Heads up - D2X shipping
Discussion
Following on from that - anyone got an opinion (as if not!) on this:
If Mrs Get lets me raid the piggy, I'm thinking of fitting a lens to the D2X and (unless I really have to) never taking it off (I'm fed up with dust on the CCD) - now bearing in mind that it'll almost exclusively be used for landscapes (I'll keep the D1X with a long lens) - do you think my 20-35 2.8 zoom is the lens to keep on - or is it worth getting a prime lens (probably a 24). I have to say I hardly ever use the full range of the 20 - 35 - but will the quality of a prime lens make that much difference?
I've been arsing about this morning using a 1.4 50mm comparing results to the zoom - and I have to say for outdoor work the results are very similar - the resolution of the D1X is by far the limiting factor I think (?) D2X might be different?
Opinions on prime v zoom would be good. Ta
O/T
I'd also been meaning to try this with the 50mm: (watch/mirror/desklamp) which worked quite well I think (perhaps 1.4 was a little too narrow?)... and I wished I'd taken it 2 mins earlier so the brand wasn't half covered - DOH) Those of you who know me will also know that I don't do 'inside'.
>> Edited by GetCarter on Sunday 13th February 11:46
If Mrs Get lets me raid the piggy, I'm thinking of fitting a lens to the D2X and (unless I really have to) never taking it off (I'm fed up with dust on the CCD) - now bearing in mind that it'll almost exclusively be used for landscapes (I'll keep the D1X with a long lens) - do you think my 20-35 2.8 zoom is the lens to keep on - or is it worth getting a prime lens (probably a 24). I have to say I hardly ever use the full range of the 20 - 35 - but will the quality of a prime lens make that much difference?
I've been arsing about this morning using a 1.4 50mm comparing results to the zoom - and I have to say for outdoor work the results are very similar - the resolution of the D1X is by far the limiting factor I think (?) D2X might be different?
Opinions on prime v zoom would be good. Ta
O/T
I'd also been meaning to try this with the 50mm: (watch/mirror/desklamp) which worked quite well I think (perhaps 1.4 was a little too narrow?)... and I wished I'd taken it 2 mins earlier so the brand wasn't half covered - DOH) Those of you who know me will also know that I don't do 'inside'.
>> Edited by GetCarter on Sunday 13th February 11:46
Nice pics Matt.
Your watches?
O/T again... I've worn my (self winding / clockwork) watch everyday for the past 5 years and it keeps perfect time (about a second a month) and I still can't see a scratch on the face. There are some very clever gits out there.
Back on topic... prime v zoom anyone?
Your watches?
O/T again... I've worn my (self winding / clockwork) watch everyday for the past 5 years and it keeps perfect time (about a second a month) and I still can't see a scratch on the face. There are some very clever gits out there.
Back on topic... prime v zoom anyone?
Steve,
I think you could take a cracking photo with a milk bottle and a Cornflakes box so the question is pretty academic! Zooms have come a long way in the last ten years, I own three lenses and they're all zooms.
Talking of watches, I've got a Breitling too, a Sea Wolf titanium.
Martin.
I think you could take a cracking photo with a milk bottle and a Cornflakes box so the question is pretty academic! Zooms have come a long way in the last ten years, I own three lenses and they're all zooms.
Talking of watches, I've got a Breitling too, a Sea Wolf titanium.
Martin.
Apparently(!) Nikon have delayed the release date so they can stockpile stock and supply all those that pre-ordered.
Re Landscapes...I dont do much shooting of that genre but whilst the optics of a prime lens are said to be better than a zoom, I would have thought a quality zoom lens..Nikkor would give you the flexibility. There are times when a zoom is useful and means you dont have to walk to find the perfect vantage point.
Steve
Re Landscapes...I dont do much shooting of that genre but whilst the optics of a prime lens are said to be better than a zoom, I would have thought a quality zoom lens..Nikkor would give you the flexibility. There are times when a zoom is useful and means you dont have to walk to find the perfect vantage point.
