|
Kenshin posted:http://www.sigmaphoto.com/product/24-70mm-f28-if-ex-dg-hsm sounds like what you want but it isn't exactly cheap. (~$800 MSRP) Don't buy glass new unless it's so new that there's nothing on the used market.
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2014 23:07
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 18:32 |
|
|
GunForumMeme posted:Aside from a 35mm 1.8 el cheapo new, the two lenses I most want are a 24-70 and 70-200 2.8, but I can never find them on Keh and I worry about the used quality I'd get from anybody else. Adorama, B&H Maybe not like Keh-tier but a drat sight better than eBay probably.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2014 00:31
|
|
|
Wild EEPROM posted:What about the 24-85 f3.5-4.5 (or the older f2.8-4) If you can deal with a bit less on the wide end, the Nikon 28-80 f/3.3-5.6G (note: 3.3 not 3.5) is loving amazing and you can usually get one for under $100. It's the one and only thing K-Rock was right about.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2014 03:34
|
|
|
WugLyfe posted:All sound like fun options! I'm looking for as-sharp-as-possible, so I'm okay if the lenses are a bit different on focal length. I already have a 50mm f/1.8 AF-D which works, but obviously not for everything. The 28-80 3.3-5.6G is sharp as all hell and has a relatively good close-focus distance. I'm on a crop sensor and it's what I mostly use when I don't know what I'll be shooting.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2014 05:23
|
|
|
JesusDoesVegas posted:Would you say that's sharper than the 18-70mm 3.5-4.5? That's my usual walk around, but it's a bit dull. I know I'm comparing prime to zoom, but my 35mm is leaps and bounds sharper. I'd like to have a mid range zoom that gets a little closer to the level of the 35mm. I honestly can't say, not having extensive experience with the 18-70, but I'll go with "probably", and seriously these loving things are almost free. I got mine for $25 with a bonus N55 attached to it.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2014 20:17
|
|
|
FISHMANPET posted:OK, So AF-S is what works on dumb babby bodies like mine. Yeah, I can see how you'd be thrown, since most/all modern G lenses are also AF-S, but there was a time when they made G lenses without built-in motors. e: you could probably also use AF-I lenses but chances are you won't even see one of those in your lifetime.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2014 23:29
|
|
|
BANME.sh posted:I just happened to grab a 28-80 3.3-5.6 G along with a 70-300 4-5.6 G and an F75 body for $40 today. Is there any difference between the black and silver models? Unfortunately mine are silver so the lenses don't match my F100, but whatever. Glad to hear the 28-80 is so well received. None that I know of, it's purely a cosmetic thing.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2014 06:27
|
|
|
SybilVimes posted:APS-Crop was *always* just a stopgap solution until full 35mm frame sensors got cheap and good enough to replace them, that's how the camera mfrs have always looked at the situation. Look how wrong this guy is.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2014 22:14
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:These are the 3 I'm looking at. Why did you bold the D in the old 24? The reviews look solid. Also, I'm looking at the Nikon 50mm f/1.4G SIC SW Prime AF-S for my 50, but what's with the weird name? That is the FX 50 1.4 right? The 28 2.8D is the middlin tier one, the 24mm is pretty good, so I hear.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2014 05:48
|
|
|
Fraction posted:Sorry for all the questions! I'm looking into other primes now, like the sigma 105mm f/2.8 ex dg os hsm macro (those letters mean nothing to me). Is there any easy way of knowing if a sigma (or other non Nikon) lens will have an autofocus motor so that I have AF with my d3100? sigma 105mm f/2.8 ex(who cares) dg(full frame) os(stabilized) hsm(decent focus motor)
|
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2014 06:17
|
|
|
Delivery McGee posted:What is people's obsession with primes? I can understand back in the '70s when zooms were kinda crap and slow, but now you can get a Sigma/Tamron 24-70 and 70-200, both f/2.8 or better, for under $1600 total. You're only printing 8x10s, the tiny bit of extra image quality from primes doesn't really matter, does it? No reason, really. 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2014 22:35
|
|
|
8th-snype posted:Sorry you feel the need to blame your shortcomings on your job. Don't worry with the state of photojournalism as a career field you should be able to get in plenty of time practicing composition between cars at the drive through. you seem kinda mad that someone has a different job than you
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2014 07:50
|
|
|
8th-snype posted:Nope, just that every post contains a reference to it like it's some sort of magic bullet explaining away whatever we are talking about. I should start doing that. Imagine the fun we can have comparing stuff In PAD to things I have seen inserted into or removed from the human body violently! (I'm not gonna do that) Please don't but actually maybe do if you're drunk or something and it's particularly apt.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2014 21:23
|
|
|
ShadeofBlue posted:A bit late, but this is a terrible comparison. They completely missed focus on the 80-200, you can see that the left edge of the photo is sharp, while in the 180 photo it's out of focus in that area. Maybe the 180 is better than the zoom, but there's no way to see that from this photo. I've found that this is pretty much universally true for test/comparison photos on the net. There's always missed focus, or motion blur or whatever. This photo was taken by me. Both lenses were focused manually with AF-confirm. On a tripod. Even if I somehow hosed up focus, that doesn't forgive the purple.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2014 06:48
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Assuming you hosed up focus, it could be some longitudinal chromatic abberation. If you'll take my word for it, I sperged out hard on it, it's not the focus. The 80-200 2.8 is an amazing lens and a great option for anyone who wants that range of zoom on a budget, but it can't even step to the 180mm f/2.8 ED-IF.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 9, 2014 06:39
|
|
|
red19fire posted:Mine always had terrible focus, I was told by the camera shop that it's because the 80-200mm is from the film era and doesn't play well with modern digital. It was loose in the mount, so I might just have had a bad copy. K*Rock also says 'professionals don't care' about the shortcomings of that lens, so That sounds like a total load, which I'd expect if an employee of a camera store was saying it. It was probably just yours, I've never had any issue with the mount (or anything else) being loose. Of course, the little button on the M/A ring... 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 9, 2014 21:55
|
|
|
Red_Fred posted:People were talking about the D2Xs as an upgrade earlier. I currently have a D80 and there is nothing wrong with it but would a D2Xs be a decent upgrade? On paper they aren't that different. The D2xs is loving amazing. Having said that, have a close look at the feature differences between the D2xs and the D2x, and if they don't matter to you, save yourself a couple hundred bucks.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2014 19:39
|
|
|
BonoMan posted:Gave my wife her little red D5300 package (tripod, bag, 18-55, 55-200) last night. Wasn't sure how she'd take a sort of "techie" present for an anniversary gift, but she cried and then immediately started reading the manual from page one. A Dorkroom Success Story.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2014 20:20
|
|
|
Musket posted:It's more about working with the fov. Do you need 28mm? Fov needs out weighs value. You can't crop a 35mm to 28. You can crop 28 to 35. It's about how you use the tools. It's also about why you specifically want the 28 1.8. Yes, it's often good and convenient to have a really fast aperture, but if that's not actually the main reason you're buying the lens, there may be way the gently caress more economical solutions to your 28mm needs. (Such as the loving mindblowingly sharp 28 2.8 E, if you're a manual focus fan.)
