[kin0kin]

We had 3 people doing the wedding, none of us carried two bodies, we just had different lenses on. One guy with a super wide, me with a tele, and the other with a 24-70 L <--he was also changing between this and the 70-200 2.8 IS instead of lugging two bodies even though he had another one in his bag. The reason is simple, it can get very tiring after awhile I am by no means not fit/thin.

I only shot 17-50 during preperation, after that, it was kept in the bag. I intend to being 3 lenses next time, 50mm, 85mm, and 80-200. I'm gonna sell off the 17-50 soon.

Final batch of the pictures that I uploaded yesterday:

 

[ozz]

nice pictures

 

[lan]

Yeah if you have a few people, there's no need to carry two bodies. I'm just saying if you were one person, it's certainly a possibility. Indeed it's not for everybody. I tried it out on my recent trip though with a still and video camera mounted on my stroboframe and I kind of enjoyed it. I'd say it wasn't too bad weight wise as they were sort of light rigs each.

Looks like some nice pics

The dress in these events are hard to take. It seems a bit blown out.

 

[kin0kin]

that's the thing with wedding gown, you either expose the skin properly, which I always do, or keep everything within the dynamic range, which will result in underexposed people unless flash is used <- which I never had a chance

. Did I mention that it was a wet wedding? lol we only had like 15-20 mins of dry-time to capture those formal shots.

For some reasons I only thought of capturing full body shot that day, I should have zoomed in closer for waist up shots...bleh next time I guess

oh BTW, i've had this idea in my mind for some time now....has anybody tried using IR torch light for AF assist? they are invisible to human eyes but the camera will see it. I was just wondering if it will affect the meter's reading. I'm planning to burn 10 bucks on ebay to experiment this

 

[ozz]

what cleaning kit would you recommend lens and camera i just have the
micro fiber cloth.

 

[kin0kin]

Micro fiber is what I use. Sometimes I just breath on the lens and wipe it clean, but if the filter is really dirty for some reasons, I'd use 50% isopropyl alcohol.

 

[dj_mocok]

For lens, I tend to use only a (good) lenspen now. It gets the job done most of the time, unless you have serious smudge (eg. oil or whatnot on your lens' surface). And a blower.

I will first try to blow away all the dust from the lens, and if there are still some specks, I will carefully brush them using the brush, then wipe using lenspen if necessary.

But usually I only use blower, cleaning lens surface too often isn't good for the coating.

 

[ozz]

what brand lens pen and thanks.

 

[dj_mocok]

The brand is lenspen too. This is the link.

 

[jjcha]

Question for you guys -- my dad's got a D200 and I'm thinking of buying him a nice fast normal prime. He's already got the 18-200 VR and a 80-300 VR as well, but nothing fast for low light. But I look at the offerings from Nikon and they don't seem to have any thing like a 35mm f/1.4 or 28mm f/2.0. I see some historic lenses (some that should be fantastic actually), but none of those autofocus, even with the D200, right?

Am I stuck looking at the 30mm f/1.4 Sigma if I want a normal prime (considering the crop) that's faster than f2.0? The Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 with the focal crop is a bit longer than I would have wanted...

Best,

-Jason

 

[cotdt]

hey jason, the sigma 30/1.4 is a really good choice and my most used lens, and then there is also the nikkor 28/1.4, but the only real difference i notice is that the nikkor is a little sharper in the corners, and cost a little more.

 

[jjcha]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cotdt /img/forum/go_quote.gif hey jason, the sigma 30/1.4 is a really good choice and my most used lens, and then there is also the nikkor 28/1.4, but the only real difference i notice is that the nikkor is a little sharper in the corners, and cost a little more.

The Nikkor 28mm f/1.4 is a legendary lens, and for good reason. You really can't compare it to the Sigma 30mm f/1.4, because the former is a true wide angle fast lens, while the latter is a crop only normal lens. Actually, I can't think of any other 28mm f/1.4 full frame lens, at least not any Leica M-mount or Canon lens. But I suppose this is all wasted on a crop camera like the D200, where Sigma saw a prime opportunity by releasing an extremely useful, digital only, 30mm f/1.4.

But I am concerned with autofocus compatibility... I guess my question really is whether the 28mm f/1.4 Nikkor will auto-focus with the D200? It should, right? This is where my confusion really is.

Best,

-Jason

 

[fabool]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jjcha /img/forum/go_quote.gif But I am concerned with autofocus compatibility... I guess my question really is whether the 28mm f/1.4 Nikkor will auto-focus with the D200? It should, right?

Yes it does. It's a beautiful (and expensive) lens, I'd love one myself

A nice page with some lens reviews. They're all tested on a D200 so the AF info should be accurate.

Not much else around the 50mm mark (including crop), I'm afraid. If you could do with f2, there's a 35/f2 Nikkor available though.

 

[perplex]

Use http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_surv.html

 

[jjcha]

Quote:

Originally Posted by fabool /img/forum/go_quote.gif Not much else around the 50mm mark (including crop), I'm afraid. If you could do with f2, there's a 35/f2 Nikkor available though.

Thanks... yeah, the 35mm f/2 looks like a fine lens, and it's prob what I would use... just knowing my dad, I know he likes the convienance of his 18-200 VR so much that I'd need to give him more than a 2 stop advantage for him to consider a prime for low-light situations.

How sad... very excellent primes playing second fiddle to a consumer zoom... but I guess that's the market for you...

Regardless though, the Sigma 30 f/1.4 does look like a great choice... I'm sure if my dad were paying (he doesn't waste his money) that's what he'd get... but as it's a gift from me, I might need to kick it up a notch...

Best,

-Jason