Got a Nikon? Share your thoughts and photos here or ask a question! (II)

monk3y wrote in post #12357019
where? can I use a mirror lens on a tripod? I would want to shoot the sun with that lens on sunset

I know mirror lens are cheap but are they good?

You have to. I couldn't imagine not using a tripod with one. I shot the moon (what else), and played with shooting some other things. The quality isn't very good, no. I usually get weird spots in my images, and the sharpness isn't there. Maybe tomorrow I'll get up and take some images...
I bought it for like $250 for an assignment to shoot the moon. Haven't really touched it since.

KenjiS wrote in post #12357000
True enough, i do have situations where getting a bit farther back or closer is hard, IE here i was in a booth at a restaurant and my 50mm is too darn long

Damn! Kenji, that looks good!

anlenke wrote in post #12356882
It depends which 50mm. The 35mm is sharper than the 50mm 1.8D, and IMO the 50mm 1.4D, the 50mm 1.4G is a little better build quality, but the sharpness is about the same at 1.8 really. The bokeh of the 50mm 1.4G is probably the best because it has an extra aperture blade, but not worth the cost difference for most. I just sold my 50mm 1.4D to make space for the new 50mm 1.8G, which likely will be better than all of them, with the exception of losing that little bit of aperture to the 1.4G. I'm not terribly concerned, especially with the price difference. I think the 35mm 1.8 is built better than the 1.8D (and will AF on your body, and is very close to the 50mm 1.4G.)

Well, you re-affirmed it. 35 it is. I'm already drooling about the potential it has in my automotive work!
I know this sounds dorky, but I think the 35 will bring out more "artistic" work.

anlenke wrote in post #12356909
The 24-120 I don't suspect you'll be happy with; very expensive, and a 24 is a 36 on the D60 or D90; not wide enough I would think. The 18-105 is going to be a step up from your lenses you have currently, and I would think probably would cover your needs pretty well. The 16-85 is nice, optically a step up again from the 18-105, but only get that if you're really using the 18 on your 18-55 a lot. If you're really in the 20-30 range, I don't think it's worth the extra money.

I've got a gripped D90 with an 18-105 if you'd like to purchase it

Well, the 24-120 f/3.5-5.6 is $669.99, which I guess I wouldn't describe as very expensive in general, but compared to other f/3.5-5.6's it would be pretty dam spendy. But you're exactly right, 36 definitely isn't wide enough for a "universal" lens, 24 would barely cut it.
The 18-105 f/3.5-5.6 is only $399.99 which fits greatly into my budget! I don't mean to pick your brain, but how significant is the step up from my current lens(es)?
I would say at least 50% of my shots are in the 20-30 range, the 16 probably isn't really worth the extra cash, although I know I would appreciate the extra wide angle in some case. I think your right, the $300 extra really isn't worth the extra 2mm.

How much do you want for the D90 w/ 18-105? We could take that portion of the conversation to pm

anlenke wrote in post #12357042
Damn! Kenji, that looks good!

Oh it is, its REALLY good, best fajitas around...

They also have nice drinks

anlenke wrote in post #12357040
You have to. I couldn't imagine not using a tripod with one. I shot the moon (what else), and played with shooting some other things. The quality isn't very good, no. I usually get weird spots in my images, and the sharpness isn't there. Maybe tomorrow I'll get up and take some images...
I bought it for like $250 for an assignment to shoot the moon. Haven't really touched it since.

show me

if you don't like it and wanna sell it I might be interested

I wanna shoot the sun more than the Moon hahahaha

where do you guys usually buy your used stuff? I've used this forum a number of times for canon gear. Is there a nice source to buy used nikon gear?

mtiotuico wrote in post #12357181
where do you guys usually buy your used stuff? I've used this forum a number of times for canon gear. Is there a nice source to buy used nikon gear?

KEH, Adorama and B&H are all excellent choices

mtiotuico wrote in post #12357181
where do you guys usually buy your used stuff? I've used this forum a number of times for canon gear. Is there a nice source to buy used nikon gear?

are you Pinoy?

I have never bought used yet

monk3y wrote in post #12357329
are you Pinoy?

I have never bought used yet

yes I am. Are you?

funny, I haven't bought new yet haha

mtiotuico wrote in post #12357379
yes I am. Are you?

funny, I haven't bought new yet haha

look at my location

huwaa were you born and raised there?

here its pretty difficult to buy used... IMHO

monk3y wrote in post #12357394
look at my location

huwaa were you born and raised there?

here its pretty difficult to buy used... IMHO

haha oh didn't see that. nah I'm born and raised in California. my parents grew up there though

mtiotuico wrote in post #12357409
haha oh didn't see that. nah I'm born and raised in California. my parents grew up there though

so are you ready for this coming Saturday night fight?

Max713 wrote in post #12357068
Well, the 24-120 f/3.5-5.6 is $669.99, which I guess I wouldn't describe as very expensive in general, but compared to other f/3.5-5.6's it would be pretty dam spendy. But you're exactly right, 36 definitely isn't wide enough for a "universal" lens, 24 would barely cut it.
The 18-105 f/3.5-5.6 is only $399.99 which fits greatly into my budget! I don't mean to pick your brain, but how significant is the step up from my current lens(es)?
I would say at least 50% of my shots are in the 20-30 range, the 16 probably isn't really worth the extra cash, although I know I would appreciate the extra wide angle in some case. I think your right, the $300 extra really isn't worth the extra 2mm.

I may be in the minority here but both lens are NOT worth those prices. There is a sharper 24-120 f4 lens but cost twice as much.

Nikon also has a 28-300 you can find for under $1K used. That lens is sharp but does suffer from barrel distortion because it's so "mega" . That distortion is easily fixable in LR and other pp apps. If I was force to pick a mega-zoom I would get that, buy it used and deal with the distortion later.

KenjiS wrote in post #12355773
Hey Nikoners, Help pull me into your camp more

I think with your current gear you're in a position where you can wait for the new gen pro bodies come out.

I just picked this up yesterday

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO