Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Nikor Wideangle lens selection  (Read 2922 times)
Guest
« on: August 29, 2005, 08:30:40 AM »
ReplyReply

No personal knowledge but in landscape photography you usually stop down to f/8-11 and use a tripod. This is the sweet spot of almost all lenses so the difference (if any) will be marginal. Because of that I will suggest the zoom.


Happy shooting,
Yakim.
Logged
giles
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 209


« Reply #1 on: August 30, 2005, 11:54:48 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I want to take a lens for landscape photography (film photography, NOT DIGITAL).
...
    I want to know, which lens will be more suitable ?
The only Nikon camera I have is a 35mm point and shoot, so I can't offer any personal experience. I would, however, suggest you to take a look at Thom Hogan's lens reviews:

http://www.bythom.com/nikon.htm

If I'm reading the lens name right, he does review the 18-35mm lens.  He also has an overview page about lenses here:

Nikon lens recommendations

Have fun,

Giles
Logged
BryanHansel
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 369


WWW
« Reply #2 on: August 31, 2005, 12:53:48 AM »
ReplyReply

I switched to digital before I bought a 17-35 or a 20-35, but I do own a 24 2.8 D.  I've never used the 18-35 that you mention, but if it has the same build as the 24-85 3.5-4.5 AFS, I'd skip it.  I bought that lens last year and it's about had it.  Of course, I put gear through tough conditions, but still.  My 24 2.8 D on the other hand has been a camp.  It's light, it's sharp, it focuses fast, it's small.  It makes my FM3a feel really nice, and I love it on my digital also.  It's a great little lens, and was my favorite when I shot film.  Now with digital, I use my 12-24 more often, but every once in a while, I shoot for a week with just the 24.
Logged

Guest
« Reply #3 on: August 31, 2005, 03:51:32 AM »
ReplyReply

>> My wife has the 18-35, but always seems to make a "mistake" and pick up my 20-35 instead. I've never quized her why

1. You sound like an experienced husband.... :-)
2. The 20-35/2.8 and 18-35/3.5-4.5 are in different categories.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.
Logged
Amal
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13


« Reply #4 on: August 29, 2005, 04:06:27 AM »
ReplyReply

Hello all !!!

  I want to take a lens for landscape photography (film photography, NOT DIGITAL). The choices are among the Nikkor 24mm/f2.8D and Nikkor 18-35mm f3.5-4.5 ED IF. I generally enlarge my prints up to 16 inch by 24 inch.
  I want to know, which lens will be more suitable ? If at 24mm, the 18-35mm produces almost equal results (in sharpness/ contrast/ colour reproduction/ distortion etc.) as of 24 mm (speed does not matter) and at this focal length with this zoom I can go up to above mentioned enlargements, then I will go for the zoom.
  Please provide me the feedback, so I can choose the right one.
Logged
Amal
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13


« Reply #5 on: August 30, 2005, 11:15:48 PM »
ReplyReply

Hello Yakim,

  Thanks for providing the views.

  
   Regards
   Amal
Logged
Hank
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 679


« Reply #6 on: August 31, 2005, 12:28:39 AM »
ReplyReply

For film my long-standing favorite is the 20-35mm f/2.8.  Tack sharp and solid as a tank.  My wife has the 18-35, but always seems to make a "mistake" and pick up my 20-35 instead.  I've never quized her why, but have had to retrieve it from her camera bags on more than one occasion.
Logged
Amal
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13


« Reply #7 on: August 31, 2005, 02:05:25 AM »
ReplyReply

Giles, Hank and Bryan,

   Many many thanks for providing the feedback.

   Regards
   Amal
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad