Recent content by enenyi

I'm assuming u have Adobe Bridge CS6. Use Adobe Bridge to download updates to CS6. The newest Camera Raw will also be downloaded so that u can use Camera Raw to open D610's NEF files.

I assume the 8-15mm is referring to Canon 8-15mm f4 fisheye? Misconception: fisheye is not equivalent to an ultra wide-angle lens. You can't use fisheye the exact same way you use a wide-angle or ultra wide-angle lens. Unless u are referring to the Sigma 8-16mm f4.5-5.6 ultra wide angle lens...

I'm a Sigma 12-24 v2 user, but on a Nikon setup. The Sigma 12-24 is a very very good and affordable lens for landscape and ultra-wide perspective shots, that's all. The Canon 11-24 would be a much, much better alternative to the Sigma 12-24 with larger max aperture (f4 constant vs f4.5 on...

I agree with Dfive. If size and weight are your concern, then u should have gone with the 50mm f1.8G (or even the 50mm f1.8D). By choosing the 50mm f1.8G over the 50mm f1.4G, u shave off a third of the weight (185g vs 278g) for half the price (ard S$250 vs ard $500). That 1/3 stop more u can...

Since u alrdy using Nikon 28-300, u shld be naturally looking at Tokina 16-28 f2.8, but local shops with export sets, since local shops with Tokina warranty would still be selling at higher than 1k. Nikon lenses shld be out of ur budget unless u turn to second hand market. Nikon 18-35 isnt...

Siggy 12-24 version 1 and even Canon 11-24 have rear-mounted filters though. So the new lens best if it has rear mounted filters. Saves a lot of money buying filters for ultra wides. :)

Hope the new Siggy 12-24 lens has filter thread. So expensive for custom filter solution for my Sigma 12-24 version 2, so I have to shoot with the lens without filters.

Some time ago it was rumoured that the new 24-70 f2.8 was gonna use Nikon's Phase Fresnel technology to shrink the lens size, probably to something like the size of the 24-120 f4. Wonder if Nikon decided that PF technology was too expensive to employ on a fast zoom lens...

TS seems like u already got the full range of Nikon lenses, so no point upgrading a working set of lenses. Just get a micro 4/3 or Sony mirrorless as secondary camera ba, good and stealthy for street photography. :)

I think this is a wrong approach towards cropping in photography. Cropping is there to enhance the final image (e.g. adjust subject to thirds line), it is a means to an end, not an end itself. So based on your logic, I own a Sigma 12-24mm version 2 lens. To get my intended subject at 200mm focal...

Not really 'struggling', but more like I want the perspective that 12mm gives me to add some effect to the composition. Kind of intended barrel distortion. If i dun wan to go that wide, i can choose to shoot at 14-18mm range, which is the best performing focal range for this lens, and 14-18mm is...

My advice is to use DX lens on DX body and FX lens on FX body. Wad can a 17-55 do on the FX body that the 24-70 cant? 24-70 can reach 24mm at its widest, 17-55 can only reach the equivalent field-of-view of 25.5mm on FX. At the telephoto end, 17-55 goes only to 82.5mm FX-equivalent while 24-70...

For some reason, many pple seem to have the thinking that Sigma 12-24 is a DX lens... Yes. Sigma 12-24 is a full-frame lens. (Link here: http://www.sigmaphoto.com/product/12-24mm-f45-56-dg-hsm-ii) And yes, if you think 14mm on the Nikon 14-24 is wide, 12mm is much wider(looking through the...

Seems like both the Tamron 15-30 and Nikon 14-24 are meant for people who are willing to pay more for the fast AF at f2.8. For me as a casual landscape shooter, i shall stick to my Sigma 12-24 Mk II until Nikon or Tamron offers something as wide and at an affordable 1k price range. :)

I think he meant the Sigma 25-105 F4 OS Art lens. Cheaper but bulkier compared to Nikon 24-120 F4 VR.