Sault Photography
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Buying a new Lens

+3
mikef
Cujo
crowellphotographs
7 posters

Go down

Buying a new Lens Empty Buying a new Lens

Post by crowellphotographs Wed Mar 19, 2008 1:08 pm

Well, my wife's given me permission to get a new lens. Very Happy I'd better jump on this quick.
The problem is, I don't know what to do. Unfortunately I should upgrade my DSLR kit, especially since an unfortunate accident has opened my 18-135mm up like pacman. (My stomach still turns when I think about it)
All that chat about the 50mm primes from nikon have convinced me that I will need one, just not today. Such a low price, I'll get one when needed.
I need a workhorse. Right now I'm leaning towards Nikon's 18-200mm VR-ED, but I've heard mixed reviews. I'm just not sure if it's not great compared to a 4000$+ f2.8 lens or if it is actually not that good.
I know you are mostly Cannon shooters here but, does anyone here have any good info/experience? Suggestions? reviews? Anything to help me to remove the icky feeling i have about buying a lens. I should be happy about this, not scared of buyers remorse.
crowellphotographs
crowellphotographs

Posts : 258
Join date : 2008-01-14

http://crowellphotographs.com

Back to top Go down

Buying a new Lens Empty Re: Buying a new Lens

Post by Cujo Wed Mar 19, 2008 1:32 pm

I have a book at home from a Nikon shooter with gear he recommends, I'll try to remember to take a look at it when I get there.

The lenses in the Canon line people keep raving about are the:
70-200 2.8 IS
17-55 2.8 IS
(and I'll say the 85 1.8 because I have it now Wink)

Not sure what the Nikon equivs are to those but maybe something similar? I guess the budget from the wifey is also a consideration.
Cujo
Cujo

Posts : 299
Join date : 2008-02-24
Location : SSM

Back to top Go down

Buying a new Lens Empty Re: Buying a new Lens

Post by mikef Wed Mar 19, 2008 1:59 pm

I would read all I could about the lenses at places like fred miranda, photo.net, the reviews on b&h, luminous landscape, and any other website that offers impartial reviews, or real-life experiences with the lenses you're considering. After that, pick it, buy it, and stop looking.. otherwise you'll start to wonder what "that other" lens could've been like.

The good thing with quality lenses is that they don't depreciate in value, so if you get something decent chances are good that you can resell it and put the money towards another lens.
mikef
mikef

Posts : 124
Join date : 2008-01-16

http://photos.mikefetherston.ca

Back to top Go down

Buying a new Lens Empty Re: Buying a new Lens

Post by crowellphotographs Wed Mar 19, 2008 2:25 pm

Thanks for the tips guys. I've been reading for a few days now and am narrowing down the search. I'll definitely check out the sites you mentioned Mike. I hadn't visited them yet.

Curt suggested some great lenses, with highly rated nikon counterparts. The only difference is that not one of them is less than like 1300$. OUCH!
With full frame and cheap lenses, I'm really starting to regret sticking with Nikon when I got into Digital. The Canon just felt alien in my hands.

Thanks Guys.
crowellphotographs
crowellphotographs

Posts : 258
Join date : 2008-01-14

http://crowellphotographs.com

Back to top Go down

Buying a new Lens Empty Re: Buying a new Lens

Post by Nando Wed Mar 19, 2008 2:36 pm

Don't know anything about the zooms but for a 50mm, I'd recommend the Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 Planar ZF, which can be found for under $600 in Nikon F mount. Many regard it as the sharpest and highest resolving 50mm ever made for a 35mm SLR. I'm confident that this lens will clearly outperform the current Nikon 50mm f/1.4's at wider apertures (except the special Melenium edition 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor-S rangefinder lens, perhaps). All manual but also all-metal and glass - no plastic. I think that aperture priority mode will still work. The lens will last forever, it won't lose much value over time (there is a chance that the lens may even rise in value) and because it is made for 35mm format so you won't need to worry about things like vignetting or a small image circle should you ever upgrade to a Nikon with a larger or full-frame sensor in the future.
Nando
Nando

Posts : 940
Join date : 2008-01-13
Location : Sault Ste. Marie, Canada or Coimbra, Portugal

Back to top Go down

Buying a new Lens Empty Re: Buying a new Lens

Post by Cujo Wed Mar 19, 2008 2:42 pm

Okay here's what the author of the current book I'm reading uses on his D200:

17-55 workhorse
80-200 length
50 1.4
105 2.8 macro

He didn't list the aperture for the top two lenses but I'm assuming they're possibly 2.8 -- once again the higher priced lenses.

