May 31, 2010 @ 09:27 AM
Yuichisuke

Post: 108

Join Date: May 2008

I've been thinking a little while on which lens get it was either the 17-55mm or the 24-70mm Nikon. I shoot on a D70s
May 31, 2010 @ 10:00 AM
ekziled

Post: 189

Join Date: Apr 2009

Location: Hong Kong

24-70 all the way.
May 31, 2010 @ 06:18 PM
julian.

Post: 3302

Join Date: Mar 2008

Location: LA.

I've been thinking a little while on which lens get it was either the 17-55mm or the 24-70mm Nikon. I shoot on a D70s


dropping that much on glass for an outdated crop body?

get some pocketwizards and tons of flashes so you can utilize the 1/500 sync speed, only thing the d70 is good for.

it's a great general lens. i rarely ever use my zooms can't beat the price either.
could still use help with finding a wide angle for good value!


tamron 17-50 2.8

julianxberman.tumblr.com /

May 31, 2010 @ 06:38 PM
hools

Post: 4461

Join Date: Jul 2008

Location: California

^ compared the Tamron with the Sigma (with those links) and don't see much a difference statistically.. didn't read into the Tamron reviews though, so i don't know how much different it is performance wise.

i do see that the Tamron has vibration compensation, but it costs extra. still leaning toward the Sigma.. any other ideas?
May 31, 2010 @ 07:15 PM
pfortades

Post: 765

Join Date: Nov 2007

I love my 50mm f1.8 mkII. Im thinking of throwing away my kit lens

http://www.pfotography.tumblr.com

May 31, 2010 @ 09:43 PM
julian.

Post: 3302

Join Date: Mar 2008

Location: LA.

oh i had no idea that sigma even made a 17-50 f/2.8.
shouldnt be a problem then, both would easily compare hand in hand.

i'd pay that little extra for vibration reduction though, seeing as UWA'S are often used with long exposures, so any vibration reduction helps.

julianxberman.tumblr.com /

May 31, 2010 @ 10:49 PM
hools

Post: 4461

Join Date: Jul 2008

Location: California

^it's actually a 17-70 but i feel you on the VC deal. if i can try and shell out that litle extra i'd for sure cop. thanks juelz :3
May 31, 2010 @ 11:17 PM
Koven

Post: 3593

Join Date: Aug 2009

oh i had no idea that sigma even made a 17-50 f/2.8.
shouldnt be a problem then, both would easily compare hand in hand.

i'd pay that little extra for vibration reduction though, seeing as UWA'S are often used with long exposures, so any vibration reduction helps.



I remember reading that you shouldn't use Vibration reduction on a tripod or steady surface because it reduces picture quality. VR should be strictly reserved for hand held shots where you need it.

all I do is sip espressos and listen to AZ -mrelllis.tumblr.com

May 31, 2010 @ 11:17 PM
Yuichisuke

Post: 108

Join Date: May 2008

dropping that much on glass for an outdated crop body?

get some pocketwizards and tons of flashes so you can utilize the 1/500 sync speed, only thing the d70 is good for.



tamron 17-50 2.8


haha aside from the body since I'll be getting a d300s anyway,
May 31, 2010 @ 11:19 PM
hools

Post: 4461

Join Date: Jul 2008

Location: California

^just a heads up, Adorama is/was having a sale for D3000 kit for ~$380, no tax, free standard shipping
May 31, 2010 @ 11:58 PM
vinsanityy.

Post: 1125

Join Date: Jan 2010

Location: swag

^it's actually a 17-70 but i feel you on the VC deal. if i can try and shell out that litle extra i'd for sure cop. thanks juelz :3


the 17-70 is not as good as the sigma 18-50mm
the tamron is slightly better at around the same price but is 1mm wider.

u can find a tamron 17-50 f2.8 non-VC for around 375
June 1, 2010 @ 12:27 AM
julian.

Post: 3302

Join Date: Mar 2008

Location: LA.

haha aside from the body since I'll be getting a d300s anyway,


oh word.
its really up to you then, both lens are so fucking nice.
24-70 would make more sense on a FF body though.

julianxberman.tumblr.com /

June 1, 2010 @ 07:12 AM
hools

Post: 4461

Join Date: Jul 2008

Location: California

the 17-70 is not as good as the sigma 18-50mm
the tamron is slightly better at around the same price but is 1mm wider.

u can find a tamron 17-50 f2.8 non-VC for around 375


^how much more expensive is the 18-50 and what's the f/? bout to look it up in a bit, just woke up.

could use help finding a 17-50 for 375, been seeing it in the in 400's

*edit

looked into the Sigma 18-50 and saw several models with different features.. i'm thinking you're talking about this one.

i'm loving that it's a lot cheaper, has HSM and OS, and judging by the pictures but not by the listed features, is also a wide angle (confirm? ).

however i'm not sure it's the one you're talking about because i also saw this one.

idk halp
June 1, 2010 @ 07:50 AM
Argh.T

Post: 162

Join Date: Mar 2009

Location: Burn

Would getting the Nikon 35mm 1.8 DX be a worthy investment? As in, if i decide to switch to a full frame body would i still use it?
June 1, 2010 @ 11:17 AM
julian.

Post: 3302

Join Date: Mar 2008

Location: LA.

i'm not entirely sure about a full frame body, but i wouldnt think so.

but on a DX body, its a fucking great lens, really wish i had one, though i don't even shoot digital much anymore.

julianxberman.tumblr.com /

June 1, 2010 @ 02:29 PM
Koven

Post: 3593

Join Date: Aug 2009

Would getting the Nikon 35mm 1.8 DX be a worthy investment? As in, if i decide to switch to a full frame body would i still use it?


