|
| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/31/2008 02:45:59 PM · #26 |
Thanks - yes, that's the new macro I was wondering about. Quality almost as good as the five year old one? Don't you just love progress... Sadly here in the UK it comes with a price tag £100 greater than that of the other lens.
I may be able to stretch my funds to get the 18-200 before I leave, but probably not - my plan at the moment is to pick it up in a kit with the D90. That CMOS sensor is appealing, plus I've already grown tired of the D60 only having three focusing points. Video might be pretty ropey quality from what I've heard, but once again - for expedition-style work where you want kit that can do as much as possible with as little baggage it saves carrying a compact along - and video with a macro lens is an appealing option.
Phil |
|
|
|
01/02/2009 11:22:37 AM · #27 |
As a follow-up question, what ring flash is recommended for use with the 60mm macro lens that's compatible with the D60? Most of the flashes I've seen suggested are full remote flash set-ups, which are entirely impractical for field shots of frogs during expedition work. Thanks again,
Phil |
|
|
|
01/05/2009 07:18:27 AM · #28 |
Originally posted by Ann:
Originally posted by pobblebonk:
snaffles/togtog: The 18-200 is on my wishlist, as a replacement for my Sigma 55-200 and Nikon 18-55. Would you say this is a good exchange? I use my camera gear a lot on expeditions and the convenience of only having one lens (especially with wildlife shots where switching lenses can cause you to miss the opportunity) is appealing. I also expect the Nikon lens to produce a better image quality than the rather average Sigma.
I'm also in the market for a macro lens, as my old macro is for film SLRs and so lacks autofocus on my D60. I've also got my eye on the 60mm f2.8 AF Micro-Nikkor D, but this appears not to be an AF-S fitting. Can anyone tell me whether this lens (which now seems to be about five years old) is capable of autofocus on a modern DSLR? Alternatively, what are people's impressions of the newer version released this year, the 60 mm f.28G ED Micro-Nikkor NAFS?
Thanks,
Phil |
The 18-200, while not a "professional" quality lens, will kick the butts of the lenses you're replacing. I use it on my D60, and it's a nice setup.
This is the 60mm macro you want, the newest version of the Nikon 60. It just came out a few months ago. The older one doesn't have AF-S. My understanding is that the new version is at least as good as the old one, which is also quite nice. |
--
A lot of this depends on (a) budget (b) weight (c) other constraints. In my heavy kit I have the current "trinity" - 14-24, 24-70, 70-200 and a D3. Let's not forget the 50mm f1.8. In another post, I mentioned the issues travelling with this: weight is 14+Kg including laptop.
The 17-35 and the 17-55DX are also super crisp contenders that seem to have been ignored here and are GREAT lenses. Again, if weight is an issue, these are heavy pro glass.
For my travel kit, I've gone with the Sigma 10-20 (77mm) and the 18-200VR (72mm) which I may swap out for the 16-85VR plus the 70-300VR to get a bit more range. The 18-70 isn't a bad choice either, on a budget when combined with the 70-300VR. Camera body is currently under consideration. The advantage with the 18-70/16-85VR plus 70-300VR is they all take the same filters at 67mm.
BTW: I do not like the 18-55 (any flavor) as this is the only Nikkor I've seen that rotates to focus. This messes up circular polarizers.
Message edited by author 2009-01-05 08:31:02. |
|
|
|
01/05/2009 08:03:32 AM · #29 |
--
I did the same thing, and have both bodies.
Your biggest change will be on the wide end. The 14-24 isn't used to full advantage on the D300 as it comes in at 21mm once you take into account the sensor. With the DX (cropped) sensor on the D300, the Sigma 10-20DC gives you more wide angle at an effective 15-30mm. There are other options from Tokina, & Tamron, and Nikon comes in with a 12-24DX, but at $1K, I opted for the cheap way out. After this, the rest sort of fall in place. I'd suggest you take them all for a test drive at your local dealer FIRST. Bring a spare CF card.
The fisheye is for DX sensors. Don't know how it'll behave on a D3 - Likely it'll mess up. Beware, a full frame fisheye on a DX sensor won't give you a fisheye effect.
These Nikkors are all full-frame (FX) lenses. "AF" is AutoFocus, "-S" is Silent Wave Motor. "DX" lenses are for cropped sensors, and none of these are DX lenses. Again, the AF-S 17-35 f2.8 is also a sweet lens worth considering. I have no complaints with any of these (the Nikkors) on my D3 except for travelling weight. I went for the AF-S Micro 105VR f2.8 instead of the 60 mainly 'cause I got a deal. I also opted for the 70-300VR f4-5.6 which is also an FX lens, and haven't tried the fixed 300 f4.
If you're after range, another FX lens with mixed reviews is the AF 80-400VR. It is slow to autofocus, but other than that, the samples I've played with (I don't own one) have seemed OK. The 80-200 f2.8 is also a bargain.
Message edited by author 2009-01-05 08:31:31. |
|
|
|
01/05/2009 09:02:20 AM · #30 |
Originally posted by asb-ca:
The fisheye is for DX sensors. Don't know how it'll behave on a D3 - Likely it'll mess up. Beware, a full frame fisheye on a DX sensor won't give you a fisheye effect.
|
beg to differ
it works like normal fisheye, just masked by the scallop hood
plenty of hints on how to make it a nearly circular fisheye by cutting the hood
as far as the old OP question /
if you are really planing to go full frame drop the
Sigma 4.5mm f/2.8 EX DC HSM Fisheye Lens for Nikon
Sigma 20mm f/1.8 EX Aspherical DG DF RF for Nikon
since they are specifically DX (would like to see the equiv of the 20 in full frame)
try the nikon 16mm fisheye instead of the 10.5mm, i am unaware of a good (& inexpensive) <28mm low light lens
also i been prefering the 80-400vr over the 300/f4 But YMMV |
|
|
|
01/05/2009 10:22:51 AM · #31 |
Originally posted by ralph:
Originally posted by asb-ca:
The fisheye is for DX sensors. Don't know how it'll behave on a D3 - Likely it'll mess up. Beware, a full frame fisheye on a DX sensor won't give you a fisheye effect.
|
beg to differ
it works like normal fisheye, just masked by the scallop hood
plenty of hints on how to make it a nearly circular fisheye by cutting the hood
|
A DX fisheye (Sigma 4.5mm f/2.8 EX DC HSM) in a D3/D700 will crop to DX and give you ~5MP IF it behaves properly. This one is 3rd party, so all bets are off (Have you tried THIS lens). A full frame fisheye (a.k.a. the 16mm) will only give you the center on a DX crop-sensor camera (D300) and hence will not give you the proper fisheye you are expecting until you put it in a full-frame camera. Am I mistaken?
Originally posted by ralph:
as far as the old OP question /
if you are really planing to go full frame drop the
Sigma 4.5mm f/2.8 EX DC HSM Fisheye Lens for Nikon
Sigma 20mm f/1.8 EX Aspherical DG DF RF for Nikon
since they are specifically DX (would like to see the equiv of the 20 in full frame)
|
On a Sigma lens the DC indicates a lens designed for a cropped-sensor camera (same as Nikkor DX). The 20mm is a full-frame lens. EX is the expensive glass, DG is full frame digital, RF is rear focus. The DF is a typo.
//www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3280&navigator=4
for Sigma - look at the 8mm fisheye: 8mm F3.5 EX DG Circular Fisheye
//www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3319&navigator=4
No comment on quality, since I've never even seen these lenses!
Originally posted by ralph:
try the nikon 16mm fisheye instead of the 10.5mm, i am unaware of a good (& inexpensive) <28mm low light lens
also i been prefering the 80-400vr over the 300/f4 But YMMV |
Message edited by author 2009-01-05 10:29:25. |
|
|
|
01/05/2009 10:36:48 AM · #32 |
Originally posted by asb-ca:
A DX fisheye (Sigma 4.5mm f/2.8 EX DC HSM) in a D3/D700 will crop to DX and give you ~5MP IF it behaves properly. This one is 3rd party, so all bets are off (Have you tried THIS lens). A full frame fisheye (a.k.a. the 16mm) will only give you the center on a DX crop-sensor camera (D300) and hence will not give you the proper fisheye you are expecting until you put it in a full-frame camera. Am I mistaken?
|
nope haven't tried it (haven't seen one in real life yet )
4.5 is circular / will only be 8Mpix or so useable pixels on a DX framed camera to start with ;)
again possibly better to do the 8mm sigma full frame as the OP stated he was moving to a D700/D3 in the future, thats also why the 16mm should be considered rather than the 10.5mm ..
(I had the 10.5mm but sold it one i purchased the D3..)
|
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 08/03/2025 11:34:12 AM  |
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/03/2025 11:34:12 AM EDT.
|