Nikon does now offer full frame with its release of the D3 and it is getting a lot of rave reviews as well.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0708/07082312nikond3.asp

I've heard some photographers (online podcast/vid cast) talk about using them and they like it a lot.

Currently selling for $5,499.95 USD on Amazon -- maybe that's a bit more expensive than the lenses you were looking at Wink
Cujo
Cujo

Posts : 299
Join date : 2008-02-24
Location : SSM

Back to top Go down

Buying a new Lens Empty Re: Buying a new Lens

Post by crowellphotographs Wed Mar 19, 2008 2:45 pm

You hit the nail on the head with that one Nando. When I upgrade to a full frame digital, the Nikon DX lenses all become useless. I've heard great things about the Zeiss 50mm. Never shot with one, but I would like to.
I had been using an old teacher's Blad paired with zeiss glass and fell in love.
Even within Medium format, the Zeiss lens stood out. Can you get one for you Russian Blad, or should I say Vlad.
crowellphotographs
crowellphotographs

Posts : 258
Join date : 2008-01-14

http://crowellphotographs.com

Back to top Go down

Buying a new Lens Empty Re: Buying a new Lens

Post by crowellphotographs Wed Mar 19, 2008 2:58 pm

Ya, I think both the top on the list are 2.8s. I really want that 17-55, which would be really nice. I do however get into the cost of the lens. 1400$ and the fact that it is also a DX small format lens.
I would do some horrible things to get my hands on a D3. They finally switched over to Canon's full frame CMOS chip. I wish I had done the same.
I'm starting to consider buying just what will suit my business needs for the present, and saving for the next couple years to get a Medium format digital. There goes that trip to Mexico, new car and birthday and christmas presents for the next two years.
Thanks again guys.
crowellphotographs
crowellphotographs

Posts : 258
Join date : 2008-01-14

http://crowellphotographs.com

Back to top Go down

Buying a new Lens Empty Re: Buying a new Lens

Post by Cujo Wed Mar 19, 2008 3:32 pm

I forgot about Nikon not remembering full frame then not having their lenses work when they decided to come out with one -- some Canon lenses don't work full frame either (mount) such as the 17-55.

I was going to suggest 24-70 (this is what the full framers use instead of the 17-55) equivalent but after looking that up on Amazon your $1400 price would make you happy Wink

Also, don't get stuck checking one place for prices, I saw the 17-55 Nikon for 11XX on Amazon.
Cujo
Cujo

Posts : 299
Join date : 2008-02-24
Location : SSM

Back to top Go down

Buying a new Lens Empty Re: Buying a new Lens

Post by crowellphotographs Wed Mar 19, 2008 4:02 pm

Wow. ya, I would be happier with the 1300$ bill. You've actually managed to make 1300 seem like a deal.

I will probably end up ordering from Vistek. With free shipping that has always arrived in half the time they've promised, it's hard to go wrong. I will shop around though. Thanks for the tip.
crowellphotographs
crowellphotographs

Posts : 258
Join date : 2008-01-14

http://crowellphotographs.com

Back to top Go down

Buying a new Lens Empty Re: Buying a new Lens

Post by Nando Wed Mar 19, 2008 4:12 pm

Some links:
Flickr Images with 50mm Planar ZF
Flickr Images with 50mm Planar ZK - same lens but in Pentax mount
Zeiss 50mm f1.4 Planar ZF Brochure
Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 Planar ZF Data Sheet

