Outline ·
[ Standard ] ·
Linear+
Photography The Official Nikon Discussion thread V6, Nikon announcement on Mar/Apr ?!
|
FaezFarhan
|
 Mar 15 2011, 03:33 PM
|
|
QUOTE(KTCY @ Mar 15 2011, 03:27 PM) I use 70200 for portrait. Used to own 85/1.8 (2 of it) but sold off due to lousiness of the lens. Yes. 50mm quite tight. 35 is good. Get the 1.4G if you can afford. It's superb ! I see. Me too, will be using the two touch for potraits. How much is the f/1.4G? I think I can afford the f/2 only bro  QUOTE(edwardgsk @ Mar 15 2011, 03:31 PM) Hahaha, 85 f/1.8!! I told someone last time the same but he say it's good, forgot who already   85 f1.8 = one of the worst lens I have used. Sorry but this is my opinion  |
|
|
|
|
|
FaezFarhan
|
Mar 15 2011, 03:59 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(aldosoesilo @ Mar 15 2011, 03:35 PM) why is 85mm 1.8 being the worst?? For me lor. Everyone has their one opinion right? It's only sharp at f/2.8. I haven't tried many other lenses tho  QUOTE(KTCY @ Mar 15 2011, 03:36 PM) 50/1.4G - 1.8k 85/1.4G - 4.6k 35/1.4G - 4.85k 24/1.4G - 6.5k Wow 35 more expensive than the 85, thought it's cheaper This post has been edited by FaezFarhan: Mar 15 2011, 04:00 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
FaezFarhan
|
Mar 15 2011, 04:10 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(geekster129 @ Mar 15 2011, 04:05 PM) How many lenses are sharp at f/1.4? 85G only? The ones that cost RM3k and above   |
|
|
|
|
|
FaezFarhan
|
Mar 15 2011, 05:18 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FaezFarhan
|
Mar 15 2011, 05:51 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(Tony Stark @ Mar 15 2011, 05:50 PM) I think he meant gigantic |
|
|
|
|
|
FaezFarhan
|
Mar 15 2011, 05:56 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(geekster129 @ Mar 15 2011, 05:53 PM) Who knows, one day she become a reknowned photographer. 
Added on March 15, 2011, 5:53 pmI just heard Canon 70-200 f/2.8L USM has dropped price? Yeah, from RM10,199 RRP to RM 8,388.00. Street price should be nearly the same as Nikkor's VRII. |
|
|
|
|
|
FaezFarhan
|
Mar 15 2011, 06:02 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(celciuz @ Mar 15 2011, 05:57 PM) Hopefully they're gonna build it in Thailand and decrease the price for the moment  |
|
|
|
|
|
FaezFarhan
|
Mar 16 2011, 03:39 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(fubs @ Mar 16 2011, 03:33 PM) if you import raw files into lightroom, by default there will be some preset settings applied, which includes a little bit of sharpening. Automatically edit? |
|
|
|
|
|
FaezFarhan
|
Mar 16 2011, 03:56 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(ReeNz @ Mar 16 2011, 03:41 PM) Automatically applied, but of course u can tuned it off and any other stuff to your preference before converting to jpeg I see. While converting to JPEG or while importing? |
|
|
|
|
|
FaezFarhan
|
Mar 16 2011, 05:00 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(celciuz @ Mar 16 2011, 04:59 PM) Crop - 1755 FX - 2470 Well best all rounder that is. Yeah agree. But I'm getting the 11-16 to pair with 80-200. 17-55/24-70 is like a normal range, even compact cameras can achieve it This post has been edited by FaezFarhan: Mar 16 2011, 06:19 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
FaezFarhan
|
Mar 16 2011, 05:35 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(s6xs9x @ Mar 16 2011, 05:13 PM) I can't seem to get sharp pictures with my 50mm. Please comment on the below, is it anywhere near sharp? No adjustments made only watermark and export via LR3. » Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... « [attachmentid=2098721] Sharp at 18-105 |
|
|
|
|
|
FaezFarhan
|
Mar 16 2011, 06:16 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(s6xs9x @ Mar 16 2011, 05:57 PM) The label What speed do you guys prefer as a minimum for hand held? Does ISO effect the sharpness? Here's another shot @ 1/200 f/2.8 does this qualify in the acceptable region in terms of sharpness? » Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... « [attachmentid=2098797] Minimum speed, depends on the lens and situation. You can follow the tumb rule. If you're at 50mm, then minimum is 1/50. For DX, if at 50mm, then it's 1/80. Right guys? I'm a noob too  Now for the picture, for me, I'd say yes. Spot-on focusing too |
|
|
|
|
|
FaezFarhan
|
Mar 17 2011, 01:07 AM
|
|
|
What size do I need for the drybox if I wanna keep = D90, D7000, 80-200, 17-50, 50, 18-105. And how much?  |
|
|
|
|
|
FaezFarhan
|
Mar 17 2011, 03:21 AM
|
|
|
QUOTE(KTCY @ Mar 17 2011, 01:11 AM) I see, kinda expensive lor. Thought about RM400-500 only QUOTE(edwardgsk @ Mar 17 2011, 01:37 AM) Vacation carry 70-200?? wahhh Get 68L or 88L, can store more. But when my gears combine with my father's, my current 68L cannot fit all in already How many lenses? Btw, can I just put lenses in the drybox? Body not that useful right? This post has been edited by FaezFarhan: Mar 17 2011, 03:21 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
FaezFarhan
|
Mar 17 2011, 12:05 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(celciuz @ Mar 17 2011, 11:58 AM) Is reminded me about it, I need my lens details ma. Awaiting part now lor~ Since you have the 85mm 1.4G, do you miss the 70-200 while it's gone? |
|
|
|
|
|
FaezFarhan
|
Mar 17 2011, 03:32 PM
|
|
|
Which range is better for weddings, 16-85 + 35 + 80-200 or 11-16 + 35 + 80-200 |
|
|
|
|
|
FaezFarhan
|
Mar 17 2011, 07:52 PM
|
|
|
Btw, my new baby = » Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... « |
|
|
|
|
|
FaezFarhan
|
Mar 18 2011, 04:54 AM
|
|
|
QUOTE(Isepunye @ Mar 18 2011, 01:31 AM) i choose 1st one if i were u. 1685 can cover most of the event so i thnks its quite good ed. all rounder. 80200 is useful for candid and outdoor. superb! 35? i dnt know or it just me that will leave 35mm and taking SP90. it done brilliant job for portraiture aka outdoor. shoot wide with 1685 is wide enuff for me. 2nd choice will make u loose all rounder lens. remimder that not all wedding held at big hall or big big house. imagine u shoot at flat / apartment. u want keep on changing 116 and 35? u will lose ur time I see, thanks for the reply bro. I have two questions, how's the sharpness of the 16-85 compared to the tokina 11-16? And is 16mm on DX wide enough for most weddings? |
|
|
|
|
Quote
0.0495sec
0.48
7 queries
GZIP Disabled