|
krooj posted:Adding to this, and out of curiosity: how is the 35mm 1.4 AI-S? They run around $500 on eBay, which is significantly less than any other new fast prime at that focal length. The contrast and sharpness are pretty bad wide open. Contrast is much better at f/2 and sharpness is great from f/2.8 on down. There's a bit of red/green CA on the edges as well (but not too noticeable unless you're looking at a 1:1 crop). It does have a pretty nice overall look with bokeh and rolloff similar to the 85/1.4 AI-s, but you're probably better off paying significantly less for a 35/2.0 or paying more for a more modern lens.
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2012 11:54
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 09:56 |
|
|
eggsovereasy posted:I have a 28mm f/2.8 AI-S lens that has a very stiff focus ring, is there an easy way to loosen it or should I just work on getting stronger fingers? It really shouldn't be that stiff. I'd send it in to be cleaned and re-lubed if you plan on using it much.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2012 19:49
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:
It does happen, and there are several service centers that can fix it. You can buy another 55/2.8 for roughly the cost of a cleaning, but it's probably worth it for the 28/2.8 if you plan on using it regularly. IIRC, focalpointlens.com charged about $160 for a cleaning but any reputable servicer will give you a quote free of charge if you send in your lens.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2012 21:14
|
|
|
The multicoating on the AIS lenses isn't all that different from the coatings on most contemporary lenses, unless you're talking about the nano-coatings on high-end lenses. Nikon was really ahead of the curve with developing coatings (at least compared to Canon), and most AIS primes don't have enough transmission surfaces to really warrant anything better than what they have.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2013 19:55
|
|
|
junto a la luna posted:So I am off to Iceland in September, for 10 days of walking around what I hope will be some amazing scenery. I bought a D3200 in February, with just the kit lens. I also have an old 50mm lens from an F301, though the AF doesn't work on my D3200. The kit lens for that is the 17-55mm, right? If the wide end on that performs well, it should make for pretty good landscape photos. If you want to go even wider, the Tokina 11-16 is pretty much the only thing that's decent under $2K. If you prefer working with a moderate wide angle, the 28/2.8 AI and AI-s are pretty much distortion-free, decently sharp and pretty cheap through most used resellers.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2013 21:14
|
|
|
Some of the old non-AI Nikkors have a bit of a lip on the aperture ring that keeps them from mounting properly on newer F-mounts (like the original 50/1.4) and would need to be "cut to AI" to mount on your D5100. Otherwise, shoot away... and watch your histograms because they won't meter on your camera.
|
|
#
¿
May 17, 2013 05:10
|
|
|
8th-samurai posted:I have mounted a nonAI 50mm on D70, D100, D200, and D700 without issue. YMMV on other nonAI lenses though. Is it the 1959 model with the "amber" coating? I inherited one of those and it won't mount on my D90.
|
|
#
¿
May 17, 2013 05:37
|
|
|
8th-samurai posted:There was no 1959 F mount 50m f/1.4 http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/50mmnikkor/index2.htm . You sure that isn't a 58mm or an f/2? My bad. They started making it in 1966. It's one of these: http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/50mm-f14-s.htm Allstar adapters don't fit on it either.
|
|
#
¿
May 17, 2013 08:18
|
|
|
And they're really good about accepting returns (and paying for return shipping) if the item you get has issues.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2013 02:32
|
|
|
If you plan on shooting any video with it, go for the D7000. The D90 is a great stills camera, but everything about the video mode is awful.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2013 03:38
|
|
|
Yes, the new Tamron 24-70 has an internal silent motor. It should work find with the D3200. I got one a couple weeks ago, and I've been pretty impressed with it. My only gripe is that it get some chromatic aberration toward the edges of the frame (on a crop sensor) at wide angles, but that's correctable.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2013 22:31
|
|
|
I have a D90 for sale at $325 http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3125105&pagenumber=160#post419060874 It's the same resolution as the D3000, but with better dynamic range, better low-light performance, better build quality and compatibility with all AF lenses. It's video function is pretty awful, but it's been great as a still camera.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 4, 2013 22:45
|
|
|
Miko posted:Buy that dude's D90. It doesn't have AI metering, but that's not an issue if you don't mind shooting a test exposure or two and looking at the histogram (which I usually do anyway because it tells you a lot more about your exposure than the simple -/+ meter). I shot tons of stuff on AI/AIS lenses with great results.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 5, 2013 00:02
|
|
|