I have a Zeiss 80mm f/2.8 Biometar MC for the my Soviet Hasselbladski. The Biometar is an 'original' Planar. After the WWII, Zeiss split into two companies - West German Zeiss (Zeiss Oberkochen) and East German Zeiss (Zeiss Jena). After reunification, Zeiss reunified as well. After the split, I understand that there were copyright/trademark problems with both companies using the same name on the lens so the West German versions were called Planars while the East German versions were Biometars. There was also an issue with the T* designation for the coating. So West German Zeiss retained the T* designation while East German Zeiss initially used nothing but later used "MC" to designate multicoating. (Rolleiflexes with 80mm labelled Biometar T* before the name-change are highly collectible and are worth big bucks). The East German Biometar stayed pretty much the same through the years - a 5-element design. There were no real market pressures to improve under a communist system. The West German Planar, on the other hand, evolved significantly over the last 50 years and the current Planar CFE version for the Hassy is a 7-element lens and significantly different from the original 5-element design. My version of the Biometar was produced after reunification - It has the original 5-element Biometar/Planar design but with modern multi-coating and quality control set to the West German Zeiss' standard. It almost has a pancake design, which makes the lens really compact. Much, much smaller than a Hassy Planar. All my Zeiss lenses for MF are late versions produced after reunification - 50mm f/4 Flektogon, 80mm f/2.8 Biometar, and 180mm f/2.8 Sonnar "Olympia" (no 180 f/2.8 for a Hassy Very Happy).

There is an old saying in Leicaland. Zeiss is ice but Leitz is nice. I must admit that my Biometar is a bit more on the icy side than most Planars. I really like the images made on the Hassies and Rolleiflexes with the 80mm Planars, especially wide-open. I admire the Schneider 80mm Xenotars on the older Rolleiflexes. Perhaps not technically superior to the more expensive Planars but there is some kind of warmness to the images made on the Xenotars that I really like. A similar quality to the older Leitz lens from the 1950's/60's. There is very modern 80 Xenotar available in Pentacon-6 mount that I can use on my Arax that is often regarded as equal (and some say superior) to the latest-greatest Planar CFE for the Hassy. Finding one is really difficult though. Sorry, getting really off-topic here.

Anyway, I was set to get a Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 Planar ZK for the Pentax but although I love the lens and the photos I've seen, there is a wee bit of that typical Zeiss coldness. (Perhaps my eyes/brain have been tainted by Leicalore). It is a smooth coldness though that goes down nicely unlike the traditional Nikkor coldness that goes down rough. I instead opted for a 1960's Pentax 50mm f/1.4 Super Multi Coated Takumar (with the radioactive glass) because I prefer its warmer/softer rendering and because I rarely use my SLR all that much to spend the $600 on the latest-greatest Zeiss. The Pentax uses the same Planar design (as all Japanese companies blatantly copied Zeiss designs as German patents were suspended after WWII) but the Pentaxes have a curve between the 4th and 5th elements that makes for a slightly softer images but beautiful bokeh wide-open. If I were mostly shooting 35mm SLR's, without a doubt, I'd get the Zeiss.

Voigtlander also recently released a 40mm f/2 pancake and a 58mm f/1.4 for the Nikon F and Pentax K mounts. The Japanese went crazy over the Voigt 58 f/1.4 "Topcor" when it was released as a special edition model a few years ago. All metal/glass, no plastics - all manual. I have a few Voigts for my Leicas and they beautiful lenses.

Some info:
http://www.cameraquest.com/Voigt_SL2.htm
Nando
Nando

Posts : 940
Join date : 2008-01-13
Location : Sault Ste. Marie, Canada or Coimbra, Portugal

Back to top Go down

Buying a new Lens Empty Re: Buying a new Lens

Post by Kenneth Armstrong Wed Mar 19, 2008 4:45 pm

I was going to post last week that Value Village had a Nikon SLR with a 50mm f/1.8 for $35. It was an old model and manual focus only but Nikon has never changed their SLR mount and it will work on a DSL. It was gone last time I went.

You might consider the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 in Nikon mount. It's nice and fast, built well and gives you a 45mm FOV. A 50mm will give you about a 75mm FOV.
Kenneth Armstrong
Kenneth Armstrong

Posts : 896
Join date : 2008-01-13
Location : Sault Ste Marie ON

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rubbergorilla/

Back to top Go down

Buying a new Lens Empty Re: Buying a new Lens

Post by crowellphotographs Thu Mar 20, 2008 10:17 am

Having started with my dad's Olympus OM/1 with a 50mm and a 200mm, I'd love to get back into primes. Unfortunately with weddings, I need multiple focal lengths covered. Or, at least that's what I've gotten used to.
I had been doing most of my shooting around the 28mm range which is exactly what you are suggesting. So maybe I will consider this 30mm instead of a 50.
Is that the same lens you had been doing some of your Soo Mich. shots with?

All I keep thinking about is that Barenaked Ladies song... you all know how it goes.
"If I had a million Dollars.... I'd be rich." There must be a photographer out there somewhere that has put their entire wish list to that tune. Or is the song not long enough?
crowellphotographs
crowellphotographs

Posts : 258
Join date : 2008-01-14

http://crowellphotographs.com

Back to top Go down

Buying a new Lens Empty Re: Buying a new Lens

Post by Nando Thu Mar 20, 2008 12:20 pm

Wedding photographers don't use multiple bodies anymore?

That Sigma looks to be a really nice lens and a bargain compared to a Canon 35mm f/1.4. However, I don't think it covers a full 35mm frame.
Nando
Nando

Posts : 940
Join date : 2008-01-13
Location : Sault Ste. Marie, Canada or Coimbra, Portugal

Back to top Go down

Buying a new Lens Empty Re: Buying a new Lens

Post by crowellphotographs Thu Mar 20, 2008 12:52 pm

Yes, definitely many do carry two, I don't anymore though. Back when it was film, camera bodies didn't need updating, you could only carry a limited number of shots without rolled film, lenses weren't at risk of becoming obsolete, or mad of plastic. Now, I could buy 2 digitals, spend around 5 grand on bodies alone and have to do it all over again in 3 years. The most common question I receive now when discussing coverage with a couple is "How many megapixels" YUCK! The other problem I've run into with the long and short lens system, is the car door and other non camera friendly obstacles. Because of weight and versatility, the main camera is the short, so the long is like a reverse wrecking ball on my shoulder.
I have recently gotten back into bringing a Med. format or large format camera with me for certain applications. But those aren't really the best photojournalistic tools.
I guess this is a lot of whining on my part. Oh Nando, Wouldn't it be great if you could just buy digital sensors to put into any body you liked. They would be much cheaper to upgrade and when you invested in a lens, you would have it forever. That's one of the reasons that as soon as I can afford a Digital back for a med. format, I don't know if i will ever go back. Maybe I'd get a rangefinder for "from the hip" shooting.
crowellphotographs
crowellphotographs

Posts : 258
Join date : 2008-01-14

http://crowellphotographs.com

Back to top Go down

Buying a new Lens Empty Re: Buying a new Lens

Post by crowellphotographs Thu Mar 20, 2008 12:58 pm

I guess I'd still be running into the long/short dilemma..... ARRG
crowellphotographs
crowellphotographs

Posts : 258
Join date : 2008-01-14

http://crowellphotographs.com

Back to top Go down

Buying a new Lens Empty Re: Buying a new Lens

Post by Nando Thu Mar 20, 2008 4:46 pm

Megapixels? You'd think that people would make their choices based on the photographer's portfolio and other things like price. I'd hate to think that a couple may opt to choose one photographer over another because one has a 14MP camera and the other has a 12MP camera. Personally, I probably would discriminate based on equipment since I would demand that film to be used but for good reasons. Better photographs, bigger enlargements, reliability of long-term storage, etc. Definitely not something silly like a 2MP difference.

I've never shot a wedding in a serious manner and I don't think I ever want to, especially as a job. Too much pressure. So please forgive my amateur musings on wedding-photography and wedding-photography gear. I did take photos at my cousin's wedding recently using a Leica MP mated to a Voigtlander 75mm f/2.5 Heliar and a Leica M3 mated to a 50mm f/2 Summitar (from 1946). Mostly portraits. I was doing well until about the 9th glass of wine. First two rolls came out fine - the last roll was horribly underexposed and I couldn't save any shots. And nearly all of the shots of my cousin and his bride were on that last roll – the first dance, cutting the cake, etc.