Steve
Do you find that with the 20-35 you are normally always shooting at around the same focal length? If so go down the prime route if quality is your main concern. The prime will have less glass (which means less aberrations) and fewer moving parts and is (in theory) going to be optically superior.
As a completely "out of the box" suggestion how about going for a tilt/shift 24mm prime? Still a prime but the movements afforded by such a lens will be great for perspective correction in architecture photography, creative control of the plane of focus etc. I don't know if Nikon do make such a lens but other companies (Hartblei possible) probably do.
As a completely "out of the box" suggestion how about going for a tilt/shift 24mm prime? Still a prime but the movements afforded by such a lens will be great for perspective correction in architecture photography, creative control of the plane of focus etc. I don't know if Nikon do make such a lens but other companies (Hartblei possible) probably do.
In the prime v's zoom battle I'm going to cop out with an "it depends"
If you're carrying your kit around all day maybe that F2.8 zoom is going to get heavy. However you do have the advantage of being able to get multiple angles of view from the same spot.
If you're going to go with just a prime I'm a big fan of the Nikkor 20mm f2.8, razor sharp and contrasty. However the quality of the F2.8 zoom should be beyond reproach and will give you a lot more flexibility.
Chris
If you're carrying your kit around all day maybe that F2.8 zoom is going to get heavy. However you do have the advantage of being able to get multiple angles of view from the same spot.
If you're going to go with just a prime I'm a big fan of the Nikkor 20mm f2.8, razor sharp and contrasty. However the quality of the F2.8 zoom should be beyond reproach and will give you a lot more flexibility.
Chris
A few years ago I did a comparison between two lenses on my D1X, a 28-300mm Tamron and an 80-400 VR Nikkor. They were both set at 200mm, and I took various shots wide open, and then at different apertures down to f/22. A tripod was used. Unfortunately I seem to have lost the results, but the salient point was that the limiting factor (in these ideal situations) was the lens, not the chip. I was very suprised by this! Of course, neither of these two lenses is SUPER sharp, but i happen to have a Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 which is measurably the sharpest (and cheapest I would guess) lens that Nikkor currently makes. Have a look at this picture here to see what it is capable of. This photo is straight out of the camera, it is also Hi-Res (2.7mb)
www.thriplow-farms.co.uk/DSC_0191.JPG
My point is that in my experience (all things being equal
), a prime lens will be sharper than a zoom. You can also get faster primes for less money. I would have thought that if a D1X can tell the difference between lenses, then a D2X will be even more picky.
Of course, sharpness (like megapixles) isn't everything, so if you're determined to have only one lens, the zoom you described maybe ideal, especially since you probably won't need to worry about using large apertures very often on landscapes with a tripod.
Personally I would go with a Prime, but don't listen to me, I'm useless at landscapes
>> Edited by dcw@pr on Monday 14th February 13:18
www.thriplow-farms.co.uk/DSC_0191.JPG
My point is that in my experience (all things being equal
), a prime lens will be sharper than a zoom. You can also get faster primes for less money. I would have thought that if a D1X can tell the difference between lenses, then a D2X will be even more picky. Of course, sharpness (like megapixles) isn't everything, so if you're determined to have only one lens, the zoom you described maybe ideal, especially since you probably won't need to worry about using large apertures very often on landscapes with a tripod.
Personally I would go with a Prime, but don't listen to me, I'm useless at landscapes
>> Edited by dcw@pr on Monday 14th February 13:18
dcw@pr said:
Have a loo at this picture here to see what it is capable of. This photo is straight out of the camera, it is also Hi-Res (2.7mb)
www.thriplow-farms.co.uk/DSC_0191.JPG
Does the subject know you posted her photo on the web. It's not necessarily the most....flattering angle
Sharp indeed though! Any camera will only ever be as good as the lens hanging off it in the first instance.
It's like everything though, you upgrade one piece and another becomes the limiting factor.
If I were buying a camera and intent on only hanging one lens off it, I probably wouldn't buy an SLR to be honest. Especially not one costing over 3k!
And seeing the quality of your landscape images already Steve, I'd probably save your cash for now (perhaps add to the watch collection
).
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff