Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: Grandpa Pete
Page: 1 2 3 next>>
Dec 29, 2018 22:20:29   #
broncomaniac wrote:
Greetings. I've inherited some gear and among the acquisitions is a Tokina AF 12-24mm f4 AT-X Pro SD DX II lens. Landscape and large group shots come to mind but I'd love to hear how others might employ this lens, were it included in their arsenals. Your thoughts would be much appreciated, unless of course "paperweight" or "I wouldn't" are your inclinations.

Thanks for any wisdom shared.


I've had that lens since at least 2010. I took several shots with it on a D90 in June of 2011 pf a glacier calving about a half mile from a cruise ship at 7:30 AM (Dawes Glacier). Absolutely clear with every ripple of the water showing when enlarged to 12" by 18". Great for when you need it. It now travels with my D 7100. My son has the D90.
Go to
Aug 12, 2018 21:29:52   #
1
Go to
May 19, 2018 14:41:22   #
CaptainPhoto wrote:
Hi All
I'm doing a 10 day trip to New York City in September and looking for some tips - where to go shoot. Is it better to get advanced passes (tickets) to the regular sites - Empire State Building, Statue of Liberty etc. ?
Any suggestions on teaming up with a professional photographer that does group walk-around. I want to do some street photography - night photography.

James Maher comes to mind - has anyone joined his groups?


The best views of the Statue of Liberty and the New York Skyline are free. Take the Staten Island
Ferry.
Go to
Sep 12, 2017 12:58:41   #
ChrisT wrote:
Used to be the 18-105 was THE kit lens, for Nikon DX Bodies. Then, they came out with this new 18-140. Neither lens has gotten particularly good reviews, has it? In fact, the older 18-105 has actually fared better than this one.
Nikon users, what would be YOUR recommendation for an all-around AP-Z (you can choose a third party one, too!)


Seeing good reviews from several sources for the Nikon 24-85 AFS lens, I picked one up about seven years ago, knowing I was going to digital soon. It was on ebay for $150.00. When I received my D90 the 24-85 went right on it and was a great walk around. Now on my D7100 and it's still great. Not too long ago, I picked up a refurb of the VR version and it's even better in low light for obvious reasons. It's light weight and quick focusing, covering most of what I shoot. It's a sleeper that has stood the test of time for me.
Go to
Sep 1, 2017 21:44:11   #
Mondolinni wrote:
Hey Folks,
Looking to purchase an ultra-wide lens for my D500 in the (10-??) range and considering options from Tokina and Sigma since they seem to be at a more affordable price point than Nikons for this type of lens.
Thinking it would be great to have for certain situations, but not "general" use.
All my current glass is Nikon. Can anyone offer some advice or experience on these other two brands I'm lookin at? They both seem to get fairly good reviews.
Thanks for any input
Hey Folks, br Looking to purchase an ultra-wide le... (show quote)

I have the Tokina 12-24 F4 (now made as a 12-28) and it's tack sharp and priced within reason. Had it for about seven years, first on a D90 and now a D7100.
Go to
Sep 1, 2017 21:32:04   #
True.
Go to
Sep 1, 2017 21:26:48   #
fotoman150 wrote:
I have a wedding in two days. It is a practice wedding where the bride is not paying.

I have never done off camera manual flash. Always used on camera flash with TTL.

Even though this is a practice weddding it's a big wedding and I want it to look good for both of us.

The flash transmitter is daunting and very confusing. I'm very intimidated by manual off camera flash.

Do I go for it or practice somewhere else first?

Or maybe try it out a little bit and shoot both ways?
I have a wedding in two days. It is a practice wed... (show quote)


I assume if you're talking off-camera as a possibility your flash is not a pop up. Consider tilting toward ceiling, a bracket and cord, a soft box or reflector on the flash or any appropriate combination of these methods.
Go to
Apr 24, 2017 10:11:20   #
DaveyDitzer wrote:
I have only a Nikon D5300. I cannot say I will never go FF, but I doubt it, especially with the advent of the D500. I just ordered, received am about to return to Adorama, a Nikon 40mm f2.8 macro lens. Lens seems OK, but the supplied lens hood and another I ordered both fit so loosely that they fall off when just brushed against my shirt. The lens inserted into the body with a slightly "rough" feel to it. I currently have Nikons: 16-80 f2.8/4 and a 55-300 f3.5/5.6 Before stepping back into this venture, I would like advice from experienced hoggers. I am considering either the 60mm f2.8 or the AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED. Both are costly so I don't want to mess up again. Both offer a serious weight penalty. I expect both offer much better glass. Since I have either focal length covered already, the choice comes down to image quality and future utility. I searched UHH and found some hoggers who liked the 90 mm Tamron and some who liked the Sigma. I usually stick with Nikon so as not to run into any issues with compatibility with the electronics in the camera. But after this experience with the 40mm, I am not so strongly "married" to Nikkor lenses. In my film days I had a Nikkor 105 f2.5 which was a stellar lens. Thanks in advance for your help and advice.
I have only a Nikon D5300. I cannot say I will nev... (show quote)


I have been pleased with the Nikor 85 f3.5 for the occasional macro shot and it's not that expensive. I also echo your comments about the 105 f2.5. That lens had a soul.
Go to
Apr 5, 2017 15:36:19   #
DennisD wrote:
Hello fellow photographers and the many equipment experts out there. After 4 or 5 years, I am looking to update from my trusty, "old" Nikon D7000 to a Nikon D7200. (Larger file sizes and better resolution ..... no sensor filter, etc. etc.)
I am a bit hesitant to pull the trigger before learning if there is an even better update to be had in the near future, an improvement from the D7200, say a D7300. These DSLR bodies are improved and upgraded every few years and I would hope to upgrade to the newest available, or soon to be available, model. Is the Nikon D7200 itself about to be upgraded? Anyone got the skinny? Suggestions? Should I just contact Nikon and would they be completely forthcoming with what's coming just around the corner? Thanks much everyone.
Hello fellow photographers and the many equipment ... (show quote)


For some years now, I have always thought that the price point sweet spot is one notch below the state of the art; or most recently a refurbished Nikon D7100 shortly after the D7200 was out. It also works on computers and with decent used cars. I think it's partiularly true for cameras.
Go to
Mar 16, 2017 11:47:34   #
RCJets wrote:
I have many slides I took in Vietnam in 1967 on my Topcon RE Super. This was a very good camera on a par with the Nikon F of that period. As a helicopter pilot based in Saigon, I had many photo opportunities not available to others. My question is this: Would it be worth considering to try to have prints made from a few of these slides. I haven't looked at them for many years, so I really don't know how they have held up. They are in slide carousels for my projector. I think I was mostly shooting Ektachrome . Would they be grainy as prints? Any suggestions on how to even gets prints made? My scanner will not do slides.

Thanks in advance.

Joe
I have many slides I took in Vietnam in 1967 on my... (show quote)


Epson V500 or 600 photo scanners (often factory refurbs direct from Epson are available at low cost) are dynamite slide scanners. I've done fifty year old slides and printed them on 8 by 10 photo paper and they were without any visible grain and colors were perfect.
Go to
Mar 11, 2017 15:57:05   #
kb6kgx wrote:
Looking (still!) for good "walk around" for a D7100. Pretty much decided on the 16-85mm f3.5-5.6.

But now I'm thinking maybe the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8? The constant f2.8 would be nice, but I'd read that the Nikon is sharper, has les distortion and better VR.

I'd love the 17-55mm f2.8, but better condition ones are more than I care to pay at this time.

Comments?
Don't overlook the 24-85 Nikon, especially the newer VR. Fairly light, sharp as a tack and FX if you want to have one for full frame (or in my case an F100 with no trade in value when I bought my D7100 to replace the D90 I gave to my son.)
Go to
Feb 22, 2017 12:28:30   #
rcdovala wrote:
I'm a big fan of Wasabi batteries. However, it seems to me that they will only charge properly when charged with the Wasabi provided charger. They don't seem to take a charge when using the camera OEM charger. What is your experience?
I don't have a problem with my D7100, nor did I with my D90.
Go to
Jan 14, 2017 22:32:35   #
GrandmaG wrote:
I sold my 70-200/2.8 lens because it was too heavy (& therefore I only used it once). Now I don't have anything that zooms in close. I know that the lenses I'm looking at are not the same quality as the one I sold but they'll fill the spot vacated with less weight and size.

I have used "search" in this website & have concluded that 70-300 is better than 55-300 & those that bought refurbished are happy and in fact think they may be BETTER than new because they go through a more thorough testing before being available for sale. There also was positive comments about the Sigma lens.

I will be using this on my Nikon D7100 & I have never bought refurbished before and I don't think I would consider "used". I own one off-brand lens and was not sorry. I do have an 18-300 but that is permanently on the D5000 for my husband. He's perfectly content with that setup but I'm a little pickier.

Currently, I am on the B&H waiting list for a refurbished Nikon 70-300mm/f 4.5-5.6 VR II for $400.

So, here's my question: I'd like to hear from folks that have this lens or the Sigma version and other opinions relating to my assessment. Thanking you in advance!!
I sold my 70-200/2.8 lens because it was too heavy... (show quote)

I bought the 70-300 vr some years back for use with my D90 and as soon as my nephew saw what it would do he ordered his own for his D300. Now we each use ours with a D7100. It's a great lens and its price is usually lower now than when we bought ours. Go for it.
Go to
Oct 7, 2016 11:28:38   #
BarbK wrote:
I have a Sigma 70-300 zoom with no VR and am looking to get this Nikkor lens. Does anyone out there have it and can recommend it? I have the Nikkor 80-400 for bird and wildlife photography but have found the 70-300 to be the go to one for all else. Thanks in advance for any help. Barb


I have had one for several years and used it with my D90 and now with my D7100 and I love it. My nephew took one look at some shots I took with it and bought one. My walk around lens is the 24-85 afs so they make a nice pair. It did well enough for me that I traded in my Tokina f4 300mm prime lens on the D7100.
Go to
Sep 27, 2016 19:43:31   #
DavidPhares wrote:
Anyone who has done business with these folks, I would like to hear of your experience.

David


Always found them spot on. I've bought several items from them over the years. Their condition grades are very conservative. Very good usually means spotless. They only offer wholesale prices when they are buying but since they are guaranteeing what they sell, that seems reasonable. Other hoggers feel if you're selling, then you can do better on ebay or craig's list.
Go to
Page: 1 2 3 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.