Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: D800 walk around lens?  (Read 24545 times)
ndevlin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 515



WWW
« Reply #20 on: May 15, 2012, 09:09:45 PM »
ReplyReply


I, too, found the 24-120 to be obviously weaker than just about all of the other Nikon lenses I have.  That makes the 'sharpist' in me reject it. However, it is the perfect 'walk-around' lens. And it is no worse than the Canon 24-105. Will you miss that 20% of quality more than the missed picture? That's what we all struggle with.

Personally, I'd like a tack-sharp 35-105mm f3.5 VR. If they can make the 16-35 and 14-24 as good as they are, this has to be possible...

- N. 
Logged

Nick Devlin   @onelittlecamera
Ellis Vener
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1801



WWW
« Reply #21 on: May 15, 2012, 09:42:36 PM »
ReplyReply

I've shot with both lenses but not simultaneously and i am leery of making comparisons of the type you ask of two lenses used in completely different circumstances including different bodies.   I'm also not a bokeh fiend -for me what is in focus and crisply rendered is more important than what is out of focus unless the OOF areas distract you from where I want your attention to go.

Without looking at the EXIF I am pretty sure that the portrait of the gentleman against a green metal door on the Via Dolorosa in Jerusalem in my portraits/people gallery of my website (http://www.ellisvener.com)  was shot with the 85mm f/1.4G on a D3s or D3X.
Logged

Ellis Vener
http://www.ellisvener.com
Creating photographs for advertising, corporate and industrial clients since 1984.
Colorado David
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 595



« Reply #22 on: May 15, 2012, 09:53:49 PM »
ReplyReply

I really want to like the Nikon 24-120 lens.  I keep hoping someone will review it favorably.  It would be the perfect lens to stay on the camera for a lot of situations.  If it weren't for this fear and trepidation.  I have a copy of its less than stellar predecessor which mostly lives on the shelf.
Logged

Ellis Vener
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1801



WWW
« Reply #23 on: May 15, 2012, 10:04:11 PM »
ReplyReply

The 24-120mm f/4G is far better than I expected it to be based on the earlier versions of this lens.
Logged

Ellis Vener
http://www.ellisvener.com
Creating photographs for advertising, corporate and industrial clients since 1984.
Colorado David
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 595



« Reply #24 on: May 15, 2012, 10:11:15 PM »
ReplyReply

The 24-120mm f/4G is far better than I expected it to be based on the earlier versions of this lens.

Ellis, do you own one or have you just used one?
Logged

Ellis Vener
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1801



WWW
« Reply #25 on: May 15, 2012, 10:32:11 PM »
ReplyReply

I've been using one on a D4, D800, and D800E since early April; "Otis" (I'm  trying ro stop calling cameras and lenses by techno jargon nomenclature) is on loan for review from Nikon. Same with the 85 Nikkors.
Logged

Ellis Vener
http://www.ellisvener.com
Creating photographs for advertising, corporate and industrial clients since 1984.
Colorado David
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 595



« Reply #26 on: May 15, 2012, 10:37:23 PM »
ReplyReply

So are you saying you've named this lens after the drunk on the Andy Griffith Show?
Logged

marcmccalmont
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1724



« Reply #27 on: May 15, 2012, 10:44:34 PM »
ReplyReply

So are you saying you've named this lens after the drunk on the Andy Griffith Show?

I've already knicknamed my 800E "Niki"
Marc
Logged

Marc McCalmont
Ellis Vener
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1801



WWW
« Reply #28 on: May 15, 2012, 10:47:51 PM »
ReplyReply

So are you saying you've named this lens after the drunk on the Andy Griffith Show?

Not that Otis, but after my neighbors 5 month old Chocolate  Labrador Retriever.
Logged

Ellis Vener
http://www.ellisvener.com
Creating photographs for advertising, corporate and industrial clients since 1984.
marcmccalmont
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1724



« Reply #29 on: May 15, 2012, 10:48:49 PM »
ReplyReply

I, too, found the 24-120 to be obviously weaker than just about all of the other Nikon lenses I have.  That makes the 'sharpist' in me reject it. However, it is the perfect 'walk-around' lens. And it is no worse than the Canon 24-105. Will you miss that 20% of quality more than the missed picture? That's what we all struggle with.

Personally, I'd like a tack-sharp 35-105mm f3.5 VR. If they can make the 16-35 and 14-24 as good as they are, this has to be possible...

- N. 
Nope if the 800E ends up a 18 mpx walk around camera in my hand and with my Leica R's on a tripod a 36 mpx mini MFDB I'll be happy!
I think from reading reviews the 24-120 suffers from distortion and CA more than lack of resolution, I'm hoping DxO should correct most of that?
Marc

Logged

Marc McCalmont
Ellis Vener
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1801



WWW
« Reply #30 on: May 15, 2012, 10:54:12 PM »
ReplyReply

I've already knicknamed my 800E "Niki"
Marc

I'm thinking of naming the D800E "Sidd" short for "Siddhartha" for the clarity with which it sees the world.
Logged

Ellis Vener
http://www.ellisvener.com
Creating photographs for advertising, corporate and industrial clients since 1984.
dturina
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 152



WWW
« Reply #31 on: May 16, 2012, 01:09:25 AM »
ReplyReply

Why even attempt to use D800 as a walkaround camera when it's not realistically going to show its maximum resolution? IMO it's better to get a lighter walkaround setup, m43 or NEX, and save yourself both money and trouble.
Logged

Danijel
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7426


WWW
« Reply #32 on: May 16, 2012, 01:28:53 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

I have seen some reports saying that the 24-120 is pretty good. Most lenses are decent at center but loose out at the corners. Lloyd Chambers ("Diglloyd") has tested a lot of lenses on his DAP page, may be worth a few dollars.

