AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 70-200 f2.8G IF-ED

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by YSLee
If that's the case, why are you using a noisy, not sharp, distorted, and bad bokeh Seekma 20mm f/1.8?

cos neither of the big 2 has a sharp, well corrected, fast f1.8 lens in the 20mm class that will give an approximate field of view of a 28mm lens on a digital SLR.

Sigma captured that market perfectly. And that 20mm is sharp down to 1.8. Can your 20mm do f1.8? ;p

if i am not mistaken, nikon has some pretty bad throw away lenses as well yeah? Oh, and not all nikon lenses fit all nikon bodies. Yeah, just the kind of complication we need.........

Sometimes the underdogs do get their day u ought to try it someday. unless of course u prefer your highly distorted vivitar watever

 

[YSLee]

As you said, the underdogs do get their day, and my cheapo lens does get a few nice photos here and there. And it's just a mere $90.

And I'm humble enough to admit my cheapo lens is not the best optically, but a few people just won't admit the weakness of their lenses.

(that's why the ClubSNAP portal now so slow to open.. someone spending too much time in Photoshop correcting his pictures)

Does my 20mm need f/1.8? Not for me. f/2.8 and f/1.8 is just 1 1/3 stop, worse come to worse, there's this thing called Press 800 pushed one stop. (less grain too, and again, no need to spend so much time in Photoshop)

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by Jed

Honestly though... Nikon might be lagging in the bells and whistles of some of their lenses, but the main technological development in the last 20 years or so Nikon has been lightyears ahead of Canon, namely digital cameras. Yes, I know the 1D is good, but it took till after Nikon had the D1 and the D1x/h. And when I mean big development, I mean something that would cause rational photographers to jump ship.

Yup, i got to give u this point. Canon does lag behind in the pro digital SLR market. And yes, they lost pros to Nikon because of that.

watever the reasons, i believe it's not a technological barrier, but some business decision screwup. how hard could it be to throw a sensor into a pro body and sell it as an interim solution to the D1?

at least they got the 1D right, even the banding problem. And let's face it, the D30 may not be pro class, but it advances the state of the art in many ways as well, most notably in the use of CMOS. If anything, the consumer DSLR market was kept alive by the likes of the D30 and the Fuji S1 Pro.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by YSLee
And I'm humble enough to admit my cheapo lens is not the best optically, but a few people just won't admit the weakness of their lenses.

i did - i did say it focuses slower than the Canon 20mm.
but to say it's not sharp is doing it injustice. :angry:

(that's why the ClubSNAP portal now so slow to open.. someone spending too much time in Photoshop correcting his pictures)

nope.....i spend more time taking pictures. fact
And wat do U know about post processing - u pay labs to do it for u!

Does my 20mm need f/1.8? Not for me.

not for u maybe, but others do. I did say Sigma captured a market trying to cope with the multiplier factor of DSLRs. at the risk of sounding personal (which i am not), do u need the F100 to take the pictures u're taking? F100 is definitely pro class. so by your definition, u belong to the wrong market. If however u can justify your need for a pro class camera, then perhaps there are pple who can also justify a fast 20mm, esp if it is a good lens.

f/2.8 and f/1.8 is just 1 1/3 stop, worse come to worse, there's this thing called Press 800 pushed one stop. (less grain too, and again, no need to spend so much time in Photoshop)

maybe if u do take the effort to spend the time in photoshop, perhaps u might actually see the grain as a result of pushing your film as opposed to having a fast lens

 

[Darren]

Originally posted by Red Dawn
oh wait.....i forgot about DO. DO technology, the promise of light weight, fast zooms and prime lenses. The 400 f4 DO IS USM is already on the shelves.

yes.... and it is still there because NO ONE CAN AFFORD TO BUY IT - SGD$11K !!! wah!!!!!

I buy a Nikon 300f/2.8 and a matched Nikkor 1.4x TC only SGD$7.5K...... arguably a more versatile combo, and I still have left over to buy, say, a 17-35AFS or a 28-70AFS or a 80-200AFS lens.

;p

 

[Darren]

anyway, before this thread degenerates into a mud-slinging Canon vs Nikon wrestling match, we all have to be content that the major manufacturers will always be leapfrogging each other in terms of development.

And it doesnt matter is Brand X introduces a tech/product/feature faster than Brand Y cos thats the way product development goes - Brand Y will always catch up, and maybe go a little further ahead.

And honestly speaking, how many of us here are debating tech for the sake of the debate - i dont think we will rush out to buy the latest and greatest when they are launched (well, i can't afford to anyway).

 

[rueyloon]

Originally posted by Darren
anyway, before this thread degenerates into a mud-slinging Canon vs Nikon wrestling match, we all have to be content that the major manufacturers will always be leapfrogging each other in terms of development.

ya, I agree with Darren, about this, we all know this debate is just for fun ..... just for the sake of it because....... RANGEFINDERS are the best cameras around

 

[Jed]

Originally posted by Darren

yes.... and it is still there because NO ONE CAN AFFORD TO BUY IT - SGD$11K !!! wah!!!!!

Hmm... that is very expensive. I thought Canon lenses were supposed to be cheaper? You can buy the longer AF-S 500/4 for less than that, and get more glass.

:bsmilie: :bsmilie: :bsmilie:

 

[ckiang]

Originally posted by Jed


Exactly why Canon users should have no excuse to not be churning out better pictures than us poor Nikon users! So that would make all Canon users who only take the same quality pictures as their Nikon counterparts worse photographers too, cause the Nikon guys have to do it with inferior gear!

