Reply to topic  [ 59 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
still need some help with small lens stuff :( 
Author Message
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:27 pm
Posts: 12251
Reply with quote
Does it have to be a Nikon lens? If the Nikon is too rich for your blood, then you will find other lenses with similar specifications for much less money.

A Tokina 12-24 will set you back a shave under £500 for example:
http://www.warehouseexpress.com/buy-tok ... t/p1030873

The best thing to do is take your camera into an independent camera shop, try a few of the lenses in the range you are looking at, fire off some shots and take the camera home and check the images to see what you get.

_________________
All the best,
Paul
brataccas wrote:
your posts are just combo chains of funny win

I’m on Twitter, tweeting away... My Photos Random Avatar Explanation


Sat Feb 13, 2010 9:02 pm
Profile
Doesn't have much of a life

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 8:23 pm
Posts: 638
Location: 3959 miles from the centre of the Earth - give or take a bit
Reply with quote
brataccas wrote:
not sure dogbert :( I had a 17-70 nikon DX F3.5 lens which I hated the photo quality of it so much that I binned it :cry:



So far I've been very impressed with Tamron lenses - I find that what goes on inside the camera seems to make more difference to the final image than the lens does. I guess at the end of the day it depends what you do with the images.

_________________
i7 860 @ 3.5GHz, GTX275, 4GB DDR3


Sun Feb 14, 2010 11:45 am
Profile
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 9:14 pm
Posts: 5664
Location: Scotland
Reply with quote
that ones an F4, I think I need at least F2.8 for indoor usage :shock:

_________________
Image


Sun Feb 14, 2010 5:04 pm
Profile
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:27 pm
Posts: 12251
Reply with quote
brataccas wrote:
that ones an F4, I think I need at least F2.8 for indoor usage :shock:


Got a tripod?

_________________
All the best,
Paul
brataccas wrote:
your posts are just combo chains of funny win

I’m on Twitter, tweeting away... My Photos Random Avatar Explanation


Sun Feb 14, 2010 7:46 pm
Profile
Doesn't have much of a life

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 8:23 pm
Posts: 638
Location: 3959 miles from the centre of the Earth - give or take a bit
Reply with quote
brataccas wrote:
that ones an F4, I think I need at least F2.8 for indoor usage :shock:


This one them?

_________________
i7 860 @ 3.5GHz, GTX275, 4GB DDR3


Sun Feb 14, 2010 8:02 pm
Profile
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 9:14 pm
Posts: 5664
Location: Scotland
Reply with quote
really not sure if it would be good image output(?), have you used that actual lens?? I have a 70-300mm TAMRON f4 and its horrible, I think I chucked that one in the bin too :roll:

_________________
Image


Sun Feb 14, 2010 8:12 pm
Profile
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 15, 2009 3:16 am
Posts: 6146
Location: Middle Earth
Reply with quote
brataccas wrote:
really not sure if it would be good image output(?), have you used that actual lens?? I have a 70-300mm TAMRON f4 and its horrible, I think I chucked that one in the bin too :roll:


Next time you want to bin a lens can I offer to pay for postage to myself?

Thanks in advance. :)

_________________
Dive like a fish, drink like a fish!

><(((º>`•.¸¸.•´¯`•.¸><(((º>
•.¸¸.•´¯`•.¸><(((º>`•.¸¸.•´¯`•.¸><(((º>

If one is diving so close to the limits that +/- 1% will make a difference then the error has already been made.


Sun Feb 14, 2010 8:21 pm
Profile
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 9:14 pm
Posts: 5664
Location: Scotland
Reply with quote
belchingmatt wrote:
brataccas wrote:
really not sure if it would be good image output(?), have you used that actual lens?? I have a 70-300mm TAMRON f4 and its horrible, I think I chucked that one in the bin too :roll:


Next time you want to bin a lens can I offer to pay for postage to myself?

Thanks in advance. :)


yep


I think I may buy that tamron one, liking the reviews etc :shock: and I do have tripod ye but the top bits missing so I cant use it

_________________
Image


Sun Feb 14, 2010 8:27 pm
Profile
Moderator

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:13 pm
Posts: 7262
Location: Here, but not all there.
Reply with quote
brataccas wrote:
I think I may buy that tamron one, liking the reviews etc :shock: and I do have tripod ye but the top bits missing so I cant use it


Duct tape and bungee straps.

Necessity is the mother of invention.

_________________
My Flickr | Snaptophobic Bloggage
Heather Kay: modelling details that matter.
"Let my windows be open to receive new ideas but let me also be strong enough not to be blown away by them." - Mahatma Gandhi.


Sun Feb 14, 2010 8:48 pm
Profile
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 15, 2009 3:16 am
Posts: 6146
Location: Middle Earth
Reply with quote
HeatherKay wrote:
brataccas wrote:
I think I may buy that tamron one, liking the reviews etc :shock: and I do have tripod ye but the top bits missing so I cant use it


Duct tape and bungee straps.

