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

Hardcore wrote in post #15207403
I have a hard time seeing the microcontrast everyone is talking about with the zeiss. What I do see is severe vignetting which gives it/them a unique look. The 14-24mm even bests the zeiss 15mm at apertures of >5.6.

Here is a link to a comparison against the zeiss 15mm. http://www.3d-kraft.com …camerasandlense​s&Itemid=2

I saw that too but, I take it with a grain of salt.

jdizzle wrote in post #15208574
I have before and wound up buying the f2 ZE. It's optically good or equal to the f1.4 at similar apertures. The decision ultimately comes down to needing f1.4.

again I have to second... I was in the same predicament... and got the f2 - its a stunning lens and very seldom do I need 1.4 especially with modern cameras iso handling.

I used to own the 85L 50L 35L 24l but I never went below f2 - its my comfort zone... :P

elrey2375 wrote in post #15204499
D600, ISO7000

3486 x 5418

EMBED PREVENTED, IMAGE TOO LARGE: http://img16.imageshac​k.us/img16/1815/dsc141​8k.jpg Click here to see our image rules.

This looks like the D700 at 3200. Did you do much NR?

I really hope Nikon has a new 35 f/2 or 1.8 in the works.

http://www.petapixel.c​om …-announcement/#more-85656

Canon's coming.

Razeus wrote in post #15210073
I really hope Nikon has a new 35 f/2 or 1.8 in the works.

http://www.petapixel.c​om …-announcement/#more-85656

Canon's coming.

I would like to see one too, just not priced like the Canon is being rumored to be priced at.

whmeltonjr wrote in post #15210096
I would like to see one too, just not priced like the Canon is being rumored to be priced at.

If it were priced the same way in the US it wouldn't be competitive, nor would the 24-70 be the kit lens for the 6D.

Yeah, the rumor of 1800 for the Canon 24-70mm f4 IS is insane. If it's really that much, Canon is smoking something reallllllly good. That's as much as Nikon's 24-70 2.8! I'm thinking it'll be around $1200-1300. But who knows.

I am annoyed with how bad the WB and color are on my D800, they just don't look right to me. Jdizzle has convinced me, gonna order a QPcard and give it a shot. ^_^

woos wrote in post #15210137
Yeah, the rumor of 1800 for the Canon 24-70mm f4 IS is insane. If it's really that much, Canon is smoking something reallllllly good. That's as much as Nikon's 24-70 2.8! I'm thinking it'll be around $1200-1300. But who knows.

I am annoyed with how bad the WB and color are on my D800, they just don't look right to me. Jdizzle has convinced me, gonna order a QPcard and give it a shot. ^_^

I wonder if the 24-105 will become discontinued by then.

Who knows, lol. The only way you'd want to buy a more expensive 24-70mm IS over the 24-105mm IS is (wow, IS is, what a mess that is!) if the 24-70 were much much better optically.

My guess is that Canon added the pseudo-macro mode to the new 24-70mm to try to justify a price increase. The new 24-70mm also has 3 less lens elements than the 24-105mm, so it's probably a bit cheaper to make!

I bet that they did 24-70mm f4 IS instead of an update 24-105mm IS, because it'll cut into 24-70mm 2.8 sales less. I bet...maybe not, but hmmm...

Also, $850 for a 35mm f/2 is insane. The profit margin in that must be sick. You'd think it'd be like $500 or so maybe, max!

Edit:

If the 24-70mm is really like $1500+, and really is going to be the 6d kit lens, Canon's 6d will get DESTROYED in sales by the D600. Think about it... 3500 or so for a 6d+24-70mm kit, vs 2500 or so for the d600 + 24-85mm kit. Even if the 24-70mm is much sharper, $1000 more is crazy. Nikon's 24-85mm VR is overpriced, imho, at $600. $1800 for the Canon competitor would just be insane, that's three times the price.

woos wrote in post #15210371
Who knows, lol. The only way you'd want to buy a more expensive 24-70mm IS over the 24-105mm IS is (wow, IS is, what a mess that is!) if the 24-70 were much much better optically.

My guess is that Canon added the pseudo-macro mode to the new 24-70mm to try to justify a price increase. The new 24-70mm also has 3 less lens elements than the 24-105mm, so it's probably a bit cheaper to make!

I bet that they did 24-70mm f4 IS instead of an update 24-105mm IS, because it'll cut into 24-70mm 2.8 sales less. I bet...maybe not, but hmmm...

Also, $850 for a 35mm f/2 is insane. The profit margin in that must be sick. You'd think it'd be like $500 or so maybe, max!

Not many f/2 IS lenses out there.

I notice 24-70 f4 have hybrid IS...maybe it's a great video lens!

Just took a look at some figures, it would cost me more to add the 24-70L II to my lineup than it would to switch to a D800 and 24-70G

woos wrote in post #15210371
Who knows, lol. The only way you'd want to buy a more expensive 24-70mm IS over the 24-105mm IS is (wow, IS is, what a mess that is!) if the 24-70 were much much better optically.

My guess is that Canon added the pseudo-macro mode to the new 24-70mm to try to justify a price increase. The new 24-70mm also has 3 less lens elements than the 24-105mm, so it's probably a bit cheaper to make!

I bet that they did 24-70mm f4 IS instead of an update 24-105mm IS, because it'll cut into 24-70mm 2.8 sales less. I bet...maybe not, but hmmm...

Also, $850 for a 35mm f/2 is insane. The profit margin in that must be sick. You'd think it'd be like $500 or so maybe, max!

Edit:

If the 24-70mm is really like $1500+, and really is going to be the 6d kit lens, Canon's 6d will get DESTROYED in sales by the D600. Think about it... 3500 or so for a 6d+24-70mm kit, vs 2500 or so for the d600 + 24-85mm kit. Even if the 24-70mm is much sharper, $1000 more is crazy. Nikon's 24-85mm VR is overpriced, imho, at $600. $1800 for the Canon competitor would just be insane, that's three times the price.

Well it is going to be an "L" lens where Nikons isn't the top of the line G so.... I would think its going to be around 1200-1400 compared to the nikons 600 for the 24-85

foxesamu wrote in post #15209627
This looks like the D700 at 3200. Did you do much NR?

This one had about +15 on the LR slider.

Tony_Stark wrote in post #15210449
Just took a look at some figures, it would cost me more to add the 24-70L II to my lineup than it would to switch to a D800 and 24-70G

Then you know what you must do!