Nikon D750 & D780

Heres another one from my weekend of fun in the sun/snow.

Frozen tree by Graham, on Flickr
 
photogwannabe said:
This little girl just got her "Grand Champion" designation this past weekend at a four day dog show; also won Best of Breed one of the days. Aaaand, she's still a puppy! I love Golden Retrievers!


Grand Champion by Paul, on Flickr
Click to expand...
What a nice looking Goldie she looks stunning. I too love Goldies such beautiful good natured dogs, heres one of mine taken recently in the forest where he loves to chew on an old stick.
Archiestickwm.jpg by Andy Foakes, on Flickr
 
I think I'm going to give up on the purchase of a Sigma 35 Art as don't seem to be having much luck getting a good one. Purchased one of the forum but was way off on AF and despite buying the dock
couldn't get it to within the tolerances on micro adjustments so it went back. Then saw a mint one in my local camera shop so popped down with the D750 to try it out. Looking on the camera display AF seemed much better
but not quite perfect so decided to wait till home and look on big screen. What surprised me is that everyone raves about this lens and says how sharp it is but on review it wasn't as sharp as the Nikon 85 1.8 that I took along as a
control lens, and I don't really regard it as a particularly sharp lens anyway. Also the shots with the Art seemed lacking in DR and overall looked darker and poorer in the colours than the 85mm.
All this and previous problems with a Sigma lens has made me nervous of now buying this lens. Perhaps if you get a good one its as good as everyone says it is but what surprises me is the number of secondhand ones that
come up for sale is huge and if they are that good why?
Not sure what alternatives I have other than the Nikon equivalent but not sure I want to spend that sort of money when its not a focus length I would use that often.
 
I’ve been looking to buy one and your post is very timely.
I suppose a Zeiss would be an alternative, but a very expensive one.
 
AndyFo said:
I think I'm going to give up on the purchase of a Sigma 35 Art as don't seem to be having much luck getting a good one. Purchased one of the forum but was way off on AF and despite buying the dock
couldn't get it to within the tolerances on micro adjustments so it went back. Then saw a mint one in my local camera shop so popped down with the D750 to try it out. Looking on the camera display AF seemed much better
but not quite perfect so decided to wait till home and look on big screen. What surprised me is that everyone raves about this lens and says how sharp it is but on review it wasn't as sharp as the Nikon 85 1.8 that I took along as a
control lens, and I don't really regard it as a particularly sharp lens anyway. Also the shots with the Art seemed lacking in DR and overall looked darker and poorer in the colours than the 85mm.
All this and previous problems with a Sigma lens has made me nervous of now buying this lens. Perhaps if you get a good one its as good as everyone says it is but what surprises me is the number of secondhand ones that
come up for sale is huge and if they are that good why?
Not sure what alternatives I have other than the Nikon equivalent but not sure I want to spend that sort of money when its not a focus length I would use that often.
Click to expand...

The Sigma 35 Art is the best lens you can buy in that focal length for Nikon regardless of what money you would spend it absolutely spanks the Nikon 35mm f/1.4. Yes there will be a few lemons around so buy new from a real retailer so you can swop if needed. The lens is known for it's large vignette which is why you are seeing the darkness in the corners it's a one click fix in Lightroom, all fast lenses like this are the same to be fair and its especially prevalent on wider fast glass. It should be ridiculous sharp though.
 
Last edited:
AndyFo said:
What a nice looking Goldie she looks stunning. I too love Goldies such beautiful good natured dogs, heres one of mine taken recently in the forest where he loves to chew on an old stick.
Archiestickwm.jpg by Andy Foakes, on Flickr
Click to expand...
Another lovely shot, as are all the ones from this set. What lighting are you using?
 
Peter123 said:
I’ve been looking to buy one and your post is very timely.
I suppose a Zeiss would be an alternative, but a very expensive one.
Click to expand...
Don't let my experiences put you off trying one, there are many excellent reviews out there so all can't be bad. Was you thinking new or used? Im wondering wether to try once more with a new one but worried about getting a refund if unhappy with it. Let me know how you get on if you decide to go ahead.
f/2.8 said:
The Sigma 35 Art is the best lens you can buy in that focal length for Nikon regardless of what money you would spend it absolutely spanks the Nikon 35mm f/1.4. Yes there will be a few lemons around so buy new from a real retailer so you can swop if needed. The lens is known for it's large vignette which is why you are seeing the darkness in the corners it's a one click fix in Lightroom, all fast lenses like this are the same to be fair and its especially prevalent on wider fast glass. It should be ridiculous sharp though.
Click to expand...
Yes perhaps your right I should buy new but always wary with Sigma and more so after trying two that are not right. I realise that it will vignette but I was seeing the lack of DR/darker colour rendition in the centre of the frame and it most definitely was not stellar sharp.
snerkler said:
Another lovely shot, as are all the ones from this set. What lighting are you using?
Click to expand...
Thanks Toby, all these were natural light as I usually try and shoot as is my preference, not got around to mastering flash as yet.
 
The 35mm don' do it justice, it's not focus properly, maybe the lens need calibrating a bit seems focus to far forward.
It's underexposed and for a shot at 400 iso it look horrible.
As i said i don't think this do it justice.

Why are you trying to compare a 35mm and a 85mm they have very different use?
 
AndyFo said:
Thanks Toby, all these were natural light as I usually try and shoot as is my preference, not got around to mastering flash as yet.
Click to expand...
Cool thanks. I thought I saw a catch light in the dog's eyes hence why I thought you'd used lighting ;)
 
The only reason I was comparing was after I had a bad copy of the 35 Art I wanted to take along a lens that I am very familiar with to see how the 35 looked in comparison to the known lens rather than just taking some test shots on its own and not knowing if any other factors may have affected its performance. By taking one shot immediately after the other, exact same lighting etc I thought this would help in determining if the Siggy was a good copy or not. Unfortunately the shop is in the middle of a shopping centre and they weren't to keen in me disappearing of with their lens to try in better light hence the 400 ISO on both. Maybe Im wrong in trying to make these comparisons but I know of no other way to check out the performance of the lens, certainly if I had only shot the 35mm I would not have been happy with the results you see above.
I think it looks horrible too but why? Focus may have been of but off a little and could be corrected in camera or with dock but I just don't like the look of it, 400ISO on the D750 should be a breeze.
 
AndyFo said:
400ISO on the D750 should be a breeze.
Click to expand...

Totally agree with you! I think it's a mix of underexposed and out of focus which make the shot look bad. Because with a focus nailed on and a good exposure you can get good results at much much bigger iso.

I think too that for this composition at 35mm and f1.4 you are pretty close and the depth of field is pretty narrow and unforgiving. Still it seem that the 35mm lake punch and contrast compare to the 85mm. I have a 35mm art and i like it lot sometime it is a bit hit and miss with my little boy which move too quickly. But when it behave it great (and i assume when it doesn't behave it's my own error really).
 
I think I will go new with this one. Black Friday deal most likely.
Both Photozone and Lenstip rate it highly.
 
Peter123 said:
I think I will go new with this one. Black Friday deal most likely.
Both Photozone and Lenstip rate it highly.
Click to expand...
Let me know if you find a good price please, the best I can find is £569 from Currys or Amazon at the moment.
 
cotty332000 said:
Still humming and arring about selling up, forced myself to use the D750 today.
Think I might regret selling all my gear,I'm going to try and get out again tomorrow.

Autumn Daughter 1 by cotty332000, on Flickr
Click to expand...

As much as I like the Nikon files I find I don’t carry my kit with me anywhere near as much as I did when I had my Fuji. I had my D750 back from Nikon almost 3 weeks ago now and it’s not been out the man cave let alone out of the house!

I’m of the opinion that a change may be on the cards for me too before long.
 
wibbly said:
As much as I like the Nikon files I find I don’t carry my kit with me anywhere near as much as I did when I had my Fuji. I had my D750 back from Nikon almost 3 weeks ago now and it’s not been out the man cave let alone out of the house!

I’m of the opinion that a change may be on the cards for me too before long.
Click to expand...

Think that’s my biggest problem is the size,I’ve always got the dog with me and it’s too much hassle!
I’ve always been disappointed with anything else though!
Never had a Fuji mind,I know a lot of pro’s that have gone this route and it could be the answer!
I’ve got so much cash tied up in lots of decent Nikon glass,I’m just not certain I’m doing the right thing by getting rid of it all.
 
AndyFo said:
Here are SOOC comparison shots from the Sigma 35 and the Nikon 85, I tried to frame them about the same ratio and I much prefer the look of the 85mm. Is there something I'm doing wrong here in making these comparsions?
35mm 1.4 400s.jpg by Andy Foakes, on Flickr
85mm 1.8 125s.jpg by Andy Foakes, on Flickr
Click to expand...
TBH Andy I'm not sure this is the best test as I don't think that the focus point is the same (probably due to focus issues). For example the central black sandisk card looks sharper on the 85mm but the test Delkin card next to it looks sharper with the 35mm. Ideally you should have used contrast detect focus to determine which lens has the best sharpness capability assuming that you get ones that focus properly. Also, the 35mm shot is far noisier, are you sure they're both the same ISO, I don't normally see noise at 400 iso on the D750? Another thing to consider is DOF. To get the same framing you'd have had to get much closer with the 35mm, and with it being f1.4 I think (although it's just. hunch) that the 35mm will give more shallow DOF.

From my experience I have never had a Sigma Lens that behaves well with the D750. My 85mm f1.4 is the best to date, but it's not perfect. The outer focus points give sharp results with close subject distances, but use these points on more distant subjects and there's massive back focus and they're unusable :(
 
Last edited:
@snerkler
I think the 35 was front focusing a little so that's why the Delkin card may look a bit sharper. I didn't have my tripod so didn't really think to use live view to get contrast detection but your probably right it may have helped and if it was only the focus issue I may have gambled on micro adjustments sorting this out although wary as the the one I purchased of the forum front focused a bit at close range but massively back focused at a distance of over a couple of metres.
What concerned me more was the lack of DR and the noisy flat appearance that the shot gave.
I just double checked the ISO on the exif and both were definetly at 400. Thanks for your comments.
 
Last edited:
So i've sold my 50mm 1.8 due to getting my 85mm.
Also looking to sell my 28-105mm as i only use it for landscapes.

Looking at getting a wide angle zoom, something that won't break the bank. Should get about £200 for the lenses above so looking to put another £100 in.
I was considering getting the 35mm 1.8 but would like a zoom if possible.

Used for landscapes and environmental portraits.

Any recommendations for about £300?
 
markgodley said:
So i've sold my 50mm 1.8 due to getting my 85mm.
Also looking to sell my 28-105mm as i only use it for landscapes.

Looking at getting a wide angle zoom, something that won't break the bank. Should get about £200 for the lenses above so looking to put another £100 in.
I was considering getting the 35mm 1.8 but would like a zoom if possible.

Used for landscapes and environmental portraits.

Any recommendations for about £300?
Click to expand...
Nikon 24-85mm G non VR or 24-85mm D f2.8-4 both as sharp as the 24-85mm VR which is a good lens. Unfortunately the 18-35mm G is out of range.
 
cotty332000 said:
Still humming and arring about selling up, forced myself to use the D750 today.
Think I might regret selling all my gear,I'm going to try and get out again tomorrow.

Autumn Daughter 1 by cotty332000, on Flickr
Click to expand...

That's a lovely shot!
I love my d750 i won't part with it. I usually only take one lens out at a time and keep the camera in a small lowepro backpack. Don't find it much of a problem. Also i have a fuji lx100 which i bought for the few month I had in between my canon 70d and the nikon d750 and i've kept it. Occasionally i take it out and if i have to do video I use that as i'm never that fuss about video quality.
At the end of the day if you take nice picture you'll take nice picture with any camera.
 
markgodley said:
is that the f/3.5-4.5G? I did look at the 24-85 2.8 but heard it was really soft in the corners.

Really wanted a 2.8 zoom if possible.

Any tamaron sigma options?
Click to expand...
Not sure about the 24-85mm being soft in the corners, is this wide open because you’ll be stopped down for landscapes?

Tbh the 24-70’s aren’t that sharp, I couldn’t tell much difference between the two Nikon 24-70’s I’ve had and the 24-120mm f4 in terms of sharpness. The 24-70’s are good don’t get me wrong, but they’re not razor sharp imo. The Tamron is supposedly pretty close to the Nikon but not sure how much they are used.

If you want sharp then maybe wait a bit longer and save for the 18-35mm G, it’s noticeably sharper than the 24-70’s and 24-120mm f4.
 
cotty332000 said:
Think that’s my biggest problem is the size,I’ve always got the dog with me and it’s too much hassle!
I’ve always been disappointed with anything else though!
Never had a Fuji mind,I know a lot of pro’s that have gone this route and it could be the answer!
I’ve got so much cash tied up in lots of decent Nikon glass,I’m just not certain I’m doing the right thing by getting rid of it all.
Click to expand...

I came from having lots of different Fuji’s but the size differential is tempting even if the ultimate image quality isn’t the same as the Nikon.

Having said that I might just sell the whole lot and buy an M9 Leica. :D
 
markgodley said:
So i've sold my 50mm 1.8 due to getting my 85mm.
Also looking to sell my 28-105mm as i only use it for landscapes.

Looking at getting a wide angle zoom, something that won't break the bank. Should get about £200 for the lenses above so looking to put another £100 in.
I was considering getting the 35mm 1.8 but would like a zoom if possible.

Used for landscapes and environmental portraits.

Any recommendations for about £300?
Click to expand...

35mm isn’t really that wide. You could look at a 28mm? It’s a great focal length being wide but not too wide. Mine was in the classifieds but think I left it too long to bump it up!!
 
markgodley said:
is that the f/3.5-4.5G? I did look at the 24-85 2.8 but heard it was really soft in the corners.

Really wanted a 2.8 zoom if possible.

Any tamaron sigma options?
Click to expand...
Mark,

I have a Tamron 28-75 F2.8, which has been to Tamron and I have also adjusted it on the body but I still don't think it is as sharp as either 28-105 or the 70-210f4 that I have.

So if you decide to go the Tamron route make sure you test it thoroughly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top