or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Gear-Fi: Non-Audio Gear and Gadgets › The NIKON Thread (Talk About Nikon Stuff here)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The NIKON Thread (Talk About Nikon Stuff here) - Page 373

post #5581 of 5866
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank I View Post
 

Maybe you amy want to try the new smaller Nikon also since you have the lenses Nikon Df Is A Small, Retro, Full-Frame DSLR - First Look from ...

 

 

The Df just don't do it for me, too light and feels like a cheap camera.  It is fine when you have all prime lens, as sson as you mount a zoom lens it is off balance.  I admittedly love the look of it.

post #5582 of 5866
Quote:
Originally Posted by jc9394 View Post

...Off topic, I use the Sony RX100 when I trip for business with upper managements.  Not a good idea to look like a tourist while travel with big wigs.  I had looked at the RX10 too but lack of zoom is a no no for the wife, she use it to take pics of my girls.

I think that's the RX1--the full frame with fixed 35mm--you're thinking of. I have the RX10, which has a 1" sensor (same as RX100 II) with (equivalent) 24-200mm and f/2.8 throughout its entire range. It's not small, so it might not work for you, but it's amazingly thorough. I also have the RX100 II, and agree that it's very nice for when I just want to carry a really small camera.
post #5583 of 5866

I have not actually seen one yet but if he wants a light body from Nikon there are only two choices in full frame the D610 or the  Df which is retro. I thought Nikon priced the Df high when they introduced it and reminds me of my Fuji X100S with the retro style which I use for lots of casual shooting when I dont want to carry the gear.  I need to try the DF but I cant see my self buying t as I have 4 cameras now and the d7000 still here because I wont give it away rather just keep it or give it to my daughter.

 

JC surprised they made it cheap for 2700 though.


Edited by Frank I - 1/30/14 at 6:29pm
post #5584 of 5866
Quote:
Originally Posted by jude View Post


I think that's the RX1--the full frame with fixed 35mm--you're thinking of. I have the RX10, which has a 1" sensor (same as RX100 II) with (equivalent) 24-200mm and f/2.8 throughout its entire range. It's not small, so it might not work for you, but it's amazingly thorough. I also have the RX100 II, and agree that it's very nice for when I just want to carry a really small camera.

 

 

You are correct, Sony's model number are very confusing.  I carry it in my jacket pocket all the time when I travel to a foreign country.

 

SOOC shot with RX100

 

 

Since we are audio geeks, tube p0rn...

 

post #5585 of 5866
Quote:
Originally Posted by jc9394 View Post
 

Going to replace my 16-35 with this... Finally complete the Nikon Holy Trinity

 

 

I ended up buying the Tamron 24-70mm, since it as sharp, but a lot cheaper and more compact than the Nikon. I have been using the 16-35mm which I got to cover the times when I'd want to use the 14-24mm and a 28 or 35mm. I found though that as switching from wide to ultra-wide requires a change in mentality when shooting that is too easy to zoom out and forget this. Given the rate at which the 14-24mm keeps turning up s/h around here it has been tempting me to do the same switch.

post #5586 of 5866
Quote:
Originally Posted by jc9394 View Post
 

Going to replace my 16-35 with this... Finally complete the Nikon Holy Trinity

 

used a straight 14 myself over the weekend  - shooting video though

post #5587 of 5866
Quote:
Originally Posted by Currawong View Post

I ended up buying the Tamron 24-70mm, since it as sharp, but a lot cheaper and more compact than the Nikon. I have been using the 16-35mm which I got to cover the times when I'd want to use the 14-24mm and a 28 or 35mm. I found though that as switching from wide to ultra-wide requires a change in mentality when shooting that is too easy to zoom out and forget this. Given the rate at which the 14-24mm keeps turning up s/h around here it has been tempting me to do the same switch.

If you can find one mint/excellent condition, you really should upgrade. It is much sharper than the 16-35, especially at the edges and corners at the widest. The 16-35 is kind of mushy. I never noticed that until I received the 14-24.
post #5588 of 5866

Or just stop it down to f/5.6 and all lenses are basically the same.

post #5589 of 5866
Quote:
Originally Posted by jc9394 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Currawong View Post

I ended up buying the Tamron 24-70mm, since it as sharp, but a lot cheaper and more compact than the Nikon. I have been using the 16-35mm which I got to cover the times when I'd want to use the 14-24mm and a 28 or 35mm. I found though that as switching from wide to ultra-wide requires a change in mentality when shooting that is too easy to zoom out and forget this. Given the rate at which the 14-24mm keeps turning up s/h around here it has been tempting me to do the same switch.

If you can find one mint/excellent condition, you really should upgrade. It is much sharper than the 16-35, especially at the edges and corners at the widest. The 16-35 is kind of mushy. I never noticed that until I received the 14-24.
 

I'm in two minds about it still. I didn't find the 16-35mm mushy at all. It isn't as sharp as the Tamron 24-70mm but I wasn't disappointed with the sharpness I did get from it.  Some of that might have come from it simply being wide all the time and that I end up cropping a lot as a result, especially when trying to capture my kids and their friends doing funny things.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot View Post
 

Or just stop it down to f/5.6 and all lenses are basically the same.

 

I took identical shots with half a dozen lenses at 35mm-1/60-f11 of an identical view with identical light and it was very easy to see the difference in sharpness on the D800. So I can say, from actual testing, no they are not "basically the same", but then I have a D800. I can only wish that I could have just used the $80 second-hand old 24-70mm f3.5-5.6 instead of the Tamron to get just as clear shots.


Edited by Currawong - 1/31/14 at 3:23am
post #5590 of 5866
Totally agree with Currawong, it is a big difference with D800 sensor. I even stop down to f/8 and f/11, the edge is still mushy compare to 14-24.
post #5591 of 5866

Would you call slight softness in the corners you can only see blown up to 100% a big difference? Because in everyday shooting, I'd never notice that at all.

post #5592 of 5866
Well depends is paid gig or not. If it is a paid one, I want the absolutely the sharpest if possible.
post #5593 of 5866

How many weddings require sharpness in the extreme corners when printed eight feet tall?

post #5594 of 5866
Not wedding and I don't do wedding, the 14-24 is not good for wedding anyway. They may not need extreme sharpest but if I get paid I do give them the sharpest I can produce, you may feel different way but I personal prefer to deliver the best.
post #5595 of 5866

 


Edited by Frank I - 2/1/14 at 7:40am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Gear-Fi: Non-Audio Gear and Gadgets › The NIKON Thread (Talk About Nikon Stuff here)