In this case, both new lenses will become more useful for photographers to capture the image they looking for.
Yeah.. switch to DX if not enough reach.. ;p
What do you think of the NEW Nikon AF-S 14-24 mm and 24-70 mm F2.8G ED?
- Thread starter 2.8photography
- Start date
- Status
Yeah.. switch to DX if not enough reach.. ;p
Bernard Ong
New Member
but sometimes i feel that old lenses liek 17-35 and 28-70 can be much better.
Well, lets see how the nano-crystal coating perform on the 2 new lenses.
Well, lets see how the nano-crystal coating perform on the 2 new lenses.
yyD70S
Senior Member
Rightfully so.
These are have earned their status over time. Calling them trinities (together with the other zoom); I find a little extreme. However, the are the better ones.
The incumbents -- AFS14-24mm f/2.8 & AFS24-70mm f/2.8; the specs look good but we'll only know how good they really are out in the field -- starting from this Nov/Dec.
Oh, it's only Tuesday.
These are have earned their status over time. Calling them trinities (together with the other zoom); I find a little extreme. However, the are the better ones.
The incumbents -- AFS14-24mm f/2.8 & AFS24-70mm f/2.8; the specs look good but we'll only know how good they really are out in the field -- starting from this Nov/Dec.
Oh, it's only Tuesday.
but sometimes i feel that old lenses liek 17-35 and 28-70 can be much better.
Well, lets see how the nano-crystal coating perform on the 2 new lenses.
2.8photography
Senior Member
new trinity? 14-24, 24-70, 70-200 vr (all f/2.8)? after all, it does offer all the way from 14-200 in f/2.8, unlike the current 1 which starts at 17. apparently the 3mm makes a world of a difference.
haha
wat do u guys think?
haha
wat do u guys think?
i don't think switching to DX will really matter in terms of reach. switching to DX will only give you 5.1mp with the D3. just shoot in FX then just crop off the part that you don't need. it will still look like you zoomed in but you might still end up with a higher resolution image.
zac08
Senior Member
You'll end up with the same resolution... you tried cropping in RAW mode before??
i just checked again the specs of the d3 at www.dpreview.com and you'll only get 5.1 megapixels in DX format
why not just shoot in FX then just crop the parts you don't need? you won't get 12mp in DX format You get to see the crop before you shoot.. ;p
new trinity? 14-24, 24-70, 70-200 vr (all f/2.8)? after all, it does offer all the way from 14-200 in f/2.8, unlike the current 1 which starts at 17. apparently the 3mm makes a world of a difference.
haha
wat do u guys think?
Yes.. I think so.. I posted it a few days ago. This combi has to be the new trinity.
yes i agree with you with your statement above but i think we are talking about extending the reach and not seeing the crop before you shoot
DX is 1.5 crop. then you effectively cropped the image 1.5. why not just shoot in full frame and maybe you only need to crop 1.2 parts of the image. you'll end up with a higher resolution image and also probably an image with more impact
zac08
Senior Member
i just checked again the specs of the d3 at www.dpreview.com and you'll only get 5.1 megapixels in DX format
True... but if all you need is what the DX can offer you in the focal length, you'd end up with the same small res... I shoot with my D200 and crop off about 50% off the original image and normally I'd end up with 4 - 5 Mp res..
i agree with you!
i am not telling people not to use DX lenses. it is only my opinion that DX format doesn't really increase the focal length since you also use less sensor thus ending up with 5.1mp.
if both FX and DX will end up with 12.1mp then you might have probably increased the focal length. but since you ended up with less resolution then you actually didn't get to zoom in. it is just like shooting in FX 12.1mp then i just crop 1.5x of the image and end up with DX 5.1mp
i myself own 2 DX lenses and i do enjoy them. i am not implying on not using DX...
zac08
Senior Member
i agree with you!
i am not telling people not to use DX lenses. it is only my opinion that DX format doesn't really increase the focal length since you also use less sensor thus ending up with 5.1mp.
if both FX and DX will end up with 12.1mp then you might have probably increased the focal length. but since you ended up with less resolution then you actually didn't get to zoom in. it is just like shooting in FX 12.1mp then i just crop 1.5x of the image and end up with DX 5.1mp
i myself own 2 DX lenses and i do enjoy them. i am not implying on not using DX...
Well, the good thing for us is that we get to have a in-cam TC... :bsmilie: 1.5 x without haing to spend an extra $500..:bsmilie:
yes i agree with you with your statement above but i think we are talking about extending the reach and not seeing the crop before you shoot
DX is 1.5 crop. then you effectively cropped the image 1.5. why not just shoot in full frame and maybe you only need to crop 1.2 parts of the image. you'll end up with a higher resolution image and also probably an image with more impact
Yeah.. probably.. But Nikon's provision of the DX crop is actually more for the frame rate than anything else because we can crop in post.
yes i agree with you regarding frame rate
i was actually replying only to your original message wherein you said that "Yeah.. switch to DX if not enough reach.." i am not talking about the frame rate
all i'm saying is that using DX on a D3 doesn't actually extend the reach
sample here
#1
- use a 12-24 f/4 DX lens on a D3
- shoot a scene at 18mm
- you get a 5.1mp image since you are on DX mode
#2
- use a 17-35 2.8 on a D3
- shoot the exact same scene as above at 18mm
- you get a 12mp image
- crop the image 1.5x and retain more or less 5mp of image at the exact center
- you'll get the same image as above
with the sample, you actually didn't get to extend the reach right? if both FX and DX will give you 12mp then you actually extended the reach. but this 1 does not.
i am not saying anything about frame rate. all i am saying is that using DX mode doesn't really increase your zooming capability
anyway, i don't want any word war here
i am just merely pointing out my view.let us all enjoy our gears since we are all Nikon fans in this forum. cheers!!
with the sample, you actually didn't get to extend the reach right? if both FX and DX will give you 12mp then you actually extended the reach. but this 1 does not.
i am not saying anything about frame rate. all i am saying is that using DX mode doesn't really increase your zooming capability
Yeah.. I know what you mean. ;p My view was that if you don't need the resolution, you could just do an in camera cropping to give you a narrower FoV at the expense of resolution. You could just use the JPEG straight out of the box regardless whether it's 12MP or 5MP, it's already a correctly framed image which is ready to be published. I think in press photography, this is important rather than the news house not knowing what you're trying to shoot because of the surrounding stuff and then rejects the image because it's too messy.
For example, I just brought a 70-200/2.8 but was not able to get a good crop of, say, the US president because of the crowd and I'm already zoomed to 200mm, I just need a little bit of reach, I could sacrifice resolution and do a DX crop, zoom slightly out to, say, 180mm and get my perfectly framed picture and WLAN it to the press house. How about that?
Ansel
Senior Member
Yeah...save space on the CF card too.
Yatlapball
Senior Member
I have long since given up on being able to buy new lenses for my fm series...
- Status