The NIKON Thread (Talk About Nikon Stuff here)

[Towert7]

Originally Posted by OverlordXenu

A chance at doing what, exactly? Auto-focusing on the wrong subject and taking a mediocre snapshot?

That's what had me perplexed. I couldn't see anything special about it. Maybe he was talking about the built in light meter in the camera??? No idea. Let us know Kevin what you meant by that. I'm very interested.

[WhatMACHI]

Originally Posted by Towert7

The typical pro wedding setup is one camera with a 70-200 F/2.8, and another camera with a 24-70mm F/2.8. That's typical.

If this is the case, i may lean towards the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 since i will only really be using this pre and post ceremony.

Originally Posted by bigshot

but you might need something longer for the ceremony itself. They usually stick you up in the choir loft if you're packing.

I wont be shooting during the ceremony so that reduces my need for any significant zoom, it just seems that a little zoom is convenient to save me moving around, and allows me to grab some middle range candid shots.

I've got an SB-600 which im still getting used to but im fairly certain for the ametuer shots ill be taking that it should be fine.

Final thoughts to replace my 18-135:

NO: Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 Maybe better for weddings, but definately not enough zoom for my everyday walking.

MAYBE: Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 Better for event shooting than the 18-200VR

MAYBE: Nik 18-200VR slower, but more versatile...

Bah, why cant things be easy.

[bigshot]

The way I've handled it is in my main digital kit, I have the 18-200 VR, the Tokina 100mm f2.8 macro for portraits and close up, and on order I have the new Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 ultra wide zoom for landscape. Aside from a fast telephoto for sports, this should cover most everything. My bag full of fixed length lenses sits with my 35mm body in a bag.

See ya
Steve

[kevin gilmore]

Originally Posted by Towert7

That's what had me perplexed. I couldn't see anything special about it. Maybe he was talking about the built in light meter in the camera??? No idea. Let us know Kevin what you meant by that. I'm very interested.

Yeah next time the focus will be in the right place.
Combined weight of camera and lens well over 10 lbs.
hand held getting the focus right and no jitter at the
same time, not so easy when you are my age.
Even on a heavy duty tripod just hitting the shutter button
at 400mm causes jitter. Shooting thru a glass door does
not help with the autofocus.

If i did the same thing with the F5, the whole thing would
have been out of focus due to jitter. Probably not a fair
comparison as the F5 came before the VR stuff. But many
i have talked to say the F6 still does not do as well when
compared to the digital.

The next time i need to get serious, i'll take my 50 lb tripod, rent
a mamiya medium format camera with the kodak 40mp back and
take hours and get it right. Don't think i will be doing that again
for a while.

[stuartr]

You realize that VR works on the F5 and F6 as well, don't you? I have an F6 and the VR seems to work the same on it as it does on digital.

[Tuarreg]

Check this out!!


Nikon 24 mm f/3.5 PC-E Nikkor ED

Tuarreg

[Arainach]

Originally Posted by stuartr

You realize that VR works on the F5 and F6 as well, don't you? I have an F6 and the VR seems to work the same on it as it does on digital.

Correct. VR is lens-based, not camera-based, so on any camera with coupling capable of powering it (F5 or F6, any digital) it'll work perfectly. And as far as I know the only reason it can't work on the F2 through F4 is that they can't take G lenses and all of the VR lenses are G (i.e. no aperture ring).

[perplex]

Originally Posted by kevin gilmore

...

So you finally got your Nikon full frame

[M0T0XGUY]

I just picked up an 80-200 f/2.8 (2 ring) and a 35 f/2 from eBay - both of which should be here quite soon. Did I overspend at 750 for the former and 265 for the latter? (Regardless, I've seen the capabilities of both these lenses, and at this point I don't really care about the prices).

[Towert7]

Originally Posted by M0T0XGUY

I just picked up an 80-200 f/2.8 (2 ring) and a 35 f/2 from eBay - both of which should be here quite soon. Did I overspend at 750 for the former and 265 for the latter? (Regardless, I've seen the capabilities of both these lenses, and at this point I don't really care about the prices).

265$us for a used 35mm F/2 seems like not such a good deal when the new one can be had for 320$ which insures it is brand new, working flawlessly, and comes with a full 5 year warranty. That's just me though.

You are right though, they are 2 very nice lenses. I wish I had a pro 70-200mm type lens.