[dj_mocok]

Man... D3 and a Zeiss lens... how can you not "stand" that combo? That's like a lot of photo enthusiasts' dream to be able to shoot with a D3 and a Zeiss attached to it.
I know it is not practical but you get a totally different feeling when using a solid MF. I just wish that my camera's viewfinder is as large as D3's. It will be even more fun for me to use MF.

Speaking of Zeiss and manual focus, have you read the review I just made a few days ago by any chance? It's not really an objective review, and there's a lot of personal feeling involved, but maybe you can see why I like the lens and manual focusing.

Clickly link below:
Zeiss Review

 

[lan]

Well I don't like any 35mm viewfinder except the A900. D3 to me is more of a fast camera.

If I go "slow" I would rather prefer ZEISS on Rollei or Hasselblad.

I tried the 85 1.4 vs. Nikon 85 1.4. I ended up keeping my 105 f2 DC.

That is easily one of my best lenses.

I will checkout your review now. BTW you should change the page's title. It still says Tokina 11-16 review.

 

[lan]

You did a nice review from your heart.

That's cool that you like ZEISS and FUJI. They are indeed unique products with unique results. When shooting JPEG, it is quite important to get things right out of camera. I use photoshop a lot to modify things like color and contrast so for me differences between lenses and bodies isn't that big of a deal.

 

[dj_mocok]

I know, title problem... When I started the blog I shortsightedly titled my blog as Tokina review instead of just Lens review or something. Now every other thing I write will have that stupid title.

With S5 combination and it's JPG output, I seriously don't need to post process that much because the result straight from camera looks very pleasant already. Some of the shots I posted on the review were unprocessed, but they still look good.

I am 90% sure will get whatever the successor of D700 because I want an FX camera. But I am not planning to sell the S5 at all, unless the new camera can match the S5's jpg output straight from camera. Not talking about resolution though, but the colour tone of S5 is just so different and looks more intimate, that's why I like it.

 

[vagarach]

So dj_mocok, I noticed that a lot of the sample pictures in your review are very 'pretty'. Colours pop, the contrast makes the subject pop, everything is so nice, so smooth. Suddenly I want to buy a lens that costs twice as much as my D50 kit did back in 2006.

Is this the lens or the just the nature of the Fuji's in-camera processing, the resizing to web size, etc?

 

[dj_mocok]

Well, a bit of both really.
With Zeiss (or with other modern nice lenses) you will get better colour and contrast even wide open. I personally believe that Zeiss has more pleasant colour tone and the colours look richer compared to my other Nikon lenses.
But S5 also known to deliver excellent jpg straight from the camera.
But basically what you mentioned about contrast, colours pop, and smooth are the reason why I got the lens. And the build quality of the lens.

Zeiss is re-releasing some of the lines with CPU contacts, so that will work with your D50.

 

[dj_mocok]

I might also write a quick one about the Nikon 35mm f/2. This lens is surprisingly very good!

 

[l1f35ux]

can you guys recommend me the website or forum where I can get my hands on a used 70-200vr?

 

[fureshi]

recently i've seen quite a few pop up on craigslist

 

[Zodduska]

Quote:

Originally Posted by l1f35ux /img/forum/go_quote.gif can you guys recommend me the website or forum where I can get my hands on a used 70-200vr?

forum: fredmiranda.com: Specialized in Canon - Nikon SLR Cameras, Forum, Photoshop Plugins, Actions, Reviews, Hosting and Digital Darkroom

website: http://www.KEH.com

 

[l1f35ux]

Thanks guys, i really appreciate

 

[dj_mocok]

I am not sure about the used market trend in US, but if it's the same as here in Australia, popular lenses from Nikon are usually sold at very close price as the new ones.
Eg. if new one costs $2000, you'll probably see a great condition used one will sell around $1700-$1800.

Now for something as expensive as 70-200mm VR, I personally would rather pay $200-$300 extra and get my self a brand new one with warranty than trying to save $300 but then I have to think about the risk that it might crap on me halfway or maybe there's something wrong with the lens, etc etc...

There are lots of moving parts in 70-200mm too, if it was mechanical Ais lenses I'll probably won't be that concerned. But this is my opinion of course.

 

[lan]

I'm packing for a trip and it WAS hard choosing what cameras to bring until I looked at the size and weight of everything. Now that I must downsize, I think I'm bringing my Nikon because the overall setup is smaller and lighter.

Imagine this, the Canon 85 1.2 weighs as much as the Nikon 35/2, 50/1.8, 55-200VR, AND Tamron 17-50 2.8 combined! I want to be light and mobile though.

 

[dj_mocok]

On my last trip I only brought my Panasonic LX3. It was fun, I can concentrate on food, the city life, and everything else instead of worrying about what lens I need to use for what picture, what's the angle, etc etc...

But it all depends on where you're going too of course. If it's only casual city I probably won't bother so much about equipments... Unless I'm going to a trip to Amazon or something.

 

[lan]

I just got a cheap LX3 for this trip also. I can use pocketwizard on the hot shoe so I can still use my lights. It also has electronic shutter so I can darken the sky easily so I don't have to use big powered lights. It uses a CCD which gives no rolling shutter effect on the video. I also love the fact it can shoot RAW. I wish it could shoot RAW + JPEG (in the high dynamic mode). I will use a slave flash with it for everyday stuff.

I'm going to Europe so it will be scenic but I primarily only shoot models now lol so I'm not too particular about taking photos of other things.