and awesome - AF motor included. Maybe I was thinking of the 1.4 then.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2014 17:09
|
|
|
a foolish pianist posted:Nah, the 50/1.4 is FX and pretty expensive. The 50/1.8G is DX, cheap, and awesome - AF motor included. You can also go a generation older. The 1.4D is like $300, and the 1.8D is around $100. AF will work with the D7XXX, and will still work if you eventually upgrade to FF.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2014 17:23
|
|
|
a foolish pianist posted:Nah, the 50/1.4 is FX and pretty expensive. The 50/1.8G is DX, cheap, and awesome - AF motor included. The 50 f/1.8G is an FX lens, afaik there are no 50mm DX lenses at all. If you've got a camera that covers AF-D I'd just pick up a 1.8D for just a few photobux, they're easy to flip without losing much if anything at all should you not like it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2014 17:26
|
|
|
On the other hand the only time I take my 50mm f/1.4 off of my D3200 is to put my telephoto on. I picked it up back in November on Black Friday on a great deal for about $350 and it's an amazing lens, to the point where I barely use my 35mm f/1.8G any more. But yes, it really depends on what you're taking photos of, and it is very hard to go wrong with the 35mm f/1.8G. It's hard to get anything better for the money.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2014 18:14
|
|
|
a foolish pianist posted:Nah, the 50/1.4 is FX and pretty expensive. The 50/1.8G is DX, cheap, and awesome - AF motor included.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2014 19:47
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:All nikon 50's are full frame. You are talking out of your rear end. I think people call it DX (wrongly and stupidly) because the 1.8G is the one that'll work with all their current crop bodies, including the lower-end ones, as opposed to the 1.8D. Of course, it having an AF motor has nothing to do with DX or FX or crop or full frame or anything except body compatibility, so in short yes that gentleman is talking directly out of his rear end.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2014 20:32
|
|
|
I want to reiterate everyone's love for the 1.8D as long as you have a body with the AF motor. It's a great cheapo 50 compared to Canon's shitbox 50 1.8.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2014 20:34
|
|
|
Kenshin posted:But yes, it really depends on what you're taking photos of, and it is very hard to go wrong with the 35mm f/1.8G. It's hard to get anything better for the money. Considering that the 50 1.8D costs $100 less and comes with way less distortion, I'd say it takes the prize for best lens at the lowest cost. Different FOV from the 35 on the same platform of course, but going from DX to FX I was shocked to get a better lens than the 35 for $100 cheaper. They don't call them nifty fiftys for nothing, I suppose.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2014 20:49
|
|
|
vote_no posted:Considering that the 50 1.8D costs $100 less and comes with way less distortion, I'd say it takes the prize for best lens at the lowest cost. Different FOV from the 35 on the same platform of course, but going from DX to FX I was shocked to get a better lens than the 35 for $100 cheaper. They don't call them nifty fiftys for nothing, I suppose. It also doesn't come with a focus motor, which will be a problem for an increasingly large number of people. The 35 1.8G is a hell of a lens and really the only legit reason not to buy one is if you're buying a full-frame body in the next three months and are selling all your crop bodies and never using one again. If that's not the case, it's a very solid purchase for its price.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2014 20:55
|
|
|
I like my 1.8D but it does have some issues shooting at 1.8 in the sun/outside. Lots of CA namely. I'm not sure if this is just the lens but it's almost unusable at 1.8 on a sunny day. example:  
VelociBacon fucked around with this message at 21:35 on Apr 26, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2014 21:32
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:All nikon 50's are full frame. You are talking out of your rear end. Oh, weird. I would have sworn that was a dx lens.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 09:25
|
|
|
a foolish pianist posted:Oh, weird. I would have sworn that was a dx lens.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 14:58
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:There a DX 35/1.8 (and a newer FX one). Notably, DX lenses will still function perfectly fine on FX bodies. There may be vignetting, which can be removed on crop, though zooming can abate it as well. If you're a baller like me you'll even use your 55-200 on film, if you don't need fanciness like stabilization, autofocus or aperture control  (vignetting is the only thing that happens on digital bodies. Nikkormat represent.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2014 00:31
|
|
|
So, KEH had two of those 35 1.8G lenses on Friday, and today they have zero. Admit it, two of you guys bought them before I got around to pulling the trigger.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2014 01:16
|
|
|
The 35 1.8g is a great lens you should buy one even at regular price ($200ish) Here it is for $197 http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/606792-USA/Nikon_2183_AF_S_Nikkor_35mm_f_1_8G.html
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2014 02:40
|
|
|
I'm not in any kind of hurry so if I can save $50 by waiting a week or three that's fine with me. But I'll hang onto that link if another one doesn't pop up on KEH in a reasonable amount of time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2014 02:46
