20, 24, 30?
-
Michael Dunn wrote:
I personally stick above 50mm unless I actually need a big wide field of view (not very often, I actually don't own any lens under 50mm).
I'd have thought 50 would not be wide enough for most general shots. You'd have to stand back far enough to get the whole frame in view, for instance when you want to shoot a whole building.
Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
My latest book : C++/CLI in Action / Amazon.com linkWell, I don't shoot whole buildings very often :) (Although funnily enough, the one time I can remember wanting a lens below 50mm was when I was shooting buildings on the UCLA campus.)
--Mike-- Visual C++ MVP :cool: LINKS~! CP SearchBar v3.0 | C++ Forum FAQ "That's what's great about doing user interface work. No matter what you do, people will say that what you did was idiotic." -- Raymond Chen
-
Well, I don't shoot whole buildings very often :) (Although funnily enough, the one time I can remember wanting a lens below 50mm was when I was shooting buildings on the UCLA campus.)
--Mike-- Visual C++ MVP :cool: LINKS~! CP SearchBar v3.0 | C++ Forum FAQ "That's what's great about doing user interface work. No matter what you do, people will say that what you did was idiotic." -- Raymond Chen
Michael Dunn wrote:
Well, I don't shoot whole buildings very often Smile (Although funnily enough, the one time I can remember wanting a lens below 50mm was when I was shooting buildings on the UCLA campus.)
:) Btw a lot of P&S users are surprised when I keep moving forward and backward when using my 50mm lens. They have an expression like "can't this guy use the zoom?" - they probably think I am a moron.
Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
My latest book : C++/CLI in Action / Amazon.com link -
Chris Losinger wrote:
18-105 VR !
That's a good lens, but the OP seems to want lenses with wider aperture. I recommended the Tamron 17-50 2.8 to him (I myself plan to get one sometime soon).
Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
My latest book : C++/CLI in Action / Amazon.com linkif it's just a matter of speed, the VR will get you a couple of stops for free. if it's a matter of focal depth, then yeah, gotta have the wider aperture.
-
Michael Dunn wrote:
Well, I don't shoot whole buildings very often Smile (Although funnily enough, the one time I can remember wanting a lens below 50mm was when I was shooting buildings on the UCLA campus.)
:) Btw a lot of P&S users are surprised when I keep moving forward and backward when using my 50mm lens. They have an expression like "can't this guy use the zoom?" - they probably think I am a moron.
Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
My latest book : C++/CLI in Action / Amazon.com linkNishant Sivakumar wrote:
they probably think I am a moron.
Unlikely, if they know you at all. More probably they assume you're drunk and just can't hold still. :-D
"A Journey of a Thousand Rest Stops Begins with a Single Movement"
-
Since your budget is around 400 bucks, the Tamron 17-50 2.8 would be a very good option. It gives you 2.8 through the entire range though it probably may not be as good as an equivalent prime.
Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
My latest book : C++/CLI in Action / Amazon.com linkThat looks like a good choice. Great speed and a wide range of focal lengths. The price isn't half bad, either. My Olympus came with a stock 14 - 45 mm lens, plus a 40 - 150 mm zoom, but both are slower (f3.5 to f5.6). I use the former as my stock lens, but still wish I could get more into a single frame. The vistas here tend to be quite large, and my favorite subject matter is still life - of the vegetable and igneous kind. Thankfully there exists software for making panoramas; I couldn't live without it. My latest was a sequence of pics of the Colorado River; once I integrated them into a panorama, I printed the final product 18' long by 2' tall, and it looked great! All of the shots were taken with the shorter lens, which I tend to use for about 95% of my photography.
"A Journey of a Thousand Rest Stops Begins with a Single Movement"
-
Chris Losinger wrote:
18-105 VR !
That's a good lens, but the OP seems to want lenses with wider aperture. I recommended the Tamron 17-50 2.8 to him (I myself plan to get one sometime soon).
Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
My latest book : C++/CLI in Action / Amazon.com link -
Henry Minute wrote:
IMHO anything shorter than 30 tends to give too much fisheye/paralax distortion, particularly on architectural subjects.
I think you are using the older film specs? In which case this 30 you mention might be the equivalent of 18mm in DX?
Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
My latest book : C++/CLI in Action / Amazon.com link -
Isn't it the other way around? I mean 30mm on a DX would seem like 45mm
Aim small, miss small
tatchung wrote:
Isn't it the other way around? I mean 30mm on a DX would seem like 45mm
Yeah and 18mm on a DX would seem like 30mm - he said anything wider than 30 mm would distort which I think is an unusual thing to say. So I presume he means the equivalent of 18mm DX.
Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
My latest book : C++/CLI in Action / Amazon.com link -
if it's just a matter of speed, the VR will get you a couple of stops for free. if it's a matter of focal depth, then yeah, gotta have the wider aperture.
Chris Losinger wrote:
if it's just a matter of speed, the VR will get you a couple of stops for free.
Even in low light?
Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
My latest book : C++/CLI in Action / Amazon.com link -
Nishant Sivakumar wrote:
they probably think I am a moron.
Unlikely, if they know you at all. More probably they assume you're drunk and just can't hold still. :-D
"A Journey of a Thousand Rest Stops Begins with a Single Movement"
Roger Wright wrote:
More probably they assume you're drunk and just can't hold still. Big Grin
At least in some cases, they wouldn't have been too far off the mark! :rolleyes: [some of my better shots have come when I was a tad drunk - so maybe it actually helps]
Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
My latest book : C++/CLI in Action / Amazon.com link -
Check out Ken Rockwell's reviews of Nikkor Lenses[^]. Actually, his site is a good place to get decent reviews of both Nikon and Canon (and various third-party vendors who supply lenses compatible with these systems). I'm a Canon shooter, but whatever you decide to get should be based on what you'd like to accomplish with the lens. The 50mm f/1.8 is a fairly fast lens, especially for the price. Are you "replacing" it or adding to your kit? How much shooting do you expect to do in low light situations? Is available light your "prime" decision-factor? Or is shooting wide the primary factor?
Matt Newby President, Matt Newby Enterprises, Inc. matt@mattnewby.com
Yeah I love my nifty fifty however I'm having trouble shooting indoors due to the narrow corridors. And to answer your question I just love shooting wide :rolleyes: .
caspianx67 wrote:
Check out Ken Rockwell's reviews of Nikkor Lenses[^]
I did...that's the part I got confused with actually. Every recommendation suggests to buy one if I need it...not much of a help actually but the specs does contribute a bit :-D
Aim small, miss small
-
That looks like a good choice. Great speed and a wide range of focal lengths. The price isn't half bad, either. My Olympus came with a stock 14 - 45 mm lens, plus a 40 - 150 mm zoom, but both are slower (f3.5 to f5.6). I use the former as my stock lens, but still wish I could get more into a single frame. The vistas here tend to be quite large, and my favorite subject matter is still life - of the vegetable and igneous kind. Thankfully there exists software for making panoramas; I couldn't live without it. My latest was a sequence of pics of the Colorado River; once I integrated them into a panorama, I printed the final product 18' long by 2' tall, and it looked great! All of the shots were taken with the shorter lens, which I tend to use for about 95% of my photography.
"A Journey of a Thousand Rest Stops Begins with a Single Movement"
The wide-end of 14mm sounds really good. I find that 18mm is sometimes not wide enough for me and I have to move further back than I'd normally want to - sometimes you can't move all that much as you want to either. Do you notice any distortion at 14 mm - compared to say 18 mm?
Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
My latest book : C++/CLI in Action / Amazon.com link -
caspianx67 wrote:
Check out Ken Rockwell's reviews of Nikkor Lenses[^].
Hmmmm... Best to check this out first. http://www.bahneman.com/liem/blog/article.php?story=Ken\_Rockwell\_Facts\[[^](http://www.bahneman.com/liem/blog/article.php?story=Ken_Rockwell_Facts "New Window")]"> :cool:
-
Michael Dunn wrote:
Well, I don't shoot whole buildings very often Smile (Although funnily enough, the one time I can remember wanting a lens below 50mm was when I was shooting buildings on the UCLA campus.)
:) Btw a lot of P&S users are surprised when I keep moving forward and backward when using my 50mm lens. They have an expression like "can't this guy use the zoom?" - they probably think I am a moron.
Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
My latest book : C++/CLI in Action / Amazon.com link -
Roger Wright wrote:
More probably they assume you're drunk and just can't hold still. Big Grin
At least in some cases, they wouldn't have been too far off the mark! :rolleyes: [some of my better shots have come when I was a tad drunk - so maybe it actually helps]
Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
My latest book : C++/CLI in Action / Amazon.com linkNishant Sivakumar wrote:
so maybe it actually helps
I find that I often feel very out of place, pretending to be a real photographer, and being a little bit tipsy helps to make me relax and go with the flow. It does make for better shots - you're not wrong about that at all. It helps, too, that modern cameras have such good autofocus mechanisms; we'd be in a world of hurt without them. :-D
"A Journey of a Thousand Rest Stops Begins with a Single Movement"
-
The wide-end of 14mm sounds really good. I find that 18mm is sometimes not wide enough for me and I have to move further back than I'd normally want to - sometimes you can't move all that much as you want to either. Do you notice any distortion at 14 mm - compared to say 18 mm?
Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
My latest book : C++/CLI in Action / Amazon.com linkNishant Sivakumar wrote:
Do you notice any distortion at 14 mm - compared to say 18 mm?
No, I don't. And it's odd that you should mention that, because when I first opened the reply box I intended to mention the possible distortion - the fish-eye effect - of wide angle lenses. I really haven't experienced that as much with this lens as I have in the past with regular 35mm cameras. I've had more trouble with add-on filters causing a black ring around the image, due to the choking effect they cause by interrupting the flow of light entering the imaging area. That was much more a problem with my previous camera than the current one. It had a much smaller objective lens, so the effect was more noticable.
"A Journey of a Thousand Rest Stops Begins with a Single Movement"
-
Roger Wright wrote:
More probably they assume you're drunk and just can't hold still. Big Grin
At least in some cases, they wouldn't have been too far off the mark! :rolleyes: [some of my better shots have come when I was a tad drunk - so maybe it actually helps]
Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
My latest book : C++/CLI in Action / Amazon.com link -
Henry Minute wrote:
IMHO anything shorter than 30 tends to give too much fisheye/paralax distortion, particularly on architectural subjects.
I think you are using the older film specs? In which case this 30 you mention might be the equivalent of 18mm in DX?
Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
My latest book : C++/CLI in Action / Amazon.com linkNishant Sivakumar wrote:
I think you are using the older film specs
How on earth can you take pictures without film? Don't be silly. :) You are, of course, quite right. I havn't moved on yet, and forgot that these gol darned new fangled box brownies changed all the rules.
Henry Minute Never read Medical books. You could die of a misprint. - Mark Twain
-
Chris Losinger wrote:
if it's just a matter of speed, the VR will get you a couple of stops for free.
Even in low light?
Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
My latest book : C++/CLI in Action / Amazon.com linkin a manner of speaking yes. by stabilizing the image, the VR will give you the ability to hand-hold a shot a stop or two beyond what you could normally do.
-
Michael Dunn wrote:
I personally stick above 50mm unless I actually need a big wide field of view (not very often, I actually don't own any lens under 50mm).
I'd have thought 50 would not be wide enough for most general shots. You'd have to stand back far enough to get the whole frame in view, for instance when you want to shoot a whole building.
Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
My latest book : C++/CLI in Action / Amazon.com linkOne thing to remember is that a 50mm lens on most DSLRs is equivalent to a 80mm on a full-frame camera, because of the smaller APC sensor. The 50mm makes a fine portrait lens for full-body standing shots, giving about a 6' field of view at 15' on an APC body. That same lens is about 9' FoV at 15' on a full-frame body. And, yes, I will cite another Ken Rockwell page on portraiture lenses[^]. I shoot quite a bit with the kit lens that comes with the Canon 40D -- the 28-135 IS -- and find that even if I have a long distance from camera to subjects, I'm still doing a lot of my shots at the short end of the zoom. I did a group shot of about 10 people, with 5 standing behind a love-seat and the rest sitting on it, from at least 15 feet away, and if I'd had a 50 for the widest, I'd have been chopping people off left and right... As another poster commented, just watch out for distortion on the wide end of the zooms. If possible try to shoot something with straight lines (brick walls, for instance) straight on to see how the lens handles barrel and pincushion distortion. Some of that can be correct after the fact, but it all depends on how much time you want to spend post-processing your shots. My $0.04 worth (inflation)... -matt
Matt Newby President, Matt Newby Enterprises, Inc. matt@mattnewby.com