I used it before I sold it since it got very little time on the camera. It's small and compact. Nice for street photography. Never tried it on FX body though. Should be an ok lens if you can get it cheap.

Looking back at my old pics, it was very prone to flare from the limited usage that I had. Just have to be careful when shooting into the source of light during day or night time.



I think if one is looking at 3rd party wide engles, the Tamron 16-28mm f/2.8 is interesting. The design and shape looks a lot like the nikon's 14-24mm f/2.8. Don't know if it already available here or not...

As I recall, guitar collection is also very expensive.

That's true. DX mode on D700/D3/D3s is 5.2 MP. I lived with 4MP before on the D2Hs.

Anyway, while you can still use a DX lens on FX body in FX mode (not in auto crop DX mode) at certain focal lengths (usually at longer ends), you need to stop it down a lot to kill away the vignetting problem in the corners. Even then, the quality in the sides will be mushy because DX glasses are only optimised in the centre portion.

Used to remember that the 18-70 kit lens were plenty in the market when everybody had a D70.

This post has been edited by jchue73: Jul 22 2011, 02:55 PM

Oppphs, sorry boss.

I will buy a 3rd party lens if it can proof itself to be worthy. A good example is the Tamron 90mm f/28 macro lens which is a very good alternative to Nikon's 105mm f/2.8 micro.

Yeah, 3rd party lenses can be a headache too in terms of compatibility. Not to say that ALL 3rd parties are bad but the chances are higher than say a bad Nikkor.

Like I mentioned, selling 3rd party lenses can be a little difficult too and you'd probably loose more than say selling a Nikkor.

I would agree that if someone is on tight budget, 3rd party option is nice. Perhaps it's just an interim before one is poisoned to get the better Nikkor.

However, if someone already has some budget or the budget can stretch a little, the Nikkor can be somewhat an investment. If don't like or want to quit or want to upgrade to FX, you can always sell it for a reasonable price to fund your next item. It's not going to loose a lot of money. Put it this way... I think if you think about the lost of value when selling a 3rd party lens because you don't like it or if you want to upgrade to a better lens is quite high compared to if you had a Nikkor. Oh, plus the fact that during ownership of the Nikkor, you get the satisfaction of enjoying good quality images from the lens. Sometimes, that makes up more for the price.

First time I see a four legged subject photographed by you.

Using manual power at 1/8 or /14 indeed saves power but I use it when I want fill light only. That would mean that under low light, I would probably use f/2.8 at a little higher ISO for main exposure and the flash will only lift shadows on the subject. The flash function in this case would not be used as the main source of light.

If the OP shot in RAW, recovery would be better if the picture was overexposed. You can still get back overblown details and not bring up undesired noise if you were in underexposed in the first place. I think with LR and shooting JPGs, this is also preferred method.

Don't know if you have tried this... I use manual exposure on the camera body and let the flash be in TTL-BL or TTL if you're in spot metering.

First, I meter the dimly lit background by using spot meter on the camera in aperture or shutter priority (whichever suites you). Even easier now since you have a f/2.8 lens. Note what aperture and shutter values. I notice that I get about 1/30s, f/2.8 @ISO1600 for a typically dim wedding dinner environment. Perhaps you can tone down and put a little underexposure in the background by half a stop or so and arrive at ISO 1000 perhaps or stay at ISO 1600 and stop down aperture to f/3.2 or f/3.5. Fire away and the flash in TTL mode should take care bring the picture (including background) up to correct exposure.

In a wide angle setting, your main subjects should all be in focus at f/2.8 with the exception of the background. But then again, that should be ok since you only want to expose the background to see what's going without wanting the background to be tact sharp.

Yeah, the price difference is not as wide but again, I'm more interested in quality you can get from 3rd party. You cannot differentiate them apart if you put their pics side by side.

Voicing out different opinions is fine when done civilised. It's all good to make sure all the basics are covered as target audience is very wide. One suggestion may not always be the best for certain people.

Actually, I would be interested in 100% crops of his shots wide open. But then again, his composition skills makes up more for anything else.

I agree.

