Latest Thread Images

The NIKON Thread (Talk About Nikon Stuff here)
Sep 3, 2009 at 12:52 AM Post #3,706 of 5,895
Quote:

Originally Posted by mightyacorn /img/forum/go_quote.gif
No offense, but if you are going to read reviews on cameras, you would be better off reading from a site like Digital Camera Reviews. Here are reviews of two of the cameras you mentioned: Canon T1i and Nikon D5000.

The next thing you should do is go to a store that has both of these cameras and try them for yourself.


Yup. See which one handles better. The image quality will be pretty similar to be honest. I personally find the Canon controls not as natural and take a bit of getting used to. Nikons just seem to have a more straightforward approach but I'm sure I could use a Canon just as well with a bit more time. I guess it's just two different approaches to achieve a common goal.
 
Sep 3, 2009 at 4:53 AM Post #3,707 of 5,895
Quote:

Originally Posted by Steggy /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Well, with that in mind, do you think the D5000 would be worth the price jump from like, a d40? I would be able to get a d40 for 400 dollars and a d5000 for 640 dollars, both with the stock lens. I was also looking at the canon t1i since i could get that for...680 i believe. reviews from like, engadget peg the canon as being better, but i'm told the nikons have faster autofocus...what would you guys think the better choice would be for someone getting into DSLR's for the first time?


What sort of lenses are you planning to have with your Nikon/Canon?
If you are just after basic ones, you might want to look at Panasonic's new micro 4/3 GF1 too. It can record HD movie and it looks neat. Worth considering as a substitute if you are in the market for a small DSLR with HD movie ability.
If I am not wrong, this new Panasonic GF1 can auto focus during a movie recording mode too. That would be one seriously neat feature, especially if you use a decent lens to go with it.
Speaking of which, at the same time Panasonic also announced the 20mm f/1.7 and 45mm f/2.8 macro. I can do A LOT of things with just those 2 lenses.

The thing is the camera is quite a bit more than D40 or D5000.
 
Sep 3, 2009 at 5:32 AM Post #3,708 of 5,895
Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Shots with Nikon D300 and Sigma 3.5/10-20

Of course the small formats make it not really useful for judging image quality, after all it's better than nothing.
.


What's your opinion of the lens thus far (differences vs. the 4-5.6 version, if possible)? User reports on the new version are sparse thus far.
 
Sep 3, 2009 at 9:41 AM Post #3,709 of 5,895
yeh i scored this on ebay
smily_headphones1.gif

sickkk.jpg

can't wait for it to arrive...my first slr
 
Sep 3, 2009 at 11:52 AM Post #3,712 of 5,895
50mm 1.8 Ai or Ais are abundant everywhere, I think it's reasonably easy to win one.
If you can still find one in very good condition, by all means get it even if it's a bit more than street price (10 or 20 bucks won't make a difference in a long run).
 
Sep 3, 2009 at 12:12 PM Post #3,713 of 5,895
Hey, by the way, do you guys think in this year 2009, it's a little too late to write a review for a 50mm 1.2 Ais? (which is what, a 28 years old lens?)

But I think it would be interesting... what do you think?
 
Sep 3, 2009 at 4:04 PM Post #3,714 of 5,895
It's never to late to write a review.
biggrin.gif
 
Sep 3, 2009 at 4:45 PM Post #3,715 of 5,895
Quote:

Originally Posted by dj_mocok /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Hey, by the way, do you guys think in this year 2009, it's a little too late to write a review for a 50mm 1.2 Ais? (which is what, a 28 years old lens?)

But I think it would be interesting... what do you think?


Never late to write a review. In fact, this lens makes me to keep my F3HP. I use it a lot with my D200 too.
 
Sep 3, 2009 at 8:14 PM Post #3,716 of 5,895
Quote:

Originally Posted by Iron_Dreamer /img/forum/go_quote.gif
What's your opinion of the lens thus far (differences vs. the 4-5.6 version, if possible)? User reports on the new version are sparse thus far.


I don't have experience with the Sigma 4-5.6/10-20, but maybe you're familiar with the Tokina 12-24? This was my previous lens. Without direct comparison I would say both are equal in terms of resolution and sharpness, the Tokina having the edge at 12 mm/4.0 compared to the Sigma at 3.5/10 mm when it comes to corner sharpness (actually a bit unfair). Stopped down to 5.6 or better 8.0, the Sigma is sharp also in the corners and very sharp in the rest of the image. From 12 mm upwards the Sigma is at least as sharp as the Tokina and certainly sharper at the upmost end (again a bit unfair, as it's 20 against 24 mm). I don't notice any weak zone in terms of focal lenght.

You can imagine that 10 mm is the length I use most by far, and I'm very satisfied with the image quality here. I'm also surprised about the high number of sharp images (>85%), although I usually operate with small margins, such as 1/15 s at 10 mm (without tripod), in the interest of maximum depth of field and to avoid high ISO.

I've seen examples of quite heavy CAs from this lens, but I don't notice anything of them with my D300, which corrects them automatically (in JPEG mode). Its ability to mute lens flares is remarkable, especially compared to the Tokina. Distortion is inobtrusive with all focal lengths.

From what I gather from other owners who know the older 10-20, it has higher contrast than the latter (I don't notice any difference here compared to the Tokina, which was very good in this respect).

One downside I've noticed from the reports so far is that the number of de-centered samples seems quite high, about 40 or 50%, so not all owners are happy with this lens. Mine is in perfect shape, though, very sharp and without the least de-centering, as test images of a rough wall prove.

In short: totally satisfied.
normal_smile .gif
(The only thing I'm missing is VR.)
.
 
Sep 3, 2009 at 9:58 PM Post #3,717 of 5,895
Quote:

Originally Posted by dj_mocok /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Hey, by the way, do you guys think in this year 2009, it's a little too late to write a review for a 50mm 1.2 Ais? (which is what, a 28 years old lens?)

But I think it would be interesting... what do you think?


Yes, it's still nice to see reviews of older lenses, especially if they can be compared to newer lenses.

Secretly, I get a warm feeling when an older lens performs as well as the current generation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 6 (members: 0, guests: 6)
Back
Top