Necessity is the mother of invention.


I recently built a box to attach a camera to a telescope out of wood, electrical tape and a few nails. I then found the photo tube that came with the telescope but which still requires a make specific adaptor, so I used more electrical tape. Both work perfectly, it is the tripod system that lets the whole thing down now. Telescope and camera tripods working together with a large off-centre mass create a bit of a wobble. I've already thought of how I can eliminate a few of the surplus parts that requires, yes you got it, wood and electical tape. :P

_________________
Dive like a fish, drink like a fish!

><(((º>`•.¸¸.•´¯`•.¸><(((º>
•.¸¸.•´¯`•.¸><(((º>`•.¸¸.•´¯`•.¸><(((º>

If one is diving so close to the limits that +/- 1% will make a difference then the error has already been made.


Sun Feb 14, 2010 9:02 pm
Profile
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 7:17 am
Posts: 5550
Location: Nottingham
Reply with quote
brataccas wrote:
really not sure if it would be good image output(?), have you used that actual lens?? I have a 70-300mm TAMRON f4 and its horrible, I think I chucked that one in the bin too :roll:


To be fair the Tamron 70-300 is a really cheap lens (I know, I have one :lol: ) that for most just adds a bit of extra zoom to the camera bag. I'm sure its never intended to match the optics of something a lot pricier. Personally I dont like to use it much past 200mm otherwise it goes softer than Mr Softs soft bits.

But... that doesnt mean all Tamron lenses are rubbish. Like I said the 17-50 f2.8 has some very favourable reviews and is seen as a great 'kit lens' replacement. Likewise the 18-250 (or is it 18-270) is really useful as a 'one lens' solution. These are still under £500 though so again dont expect £1000+ Nikon optics.

Looking at the original post the two lenses you were looking at were a wide angle (14-24) and a standard zoom (17-55). Personally I would first look at which lens would be the better option as they offer different things in terms of focal lengths. Once I'd decided if I was more interested in the wide or standard zoom option then I'd set a budget. I know the Nikon glass is very appealing but £1000+ is a lot to spend when you dont have the cash. I dont know if you are a pro, semi, amateur photographer and/or sell your pictures but if you dont stand to make money from the investment I'd stick with the cheaper brands. Its only my opinion mind you, its up to you what you do with your cash (or credit). I find a £1000 lens a bit overdoing it for a hobby.

Looking at the wide and standard zoom options then I can see:

Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4.0 OS HSM £379
Sigma 10-20 f3.5 EX DC HSM £499
Sigma 12-24 f4.5-5.6 EX DG £687

Tamron 10-24 f3.5-4.5 Di II LD AF SD £384
Tamron 17-50 f2.8 XR Di II VC £529

Have a look around at some reviews. You'll see these aren't lenses to be chucked in the bin. There some good value-quality glass out there.

_________________
Twitter
Blog
flickr


Mon Feb 15, 2010 8:51 am
Profile WWW
Occasionally has a life
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 6:15 pm
Posts: 175
Reply with quote
brataccas wrote:
that ones an F4, I think I need at least F2.8 for indoor usage :shock:


For what you'd pay for a 14-24 f:2.8 you could buy a prime 24/2.8 and a new tripod and have change left over.


Mon Feb 15, 2010 1:27 pm
Profile
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:11 pm
Posts: 12143
Location: Belfast
Reply with quote
nvj1662 wrote:
For what you'd pay for a 14-24 f:2.8 you could buy a prime 24/2.8 and a new tripod and have change left over.
That's quite possibly very true, but then you don't get the 14mm goodness of that lens.
For all the money saving advice that's so far been given in this thread, that Nikon 14-24mm lens is worth every single penny. Don't underestimate just how bloody good a lens it is. (8+)

Mark

_________________
okenobi wrote:
All I know so far is that Mark, Jimmy Olsen and Peter Parker use Nikon and everybody else seems to use Canon.
ShockWaffle wrote:
Well you obviously. You're a one man vortex of despair.


Mon Feb 15, 2010 1:31 pm
Profile WWW
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 9:14 pm
Posts: 5664
Location: Scotland
Reply with quote
veato wrote:
I dont know if you are a pro, semi, amateur photographer and/or sell your pictures but if you dont stand to make money from the investment I'd stick with the cheaper brands.


I will be creating a website soon to sell my best photos only, but I take pictures as a hobby mostly, and im not professional no (never will be) just below amateur hobbyist id say ;)

_________________
Image


Mon Feb 15, 2010 5:12 pm
Profile
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 9:14 pm
Posts: 5664
Location: Scotland
Reply with quote
timark_uk wrote:
If there's any specific questions you have about the 14-24mm lens then feel free to ask.

Mark


does it work on the D80? :shock:

_________________
Image


Wed Feb 17, 2010 10:12 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 59 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software.