I wouldn't call it an investment, this glass pretty cheap at $200-300. But it is definitely the best bang for buck lens out there. Its pretty much the only lens I use.










You can use this on a Full Frame Camera in DX mode, I don't know why you would want too though. My advice is to just buy it and enjoy it on your crop sensor and if you upgrade to FF, then get some FF lenses.

all I do is sip espressos and listen to AZ -mrelllis.tumblr.com

June 1, 2010 @ 04:32 PM
365Hustle

Post: 229

Join Date: Mar 2010

I wouldn't call it an investment, this glass pretty cheap at $200-300. But it is definitely the best bang for buck lens out there. Its pretty much the only lens I use.










You can use this on a Full Frame Camera in DX mode, I don't know why you would want too though. My advice is to just buy it and enjoy it on your crop sensor and if you upgrade to FF, then get some FF lenses.


I use it too and it's an awesome lens really. No self promo but here's my flickr so you could take a look - www.flickr.com/photos/mejialabi/
June 1, 2010 @ 06:56 PM
vinsanityy.

Post: 1125

Join Date: Jan 2010

Location: swag

^how much more expensive is the 18-50 and what's the f/? bout to look it up in a bit, just woke up.

could use help finding a 17-50 for 375, been seeing it in the in 400's

*edit

looked into the Sigma 18-50 and saw several models with different features.. i'm thinking you're talking about this one.

i'm loving that it's a lot cheaper, has HSM and OS, and judging by the pictures but not by the listed features, is also a wide angle (confirm? ).

however i'm not sure it's the one you're talking about because i also saw this one.

idk halp

i was talking about the f2.8 one

theres really no point in buying the other one since its pretty much the same with the kit lens
the main reasons people upgrade to these 17-50 f2.8 is for the f2.8 aperture and the quality of the pictures that come out
June 1, 2010 @ 07:04 PM
julian.

Post: 3302

Join Date: Mar 2008

Location: LA.

get the tamron 17-50 f/2.8 and stop making it hard on yourself.

julianxberman.tumblr.com /

June 2, 2010 @ 02:40 AM
R.

Post: 2397

Join Date: Mar 2009

Location: Vancouver

Just wondering, does shooting in both raw & jpeg, double the shutter count?
June 2, 2010 @ 08:29 AM
hools

Post: 4461

Join Date: Jul 2008

Location: California

i was talking about the f2.8 one

theres really no point in buying the other one since its pretty much the same with the kit lens
the main reasons people upgrade to these 17-50 f2.8 is for the f2.8 aperture and the quality of the pictures that come out


i was thinking that too. thanks dew.

get the tamron 17-50 f/2.8 and stop making it hard on yourself.


don't mind making it hard on myself, glass costs a lot of money and i don't have the money to toss it around :\ plus i don't wanna go through the return process.

*still really considering the Tamron. seems to be the best wide angle zoom in its price range
June 3, 2010 @ 09:57 PM
Yuichisuke

Post: 108

Join Date: May 2008

In attempts to make DIY flash diffusers
June 4, 2010 @ 05:38 AM
Double SS

Post: 20

Join Date: Feb 2007

Anyone have a Micro 4/3 camera like an Olympus Pen? I'm thinking of getting a good camera but don't want to be carrying around a DSLR. Although 4/3 cameras are quite expensive is it worth getting one?
June 4, 2010 @ 07:06 AM
Argh.T

Post: 162

Join Date: Mar 2009

Location: Burn

Thanks for the replies guys!
June 4, 2010 @ 10:14 PM
.sm.

Post: 579

Join Date: Apr 2008

Location: california.

Anybody who owns a 7d or T2i and uses it for video probably know what AGC is and that it is a pain in the ass. If you don't know what it is heres a video that briefly explains it in the beginning:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=91xw_NX0Qm8

A petition was created to try to get canon to update their firmware to disable agc.

www.petitiononline.com/CanonAGC/petition.html

feel free to sign
June 5, 2010 @ 10:43 AM
hools

Post: 4461

Join Date: Jul 2008

Location: California

thinking i'm gonna pull the trigger on that Tamron 17-50 2.8

thanks guise smile
June 6, 2010 @ 04:30 AM
jamestapoz

Post: 978

Join Date: Feb 2009

Location: California

Anyone have a Micro 4/3 camera like an Olympus Pen? I'm thinking of getting a good camera but don't want to be carrying around a DSLR. Although 4/3 cameras are quite expensive is it worth getting one?


sure. if you want small, lightweight, quiet, and have the ability to swamp lenses,

micro four thirds cameras could fit your style.
June 6, 2010 @ 06:55 AM
kawsonebob

Post: 64

Join Date: Mar 2010

Location: Northants UK

Wide Angle Lens For Canon 350d
Can anyone give me some recommendations re wide angle lenses for the canon? Dont want to shell out too much cash but have no idea what i should be looking at.
June 6, 2010 @ 07:07 AM
vinsanityy.

Post: 1125

Join Date: Jan 2010

Location: swag

^for ultra wide angles go for the canon 10-22mm
or the tokina 10-17mm if u want the fisheye effect

for normal wide angle zooms try the canon 17-55mm f2.8
the tamron 17-50 f2.8
or the sigma 18-50 f2.8
June 8, 2010 @ 01:16 AM
realignant

Post: 1653

Join Date: Jan 2007

or sigma 10-20mm F3.5

Please login first to reply.
Back To Top