Nikon Lenses for Washington D.C?
Aug 7, 2018 10:05:13 #
Photo_Buff
Loc: San Francisco Bay Area
I've been shooting Nikon and their lenses since the 8008 35mm film. Just finished an AA in photography. I think I know a little bit. 
Aug 7, 2018 10:10:23 #
Photo_Buff
Loc: San Francisco Bay Area
I'm into picture quality. One lens fits all just isn't going to cut it. One critisizm of the 200-500mm is that it isn't "tack" sharp. Secret sauce missing.
Aug 7, 2018 10:11:42 #
Strodav
Loc: Houston, Tx
Fotomacher wrote:
Third party lenses with variable apertures will not ever have the “highest possible picture quality”. Convenient, yes. Ends there.
You are right, the 18-400mm will not give you the highest possible picture quality, but it is pretty good. I was very pleasantly surprised when I brought up the first images in Lightroom, clicked on the lens compensation buttons, and printed my better shots out at 13" x 19". If your goal is the "best quality", then bring out the heavy expensive glass on full frame cameras, and spend the time to get the best composition, but if your goal is to experience the monuments in DC and capture some of those memories, then weight is probably more important than best quality.
Aug 7, 2018 10:11:59 #
martinfisherphoto wrote:
I don't want to sound like a Total jerk, but you have thousands of dollars of money invested in equipment, maybe you can afford to hire a local photographer, or join a local club to help you realize what you already have. Your fully covered with what you have. I would start by using one lens at a time, this will teach you what the lens limitations are and what purposes they serve..
This is an excellent idea. I’ve been pulling out my old film camera lenses. This forces me to shoot in manual and every lens gives me a different perspective. I really enjoy going back to my newer lenses, I feel I’m better off for having used the old prime lenses.
Aug 7, 2018 10:27:11 #
Photo_Buff wrote:
Have been to DC many times, but never with a DSLR. Will be mainly outdoor, Capitol Mall, Arlington, no tripod. Have the triad, 14-24, 24-70, and 70-200, w/ tc 2. Any other siggestions, please?
If you're driving.....TAKE EVERYTHING
Aug 7, 2018 10:29:11 #
billnikon
Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
Photo_Buff wrote:
I've been shooting Nikon and their lenses since the 8008 35mm film. Just finished an AA in photography. I think I know a little bit.
I have a BS and a Masters in Education and I am still clueless.
However, in photography I have been a photo journalist for UPI (united press international) from the time I was 19 to 22, then a Nikon Rep, then 35 years as a wedding, family, and senior portraits, worked with high school students and produced a year book for several years, have done 3 one man shows, shot for the EPA, shot for school systems, taught photography, and when digital came along the learning curve started all over again. Man, technology is tough to keep up with.
Aug 7, 2018 11:21:05 #
Photo_Buff
Loc: San Francisco Bay Area
billnikon wrote:
I have a BS and a Masters in Education and I am st... (show quote)
You sound genuine. I'm impressed with your experience as a photographer. I just took a photo journalism class and it's definitely different than the aesthetic, artsy side. My photography consisted mainly of what I took while travelling. I was last using a Hasselblad 503CW and a complement of lenses. Then, after a series of digital point and shoots, I made the plunge into DSLR's. Now I'm navigating through Adobe apps, Colorthink Pro, and ND filters. Love the big giclee prints!
Aug 7, 2018 11:25:50 #
Your 3 lenses are about as good as it gets. You wouldn't need any wider angle lens. You may want lenses longer than 200mm but your lenses are a lot already.
Aug 7, 2018 12:09:21 #
Photo_Buff wrote:
Have been to DC many times, but never with a DSLR. Will be mainly outdoor, Capitol Mall, Arlington, no tripod. Have the triad, 14-24, 24-70, and 70-200, w/ tc 2. Any other siggestions, please?
If carrying that is no problem it sounds like you have it all well covered. Sounds like an excellent kit and pretty much what I would carry.
When in DC and similar places I add a light tripod in a carry case and a 100mm macro and a Rokinon fisheye. Yes it's a lot but it's on my back in a back pack and nowhere as heavy as my Army ruck sack was.
I generally find a use every time for every piece of glass that I have.
Aug 7, 2018 12:31:33 #
Aug 7, 2018 22:09:08 #
Photo_Buff wrote:
Thanks to all of you for your replies, great sugge... (show quote)
The Tamron 28-300mm is my walk-around lens when I travel. Lightweight and with auto ISO, I'm getting acceptable low light images. It opens to f/3.8
Aug 7, 2018 22:11:46 #
Photo_Buff wrote:
I'm into picture quality. One lens fits all just isn't going to cut it. One critisizm of the 200-500mm is that it isn't "tack" sharp. Secret sauce missing.
Whoever told you that it wasn't "tack" sharp is full of baloney, even if you heard it off a website test. I have one and mine certainly is "tack" sharp.
Aug 7, 2018 22:12:00 #
[quote=wetreed]I apologize to everyone who might be sick of me posting this, but if I were you I would go out and get a Tamron 18-400. You won’t have to change lenses at all. This lens will cover every focal length you will need and do it with the highest possible picture quality. Once you use you will never take it off.[/quote
I don’t mean to sound snarky but Why would you suggest this crop sensor lens to someone who owns the 3 of the best lens ever made? It seems obvious that he is shooting a full frame body if he has these lenses. The 18-400 Tamron won’t ever compare.
I don’t mean to sound snarky but Why would you suggest this crop sensor lens to someone who owns the 3 of the best lens ever made? It seems obvious that he is shooting a full frame body if he has these lenses. The 18-400 Tamron won’t ever compare.
Aug 8, 2018 00:25:09 #
Photo_Buff
Loc: San Francisco Bay Area
tomcat wrote:
Whoever told you that it wasn't "tack" sharp is full of baloney, even if you heard it off a website test. I have one and mine certainly is "tack" sharp.
The observation was from an owner. I have seen the comment online. It depends on how you are viewing the image. It probably is discernable on a large format giclee print. Then again, comparing the image quality from the 200-500mm with the 400mm f2.8 isn't fair. Would hate to have to haul around the 400mm much less having to cough up the dough.
Aug 8, 2018 00:29:05 #
Photo_Buff
Loc: San Francisco Bay Area
Architect1776 wrote:
If carrying that is no problem it sounds like you ... (show quote)
I just picked up the 100mm f1.4. Trying to get the hang of using it handheld. It is a portrait lens though, so probably more suited
for the studio.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.