Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Nikon d800 lens choices
Page <prev 2 of 2
Jul 2, 2014 10:43:23   #
Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)
 
Hirogen wrote:
I have a nikon d3200. It came with 18-55 & 55-200. If I want a lens for a wider field of view for night sky shots do I have to spend $500-$1000


You should start a new topic, but the simple answer is yes if you want Nikon, no if you are ok with a great performing Tamron or Sigma - the Sigma 10-20 F4-5.6 comes to mind as an excellent lens with a wide field of view that you can buy used in good condition for around $400.

Reply
Jul 2, 2014 11:03:02   #
Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska
 
amehta wrote:
I don't think that prime lens exists, at least for the Nikon mount.

The prime lens in question above is something at 150mm, and the Sigma 150mm f/2.8 macro fits rather nicely. I've personally never used one, but does have a fine reputation.

That said... Fixed focal length lenses are specialty lenses, and it is a gross mistake to believe that a collection of them is in any way a substitute for the appropriate general purpose zoom lens.

One common mistake is the bogus concept of "zoom with your feet". Proper technique is to first choose camera location for the desired perspective , which literally defines which scene is photographed. Changing focal length does not define the scene, it just selects how a preselected scene is framed.

Framing (the effect of focal length) can also be adjusted in post processing by cropping the image, but obviously that will reduce the number of pixels too. The perspective (the effect of camera location) is fixed and can never be changed.

Reply
Jul 2, 2014 11:12:17   #
Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)
 
Apaflo wrote:
The prime lens in question above is something at 150mm, and the Sigma 150mm f/2.8 macro fits rather nicely. I've personally never used one, but does have a fine reputation.

That said... Fixed focal length lenses are specialty lenses, and it is a gross mistake to believe that a collection of them is in any way a substitute for the appropriate general purpose zoom lens.

One common mistake is the bogus concept of "zoom with your feet". Proper technique is to first chose camera location for the desired perspective , which literally defines which scene is photographed. Changing focal length does not define the scene, it just selects how a preselected scene is framed.

Framing (the effect of focal length) can also be adjusted in post processing by cropping the image, but obviously that will reduce the number of pixels too. The perspective (the effect of camera location) is fixed and can never be changed.
The prime lens in question above is something at 1... (show quote)


:thumbup: :thumbup: on the Sigma. Other than having a slightly older version that does not work with Live View - optically it is very good and has produced some fine images for me.

:thumbup: :thumbup: on sneakerzooming. There are times you just need to have zoom. I can think of dozens of times when having my 24-70, 80-200 or 100-300 got me a shot I might have missed if I didn't have it on the camera.

Reply
 
 
Jul 2, 2014 11:23:24   #
imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida
 
NYjoe wrote:
I've been very pleased with my recent d800e/Tamron 24-70 zoom purchase....but...despite it's optic limitations, I miss the reach of my old canon 27-135 zoom. Can anyone suggest an additional d800e lens with IS that would fill this void? Thanks, all.

j


Try the Sigma 50-150 2.8 OS - and - put a 1.4X behind it also.

Reply
Jul 2, 2014 11:26:35   #
amehta Loc: Boston
 
imagemeister wrote:
Try the Sigma 50-150 2.8 OS - and - put a 1.4X behind it also.

That is a DC lens (DX in Sigma-speak). I don't think that is the best option.

Reply
Jul 2, 2014 11:34:17   #
imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida
 
amehta wrote:
That is a DC lens (DX in Sigma-speak). I don't think that is the best option.


So it is ! ....Sorry, -- that is why I am on here - to LEARN !

( it was a nice try though ) :-)

Reply
Jul 2, 2014 18:00:41   #
Zaydewise Loc: Nashville TN
 
I use the 28-300 as my go to lens and I am extremely happy with the quality. When you are hiking it is great not to change your lens when you want a wide angle or a super long lens.

Gene51 wrote:
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: for the 24-120 F4,

but :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: for the 28-300 on that camera - it was disappointing enough on a D800, I only expected to produce even worse results on a D800E - besides, Nikon does not include it on their list of recommended lenses for the D800 series - that speaks volumes about that lens.

Reply
 
 
Jul 2, 2014 18:29:00   #
imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida
 
Apaflo wrote:
The prime lens in question above is something at 150mm, and the Sigma 150mm f/2.8 macro fits rather nicely. I've personally never used one, but does have a fine reputation.

That said... Fixed focal length lenses are specialty lenses, and it is a gross mistake to believe that a collection of them is in any way a substitute for the appropriate general purpose zoom lens.

One common mistake is the bogus concept of "zoom with your feet". Proper technique is to first choose camera location for the desired perspective , which literally defines which scene is photographed. Changing focal length does not define the scene, it just selects how a preselected scene is framed.

Framing (the effect of focal length) can also be adjusted in post processing by cropping the image, but obviously that will reduce the number of pixels too. The perspective (the effect of camera location) is fixed and can never be changed.
The prime lens in question above is something at 1... (show quote)


Well said ! - and, yes, for artistic reasons - the perspective should not be compromised !

Reply
Jul 2, 2014 19:09:46   #
NYjoe Loc: US/UK
 
joer wrote:
Nikon 70-200mm F/4 VR.


Thanks Joer...just put it on my dxomark browzing list.

Reply
Jul 2, 2014 23:31:30   #
Aaron Braganza Loc: Sydney, Australia
 
Rongnongno wrote:
Quite honestly I moved away from zooms once I purchased the D800e, I now have only have prime lenses.

Yes it is less convenient, yes it it heavier (if I want to carry 5 lenses vs a single one).

If you observe your behavior when 'shooting' you will quickly realize that when on job or for yourself you select a specific zoom ration and distance and basically use that for the duration. That is what I did anyway. So selecting a prime lens for a specific job has been more productive for me simply because I do not waste time trying the zoom ratio I need and walk forward/backward if I want a different result.

The lens I use most is the 35mm.

Please be aware that I use only the central part of the lens as I almost always crop after PP. With a D800e you have so much 'real estate' that you can do that. Lens distortion? I have no idea what that beast is, it is stamped out by the central cropping area beside, using this method also allows you to have a PP control on composition so a greater latitude in the end.

Yes, I shoot raw only. as I plan for PP. I also shoot to the right.

So the lens? Forget the zoom, any range, and go for high quality prime lenses that bring you back to an era where we were not afraid of moving around and be 'close and personal'.
Quite honestly I moved away from zooms once I purc... (show quote)


Is the 35mm the f/1.8g lens? Also is that a DX lens?

Reply
Jul 3, 2014 10:07:24   #
doc4140
 
I think the real question is do you want the bokeh with a F2.8 or settle for a higher F stop. I decided to go with all F2.8
14-24, 24-70, 70-200 and I use the F2.8 all the time since I love the bokeh aspect of the photos. Much more expensive and alot heavier IMHO

Reply
 
 
Jul 3, 2014 16:13:14   #
Picshooter
 
winterrose wrote:
Second rate lenses for a top of the line camera? Shudder.......

Exactly. Not the place to try to economize with a camera like that.
Nikon glass and couplings and sensors are made and designed to work with each other.
I also like the suggestion of the 70-200 f 2.8 VRII.

Reply
Jul 3, 2014 21:17:15   #
NYjoe Loc: US/UK
 
Agreed....I'd rather not duplicate the focal lengths I already have with my Tamron 24-70.
Picshooter wrote:
Exactly. Not the place to try to economize with a camera like that.
Nikon glass and couplings and sensors are made and designed to work with each other.
I also like the suggestion of the 70-200 f 2.8 VRII.

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 2
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.