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2014 09:00
|
|
|
flongofthenight posted:Thanks! I was worried that it might be easy to break off the "tab", but it mounted fine on the D70, just needing the slightest bit of pressure to make it 'click' (which made me super nervous to begin with), then is fine. Just have to see on the 7000 when it arrives, I guess i'll just take it very carefully . Also "AI conversion" is totally a DIY thing as long as you don't give a poo poo about the metering working (which it wasn't anyways on the 5100), you can just dremel off the plastic where it interferes with the AI tab. If you DO give a poo poo about metering and want to actually cut the slot to the right dimensions then you probably have to look it up or something. Do put a rear lens cap on when you do it though, so you don't fill the inside of the lens with plastic shavings.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2014 03:00
|
|
|
BANME.sh posted:I would be able to accept that if the kerning on the end of Nik o n didn't look so frigged up It's a lens hood for a lens that people traditionally don't even bother trying to find an authentic hood for because they're pretty much the exact same as whatever random screw-in hood you can find on eBay. I wouldn't expect much. To whoever bought it though, do you find it makes a big difference? I can't say I've ever really felt the need for a hood on my fiddy.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2014 00:08
|
|
|
RangerScum posted:I vote D7000 + 18-55 kit. Yeah the 35 1.8 is really loving nice but kit lenses are also really loving handy.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2014 02:54
|
|
|
Xabi posted:I've got a fever and it feels like the only prescription is a FM2n with the 28mm f/2.8 AI-s. Does that sound like a good idea? This but the 28 2.8 E, which I shill everywhere, mostly for the reason that it's tiny and light and sharp as gently caress and also cheap as gently caress.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2014 03:49
|
|
|
Dren posted:Are you sure you want dslr video for home movies of kids anyway? My D7k in video mode would not be able to focus correctly on kids running around. The iPhone or a camera with a 1" sensor would be much better at focusing for home movies. If only a camera system with a 4/3 inch sensor existed... Ah well. (He's right though, for 'consumer grade' tasks, consumer grade gear works. Point & shoots are really good at taking terrible Christmas morning video.)
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2014 08:53
|
|
|
Dren posted:I haven't used the 4/3 cameras do they fall into that happy zone of pretty good IQ for people who aren't doing serious video and small enough sensor that missed focus isn't a big deal for bad home movies? Pretty much, yes, although people use them for semi-serious video also, and the sensor isn't SO small that you can just ignore focusing.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2014 21:36
|
|
|
The Locator posted:
3.2V under no load is not exactly 'brand new' for a lithium battery.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 28, 2014 07:11
|
|
|
powderific posted:Are you sure? I'm guessing it's a cr2032 or similar, which I think are 3 volts. To be fair, I've never put a multimeter on one. Oh nevermind I'm an idiot and was thinking of 3.7V lipo batteries which, if charged, generally read 4.2V under no load (briefly).
|
|
#
¿
Dec 28, 2014 22:02
|
|
|
VelociBacon posted:Went out with the 18-55 VR kit lens today and a ton of my shots have lens flare, I've never noticed this lens producing them so much but I guess I was shooting at a lovely angle. Lesson learned! Is this lens pretty bad for flare or were the lighting conditions and shot angles just unfavorable? It is hilariously prone to flare and I doubt the tiny hood they sell for it is going to do much. You can mitigate it some by being careful about where your light's coming from, but yeah, nice lens, not great for flare.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2014 09:30
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:I could just keep these, if they provide some sort of utility with a D3200. Like, is this Tokina going to be usable as a macro lens for still photography? Think taking pictures of painted miniatures in studio conditions. Are any of these considered really good glass, such that putting up with unassisted manual focus and guesstimating metering is potentially worthwhile? The 50 1.8 Series E is tiny and drat nice if you can deal with not having AF. The others are pretty much trash unless you can autofocus them, and no that's not a legit macro lens.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2015 02:40
|
|
|
wow do we ever need a new thread title
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2018 06:31
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 18:32 |
|
|
So uh... might be time for a thread title change or something I guess.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2019 10:45
|
|