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:So, KEH had two of those 35 1.8G lenses on Friday, and today they have zero. Admit it, two of you guys bought them before I got around to pulling the trigger.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2014 12:38
|
|
|
VelociBacon posted:I like my 1.8D but it does have some issues shooting at 1.8 in the sun/outside. Lots of CA namely. I'm not sure if this is just the lens but it's almost unusable at 1.8 on a sunny day. Its the lens. The 1.4 AF-D and the 1.8 AF-D are mostly trash wide open until about f2. CA makin machines.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2014 15:05
|
|
|
Musket posted:Its the lens. The 1.4 AF-D and the 1.8 AF-D are mostly trash wide open until about f2. CA makin machines. If anything that's actually not as bad as I'd expect from the 1.8 wide open in those conditions.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2014 00:01
|
|
|
Musket posted:Its the lens. The 1.4 AF-D and the 1.8 AF-D are mostly trash wide open until about f2. CA makin machines. Yeah I noticed this on my 50mm 1.8d too. Does the 35mm 1.8g also do this? I just picked one up and wondering if I should stick to f/2 and above when using it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2014 10:55
|
|
|
Mega Comrade posted:Yeah I noticed this on my 50mm 1.8d too. Does the 35mm 1.8g also do this? I just picked one up and wondering if I should stick to f/2 and above when using it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2014 11:41
|
|
|
The 35 1.8g is better wide open than the 50 1.8d is. However the 35 is not stunning wide open and they both have awful bokeh.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2014 14:21
|
|
|
My biggest surprise when I got the 85mm 1.8G was the amount of chromatic aberration and blow-out-glow (and vignetting!) when wide open. I was actually quite a bit disappointed, that lens being the first big(ish)-money glass I had bought. But I've gotten used to working with it, and Lightroom's lens profiles fix most of the problems automatically. It's still one of my favorite lenses to shoot with.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2014 15:25
|
|
|
The 35 f/1.8G is pretty good wide-open. The 50mm f/1.4G is very good all the way down to f/1.6, but the focal plane is so shallow at f/1.4 my D3200 sometimes has trouble focusing. Likewise for the 85mm f/1.4 (not mine, borrowed from a friend), I was able to get very usable headshots in low light at f/1.6.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2014 16:34
|
|
|
Kenshin posted:The 35 f/1.8G is pretty good wide-open. The 50mm f/1.4G is very good all the way down to f/1.6, but the focal plane is so shallow at f/1.4 my D3200 sometimes has trouble focusing. Likewise for the 85mm f/1.4 (not mine, borrowed from a friend), I was able to get very usable headshots in low light at f/1.6. Yeah, my D5000 blows the focus all the time if I try to shoot my 50/1.4G wide open. It's really annoying.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2014 16:55
|
|
|
To be fair, most fast lenses are going to show their flaws when shot wide open in broad daylight, which is why a lot of review sites use that as a torture test. It's also not a time that you'd normally expect to be shooting wide open  Stop down a couple stops and most of these issues will be irrelevant.That said, the 50 1.8G seems to do a really good job at controlling these aberrations, even when shot into the sun wide open (probably because it's an aspherical design.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2014 17:06
|
|
|
Kenshin posted:The 35 f/1.8G is pretty good wide-open. The 50mm f/1.4G is very good all the way down to f/1.6, but the focal plane is so shallow at f/1.4 my D3200 sometimes has trouble focusing. Likewise for the 85mm f/1.4 (not mine, borrowed from a friend), I was able to get very usable headshots in low light at f/1.6.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2014 17:08
|
|
|
Musket posted:Its the lens. The 1.4 AF-D and the 1.8 AF-D are mostly trash wide open until about f2. CA makin machines. That said, my experience with the 1.8 AF-D is that it's a lot better on film. I know this is not what you're asking, but I guess it makes sense as the lens was designed for that and not digital. Also like others said stop down to f/2 - get nearly the same bokeh and the aberrations clean up nicely.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2014 05:24
|
|
|
I have a D3200 with the 18-55 lens. My daughter dropped the camera and now it only sometimes focuses. Is there something I can do to find out whether it's the lens or the camera that's screwed up? I don't know a lot about this and need to learn more. :\ Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2014 18:34
|
|
|
Solaron posted:I have a D3200 with the 18-55 lens. My daughter dropped the camera and now it only sometimes focuses. Is there something I can do to find out whether it's the lens or the camera that's screwed up? I don't know a lot about this and need to learn more. :\ The motor driving the focusing mechanism is in the lens itself. The camera only interfaces with the lens' focusing motor through a set of electronic contacts, meaning nothing mechanical in the camera body is involved in the focusing movement. (However the body does have some optical and sensor parts involved in measuring focus, but you would probably see something wrong in the viewfinder if they were broken.) It's most likely a problem with the lens.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2014 18:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 18:14 |
|
|
Or the mount.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2014 18:54
|
|