Musket posted:Its a marketing gimmick to sell a body with a shutter that wont have the oil problem. No upgrades (except for 3 CF slots and better video and probably a 80mp sensor). I'm going to be annoyed if it actually does have better video. I ended up shelling out for a D800 mostly because of the exceptionally bad moire in the D600.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 5, 2013 06:12
|
|
|
That's probably the right choice for narrative films, but it has some serious shortcomings for field documentary work, no F-mount option and no stills capability.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 5, 2013 19:55
|
|
|
1st AD posted:
No F-mount is a shortcoming when you own an array of F-mount lenses and no Canon/M43 lenses, and a roughly M43-sized sensor that resolves to 1080p (give or take) isn't really suitable for still photography. I already co-own a RED with a business partner, but I would like to be able to spend days in the field tracking endangered animals without carrying 30lbs of camera, rigging, lens and batteries. The D800 works very well for this.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 5, 2013 20:52
|
|
in raw mode video is recorded into folders containing individual DNG frames, take your stills from there
|
Paul MaudDib posted:F-mount has a longer register distance than EOS and M4/3 is much shorter than that. It's not a dilemma. I already have the tools that do what I need them to do  The BMCC is great for a lot of applications, but I wouldn't have much of a use for it right now.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 5, 2013 21:07
|
|
|
8th-snype posted:I think I paid around $300 for my 28m f/2 AIS and it's a great lens. I know there's a 24mm f/2 AIS but no idea how much they run for or if they are any good. If you absolutely must have autofocus Sigma made a 20mm f1.8 but it wasn't very good and used copies run over $400 for some reason. Don't bother with the 24mm f/2 AIS. It runs for around $400-500 for a clean copy and is very soft, even stopped down. I thought I just got a bad copy at first, so I sold my first one and bought a second. Performance was the same. I keep it around because it's sharp enough for 1080p video in full frame, but don't buy it for photography.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2013 06:57
|
|
|
copen posted:I'm thinking about selling all my Nikon gear and going mirrorless. Convince me this is a bad idea and I should man up and carry my heavy rear end D200 and 80-200 f/2.8 everywhere and maybe buy this thing. If weight is the issue for you, I'd try one of these: http://joby.com/camera-straps/ultrafit-sling-strap-for-men I'm a bit of an ape, but I regularly walk around with about 10lbs. on one of those with no discomfort. Nikkor glass is great and Nikon's newer camera bodies are pretty amazing. I couldn't fathom switching, but I guess it's all about getting the tools that work best for you.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2013 05:45
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
Dr. Lenin posted:I'm looking to finally upgrade my camera and get back into some more serious photography work. Currently shooting with a 6.5 year old D80 that is probably getting close to it's shutter's final snap. Would a 7000 or 7100 be a good replacement for someone who rarely shoots paid work, but is looking to try to get drum up some more freelance work eventually? And where can I find a good rundown on the differences between the 7x00 series? I'm trying to figure out if the 7100 is worth a few hundred more than the 7000. IIRC, the biggest differences are a 24 megapixel sensor instead of 17 and a 51-point autofocus system instead of a 39-point. If those don't matter to you, performance is very similar between the two.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2014 07:46
|
|
|
Delivery McGee posted:It really annoys me when people write Amazon reviews and bitch about screw-drive lenses not working on their D5x00. READ THE loving DESCRIPTION AND/OR GET A DECENT CAMERA, YOU DUMBASSES! When I had the 18-105 I mostly used the 28-105 range because of stuff like that. The wide end has wonky distortion and poor corner performance.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2014 08:59
|
|
|
MalleusDei posted:The 50mm 1.4 is a FX lens, right? So on my crop sensor it would equate to something around 75mm? Maybe I'm mistaken. The only difference between an FX lens and a DX lens is the sensor size it will cover. A 35mm FX lens on a DX body is going to have the same angle of view as a 35mm DX lens. If you're looking for something nice outside your zoom range, the 85mm f/1.8 might be worth checking out.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2014 01:41
|
|
|
Ezekiel_980 posted:So I'm debating getting a manual focus camera so I can use my grandfathers old glass and waste tons of money on film. I've read about older nikon and was wondering if anyone here can give me their opinions on what would be better to get, a FA or a FE2? Which lenses did you get from your grandfather? Almost all F mount lenses will mount on modern Nikon cameras (although the older ones won't meter correctly but who cares we have histograms now). All my grandpa's old Nippon-Kogaku lenses he got while living in Japan in the 70's worked on my D90 (although my parents' first gen 50mm f/1.4 didn't).
