Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Check out Sports Photography section of our forum.
Posts for: Largobob
Page: <<prev 1 ... 99 100 101 102 103 next>>
Oct 26, 2017 11:39:44   #
Gitchigumi wrote:
Just don't water it!


I've had bad hair days like that too....
Go to
Oct 25, 2017 07:53:39   #
amfoto1 wrote:
Nikon DX lenses are marked "DX"... Their FX lenses are either unmarked or marked "FX".

Tokina uses the same designations as Nikon.

Sigma marks their crop sensor lenses "DC" (to help remember that, think "digital crop") and their full frame compatible lenses "DG" (maybe "digital general" purpose?).

Tamron marks their crop sensor lenses "Di II" and their full frame compatible lenses "Di".

Canon marks their APS-C crop sensor lenses "EF-S" and their full frame compatible lenses "EF".

Pentax designated their APS-C crop sensor lenses "DA" and their full frame capable lenses "FA".

Sony appears to mark their APS-C crop sensor lenses "DT" and not use any markings on their full frame lenses.

Olympus no longer makes any full frame lenses, AFAIK. All their "Zuiko Digital" marked lenses are micro Four/Thirds crop-only designs. Older "Zuiko" lenses were all film/full frame (but there are no full frame Oly cameras).

The above designations for crop-only lenses came about and started to be used in approx. the 2002 to 2004 time frame. Older lenses from the "dark ages" of film, without any of the above markings you can pretty much assume are full frame capable. (There were some lenses designed specifically for "half frame" 35mm film in years/decades past... Those won't cover the image area of "full frame". But those are quite rare.)

To further confuse things... there are now "mirrorless" lenses too, from many of these manufacturers. Often these are offered in designs and specifications similar to APS-C, but most of those are not interchangeable due to the much shorter "register" (i.e., distance from the mounting flange to the sensor or film plane of the camera, onto which the lens must focus the image). Sony is an exception, marketing both full frame and APS-C size mirrorless cameras and E-mount lenses for both. Fujifilm is also marketing two different formats of mirrorless now (see below).

Nikon's mirrorless lenses are currently marked "Nikon 1" (as are their mirrorless cameras, though there are rumors this may change in the near future).

Tokina currently only makes one lens, a 20mm in Sony full frame mirrorless "E-mount", designated "FE" (same as Sony).

Sigma marks their mirrorless lenses "DN".

Tamron marks their mirrorless lenses "Di III".

Canon marks theirs "EF-M".

Fujifilm has an extensive line of mirrorless lenses for marked "XF" for cameras using APS-C size sensors.

Fuji has also recently introduced a line of "GF" lenses specifically for their new GFX medium format mirrorless camera.

Pentax only has a few "Q-mount" lenses and doesn't use any specific designation.

Sony "E" lenses are for E-mount mirrorless cameras using APS-C sensors and Sony "FE" are for their full frame mirrorless models.

Olympus only makes m4/3 mirrorless cameras, so there is no special designation besides "Zuiko Digital", as noted above.
Nikon DX lenses are marked "DX"... Their... (show quote)




Wow. Amazing amount of information! Thanks so much
Go to
Oct 24, 2017 11:36:19   #
camerapapi wrote:
Manufacturers as a rule specify the type of lens they are selling. In your particular case:

Nikkor kit lens: AF-S Nikkor 18-70mm 1/f3.5-4.5 G ED
AF-S Micro Nikkor 105mm 1/2.8G ED
Sigma DC 18-200mm 1/3.5-6.3 HSM
Nikkor AF-S VR 70-200mm 1/f2.8 G IF-ED

First and third lenses are both DX lenses to be best used with a cropped sensor.
The second and fourth lenses are for FX or best on full frame cameras.


Thanks for the information, camerapapi. Kinda what I thought, but good to confirm.
Go to
Check out Bridge Camera Show Case section of our forum.
Oct 23, 2017 11:29:49   #
Thanks my friend. They all have produced some good (and some not so good) images for me. lol
Go to
Oct 23, 2017 11:28:53   #
BebuLamar wrote:
The Nikkor DX has DX on it.
The Sigma DC is DX.
So the Nikkor 18-70mm is DX
The Nikkor 105 f/2.8 is FX
The Nikkor 70-200 f/2.8 is FX
and the Sigma 18-200 is DX
Go to
Oct 23, 2017 10:59:19   #
I have an older D200 (DX body) with several Nikkor and one Sigma lens. I understand sensor size (Full frame, crop, etc), and about the "circle of light" resolved by various lenses. My question is.....how does one know whether a particular lens is designed as an FX or a DX lens?

Here is what I have:

Nikkor kit lens: AF-S Nikkor 18-70mm 1/f3.5-4.5 G ED
AF-S Micro Nikkor 105mm 1/2.8G ED
Sigma DC 18-200mm 1/3.5-6.3 HSM
Nikkor AF-S VR 70-200mm 1/f2.8 G IF-ED

Thanks in advance for any advice you may offer.
Go to
Oct 20, 2017 08:54:07   #
Rich1939 wrote:
Sorry I was working with experiences that go back over a 1/2 century!
Be that as it may. Backing soda is still your best bet.


