Seeking Opinion and advice (Page 2): Not a full frame lens ...

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

phlash46 wrote:

For real estate get the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 lens.

Not a full frame lens ...

cthahn

One of the reasons you are probably confused is because you have never learned the basics of photography.That means learning all the features in your camera, optics, lighting, DOF, and everything else pertaining to taking a photograph. Also the difference between a cropped sensor and a full frame sensor. Taking a picture in manual mode like everyone did in the film days. All most do now is buy an expensive camera, the longest zoom they can afford, and ask questions on UH how do do everything.

BobHartung Loc: Bettendorf, IA

twisted wrote:

Hello everyone! br br Looking to upgrade and at t... (show quote)

Look back at your shooting history. Do you use the short focal lengths or the longer (nearer 200mm) lengths the most.

You should look at the Nikon 28-120 (that could be a 24-120) f/4 lens. This is a great lens with no where near the weight of the 70-120. You give up one stop but that is not usually a problem. Coupled with a 1.4x tele extender gives you even more overall coverage.

Something to think about.

mas24 Loc: Southern CA

shagbat wrote:

Hi Twisted, I use an old F2.8 20mm Nikkor, (with dubious provenance, as I bought it from a press hack!) it is a wonderful lens and it suits me. I lust after the F1.8! Must buy flowers and chocs. for Mrs. 'What do you want another bloody lens for?'

You're the 2nd person on this forum, I've read, that praises the Nikkor 20mm f2.8. In fact that person says it stays on the camera permanently. That wouldn't work for me though.

wbchinook Loc: Everson WA

I have a Nikon 20mm F1.8 I think it is great. Very sharp. I also have a first gen. 70-200mm F2.8 Don't use it a lot anymore. I find my 28-300mm stays on my D810 most of the time.

cfbudd Loc: Atlanta, Georgia

BobHartung wrote:

Look back at your shooting history. Do you use the short focal lengths or the longer (nearer 200mm) lengths the most.

You should look at the Nikon 28-120 (that could be a 24-120) f/4 lens. This is a great lens with no where near the weight of the 70-120. You give up one stop but that is not usually a problem. Coupled with a 1.4x tele extender gives you even
more overall coverage.

Cannot use Nikon TC's on Nikkor 24-120 lens.

Something to think about.

cfbudd Loc: Atlanta, Georgia

BobHartung wrote:

Look back at your shooting history. Do you use the short focal lengths or the longer (nearer 200mm) lengths the most.

You should look at the Nikon 28-120 (that could be a 24-120) f/4 lens. This is a great lens with no where near the weight of the 70-120. You give up one stop but that is not usually a problem. Coupled with a 1.4x tele extender gives you even more overall coverage.

Something to think about.

Cannot use Nikon TC's on 24-120 lens

Dan De Lion Loc: Montana

twisted wrote:

Hello everyone! br br Looking to upgrade and at t... (show quote)

-----

Hi Twisted - For real estate photography I've found the following lenses useful: Nikkor 18-35G for inside work, Nikkor 24-120 for outside work and a Nikkor 14mm for tight spaces. There's no need for expensive PC lenses - PS can easily duplicate their operations.

For short telephoto work either of the current Nikkor 70-200s are exceptionally good. Both the f2.8 and the f4.0 have professional grade build and optics. The f4 is a little sharper. The f2.8 is better for dark arenas. Breathing is much better for the f4.

If you have professional aspirations, choose Nikkor lenses. It looks bush to show up at a shoot with a Tamron lens. And believe it, looks count a lot for a professional. Additionally, Tamron lenses have known QC issues and questionable forward compatibility issues. Leave the Tamron lenses for the amateurs, you're buying professional tools.

-----

shagbat Loc: London

mas24 wrote:

You're the 2nd person on this forum, I've read, that praises the Nikkor 20mm f2.8. In fact that person says it stays on the camera permanently. That wouldn't work for me though.

Absolutely Mas, ultra wides need a different approach to 'normal' wides, they are not for everyone, I am quick to admit.

Bullfrog Bill Loc: CT

If you don't need f2.8, the f4 version is much lighter.

CatMarley Loc: North Carolina

twisted wrote:

Thank you for the thoughtful reply.
Question, any thoughts on the 20mm f1.8? Also, curious as to why you recommend not using the ultra wide angle lenses. I am trying to learn as much as I can about wide angle lenses.

Thank you again!

Great choice! I love my 20mm. Great for landscapes as well as architecture.

jackpi Loc: Southwest Ohio

jerryc41 wrote:

If the reviews and comparisons don't give you a definite answer, it's probably because the lenses are so close that shooting with one or the other is not going to make a difference to you. Save money and buy the Tamron.