Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: Kissel vonKeister
Page: <<prev 1 ... 48 49 50 51
Dec 22, 2016 18:27:12   #
streetmarty wrote:
https://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-store/refurbished-cameras.page#!/tag:8ps:Lenses

50mm 1.4 is a great lens, I have owned both 1.4 and 1.8. Also Nikon refurbished (from Nikon) is great. I have spent thousands and never had an issue, more than happy every time! Good luck.


I thought the OP was asking about PRIME lenses. . . .
Go to
Dec 22, 2016 18:23:34   #
DaveO wrote:
Why would the average guy waste his money on a 1.4 in lieu of a 1.8? Most could not tell the difference and fewer would be shooting wide open all the time even if there were a big difference. Two thirds of a stop??


Could not agree more. So many folks turn lens acquisition into a spending exercise.
Go to
Dec 22, 2016 18:19:30   #
Ikonomos wrote:
Hi,
I can't make up my mind on what to buy.
Nikon 50mm G 1.8 @$299
Nikon 35mm G 1.8 @ $ 650 ( used )
Nikkor 23mm AF 2.8 @ $295 (Used)
All in Australian dollars.
I am looking for a light weight lens to carry around all day on my 610, for street & landscape photography, occasionally with people included.
I need it to be fast also as I like shooting the above in low light & at night, both indoors & out.
I also have a limited budget of under $1000.
Any advice would be much appreciated.
Hi, br I can't make up my mind on what to buy. b... (show quote)


The 35mm for sure. Are you sure of that price? I didn't think it was that expensive a lens. Oops, maybe I'm thinking of the DX version. That 50mm 1.4 is kinda heavy.
Go to
Dec 18, 2016 22:26:54   #
kymarto wrote:
I work alongside them at major press events and news events across Asia. They don't have "proof sheets". They shoot everything they think might be of interest to their editors, and why not? In fast moving events one never knows what will prove to be valuable. Have a look at my raw footage as a news video shooter sometime. I roll on EVERYTHING. What is not used can easily be discarded. It costs only the electricity to charge the battery and format the card. What is important is to have the shot that is needed. Tidy proof sheets are useless if they don't contain the right image, and news photogs do not have the luxury of setting up their shots.
I work alongside them at major press events and ne... (show quote)

Thus they often don't produce very good results. You know, there is a modern equivalent for the term "proof sheets". I was hoping you would apply it in this context. OK, subfolders, programmed slide shows, Lightroom collections, memory card contents, whatever . . . . .
Go to
Dec 18, 2016 21:33:52   #
kymarto wrote:
You are absolutely wrong. I work alongside the press corps around the world and they are some of the best and most dedicated photographers anywhere. "No idea what they are handling"--what the hell does that mean? They get their shots under great pressure and whatever the conditions. They know their gear inside out and upside down and how to use it to get what they need under any circumstances. Capa? Cartier-Bresson? Some of the world's best were and are press photographers.


Fair enough; there are always exceptions and I wasn't commenting about the masters. Have you ever scanned the average news shooter's proof sheets?
Go to
Dec 18, 2016 14:09:33   #
burkphoto wrote:
Because press journalists are sheep, just like the writers? Canikon is a "safe" choice, and ensures you won't catch sneers from peers.


Press journalists are hardly an authority on anything other than making one good image out of every 800 shot. They know how to handle cameras, but they have no idea what they're handling. Canon made great strides in sports photography market penetration because of Nikon's slow and indifferent repair service years ago.
Go to
Dec 16, 2016 15:04:12   #
The airlines also tell you what time you will arrive.
Go to
Dec 9, 2016 12:42:15   #
Turn stabilization off when you're on a tripod. If it's perfectly still it CREATES movement.
Go to
Dec 5, 2016 20:43:31   #
I have off-brand lenses. Tokina seems the best choice. They make lenses for almost everybody except Leica. That includes almost all the Pentax Super Takumars, and Nikon long zooms. Had an interesting conversation with a regional manager of THK who told me that. I believed it, given the fact that I have a Tokina 80-400 that is IDENTICAL to the equivalent Nikon. Nikon is too small a company to make all the lenses that bear their name.
Go to
Dec 5, 2016 20:36:40   #
Paul Chefurka wrote:
In that case you might be missing out on one heck of a gift. Sigma's "Art" series lenses are not your grandfather's Sigmas, they are whole other kettle of carp. Every Art series lens I've handled is better made than the Nikon equivalent. I traded a Nikon 17-55/2.8 DX for my 18-35/1.8 Sigma, and it makes the Nikkor feel seriously underbuilt as well as putting it in the shade optically. I was staying away from third-party lenses just like you - Nikkors only, please - until I started doing some reading. I discovered that time has marched on, and so has Sigma.
In that case you might be missing out on one heck ... (show quote)


This guy is strange looking, but he really knows photo hardware. This is worth a look:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqGBpFDV--E
Go to
Dec 5, 2016 15:53:04   #
GoofyNewfie wrote:
Which lenses do you have?
They used to make really crappy lenses but I love my old(er) version of the 50-150 2.8 for DX.
Have two of those at work and they are as well built as Nikon top of the line.

Welcome to the 'hog!


No argument there. Sigma lens quality has been highly variable, but now they are mechanically poor. Mine were (are) the 28mm f1.8 with the Sukiyaki (or whatever they called it) cladding on the body. Optically very good except it won't quite focus all the way to infinity on my D7000 body and I can't hold it because the Banzai (or whatever they called it) cladding has turned to goo. Sigma wouldn't fix it. The other was an 80-200 zoom that fell apart internally. In both cases Sigma sent them back with the message "no longer serviced". I wouldn't have any Sigma lens, even as a gift.
Go to
Dec 5, 2016 15:42:50   #
whitewolfowner wrote:
To word this correctly, any lens on a DX camera will give you the magnification of 1.5X, but a 50mmm lens will not act like a 75mm, because, yes, you get the magnification, but the perspective is still that of a 50mm lens. Think of it this way and the proportions are not accurate but for understanding. Putting a 50mm lens on a DX camera is like putting the 50mm on an FX lens and blowing the photo up to an 8 X 10 photo. Now take that 8 X 10 and cut it down to say a 5 X 7 photo. It has a smaller angle of view and appears to have the telephoto effect, but the perspective is still that of a 50mm lens.
To word this correctly, any lens on a DX camera wi... (show quote)


Perspective has nothing to do with lens focal length. It's a function of camera-to-subject distance.
Go to
Dec 5, 2016 15:09:27   #
I've never seen a Sigma lens that was assembled with any quality in mind and I avoid them completely after owning two. Neither one is serviceable, and Sigma won't fix them any more. The lens you're asking about has had some very negative reviews, citing way too many elements to ever deliver a great image, and costing waaaay too much. You can spend money much more wisely than buying ANY Sigma lens. Yes, I know some Sigma lenses have delivered some really great images, including my two dust gatherers.
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 ... 48 49 50 51
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.