|
Post by herron on Sept 15, 2009 21:01:20 GMT -5
Just ordered a new lens for my Canon 30D dSLR ... a Sigma 18-250mm f/3.5 ... optically stabilized (anti-shake). Will have to sell a few things to afford it, but I've been talking about paring down my collection for a while now. Will post some shots, as soon as it arrives. ----- But this does NOT mean I'm giving up any of my film cameras! LOL!! ;D
|
|
casualcollector
Lifetime Member
In Search of "R" Serial Soligors
Posts: 619
|
Post by casualcollector on Sept 23, 2009 19:33:32 GMT -5
I am still astounded by the focal length range of modern zoom lenses! Have fun with it!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2009 21:17:11 GMT -5
Ron:
I have the Nikkor 18-200 VR (anti shake). When we went to China it was just about permanently attached to the camera. The model I have has a tendency to creep ot to full tele. It's my understanding that the latest version has a zoom lock to keep that from happening. I was skeptical that a zoom with that wide a range could be very sharp but I find it very acceptable and the ultimate travel lens.
Wayne
|
|
Reiska
Lifetime Member
Member has Passed
Posts: 558
|
Post by Reiska on Sept 25, 2009 14:51:08 GMT -5
How long it takes when we can forget camera with three or four "glass tubes" inside the camera bag? My guess is that that date will be quite soon. One hyper zoom will be adequate for all needs. More and more light sensitive sensors don’t need fast and BIG lenses. New optical glasses and constructions will be so good, that the wavelength of a light are starting to be a problem to gain more sharpness. Even the control over the depth of field could be a piece of cake.At least this will be enough even for a more advanced amateur but for a professional use the special lenses will still be useful. Cameras with interchangeable lenses might also be rare after fifteen years or less in the future.
I am very satisfied with my small 2,8/17-50mm Tamron. It is OK for an available light shooting and it has a nice “bokeh” but 50mm (75mm/35mm film) it needs longer companion, so two lenses might be necessary for travel. Both Nikon and Sigma superzoom with VR/OS are excellent. Ron, you will be absolutely satisfied.
Nostrad.. uh.. Reijo
|
|
|
Post by nikonbob on Oct 3, 2009 10:57:36 GMT -5
Ron
Be sure and let us know how that lens works out for you. I just got back from a two week trip and was very impressed with the 28-200 used Tamron that I took along. I did bring along longer and wider lenses but the 28-200 was on the D700 most of the time. The advances in the last 20 years in super zooms has been amazing and when couple to sensors like the D700 has and VR/OS really negates a lot of the need for high speed lenses for most people.
Bob
|
|
|
Post by herron on Oct 4, 2009 20:41:25 GMT -5
Ron Be sure and let us know how that lens works out for you. I just got back from a two week trip and was very impressed with the 28-200 used Tamron that I took along. I did bring along longer and wider lenses but the 28-200 was on the D700 most of the time. The advances in the last 20 years in super zooms has been amazing and when couple to sensors like the D700 has and VR/OS really negates a lot of the need for high speed lenses for most people. Bob The Sigma lens was great! I never put a different one on the camera for the whole week! It does have a zoom lock, so that wasn't a problem. I just wish the aperture was better than 4-6.3! There were some low light situations that might have produced some nice images, had I packed a tripod! I'm going to have a lot of fun with it!
|
|
|
Post by nikonbob on Oct 5, 2009 6:15:04 GMT -5
Ron Glad that it worked out so well for you. These super zooms can't do everything as good as they are. There is still a place for a fast lens and/or tripod. Sometimes you get away with hail mary shots though. This was taken at 70mm with the 28-200 Tamron xr lens. I had the iso jacked to 3200 and shot handheld at 1/15 and f 4.5. Just saw that data for this shot and I was mistaken about which lens I used. It was a Nikon 70-300 VR for this one. Sorry for the mistake. Bob
|
|
|
Post by herron on Oct 5, 2009 21:46:17 GMT -5
Very nice, for handheld! I just don't like pushing the ISO up when I shoot ... personal preference ... didn't like it in film, either!
|
|
|
Post by herron on Oct 5, 2009 22:08:04 GMT -5
This was a shot with that new Sigma lens on my Canon 300D. Using it about an 80mm equivalent, with lighting from recessed overhead lights (in a 15-foot ceiling!) and the soft fill of a cloudy outside light coming through double sliding doors, near the end of the day. Handheld, with ISO pushed to about 1600 ... shutter speed was still fairly slow (but I didn't record it). I was happy with the shot, but would have preferred a much lower ISO with the camera on a tripod, so it could be sharper, with less grain!
|
|
|
Post by nikonbob on Oct 6, 2009 4:53:47 GMT -5
Ron
I have to agree with you that my preference is also to shoot at lower iso settings if possible with both film and digital. I never did like flash and when traveling I used Fuji 800 and a 28/2.8 lens to get shots in museums etc. Just to see what the 3200 looked like, I printed a cropped 8x10 of the posted shot. It beat any Fuji 800 print I ever did and that is using a super zoom wide open and not a prime lens. The new sensors like the D700 has are just amazing. If you add VR/OS technology into the mix you have some very interesting possibilities. Your 1600 iso shot doesn't look too bad at all on my monitor. I think you got a winner on your hands with that new lens.
Bob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2009 8:55:33 GMT -5
I seldon shoot above 400 ISO even thoufg the D300 handles up to 1600 pretty well. Old habits die hard--even when they are old film habits.
Wayne
|
|
|
Post by herron on Oct 6, 2009 16:11:29 GMT -5
I still like the lower ISO, and my digital is usually set no higher than 200. If I have my tripod it's set at 100, unless there is a lot of movement going on that might blur unacceptably at the slower shutter speeds. Even shooting film, 200 was it, although I have to admit it's fun to push the envelope to see what happens! ;D
|
|
|
Post by Microdad on Oct 7, 2009 14:08:05 GMT -5
I stay at ISO 200 unless the lighting situation forces otherwise. As I understand it, digital chips are designed to operate normally at a certain sensitivity (normally ISO 200) and it has to emulate speeds that are faster or slower. My D200's chip's "normal" speed is 200, so even if I go down to 100 it has to emulate the slower speed.
|
|
|
Post by nikonbob on Oct 15, 2009 15:54:57 GMT -5
Looks like some super zooms are just not as good as others. I had a chance to try out a Promaster 24-200 AF today and let me tell you it can't compare to the Tamron 28-200 I have been using. Not a scientific test just shooting so 48 general photos. I would not hesitate to use the Tamron wide open at any focal length but found the Promaster seemed soft unless stopped down to f8 to f11. OTH the Promaster focuses equally fast and appears to be better built. I think trying to to 24 at the wide end might just have involved too many compromises and also there is such a thing as sample variation. I guess it is try before you buy or at least have buy from a place that has a decent return policy.
|
|
daveh
Lifetime Member
Posts: 4,696
|
Post by daveh on May 30, 2010 5:59:40 GMT -5
I have a 18-200 Sigma (Canon) and a Tamron 28-300(Pentax). Neither lens has the range claimed. I have not done accurate measurements and those that I have done are only at the telephoto end. The Sigma appears to stop at about 175mm, and the Tamron about 270 mm when measured against other lenses. It will be interesting to see who the new lens compares. Film speed: I use whatever I need for the photograph. Trying to shoot rugby action at 4:00 pm in December I find that ISO 100 gives exposes that are slightly too long with an f4-5.6 lens. Canon 30D, Canon 75-300, ISO 3200, 1/60 f4.5
|
|