DavidPine Loc: Fredericksburg, TX

Pat, my favorite lens is my Nikon 24-70 f/2.8. However, for portraits I use my Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 or my Nikon 105G f/2.8.

Bill Emmett Loc: Bow, New Hampshire

The quality of the reproduction of your image has to do with the quantity of pixels per inch of your sensor in the camera. Lenses have absolutely no bearing on the size of your reproduced image. The quality of the lens will have some control over the quality of the image as projected on your cameras sensor. The lens controls focus, aberrations, quality of the overall image projection. The actual size of a reproduced, cropped, image relates to the physical size of the sensor, and the amount of pixels on the sensor. As the amount of pixels per inch increases the cleaner the photo, lower pixels per inch will make the image look a bit fuzzy. Look at the funny page of the newspaper, those images are made up of different color dots that are spaced to give the color image. If you look close you can see individual dots, these relate to pixels. The lens does not make these pixels any closer together to give clear edge lines. It's the sensor that places more pixels in the image to give it a cleaner appearance. Now, the sensor with its pixels will give you the advantage to tell how lens is performing, and the quality of the focus, glass, IS, or other lens factors.

B

studavis

I don't have deep pockets but I won't spend it for somthing I plan to keep for ever. That is why I buy better but not often.

rocketride Loc: Upstate NY

Not really an option for a Nikon user.

I'm a Canon user and I have a mix of Canon, Sigma and Tamron lenses. There was a time when you could safely say that the camera manufacturer's lenses were almost always better than other brands. The major aftermarket lens makers have 'raised their game' in recent years. There are recent cases of an aftermarket manufacturer's lens being better than the camera manufacturer's similarly-'spec'ed model.

rocketride Loc: Upstate NY

Off Topic: Is your instrument some kind of psaltery?

Tomcat5133 Loc: Gladwyne PA

Hi. If you wan't to take good pictures of your grandkids
get a small Nikon/Sony/Canon camera with good AF. Sony a6000?Honestly I know the 24 70 2.8 Nikon
lens is really good. I owned one but found myself wanting 70
200 more. The 24 70 with a big Nikon DSLR is a heavy load
to try and get run and gun photography. OK yes for a sit down portrait. Now before I get busted for not talking to the question, I don't feel you buy a lens for the print quality.
A full frame sensor like the Nikon D800 with a good lens will
blow up to 16x20 if the photo is good. For larger advertising shooters they would probably use a medium format camera.
Good luck.

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

Ithink that it is the camera, more than the lens. Sensor and MP as well as full frame vs crop are more important. How ever if you only print to 8X10 and do not agressively crop none of the above matters that much

SteveR Loc: Michigan

One of the best lenses that I have used was a Nikon 35-80mm kit lens that came with my Nikon 6006 film camera. It gives great images on my D7000 but I've noticed a drop off in quality when I use it with my D800. So...I'll use it on my D7000. However, it lets me know that a camera like the D800 requires a superior lens.

romanticf16 Loc: Commerce Twp, MI

That really wouldn't help a Nikon user, eh?

romanticf16 Loc: Commerce Twp, MI

It might steer you to the 24-85 f4 VR Nikon for less than $500 instead of the 24-7-f2.8 Nikon for 3x the price.

romanticf16 Loc: Commerce Twp, MI

It looks like an autoharp from the photo. Buttons on the bottom are pushed to create chords, and it is strummed with fingerpicks.

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

You might consider it a determining factor. I wouldn't consider it the only determining factor.

Personally, I'd recommend paying more attention to the lenses you buy than the bodies. If you're serious about photography, you WILL buy another body, since they're updated at 2-4 year intervals. On the other hand, lenses are updated at 2-4 decade intervals.

If you take reasonable care of them, lenses will hold value much longer than bodies. So if you get a good lens and lose interest in photography, you will be recoup a larger fraction of the original cost on your lenses than you would on your bodies. But if your interest grows, a good lens will be useful on a much improved body that you upgrade to at a later date. A cheap lens will be a mismatch to a highly capable body and you will have to upgrade your lens(es) also.

romanticf16 Loc: Commerce Twp, MI

Sharpness is relative- the larger the print, the farther you should be standing back from it to view it in proper perspective. Getting "face close" is great for counting pixels, but is not a realistic way to view large prints.

romanticf16 Loc: Commerce Twp, MI

Exactly, and OEM lenses will usually command a higher used price than those of secondary manufacturers, even if their optics are razor sharp.

rocketride Loc: Upstate NY

Thanks, I haven't yet had a chance to show the picture to my fiancee, yet. She plays pretty wide swath of the un-bowed instruments, and would have been able to tell me.