[lan]

I like the 14-24 f/2.8

The extra stop is also about the weight. More weight = more stable to hold.

 

[dj_mocok]

I like heavier lens too, but not heavy like 70-200 though. The Tokina 12-24mm f/4 is extremely solid lens, for me it even feels more solid than 17-35 mm Nikon pro lens. The build of that Tokina reminds me of Ai-s lenses.

Although if you want solid and heavy, nothing beats Russian lenses. Damn, with Russian lenses like Helios or Jupiter, you can probably bash a mugger to hospital and still resume shooting afterwards.

 

[Arainach]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lan /img/forum/go_quote.gif I like the 14-24 f/2.8 The extra stop is also about the weight. More weight = more stable to hold.

I disagree. The 14-24 in my hands is so heavy that it's considerably more unstable than the 12-24 or 17-35. It's heavy enough that I wouldn't want it on a body around my neck all day long.

 

[dj_mocok]

It's almost a kilo right?

 

[dj_mocok]

Whoa, look at the design of those blades! It's so cool, curvy and it's so cool (did I say that the first time?), for some reason it looks badass to me. Stopped-down and still retain the round shape? *drool*

Picture belongs to gokevincameras

 

[uppis]

Oh those blades are sweet..! Whats the name of this beauty?

 

[haibane]

Canon... Runs away quickly

 

[Towert7]

Hey guys and gals, quick question.
Why would someone want a full frame (35mm) CCD sensor like that found in the Nikon D3, compared to a ~1.5x crop factor CCD like that found in the D300. What are the benefits? What are the detractors?

Thanks a bunch!

 

[haibane]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Towert7 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Hey guys and gals, quick question. Why would someone want a full frame (35mm) CCD sensor like that found in the Nikon D3, compared to a ~1.5x crop factor CCD like that found in the D300. What are the benefits? What are the detractors? Thanks a bunch!

Better noise, faster focus, standard film lenses are actual dimensions instead of zoomed. Generally slightly better dynamic range too.

 

[nineohtoo]

I'm getting awfully greedy... I just picked up another speed light. The other day my manager found an SB-600 in one of the totes and said he was gonna buy it. I saw it still in the store today, adjusted the price, then had someone ring me up for it

Had no time to find the accessories so I wouldn't get caught. I'll look for them tomorrow, if I can't i'll just pay the $25 or so on B&H(I just want the diffuser, pouch and stand since I already lost my SB-800s stand). Now I really need to get a D70 or better so I can have fun with the wireless flash. I've only been doing this a month and it's been costly!

Quick shot of Haruhi on my desk

 

[dj_mocok]

Quote:

Originally Posted by uppis /img/forum/go_quote.gif Oh those blades are sweet..! Whats the name of this beauty?

Kinoptik. I took it from this eBay sale.

 

[Old Pa]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Towert7 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Why would someone want a full frame (35mm) CCD sensor like that found in the Nikon D3, compared to a ~1.5x crop factor CCD like that found in the D300. What are the benefits? What are the detractors?

Same old question as when the 4x5 view camera people labeled the "new" 35mm format as "miniature"; the smaller the format, the more the image has to be enlarged to get to finished viewing size. And with enlargement, all the flaws and defects are enlarged as well.

Coming into DSLRs with DX size sensors brought back especially the need for me to limit camera motion during exposure. Holding out at arm's length a point-and-shoot camera (with an even smaller sensor) to use the view screen as a viewfinder even further exacerbates the camera motion problem. If you don't have enough shutter speed/ISO speed dialed in, motion blurring is almost guaranteed. And since automatic exposure is the credo of the point-and-shoot crew, there you go. Forget, also, the depth of field benefits of a high f-stop.

Fight camera motion when handheld with braced camera position and smooth shutter release. Better yet, put the camera on a sturdy tripod and use a shutter release. Some folks go so far as to lock up the mirror before final exposure to avoid the vibration of its flop. But even a monopod or bracing against a tree, post or other stable object will help sharpness.

Down side to larger sensors? Not many, unless you're already stocked with good DX lenses. I've always been kind of a "telephoto guy" anyway, and have looked at the 1.5X magnification bump as a boon. Right now, I'm waiting for Nikon to introduce the D300s with a full size sensor so I can score an "old" D300.

 

[Arainach]

Quote:

Down side to larger sensors?.........I've always been kind of a "telephoto guy" anyway

You're a telephoto guy and you missed the most obvious disadvantage to large sensors?

Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VR: $1600
Nikon 300 f/2.8 VR: $4500

You have to spend a LOT more to get the same field of view on the larger sensor. Comparatively speaking, the cost of repurchasing an ultrawide (say the Sigma 10-20mm) for DX isn't nearly as bad.

 

[Old Pa]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arainach /img/forum/go_quote.gif You're a telephoto guy and you missed the most obvious disadvantage to large sensors? Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VR: $1600 Nikon 300 f/2.8 VR: $4500 You have to spend a LOT more to get the same field of view on the larger sensor.

I didn't miss the expense point, I just didn't mention it with the other points I was making. BTW, I've owned the Nikon ED AF-S VR-Nikkor 70-200mm F2.8G for a couple of years and it's a very nice lense. Great boka and the VR is like picking up two or three stops. And it's a 105-300mm equivalent on my D200.

 

[Towert7]

Thanks for the info Old Pa and Haibane!