I'd suggest that Lightroom makes decent work on vignetting and chromatic aberration, at least with lens profiles. I prefer LR to DxO, but that's just me.

Personally, I use a 16-80/3.5-4.5 (Sony lens with a Zeiss label) on my Sony Alpha 77 (at 24 MP / APS-C) and it works decently.


Best regards
Erik 

Nope if the 800E ends up a 18 mpx walk around camera in my hand and with my Leica R's on a tripod a 36 mpx mini MFDB I'll be happy!
I think from reading reviews the 24-120 suffers from distortion and CA more than lack of resolution, I'm hoping DxO should correct most of that?
Marc


Logged

HarperPhotos
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1246



WWW
« Reply #33 on: May 16, 2012, 01:49:01 AM »
ReplyReply

Gidday,

My walk around lens I use on my Nikon D3x and eventually my new Nikon D800E is a Tokina ATX Pro AF 28-80mm F2.8 lens.

Its built like a tank and at 28mm will out resolve my now sold Nikon AF28mm F2.8 D lens.

They come up for sale on EBay occasionally.

http://www.photographyreview.com/cat/lenses/35mm-zoom/tokina/at-x-280-af-pro-28-80mm/prd_84797_3128crx.aspx

http://www.tokinalens.com/products/tokina/afl-04.html

Cheers

Simon
Logged

Simon Harper
Harper Photographics Ltd
http://www.harperphoto.com
http://www.facebook.com/harper.photographics

Auckland, New Zealand
marcmccalmont
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1724



« Reply #34 on: May 16, 2012, 02:54:55 AM »
ReplyReply

Why even attempt to use D800 as a walkaround camera when it's not realistically going to show its maximum resolution? IMO it's better to get a lighter walkaround setup, m43 or NEX, and save yourself both money and trouble.
Yes good idea but I have a K5 and a 17-70 f4, what I'm looking for is the equivalent to the 24-105 I had on my 5DII and used a lot. I guess that's the Nikkor 24-120 f4 for the D800
Marc
Logged

Marc McCalmont
marcmccalmont
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1724



« Reply #35 on: May 16, 2012, 02:58:30 AM »
ReplyReply

Gidday,

My walk around lens I use on my Nikon D3x and eventually my new Nikon D800E is a Tokina ATX Pro AF 28-80mm F2.8 lens.

Its built like a tank and at 28mm will out resolve my now sold Nikon AF28mm F2.8 D lens.

They come up for sale on EBay occasionally.

http://www.photographyreview.com/cat/lenses/35mm-zoom/tokina/at-x-280-af-pro-28-80mm/prd_84797_3128crx.aspx

http://www.tokinalens.com/products/tokina/afl-04.html

Cheers

Simon
I love Tokina glass (Hoya) but I'm looking for a stabilized lens, I wish Tokina had gotten into IS/VR One of my best lenses is the Tokina 100 macro unbelievable bokeh and as you focus the image size stays constant so focus stacking is easier.
Marc
Logged

Marc McCalmont
ihv
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 78


WWW
« Reply #36 on: May 16, 2012, 03:32:25 AM »
ReplyReply

For me the Canon 24-105 F4 was quite a popular lens for compact travelling. So I did not hesitate long to get the Nikon 24-120 F4.
While it is not a very bright aperture lens the stabiliser is pretty good. At 24mm the distortion was even stronger compared to Canon 24-105 but as this is more of uniform type it can be easily fixed. I don't have yet much experience with the lens but initial tests seem to be satisfying for me.

Not a striking subject but considering relatively slow shutter speed pretty decent.

Handheld at 120mm f8 1/50 iso6400:

modified: hum, doesn't seem to show the bigger image, it is not clickable?

« Last Edit: May 16, 2012, 03:34:28 AM by ihv » Logged
marcmccalmont
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1724



« Reply #37 on: May 16, 2012, 05:56:35 AM »
ReplyReply

For me the Canon 24-105 F4 was quite a popular lens for compact travelling. So I did not hesitate long to get the Nikon 24-120 F4.
While it is not a very bright aperture lens the stabiliser is pretty good. At 24mm the distortion was even stronger compared to Canon 24-105 but as this is more of uniform type it can be easily fixed. I don't have yet much experience with the lens but initial tests seem to be satisfying for me.

Not a striking subject but considering relatively slow shutter speed pretty decent.

Handheld at 120mm f8 1/50 iso6400:

modified: hum, doesn't seem to show the bigger image, it is not clickable?


Nice B&W conversion the bird feeder reminds me of a bird house I made, carved the face of a cat on the front with the hole the cats mouth. Just ordered a 24-120 (newegg had them in stock) I'll give it a try my 24-105 was pretty darn good maybe I'll get lucky with a sharp copy of the 24-120.
Marc
Logged

Marc McCalmont
marcmccalmont
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1724



« Reply #38 on: May 16, 2012, 06:05:05 AM »
ReplyReply



I'd suggest that Lightroom makes decent work on vignetting and chromatic aberration, at least with lens profiles. I prefer LR to DxO, but that's just me.


Maybe I should give lightroom a try? I've been using C1 for my phase one DB's and cameras w/o DxO lens modules and DxO for most of my DSLR stuff because of the lens modules but perhaps it's time to give LR a try
Marc
Logged

Marc McCalmont
JohnBrew
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 746


WWW
« Reply #39 on: May 16, 2012, 06:12:57 AM »
ReplyReply

I really want to like the Nikon 24-120 lens.  I keep hoping someone will review it favorably.  It would be the perfect lens to stay on the camera for a lot of situations.  If it weren't for this fear and trepidation.  I have a copy of its less than stellar predecessor which mostly lives on the shelf.

Check out Moose Peterson, he seems to be in love with this lens.
Logged

Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad