NIKON 24-70 OR THESE PRIMES.

Arkady said:
Well I just finished doing a job out on the airfield...Half-past midnight, minimal light from one spotlight 100m from the subjects and some ambient light from an aircraft interior...
ISO 1000 and speeds of 30th-60th at f/2.8
More than adequate as the multiple subjects were relatively slow-moving - at the slow-march, in fact. Even though I had the 50mm f/1.4 in my pocket, the 24-70 stayed on as I had to constantly re-frame and was unable to move as freely as I would have liked.

FYI the event was a Repatriation Ceremony - known as Op PABAY to us...five lads coming home early...

Sometimes you just have to stand still, know what I mean?
Click to expand...



Find myself sitting and thinking of you guys/girls more often than not these days. Tonight I'll think of those 5 lads...

Kev.
 
FYI the event was a Repatriation Ceremony - known as Op PABAY to us...five lads coming home early...
Click to expand...

My heart go's out to you all.
 
Arkady said:
The only people who should worry about lens-IQ on modern Pro lenses are lab-rats who spend thier lives photographing test charts...
Click to expand...
In which case you should get the sigma 24-70 HSM for half the price.

In answer to the original question, it obviously depends what you're taking pictures of and how easy it is to change lenses. The Nikon 24-70 is said to be as good as zooms get, but at 2 stops slower, it's not an 85mm f1.4. I have the 85mm and will be adding a 24-70, but I don't know if I'll got for the Nikon or Sigma yet - the Sigma is supposed to be very good.
 
Triggaaar said:
In which case you should get the sigma 24-70 HSM for half the price.

In answer to the original question, it obviously depends what you're taking pictures of and how easy it is to change lenses. The Nikon 24-70 is said to be as good as zooms get, but at 2 stops slower, it's not an 85mm f1.4. I have the 85mm and will be adding a 24-70, but I don't know if I'll got for the Nikon or Sigma yet - the Sigma is supposed to be very good.
Click to expand...

I don't regard any third-party lens as a 'Pro' lens - I should have added the caveat: 'Nikon or Canon' Pro Lens...
 
Arkady said:
I don't regard any third-party lens as a 'Pro' lens - I should have added the caveat: 'Nikon or Canon' Pro Lens...
Click to expand...
There have been plenty of non Nikon/Canon lenses capable of producing just as good results in terms of image quality.
 
Triggaaar said:
There have been plenty of non Nikon/Canon lenses capable of producing just as good results in terms of image quality.
Click to expand...

I'm sure there has - I just wouldn't buy them...

I said I don't regard them as such...
 
NorthernNikon said:
Maybe you're reading something between the lines there, but I see no contradiction in Nod's post.
Click to expand...

Actually, Barney, he's FAILING to read between the lines! In extreme low light, the extra light an f/1.4 lets through to the AF module can allow the set up to get a decent AF lock wher an f/2.8 might miss, although if it's possible to use the AF assist light, an f/2.8 will cope quite well. In that sort of situation, it's unlikely that a quick lens change would be needed.

As for Rob's point about the Sigmas not being up to Canikon's standards, he's quite right. Image quality may be fine - while they're working but put a Sigma through what he puts his kit and you'll almost certainly end up with either a bag of bits, a stub on the front of the camera (if he hasn't got time to pick up and bag the bits!) or a tube full of all sorts of detritus that the sealing on the professional manufacturers' stops.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top