Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,951   Posts: 1,585,967   Online: 963
      
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 47
  1. #21
    shnitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    16
    Images
    1
    While those primes are incredible, you can get very respectable pictures from zooms. I think that most people would be very happy if they had a prime lens that performed as well as the Nikon 28-70.

    blockend, stay away from the Sigmas. God, they are built horribly. Even if you manage to get a good example, internally they look like a joke compared to other lenses. A zoom's convenience and ability to quickly compose and capture a shot of dynamic subjects may be worth the image degradation. There's a ton of info on the web, but if you're already happy with your zoom, then by all means stick with it.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    northern england
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    739
    Quote Originally Posted by shnitz View Post

    blockend, stay away from the Sigmas. God, they are built horribly.
    I have four Sigmas, three bought new and a second hand one. Only the 28mm 1.8 is a good lens.
    I was put off the make when their surfaces disintegrated in storage, melted basically, into a thick gummy texture. The company suggested they'd been in contact with a corrosive substance. All the other lenses in the same drawer were fine. I would not buy another Sigma lens.

  3. #23
    Athiril's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Melbourne, Vic, Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,666
    Images
    28
    Don't be put off by silly opinons of bad copies, they're aligned/calibrated for free, and certain lenses in the Nikon and Canon lineup and others are notorious for having bad copies..people having to go through 5 or 6 to get a good one. Sigma make some of the world's best lenses that are unrivalled.

    Depends on the lens.

    Primes simply cannot compare to the Sigma 12-24mm for example. UWA primes have so much distortion and CA to boot. Only the Nikon 14-24/2.8 (or is that 14-28/2.8) tops it.

    And the new Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II is basically perfect @ f/2.8 at all focal lengths that has better resolution than many modern primes.
    Last edited by Athiril; 03-09-2011 at 01:09 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  4. #24
    Rol_Lei Nut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Hamburg
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,118
    Quote Originally Posted by Athiril View Post
    Primes simply cannot compare to the Sigma 12-24mm for example. UWA primes have so much distortion and CA to boot. Only the Nikon 14-24/2.8 (or is that 14-28/2.8) tops it.
    I assume it also makes excellent coffee and lays a golden egg at least every other day...
    M6, SL, SL2, R5, P6x7, SL3003, SL35-E, F, F2, FM, FE-2, Varex IIa

  5. #25
    mr rusty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    lancashire, UK
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    652
    Images
    106
    What's "worse"? use what you've got.

    Do Zooms have barrel distortion? Sure - some do. My zuiko F4 35-70 certainly does, but look at my pic of "The Albert" in my gallery http://www.apug.org/gallery1/showima...mageuser=35532.

    IMO the barrel distortion makes this image with the modern concrete and glass looming over the isolated old building.

    I've tried perspective straightening this, and it totally loses its impact.

  6. #26
    benjiboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    U.K.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    7,227
    The majority of viewers of your photographs couldn't give two monkeys f**ks whether they were shot with a prime or a zoom lens, but would be concerned with what they say, if anything.
    Last edited by benjiboy; 03-11-2011 at 06:51 AM. Click to view previous post history.
    Ben

  7. #27
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,756
    Quote Originally Posted by benjiboy View Post
    The majority of viewers of your photographs couldn't give two monkeys f**ks whether they were shot with a prime or a zoom lens, but would be concerned with what they say.
    I'd be concerned with what the monkeys say, too.
    I do use a digital device in my photographic pursuits when necessary.
    When someone rags on me for using film, I use a middle digit, upraised.

  8. #28
    Athiril's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Melbourne, Vic, Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,666
    Images
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by Rol_Lei Nut View Post
    I assume it also makes excellent coffee and lays a golden egg at least every other day...
    UWA primes are terrible compared to the Sigma. Straight lines stay straight on the 12-24mm, even at 12mm.

  9. #29
    Rol_Lei Nut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Hamburg
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,118
    Quote Originally Posted by Athiril View Post
    UWA primes are terrible compared to the Sigma. Straight lines stay straight on the 12-24mm, even at 12mm.
    Which UWA primes have you used in order to reach your all-encompassing conclusion?

    I've used ones made by Zeiss, Leica, Zeiss Jena, Mamiya, Nikon, Pentax, CV, Vivitar, Tamron, Tokina, Olympus, Canon, Arsat, Russar and probably several others: I seriously doubt I'd be impressed by the Sigma 12-24, also based on what I've heard about it from other sources.

    You also previously mentioned CA, which is usually not a problem with UWA lenses used on film cameras (but is if used on sensors, which is how most of the online comparative "tests" are conducted).
    M6, SL, SL2, R5, P6x7, SL3003, SL35-E, F, F2, FM, FE-2, Varex IIa

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minden Hills, Ontario, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    215
    For my Nikon F2AS I only have two zooms, both 80-200mm. The Vivitar f/4.5 was all I could afford when
    I bought it. It takes a 55mm filter. The Nikkor AIS f/4 takes 62mm filters. The Vivitar will do, it is tough,
    has been dropped on concrete and I can't see any problems! The Nikkor is faster and a bit sharper,
    But not quite as sharp as my Nikkor 200mm f/4 prime. If you want to travel light, take a zoom but test
    it thoroughly first.
    Best regards,
    /Clay

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin