The "New Gear/Willy Waving" thread
- Thread starter Fusion
- Start date
I have the same lens. The picture quality really is excellent even completely wide open. It is prone to zoom creep though. Did you buy it new or second hand? How much did you pay?
Yeah zoom creep is my only real niggle with this lens, especially when using a sling- if my leg brushes the zoom ring while walking it always creeps. If I'm not using a CPL, I just leave the hood on, and let it do it's thing.
Well fingers crossed that the next lens is the right one
Rang them up day after a got it and the courier picked the item up that day (Thursday) arrived back at company today (friday) and hopefully the right lens should arrive tomorrow (Saturday)
Rang them up day after a got it and the courier picked the item up that day (Thursday) arrived back at company today (friday) and hopefully the right lens should arrive tomorrow (Saturday)
Do it. I can't wait to see you become the worst shallow-dof *five letter word for working girl* of us all after years of lashing out because your APS-C sensors couldn't do it as well
Caporegime
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 75,941
- Location
- Wish i was in a Ramen Shop Counter
Missed the first delivery it seems.
They must be highly sought after, I still haven't even had an email from companies I signed up with to be alerted of stock for, and WEX are still showing preorder on the site.
Still pondering waiting for the 24mm in October. I'm also considering getting a fisheye lens for more arty things, although the prices for those are quite silly considering the limited use you'd have for them.
Nope, I use a humble nikon D90. I've always invested in lenses, filters, tripods, heads etc that have a long life. Camera bodies change all the time.
FF has at least as many cons as pros, in fact I firmly believe crop is better for most people and for my own use it is kind of borderline. For starters you pay far more mney for FF, you could go through several high end crop bodies and still be quids in. Then there is the pixel density and sensor size - the big sensor only help if you have glass to cover that. I use a 300mm f/4.0 with a 1x4xTC on 1.5x crop DSLR so I am used to 630mm of reach, ideally I would want another 100mm and a stop faster. Going FF will gain me a stop of light but will cost me 200mm instead of gaining me anything.
The D800 is the only FF DSLR from all manufacturers that really makes sensor to me because at least I can get a 16MP crop out of it when needing reach. But then the D7100 is a faction of the cost and would put 24MP in the same area and has AF points that cover the entire frame.
FF doesn't give you magic powers- it just changes a few parameters and you have to decide if those parameters are useful for you or cannot be replicated on crop. DoF is one such parameter, you get a little over 1 extra stop on FF - but far too many people end up throwing a 24-105mm f/4.0 on it which is just ridiculous as the same DoF would be achieved by a 17-55mm f/2.8 and you could get the sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 to get yet another stop. Unless you are constantly shooting primes at f/1.4 then you don't get any advantage. Another parameter is he extra stop of light, but the same applies, if you are not using fast glass then you are not gaining anything. I've sen people use a 70-200mm f/2.8 for sport on a crop body, move to FF and then realize they don't have the reach so add a 1.4xTC and loose that stop of light again.
Do it. I can't wait to see you become the worst shallow-dof *five letter word for working girl* of us all after years of lashing out because your APS-C sensors couldn't do it as well
The thing is a crop sensor can - I have a Nikon 24-70mm to use on a D800, I could buy a D7100 and sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 and get identical low light and DoF capabilities with money left over.
Saying that I will probably put in the order today
Caporegime
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 75,941
- Location
- Wish i was in a Ramen Shop Counter
I would argue Architecture is where FF is stronger, the lenses designed for it are FF – 17mm TSE for example is a killer architectural lens. Using that on crop ruins half the reason it was created in the first place.
yep, architecture is best on FF if you can afford TS/PC lenses otherwise there isn't a big difference. Wide angle lenses for cropped cameras used to be rare, and have very bad distortion. Now there are far more ultra wide angle options for crop than FF and distortion is similar.
High resolution work is also a FF advantage, but only if good technique is used is it really a necessity. E.g. You could have a 24MP D71000, use excellent glass, shoot at optimal apertures, use hyper focal focusing, mirror lockup, remote and a sturdy tripod and get far more detail than picking up a FF camera and using mediocre lenses combined with slopping technique and hand holding. Of course the same bad technique with a high res crop will be worse still, my point is if you are not doing everything right on crop then there is no need to move to FF, yet.
You basically only really gain 1 stop high ISO performance and 1 stop shallower DoF - unless you are shooting wide open on fast glass then there is not real advantage. Shoot the sigma 25mm f/1.4 @1.4 on FF - you can't ever replicate that on crop. Shooting a 24-105mm f/4.0, buy some primes!
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Mar 2006
- Posts
- 3,975
I don't think is worthy of a new thread, so I'll ask it here - is the Nikon 85mm 1.4 worth another £700ish over the 85mm 1.8? Looking for some gig photography options.
£700 for 2/3rds of a stop seems pricey.
£700 for 2/3rds of a stop seems pricey.
I don't think is worthy of a new thread, so I'll ask it here - is the Nikon 85mm 1.4 worth another £700ish over the 85mm 1.8? Looking for some gig photography options.
£700 for 2/3rds of a stop seems pricey.
IMO, no. I have the 1.8G and it is incredibly sharp and renders nicely. the 1.4 is supposed to have a nicer bokeh so partly it depends how much of a bokeh fanatic you are, and how much you need 2/3rds of a stop. The 2/3rds of a stop is really a little over estimate because with digital sensors the transmission % reduces notably on aperture wider than f/2.0 so you are looking at less than 0.5 a stop of extra light gathering (the camera will secretly boost your ISO without you knowing to compensate....). You do gain the 067 stops of DoF - look up a DoF calculator to see if at your subject distance that decrease is desirable. For gig work I would tend to say know - you don't want wafer thin DoF, looks too feminin and you will get focus issues with super narrow DoF.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Mar 2006
- Posts
- 3,975
Thanks DP, helpful as always.
I think I'll go for the f/1.8. ******* sell it for £330, else the 1.4 is £600 more. I bought a Samyang 85mm 1.4, but the chromatic abberation is reasonably significant (though nothing that can't be mostly fixed in Lightroom) and it does seem too contrasty for my liking. Whenever I use it I have to up it half a stop or more straight away, and that takes away the 2/3rd/whatever stop advantage almost straight away. Plus the Samyang is manual focus and though it's almost enjoyable using manual focus, it probably wouldn't be that practical.
I think I'll go for the f/1.8. ******* sell it for £330, else the 1.4 is £600 more. I bought a Samyang 85mm 1.4, but the chromatic abberation is reasonably significant (though nothing that can't be mostly fixed in Lightroom) and it does seem too contrasty for my liking. Whenever I use it I have to up it half a stop or more straight away, and that takes away the 2/3rd/whatever stop advantage almost straight away. Plus the Samyang is manual focus and though it's almost enjoyable using manual focus, it probably wouldn't be that practical.
Last edited:
