DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> Help me demystify the lens lingo!
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 31, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 04/12/2007 06:36:00 PM · #1
I'm finally getting my D80 with my tax return. Yay! Unfortunately, all the crazy numbers on lenses might as well be Martian. Boooo...

So what do all the numbers mean? All I understand is the f/whatever and that AF is autofocus.

And secondarily: if you could get the coolest lens ever for a D80, what would it be? I probably can't afford it, but it's nice to have a goal. :-)
 04/12/2007 06:40:08 PM · #2
Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S DX VR II Autofocus Lens, but you must be VERY patient. ;)
 04/12/2007 06:41:31 PM · #3
well let say 18-55 or 18-200, those are focal lengths. On a 35mm camera 50mm would be considered the "zoom" we see basicly normal focal length. ANything larger is telepoto. Anything shorter is wide angle.

On digital camera's such as the D80 have a focal multiplier of 1.5. Not to confuse things but basicly a 50mm focal length on the D80 is gonna be like a 75mm focal length on 35mm. SO the 50mm on the D80 is gonna be a little further zoomed up.

18-55 means it can zoom from a wide angle focal length of 18 up to 55 so on and so forth.

the lenses well tell you what the largest aperture they maintain from wide angle to telephoto. Alot of lenses its F/2.8 at wide angle and F/4.0 at telephoto.

Smaller aperture (higher number) the less light is coming in but the depth of field is also decreased giving you more detail so to speak at longer distances.

Either way the lense will usually go down to an aperature as small as f/8 or f/11 some going even further.

EDIT - Yeah the 18-200 VR is the lense to get theyres a couple similar ones out there but the quality on some isnt as good. A wide angle to super zoom lense is always gonna have minor quirks due to its versatility. Chances are its higher quality then anything mounted to your point and shoot.

Message edited by author 2007-04-12 18:45:17.
 04/12/2007 06:55:45 PM · #4
Read this.

04/12/2007 06:59:50 PM · #5
Originally posted by TJinGuy:
Read this.


Page 18 explains focal length (18-55 and so on) and aperature (f/) in a simple visual manner.
 04/12/2007 07:01:29 PM · #6
For Nikon, ED = Extra Dollars
For Canon L = Ludicrous
What else is there to know?

There are lots of threads about lenses in DPC, and usually the more expensive lenses are better You have to decide what you want to do with your camera, and go from there about choosing which lenses you want or need to get, for the way you want to shoot.
04/12/2007 07:02:31 PM · #7
Originally posted by MelonMusketeer:
For Nikon, ED = Extra Dollars
For Canon L = Ludicrous
What else is there to know?

There are lots of threads about lenses in DPC, and usually the more expensive lenses are better You have to decide what you want to do with your camera, and go from there about choosing which lenses you want or need to get, for the way you want to shoot.


Lets see Fuji S3... oh thats right your using nikon lenses go ED lol!
 04/12/2007 07:15:44 PM · #8
Originally posted by MelonMusketeer:
For Nikon, ED = Extra Dollars
For Canon L = Ludicrous
What else is there to know?

There are lots of threads about lenses in DPC, and usually the more expensive lenses are better You have to decide what you want to do with your camera, and go from there about choosing which lenses you want or need to get, for the way you want to shoot.


I thought Canon L = Larus
 04/12/2007 07:17:51 PM · #9
The ED makes them pricey, but it is worth the difference if you are serious about quality. There is a big difference in contrast and sharpness with the ED series, and flare control is better as well. This is especially true of the ED's when shooting into the light.
I didn't think there would be so much difference in quality until I started buying them.
For Rebecca, you may want to get with someone who has a Nikon and several lenses so that you can see how they feel and work. Another option is to go to a camera store, and try several with your new D80 to see what you like.
I hope you will end up with exactly what you need.

04/12/2007 07:26:13 PM · #10
Once everything is clear in your head...then you can add the x1.5 (I believe on the Nikons) crop factor. It's fun, all of us w/o full frame cams have to do it...

Message edited by author 2007-04-12 19:26:57.
 04/12/2007 08:28:32 PM · #11
Okay, let's look at this one as an example, since it comes with one of the D80 kits:

Nikon 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor Lens

18-135mm is the focal length

f/3.5-5.6 is the largest aperture the lens can handle at its minimum and maximum focal lengths (right?)

AF is autofocus

Now what are G, ED-IF, the S on AF-S, and DX?
 04/12/2007 08:41:57 PM · #12
Originally posted by Rebecca:
Okay, let's look at this one as an example, since it comes with one of the D80 kits:

Nikon 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor Lens

18-135mm is the focal length

f/3.5-5.6 is the largest aperture the lens can handle at its minimum and maximum focal lengths (right?)


Yes

Originally posted by Rebecca:

AF is auto-focus

Now what are G, ED-IF, the S on AF-S, and DX?


DX is a lens that was designed specifically for the APS-C (1.5 crop) sensor.

The "S: in AF-S stands for "Silent Wave" when you see AF-S it means fast and quiet. You can also go to manual focus just by turning the ring. The AF-S is the only way to go.

ED = extra-low dispersion glass (better quality)
IF = Internal focus

G = No Aperture Ring on Lens

Message edited by author 2007-04-12 20:44:04.
 04/12/2007 08:56:57 PM · #13
IMHO the must have Nikon lenses are:

50mm 1.8 prime
17-55mm 2.8 AF-S DX
70-200mm 2.8 AF-S VR (Vibration Reduction)
or
The older but still great 80-200mm 2.8 AF-S

But the 18-70mm3.5-4.5 AF-S is a great little lens as well

The only other must have is the Tokina 12-24mm f/4 super wide

Message edited by author 2007-04-12 20:57:49.
 04/12/2007 11:12:37 PM · #14
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:

G = No Aperture Ring on Lens


Does "D" then mean there IS an aperture ring on the lens? And what exactly would an aperture ring do, anyway? What benefit is there to having or not having one?
 04/12/2007 11:42:01 PM · #15
I have both types, G and D lenses. The only advantage so far is that I can use the D lens with an older teleconverter which does not couple the lens to the cameras electronics. The aperture ring also allows me to use the D with extension tubes for super macro shooting.
In practical use, for normal purposes, there is no difference, except that there are less moving parts to break with the G series. The aperture is controlled with the control dials on the camera body with both lens types.
04/13/2007 12:19:08 AM · #16
nevermind.

Message edited by author 2007-04-13 00:19:26.
 04/13/2007 01:28:30 AM · #17
Thanks for the lessons, everyone.

That 18-200 VR lens is one of the primary reasons I'm seriously (as in I might go this weekend) looking at Nikon vs. Canon. I understand it's not the fastest lens, and it has some sharpness issues at the extremes, but it solves my #1 problem with an SLR: crap to lug around. :)

Rebecca, VR (Nikon) or IS (Canon) means that the lens has components that shift around to allow for a little camera shake from your hand, keeping the shot crisp. VR=vibration reduction, IS=image stabilization.

The typical description is that you can shoot at 2-3 stops slower than with lenses lacking that capability and get shots just as crisp. It's also extremely handy when shooting long zooms. It won't help you stop moving subjects, but it really helps with hand shake.

On my point-and-shoot, I can attest to how well it works.
 04/13/2007 02:04:44 AM · #18
i'll throw my 2 cents in ... but i won't talk about technical specifics, since it's already been handled so well. i'll just talk about lenses.

if you're buying the camera with tax return money, i guess that you're not loaded up the wazoo with cash (just like most of us here). therefore you want to spend well and spend wisely.

the 17-55mm f2.8 is one of the best nikon lenses available. however it's expensive and heavy. when money falls off trees, i'll buy one myself.

i think that the 18-70mm or the 18-200mm VR (first choice) would be a good base lens. this is the lens you'll use most often.

it's good to have a telephoto, and the 80-300mm VR is a great lens. i have one. it's fast and sharp.

the 50mm f1.8 is a must have lens ... it's small, cheap and the aperture is fantastic for bokeh and low light.

if you can afford dedicated f2.8 lenses, the go for it!! they're worth their weight in gold ... but if not, get yourself those 3 great lenses for about $1500 and you won't regret doing it.

to give you an idea, the 17-55mm f2.8 is around $1200.

the 18-200mm VR + the 80-300mm VR + the 50mm f1.8 will cost maybe $1400.

f2.8 lenses will run you over $1000-1500 apiece ... easily!!!

btw, i'm ballparking those prices. so don't take them as gospel!

Message edited by author 2007-04-13 02:09:21.
 04/13/2007 02:21:08 AM · #19
Originally posted by awpollard:
Once everything is clear in your head...then you can add the x1.5 (I believe on the Nikons) crop factor. It's fun, all of us w/o full frame cams have to do it...


I don't have to do it!
04/13/2007 03:10:42 AM · #20
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
The only other must have is the Tokina 12-24mm f/4 super wide


If you have/willing to spend the money, get the Nikon version.


04/13/2007 04:41:31 AM · #21
Same as everyone, really... you're lucky enough to get pretty similar responses here, too.

50mm (I have the 1.4, but it's swings and roundabouts) prime is probably the best ratio of lens to money you'll ever get. In addition it's dead handy indoors and/or for situations where you don't want to have some enormously expensive-and-technological-looking piece of aparatus hanging round your neck. The 18-200 VR is magnificently versatile - as you may well imagine. I'd say get those two and see what sort of photography you tend to be doing before getting any more.

Congratulations and good luck.
 04/13/2007 09:18:42 AM · #22
Well, after looking everything over and comparing prices and whatnot since no, I'm not rich, I'm looking at the Tokina super wide and, for fun because I'm like that, a Lensbaby 2.0. Heh... I have to keep in mind that I need some other accessories too, like a polarizer, and lens hood, and a much nicer tripod.

Thanks for the help everyone! So many threads here are "what lens is best?" and then people post a string of numbers and letters that meant absolutely nothing to me without any explanation as to how to decode it.
04/13/2007 11:08:39 AM · #23
Originally posted by Rebecca:
Well, after looking everything over and comparing prices and whatnot since no, I'm not rich, I'm looking at the Tokina super wide and, for fun because I'm like that, a Lensbaby 2.0. Heh... I have to keep in mind that I need some other accessories too, like a polarizer, and lens hood, and a much nicer tripod.


The Tokina 12-24 comes with its own lenshood.
Haven't used a polarizer since 2004 and don't miss it really.
Good tripod, that's important.


04/13/2007 11:11:34 AM · #24
Originally posted by Azrifel:
Originally posted by Rebecca:
Well, after looking everything over and comparing prices and whatnot since no, I'm not rich, I'm looking at the Tokina super wide and, for fun because I'm like that, a Lensbaby 2.0. Heh... I have to keep in mind that I need some other accessories too, like a polarizer, and lens hood, and a much nicer tripod.


The Tokina 12-24 comes with its own lenshood.
Haven't used a polarizer since 2004 and don't miss it really.
Good tripod, that's important.


I have a polarizer for my Coolpix and I couldn't live without it. ;-)
 04/13/2007 11:33:33 AM · #25
I had a chance to muck about with another shooter's D80 on Wednesday night and I will repeat what I have said before. The Nikon 50mm f/1.8 is more expensive than the Canon variant and worth every stinkin' penny. It's truly a sweet lens. I would never even consider using a Nikon for any length of time without one...

I also used her 18-200 f/3.5-who really cares VR II blah blah lens.

Sure it was kinda cool to have such a huge range and be able to shoot wide without changing lenses (I was shooting about 15 feet behind her with my 80-200 f/2.8L), but shooting a series of student stage performances (read: crap for lighting 80% of the time), I think I would have considered taking a sledge hammer to that thing at anything beyond 70mm... I was hand-holding my camera, shooting at ISO 1000. She was shooting ISO 1600, but anything that wasn't shot wide open was junk. I came away with around 40% usable shots numbering around 250. She came away with around 15-20% usable shots, numbering around 40. She didn't have a single close-up that worked. I've got almost 100 head shots.

Both of us would have done better if we had teamed up beforehand and she had been using a Tamron 17-50 f/2.8.

And while on the subject of that lens, there's proof that you CAN get a very good f/2.8 constant in a good range on a nice lens for much less than 1000 bucks.

Of course, given some better lighting, this wouldn't have been an issue at all. Shooting outdoors, stopping that 18-200 VR down to f/8 should yield some excellent results. I paid good money for glass that lets me shoot in situations where stopping down simply isn't an option.

Message edited by author 2007-04-13 11:38:39.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/16/2024 07:09:18 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/16/2024 07:09:18 PM EDT.