Some of the photos:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/fgsemedo/sets/72157602037365673/

If I were to do it over again, I'd add a third lens - my Voigtlander 35mm f/1.2 Nokton, which I didn't have then. I'd keep a 50mm on my M3 permanently and switch between the 35 and 75 on my MP. My fantasy setup would be the Voigt 35mm f/1.2 Nocton and Leica 75mm f/1.4 Summilux on the MP and the Leica 50mm f1 Noctilux on the M3. Would a serious "pro" wedding photographer need anything wider than a 35mm and longer than a 75mm? For carrying the gear, I’d probably use the old dual neck-strap trick – one neck strap shorter than the other so that one camera rests on my chest, while the other rests on my stomach with a good few inches between them to minimize the chance of them banging against each other. Plus a belt-pouch for storing the 35/75. Or, I’d go with wrist-straps on both cameras and use my small M-Classics bag for storing the camera and lenses I’m not using. The bag is really easy to handle while on the shoulder and opens very quickly.

I like what Mamiya is offering - a medium-format digital back that is competitive with top digital bodies from Canon/Nikon. It's great for people who already have a Mamiya kit. The Hasselblad backs are of much higher spec but they cost quite a lot of money. Pentax is always promising a digital 645”D“that will also be competitively priced with the top Canon/Nikon bodies but they never seem to come out with it. Would medium format SLR be suitable for weddings though? Mirror-slap on those big cameras is brutal. Portraits and group photos would be ok but what about in the darker ceremony and reception settings? I'm thinking that a Rolleiflex TLR would be really good. They're hand-holdable at very low-speeds due to the lack of a mirror and they are whisper-quiet. Of course, you know how good a 80mm f/2.8 Planar is on the Hassy - the same lens can be had on the Rolleiflex.

If Canon/Nikon stopped making cameras that didn't need replacing every few years, would they make more money? Camera companies want continuous income. It used to be that one would by a camera and it would last a very long time. Even economical cameras would last at least a decade or more. Everything was also repairable. Camera companies made money on the initial sale of the body and lenses along with the occasional CLA/repair services but that's it. Camera models and lenses were in production for a long time. The Pentax MX, for example, had a 10-year production run. These days, it would have been more like 10 months! The only firms in the photography business that had a near continuous stream of income were the film manufacturers. Now with digital, camera companies have found a new way of generating continuous income - disposable camera bodies and to a lesser extent, disposable "digital" lenses. Everything is a disposable commodity from the most cheapest point-and-shoot to the most sophisticated “pro” body. There is absolutely no reason why a high quality, upgradeable digital camera bodies couldn't be made. Unfortunately, it all comes down to making $$$$$$$.

There was a company called Silicon Film that was going to make digital backs for film cameras. Back in 2002, the specs were quite impressive for the time - a full-frame sensor with 10MP. It never came to be.

More info:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0209/02091903siliconfilmagain.asp

Imacon were contracted by Leica to make a digital film back for the R9 SLR called the Digital Module R (DMR). One could switch between film and digital with that camera. When a upgrade was available to the DMR, you upgraded the digital back, not the entire camera. It fell through too, especially since Imacon were bought by Hasselblad. The R9 is still the only 35mm camera that I know of that can switch between digital and film however one can only now buy the DMR digital back used. Rumour has it that if there is an R10, it will be all-digital.

The Leica M8 digital rangefinder is upgradeable. An M body is pretty much set in stone - Leica can't change it too much (too much being a just few millimetres difference here and there) because most Leicaphiles feel that the body is perfection. If the body will always be the same, then most changes over time will be with the electronic innards. So instead of buying a new digital-M, owners will have the option of upgrading their current digital M body to the latest specs for a smaller fee than buying brand new M-body. So if I had an M8 and Leica comes out with a new M featuring a full-frame sensor and fancier LCD - I can send Leica the body and they'll swap out the old electronic guts for the new ones. Owners can pick and choose what upgrades they want and when they want to make them. So I could probably opt for the full-frame sensor only and skip the LCD upgrade. I really wish a company like Pentax could take Leica's concept and create an economical, upgradeable digital body (but they must make it EXACTLY like the Pentax MX or LX if they want me to buy it). I know that Canon/Nikon won't do it but a smaller, more enthusiast-oriented company like Pentax just might do it.

If I had a Nikon SLR, these would be the lenses I would like to have. All primes. However, as you can see, a rangefinder is better suited for the focal lengths that I like.

Zeiss 28mm f/2 Distagon ZF
Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 Planar ZF
Zeiss 85mm f/1.4 Planar ZF
Voigtlander 125mm f/2.5 APO-Lanthar Macro
Nando
Nando

Posts : 940
Join date : 2008-01-13
Location : Sault Ste. Marie, Canada or Coimbra, Portugal

Back to top Go down

Buying a new Lens Empty Re: Buying a new Lens

Post by bjotoole Fri Mar 21, 2008 11:26 am

I was interested in the Nikon 18-200mm VR lens, as it would make a convenient general lens for traveling, etc, but I'm no longer sure about it after reading some of the reviews. Aside from it's appealing range, it doesn't really perform all that well throughout it's entire range. As many reviewers state, it's a "jack of all trades, master of none" Here is a link to a review recently posted by dpreview.com:
http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/nikon_18-200_3p5-5p6_vr_afs_n15/

I haven't read any reviews about the new Nikon 16-85mm VR, but it looks like a very interesting lens. May be worth taking a look at, especially as a possible replacement for the 18-135mm for are looking for.

I wish I could help you out further, but I have little to no experience or knowledge of other options. I only have the NIkon 18-70mm kit lens (which is actually a nice lens) and the 50mm f/1.8.

Good luck. Let us know what you decide on.
bjotoole
bjotoole

Posts : 115
Join date : 2008-01-28
Location : Sault Ste. Marie, ON

http://flickr.com/bjotoole

Back to top Go down

Buying a new Lens Empty Re: Buying a new Lens

Post by Kenneth Armstrong Fri Mar 21, 2008 11:49 am

My 24-70mm f/2.8 and 70-200mm f/2.8 are really the only two zooms I am interested in. I'd be happy for everything else to be primes. Right now I just have the 30mm f/1.4 and the 50mm f/1.4 along with a Zenitar 16mm f/2.8 fisheye but I would love to get a 300mm f/2.8 IS and maybe a 135mm f/2. The Canon 35mm f/1.4 is a dream lens, I borrowed one for a weekend 2 years ago and haven't been able to stop thinking about it but the Sigma will do for now.

17-40mm f/4 or 16-35mm f/2.8 II are the only two zooms left that I would consider

I don't know if me talking out loud helps you at all, but I agree that primes are the way to go.
Kenneth Armstrong
Kenneth Armstrong

Posts : 896
Join date : 2008-01-13
Location : Sault Ste Marie ON

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rubbergorilla/

Back to top Go down

Buying a new Lens Empty D3

Post by verotik Wed May 28, 2008 8:21 am

the d3

Re: Buying a new Lens

Post by crowellphotographs on Wed Mar 19, 2008 1:45 pm
You hit the nail on the head with that one Nando. When I upgrade to a full frame digital, the Nikon DX lenses all become useless.


Q: I am interested in the new D3, but I am concerned that some of the existing lenses – 12-24mm, 17-55mm and 70-200mm VR lenses – will not be compatible with the D3. Can you please confirm whether these lenses are fully compatible with the D3?

A: The D3 is compatible with a wide range of Nikon lenses including DX lenses. The D3 will by default automatically switch to DX crop mode once a DX lens is attached. The DX crop mode will reduce the resolution to 5 million pixels. This mode can be overridden if you wish and the FX frame area can capture the DX lens projection. Please note that using DX lenses with the DX crop mode turned off, will result in severe vignetting at certain focal lengths. The AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8 VR lens is fully compatible and can be used without the DX crop mode.

verotik

Posts : 2
Join date : 2008-05-28

Back to top Go down

Buying a new Lens Empty Re: Buying a new Lens

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum