Printable View
Hi Kenley,Quote:
Originally Posted by kenleyfred
Well done on the D7000 - its an astonishing camera. I pair mine up with the 17-55 F2.8 nearly all the time, they are very well matched. As it is a cropped frame (no good for full frame cameras) lens you can get them second hand for a very reasonable price.
Since I've had these, I have not picked up my other cameras!
I don't really enjoy zoom, I much prefer prime. Looking to get a (Nikon) 50mm 1.4 as soon as my finances allow...settling for the D over the G looks like my only option to avoid a 1.8.
Yeah the 1.8 is very disappointing, anything less than 2.8 will be soft and without contrast.Quote:
Originally Posted by LSD_AUTOMOTIVE
I've heard as much, I guess the price is an indicator though. Easily under $150...I just ordered a new 1.4D from the US (significantly more than $150!). This thread is dangerous :o Perhaps I'll swing for the G when I upgrade camera down the track. I'm only a hobbyist :angel:Quote:
Originally Posted by flagg
The 50mm f/1.8 very disappointing :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by flagg
It is an awesome glass regarding as one of the best premiers for the money after the f/1.4 G lens.
It is not only mi opinion, have a look THIS reputable site.
A fine choice of camera, the 64 (million) $$ question is what do you want to take photos of?Quote:
Originally Posted by kenleyfred
Primes (f2.8 or lower) are the fastest and best for low light but you are locked to one size
Zooms are more flexible in photo size but you are limited in the speed and light level you can take photos in.
best rule of thumb, the highest quality glass you can afford the better off you are.
I'm still trying to work out which ones though hence the thread to ask the people who use them ;)
What I dont want to end up with is 10 lenses that seemed like a good idea at the time but only end up using a couple of them regularly
It is very hard to answer the question without knowing for what the camera is going to be used.
As an example, I dedicate my photography to nature so I use only one lens for landscaping (Tokina 12-24 f/4) and one lens for birds, wildlife and close up shots (insects flora etc) the 70-300VR
I have in the second body a Nikon 35-70 which I use for family shots but not very often.
If you are going to use the lens for general photography (walk about and family shots) perhaps the best out there will be the 24-70
If money is a problem the Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-120mm f/4G ED VR for under $1200.00 can be an option.
Cheers
I've had a number of professional (portrait) photogs steer me away from the 1.8...it's good especially when taking into account the price but the 1.4 is better. From what I've heard the main issue with the 1.8 is the lower apertures not giving decent results. Basically - Low light situations where you need to open all the way up and you get proper exposure indicated but you're getting very soft results and spend too much time in PP... It's not worth it. For me I shoot children (ha) so you can't be too far away from them either - if you need the lower aps for decent bokeh and such you want them to still be crisp... Not to mention if you have to stick to a higher ap then your shutter speed will start to suffer and the flailing limbs of a 6 month old = unnattractive motion blurs :p If you're taking in a landscape or you've got older, better behaved subjects I am sure the 1.8 is great....but it won't be the best option for all situations :) I think the general consensus is a full stop adjustment will make the 1.4 and 1.8 comparable in terms of sharpness - but I want as much range as possible. The 1.8 would no doubt kick butt compared to a zoom in terms of sharpness thoughQuote:
Originally Posted by Chucaro
edit to add an example of what I mean :)
http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/threa...w-clubsnappers!
For me Nikon 18-200 on my D300 98% of the time Excelent all round lense & Tamron 28-200 on my F100 again 98% . Don't have to change lenses much / lazy I know but faster.