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2014 07:13
|
|
|
GunForumMeme posted:I was looking to get into Sports/Wildlife a bit more and am torn between two cameras. I wanted a crop body for the reach, but I'm stuck between the D300S (bigger buffer, higher fps, stronger build) and the D7100 (better AF, higher res). Either way, I'm looking to buy used. Any reason you guys know of that I should get one versus the other? If you're going to get into bird photography, the higher resolution and better AF of the D7100 will be worth it.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2014 07:57
|
|
|
pootiebigwang posted:This brings up another question. What, if any, difference is there between that lens, the 1.8D, and the 1.8G? I know the G doesn't have an aperture ring, but optically is there any difference between the three?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2014 21:47
|
|
|
VelociBacon posted:What is the use of a largish aperture capability on a landscape lens that you'll be shooting with at f/16 or more? Or do people use a 20mm for things where they'll get bokeh? Fast wides are useful for filmmaking, astrophotography and general low-light use. Unless corner-to-corner sharpness is stellar and it completely lacks distortion, I don't see the 20mm displacing the 14-24mm for landscape use.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2014 20:23
|
|
|
Don't get a kit lens. The new Sigma 24-105 is a lot sharper than Nikon's 24-120 and about 2/3 the price. Tamron's 24-70mm is worth considering, too - the performance is pretty stellar considering the price point (my only real gripes about that one are slightly soft corners on full frame and distortion at the wide end). As for the D750, I'd wait for more comprehensive reviews and comparisons to come out before placing an order, but it looks like a great camera for people who were considering the D610 and wanted a little more out of their camera. If I was on the market for a body, I'd be considering getting one.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2014 21:23
|
|
|
RangerScum posted:I've never used it or anything, but 24-120 isn't all that far from 18-200 which is a general failure of a lens. Which I also haven't used lol. But seriously if you're going with a zoom keep it all in the same range, wide zoom, mid-range zoom, telephoto zoom. The different optics don't work well together is what I hear. There's no reason good superzooms can't be made, they're just too enormous and expensive to be of use for still photography unless you're rich and insane.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2014 08:52
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:hi welcome to dorkroom I wanna see someone use that angie for their catte photography
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2014 09:12
|
|
|
1st AD posted:Doesn't cover full frame Vincent Laforet spotted.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2014 23:26
|
|
|
RangerScum posted:Tamron 17-50 f2.8. If that isn't long enough for you, the Tamron 24-70 f2.8 is worth every penny and then some.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2014 06:15
|
|
|
If that was my lens budget, I'd go with the Sigma 35mm Art and Nikkor 85mm f/1.8 and spend most of my time shooting with those, then pick up a Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 and Nikkor 24mm f/2.8D to fill in the gaps.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2014 06:29
|
|
|
Fraction posted:Will the AF-S 50mm 1.8 work on a d3100? I want a prime next but I thought* full frame lenses don't work on crop bodies? It will work fine. All AF-S lenses will work on all recent Nikon bodies. Edit: except DX lenses won't cover FF35 sensors. Some FX cameras autodetect crop lenses and set themselves to DX mode when appropriate, though. Moon Potato fucked around with this message at 08:33 on Oct 2, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2014 08:11
|
|
|
Wild EEPROM posted:Yes all lenses will fit on all bodies. AF-S models have some iteration of the "Silent Wave Motor" which doesn't depend on a screw drive. That (and it's predecessor, the AF-I internal motor) were introduced in some of the later higher-end D lenses, then were present in all of the G lenses except for a handful of very early budget models. Nikon's lens alphabet soup is fun.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2014 09:47
|
|
|
Fraction posted:This is awesome, thanks! The Sigma you were talking about earlier is just about the best macro you can get at that focal length. There are some pretty solid macros for less than that, but they're either manual focus or need a body that can deal with focus screws.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2014 04:59
|
|
|
Mido posted:
It's actually pretty good on CA if you don't shoot wide open. This was at f/5.6 and there wasn't a hint of fringing or color shift. 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2014 07:34
|
|
dont take this away from me
|
vote_no posted:Yeah, I also picked up the 50 1.2 recently against the advice of this thread, and I'm regretting it a little bit. The 50 1.8D is just so awesome for $100, so the few occasions where the 1.2 outshines it aren't really worth the extra money. Try shooting with it for a bit before you let it go. Even though it's not worth using wide open most of the time, I find it to be one of the lenses in the Nikon lineup that has its own special magic to it. I held on to mine and I don't regret it (although I did find a copy for $300, so I don't feel too bad about how cheap the other 50mm's are in comparison).
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2014 05:43
|
|
|
The D90 will still take good pictures, but the D7000 got a pretty big boost in sensor performance, much better autofocus, weather sealing, AI metering, video acquisition that's not horrible and probably some other stuff that make it worth the extra money. If that's too expensive for you, a used D3200 is still a step up in most respects from the D90 (although you lose screw drive autofocus compatibility).
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2014 23:52
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 09:56 |
|
|
spookygonk posted:My office is going to order a Nikon DSLR for stills and video (1080 25p) work. I've suggested the D5300 (with the swivel LCD), but the boss is looking at the D7100 (in-camera AF motor). We use JVC GY-HM600E (& older DV-CAM cameras) as well as a Sony F5, but looking to setup a small, lightweight rig as well. Three people in the office shoot Nikon, so there's plenty of lenses to borrow. Any opinions on which to go with? If you don't need the 24 megapixel sensor or 51-point AF array of the D7100, the D7000 is probably worth a look. That has an internal AF motor and should have very similar video performance to the D7100.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2014 23:09
|
|