The paste in a typical battery is acidic (pH<7)....it will corrode metal such as your camera's electrical contacts. Baking Soda (Sodium Bicarbonate) is alkaline....a basic compound (pH>7)....that will neutralize the pH of the battery acid. A pH neutral battery comparment, is a far better environment for a battery and for the continued lifespan of your equipment.
Go to
Check out Traditional Street and Architectural Photography section of our forum.
Oct 19, 2017 07:34:07   #
Rich1939 wrote:
When we buy a car we expect to use it for a while and then when parts need ‘upgrading’ we either pay for the repairs or get a new car.
Alternatively we lease the car, upgrade it every couple of years and keep paying a lease charge.
BUT when we want a software package we expect the company to keep investing money to upgrade it and then supply us with the upgrades forever, free of charge. If that company decides that is not a way to keep their shareholders happy and wants to lease the packages with perpetual upgrades, we holler that is not fair and the company is greedy! Using that last thought process I should be able to pay a one time fee to my cable company and then get to use their services forever with no additional charges. I can give many more ludicrous examples however the point should be clear. There ain't no free lunch.
When we buy a car we expect to use it for a while ... (show quote)


Absolutely..... 100% correct.
Go to
Oct 17, 2017 08:35:55   #
cthahn wrote:
Join TBCC. Tampa Bay Camera Club.


Go to
Oct 17, 2017 08:14:12   #
Screamin Scott wrote:
Any decent hobby is expensive.... Shoot other subjects. A good place for nature shots is the Florida Botanical Gardens over in Largo.... I was there a few months back & loved it...


Florida Botanical Gardens, Lowry Park Zoo, Tarpon Sponge Docks area, Ybor City, etc, etc, etc. Just venture out and enjoy yourself.
Go to
Oct 17, 2017 07:56:11   #
drmjp429 wrote:
I would appreciate advise on purchasing a pre-owned but excellent condition lens .I shoot in RAW with a Nikon D300s.
My need is to improve the sharpness of my photos , notably those at distance. I'm thinking of a zoom 70-200 mm for that longer distance. I think I need a continuous f/2.8 instead of the typical variable f range that is not so good at the top of the range. I'm also thinking of ED glass but what other key features should be on my list?
Also, should i be buying an FX lens instead of DX so if i decide to upgrade to an FX body I assure best compatibility?? I'm assuming DX will work but not as well on the FX model bodies.
Any other tips on which are good sources of used lenses to assure a safe purchase with pre-owned lens would be appreciated.
Thanks much for guidance
drmjp429
I would appreciate advise on purchasing a pre-owne... (show quote)


There are many factors to be considered in making this decision. I will simply tell you that the Nikkor AF-S VR 70-200mm f/2.8 G IF-ED AF is an AMAZING lens. Laser sharp; pleasing bokeh; fast/accurate focus; great contrast and color.... And I understand the newer version (VR II) is even better. I have never purchased pre-owned optics....so I have no advice there. Good luck with your decision.
Go to
Check out True Macro-Photography Forum section of our forum.
Oct 17, 2017 07:29:27   #
Ellen101 wrote:
Plain and simple photography is turning out to be a very expensive interest.
When I do not have my camera with me I feel lost. I need to keep shooting away.
I shoot close ups of people but I have found that most people in Florid do not have
culturally interesting faces of different ethnicity.

I am trying to emulate National Geographic photography without having to travel far.

Any suggestions for person on a fixed income living in Tampa Bay, Florida?


Have you thought of venturing out a bit to find interesting subjects? Tarpon Springs (Greek Sponge fishermen), Ybor City (Cuban cigarmakers), inner-city (African-American, Hispanic, Asian, etc), Seminole Indian Reservation, etc. As far as needing money is concerned, I have taken some of my best pics with a used ($12 from a Pawn Shop), fixed lens, rangefinder-focus, imported, 35mm SLR. Top-notch equipment is wonderful....but not always the only answer. You may also want to find a friend with similar interest in photography, to go out shooting with. Four eyes, two brains and shared interest might make for some great images. Good luck to you, Ellen.
Go to
Oct 14, 2017 08:57:35   #
Hank Radt wrote:
Here's an article that lists some of the pros and cons: https://digital-photography-school.com/the-pros-and-cons-of-using-tele-converters-extenders-on-your-dslr/


Good basic information. Thanks for sharing.

Go to
Oct 14, 2017 08:41:41   #
rgrenaderphoto wrote:
The Holy Trinity, or Hebrew Trinity if you're Jared Polin, of Nikon Fx lenses:

Nikkor 14-24 mm f/2.8
Nikkor 24-70 mm f/2.8
Nikkor 70-200 mm f/2.8


Can't vouch for the first two, but the 70-200 (Nikkor AF-S VR 70200mm f/2.8 G IF-ED) is a MAGNIFICENT performer. Sharp as a tack; fast focus; wonderful Bokeh; but weighs a ton and not inexpensive. My best glass.
Go to
Oct 13, 2017 09:49:37   #
CO wrote:
This technique of taking the single image, creating three different exposures from it, and merging them in an HDR program is not the same as taking three different exposures with the camera. If your single image has blown highlights, details are permanently lost. You can lower the exposure but those details are still irretrievably lost. The same goes for blocked up shadow areas.


Go to
Page: <<prev 1 ... 99 100 101 102 103 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.