And Canon users haven't been spoilt. They are spoilt!

WAY TO GO!! :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:


Regards
CK

 

[ckiang]

Hi,

Originally posted by Red Dawn


i did - i did say it focuses slower than the Canon 20mm.
but to say it's not sharp is doing it injustice. :angry:

nope.....i spend more time taking pictures. fact
And wat do U know about post processing - u pay labs to do it for u!

I remember both YS and myself mostly shoot slides... no post processing! ;p

Regards
CK

 

[rueyloon]

hey, Nikon's slogan isn't "we make the best equipments"

it is

(or something like that)

"we take the greatest pictures"


heheheheh

 

[Jed]

Originally posted by rueyloon

"we take the greatest pictures"

I think it's we take the world's greatest pictures, but you've got it more or less right.

As I was telling Boon Hwee earlier today, that's complete rubbish .

Because as we all know, it's the photographers using Nikon equipment that take the world's greatest pictures.

And not those using Canon cameras :bsmilie: :bsmilie: :bsmilie:

If anyone cannot tell the humour in that then please see me about it personally... :bsmilie: :bsmilie:

 

[YSLee]

Originally posted by rueyloon


ya, I agree with Darren, about this, we all know this debate is just for fun ..... just for the sake of it because....... RANGEFINDERS are the best cameras around

You Hexar AF doesn't count.. cause it doesn't have a interchangeable lenses..

 

[YSLee]

Originally posted by Red Dawn


i did - i did say it focuses slower than the Canon 20mm.
but to say it's not sharp is doing it injustice. :angry:

Sharp meh? Ask all the guys here lor. ;p

nope.....i spend more time taking pictures. fact
And wat do U know about post processing - u pay labs to do it for u!

Sorry hor, I shoot slides one. No post processing needed. I get my shots right the first time.

not for u maybe, but others do. I did say Sigma captured a market trying to cope with the multiplier factor of DSLRs. at the risk of sounding personal (which i am not), do u need the F100 to take the pictures u're taking? F100 is definitely pro class. so by your definition, u belong to the wrong market. If however u can justify your need for a pro class camera, then perhaps there are pple who can also justify a fast 20mm, esp if it is a good lens.

F100 - 1/250 flash sync.

The sigma on the other hand, is nowhere near any Nikon or Canon 20mm. The f/1.8 is just a gimmick (also explains why it's more distorted and less sharp)

maybe if u do take the effort to spend the time in photoshop, perhaps u might actually see the grain as a result of pushing your film as opposed to having a fast lens

Sorry hor, Press 800 pushed 1 stop 10x better than your D30 at 1600. Not to mention that I still need not do any post processing!

 

[ckiang]

Originally posted by Jed


I think it's we take the world's greatest pictures, but you've got it more or less right.

As I was telling Boon Hwee earlier today, that's complete rubbish .

Because as we all know, it's the photographers using Nikon equipment that take the world's greatest pictures.

And not those using Canon cameras

If anyone cannot tell the humour in that then please see me about it personally... :bsmilie: :bsmilie:

Or, to see it another way, it's Nikon (staff/company) who takes the world's greatest pictures, not the rest of us. ;p

Regards
CK

 

[ckiang]

Originally posted by YSLee

Sorry hor, Press 800 pushed 1 stop 10x better than your D30 at 1600. Not to mention that I still need not do any post processing!

Unfortunately, this I don't quite agree. Having shot several Press 800 @ EI 1600, I find digital output of any D-SLR easily beats the hell out of it. Although the grain is not as bad as Max 400 underexposed, I get problems with subjects lit by red light or purple light - the subject gets washed out in red/purple. No details.

Digital is so much cleaner.

Regards
CK

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by rueyloon


ya, I agree with Darren, about this, we all know this debate is just for fun ..... just for the sake of it because....... RANGEFINDERS are the best cameras around

rueyloon - i think i know wat u mean....i found myself staring at various Leica and Bessa models today, together with their associated (expensive) lenses ;p

i think i was there 45 mins....definitely treading on dangerous grounds

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by YSLee

F100 - 1/250 flash sync.

The sigma on the other hand, is nowhere near any Nikon or Canon 20mm. The f/1.8 is just a gimmick (also explains why it's more distorted and less sharp)

have u used a Nikkor 20mm or Canon 20mm before, let alone the Sigma? have u compared the output from all of these? i compared the Canon and Sigma models before i bought mine. There's also a fair amount of input from around the net on the 3. Now may i suggest u do a bit of research before launching these baseless diatribes. and that includes that little issue of pushing 800 film....

and if u're going to be reaching for your flash units everytime u don't have enough light, and u think f1.8 is a gimmick, u obviously don't understand available light photography and never shoot performing arts. Don't lamblast a particular lens just because u don't understand enough how to utilise it to the fullest. Especially if u have never used one before. it makes u look...uhmm...stupid. (like making statements like "F100 - 1/250 flash sync")

 

[kongg]

I think Canon patented their IS technolgy...........so Nikon can only incorporate VR into their lens product line when the patents expire. Thus the delay.

 

[Jed]

Originally posted by kongg
I think Canon patented their IS technolgy...........so Nikon can only incorporate VR into their lens product line when the patents expire. Thus the delay.

Unlikely, cause patents last 20 years...