On a side note, I was surprised to see that the 18-70 was still being used as one of UK's pro wedding photographer that was featured in DCM's June edition. Of course body is D3 / D700. Again, good composition is everything and what separates the pros from the rest.

This post has been edited by jchue73: Jul 23 2011, 02:21 PM

Agreed there. So a Nikkor micro lens then?

If on budget, you make compromises with 3rd party lenses. Depending on certain people, some compromises are more important to certain people and some not. If I were to make compromises, image quality would be the last thing I would compromise. Given the shortcomings of the 3rd party lens and if I had a low budget, I would take the Tamron macro. But then, I'm no macro person...

Ok. With macro, speed is no issue. But a wide angle lens for general wedding needs to function and focus fast. No point having the best glass when you cannot capture the moment. I guess that's the reason why people don't use a manual focus Zeiss for wedding.

So again, speed and hence accuracy is being compromised here. It's up to the person if he/she thinks that saving some money is worth the compromise.

Jumping straight to a fixed prime lens require lots of discipline and restraint. You must already have an idea what you want to shoot when you use a prime so that you can plan ahead. If not, it would be a very frustrating experience.

My suggestion? Stick with kit lens first. Be familiar with the camera controls and find your real niche by using your kit lens. Then go for the lens that would best suite your shooting style and would help you in achieving best results in the type of photography you want to do. Like celciuz mentioned, for scenery photos, you would require a wider lens. The kit lens would work out good as a general purpose lens.

If you're already used to the 24-85 range, the 24-120mm f/4 VR should be an excellent replacement I think. But if you feel that you want wider, you need to look at something else. I guess the 16-35mm f/4 range can work out fine on a DX body but at the end of the day, your shooting style must still ngam with that focal range. Else, no point also.

If you are already using f/2.8 lens and set at a wide angle of say 17 or 18mm, you can take a group shot of 6 people or so side by side and stand about 7 feet away from them. That gives you a total DoF of about 6 feet (between 5.1 feet to 11.1 feet in front of you, subjects in that zone would be in focus). So you don't need to worry about DoF at wide open.

If you're taking full length portraits of the wedding couple in portrait mode, you would be about 17 feet away from them if you are at 55mm on focal length. At f/2.8, your DoF is about 3.3 feet in total (between 15.5 feet to 18.8 feet in front of you, subjects in that zone would be in focus). Still a lot of DoF to get your subjects sharp in focus at the tele end.

The 17-55 is excellent wide open and using it wide open saves a lot of SB 900 juice. Your photos will turn out better because the flash would compliment the ambient lighting and would not be the only source of light like when you shoot using f/7.1.

Why not switch to 1/30 instead of the default 1/60 when you use flash? You get extra 1 stop of flash power.

Yes.

That would be using flash as fill flash.

Yup.

Like I suggested, you can also stick to manual exposure and leave flash at TTL to fill in as needed.

This post has been edited by jchue73: Jul 24 2011, 11:50 PM

Glad that somebody appreciates the technicalities and bothers to check how much DoF you get.

Do some test shots. Try and purposely shake while shooting at 1/30 with flash. See the outcome. If you're still afraid, then stick with 1/60 lor...

Of course it does.

It's not complicated. Just punch in the numbers and the results will be automatically calculated. If you do not know what the numbers mean, there is a diagram there to illustrate how much of DoF you will get.

Besides, after spending so much, you owe yourself to learn and appreciate the lens more.

Thought about the AF-S 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR ? A little bit more expensive and it's an FX lens.

I don't have this lens nor have I held it in my hands. Just came across some positive user reviews.

Shashinki list the lens at RM 3k.

The Canon only "seem" to dominate that market but the real champ is the Oly XZ-1. Nikon has no equal unfortunately. Sad but true.

Have you not read my reply post?

Ditch the 24mm f/2.8.

AF Fisheye-Nikkor 16mm f/2.8D
AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D
AF Nikkor DC 105mm f/2D
AF DC 135mm f/2D
AF Nikkor 180mm f/2.8D IF-ED
AF Micro-Nikkor 200mm f/4D IF-ED

PC-E NIKKOR 24mm f/3.5D ED
PC-E Micro NIKKOR 45mm f/2.8D ED
PC-E Micro NIKKOR 85mm f/2.8D

I thought body only is slightly less than 3k so my guess is that the pricing looks ok. The question now is do you want the older 50mm f/1.8D (given "FOC") or the newer 50mm f/1.8G?

Normal.

6 years ago, it was very isolated and green.

That time only D70 body. Both pics were shot with the AF-S 80-200mm f/2.8 + 1.4xTC.

280mm. Exif also says that. I wish I had a 480mm f/4 lens though. Would have been great.

Why need to specifically be D7000? Your D70s also can lah.

MP is not everything. High MP but everytime you miss focus, what's the point?

On using a machine gun for sports, you're right. That is why at that time when I wanted to shoot sports, I had to resort to the D2Hs machine gun.



My 80-200 is not two touch. Mine is AF-S version.

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/compa...00mm/index4.htm

I can use Nikon's 1.4x TC but I got the Kenko 300 Pro DG 1.4x TC instead because of budget.

If you want to use TC on your two touch and still have AF, you need this Kenko. If you want to use the new Nikon 1.4x TC on your two touch, you need to file off the tab on the TC so that you can physically mount the TC on your lens. Anyway, even after you manage to do that, you would not have AF. It's only manual focus.

http://nikonpages.heymanphotography.com/tcmod/

Thank you. I invested in good lenses since 6 years ago and still keep them till today. I change bodies over time and from what I can tell, the D90 is lightspeed ahead of the D70 by today's standards.

I'm no expert on studio shoots but that looks like the lighting too harsh on the model? Shadows are also hard and not soft and pushing the saturation high makes the shadows end up with no details. Might be better if you set Picture control to neutral.

Aperture? Shutter speed? What camera settings did you end up with?

The D90 plastic screen (BM 10) is about RM 60 or so. Perhaps get a GGS screen protector?

The Kenko 300 Pro DG 1.4x TC will AF with your AF-D lens. Latest Nikon TCs will only work with AF-S tele lenses.

Both the lenses you mentioned are AF-S type lenses. They should work fine on your D5100.

In fact, just pick any AF-S type lens and you should be fine on your D5100.

I think when comparing the Kenko 1.4x TC and Nikon's 1.4x TC, both are quite equal in terms of sharpness for the centre part with perhaps the Nikon being slightly better. But if compare edge sharpness, the Nikon triumphs. I myself still looking for Nikon's 1.4x TC. I might get it one day since I already have the 1.7x and Nikon's latest 2.0x TC.

You're right. Very very slight play but I'm fine since the Kenko was about RM 500++ when I got it brand new. I think now may be slightly more expensive?

The thing is there is no compelling reason to get it at the moment because the Kenko is not bad. I can buy the Nikon now but when would I use it? Hmmm, perhaps MotoGP? I guess I can still take my time.

Just like the 2.0x TC EIII... I got it the day before F1 started because I wanted 600mm reach which I got what I wanted. I actually already have the 2.0x TC but it's the first version which is inferior.

Surprisingly, I find that they are about equal in performance which is fine by me. But I read that some people say that the new 2.0x TC is better than 1.7x. Both TCs work best when used about 1 stop down.

The only problem I find with the 2.0x EIII TC is that it slows the AF. But on a super fast 70-200mm f/2.8, should be a fine trade off. Just don't use it on a DX body. The drop in speed is a lot even though mounted on a good DX body. There is a noticeable difference between putting the 2x TC on the D700 and on the D300.

Aiks... Sudah naik harga?

On fast tele lenses, it's bearable. But if you use the AF-S 300m f/4 which is already known to have a slow AF-S motor, the slowdown is more evident.

400mm maybe fine for motorsport. But not for birding? Please define. Feathered or non feathered kind?

For feathered type, Malaysian birds are usually very tiny and very shy. So getting close is quite hard.

Everydying is right. Price? Got it for RM 1.7k for the 2.0x TC EIII.

Yuks. Digiscoping may get you the distance quite cheaply but the quality is horrible.

Whoa, that's a good buy. Where did you find it?

I guess that is not a problem since it's advantageous if you know one of the judges.