Lens re-jig

[Radiohead]

Righty-ho

I've sold my Sigma 10-20mm as it wasn't getting any use and did the job I bought it for. I've also sold my Tamron 90mm for the same reasons (and because neither landscapes or macros really blow my skirt up).

That leaves me with the Sigma 30mm f1.4 and the Sigma 70-200mm f2.8, with my Nikkor 18-70mm being sold with my D70 (in anticipation of a second D200 body).

So, I've got the Nikkor 18-200mm on order and that should arrive later this month - I antipate this lens being on the camera a lot. I've also bought a mint Sigma 2x TC to go on my 70-200mm and give me more length when required (ie. every night). I'm therefore thinking about a fast medium zoom as an alternative walkaround to the 18-200mm, with either of these being an option:

Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 EX DC
Sigma 24-70mm EX DG Macro

The latter is bigger and heavier, but does offer more on the long end, plus the macro option as I really don't need a specific macro lens. I can't afford the lust-worthy Nikkor 17-55mm as I also want to sort a new PC out in the next few months.

Thoughts?

[puddleduck]

I'd pick the 18-50 out of those two - I'm not sure if you handled the 24-70 but its big, almost as big as the 70-200.

I'd make sure if I got the 18-50, the dealer has a decent return policy - I've heard just a little too many stories about softness / focus isses with this lens to make me wary of jumping myself.

How about getting something like the Nikkor 28-70 f/2.8 s/h? Its supposed to be optically as good as the 17-55?

[Radiohead]

Worth a thought Andy yes, I'll have a look at prices.

Ouch - same sort of price at the 17-55mm.....too rich for me.

[Radiohead]

Another possible is the Tamron SP AF 28-75mm Di f2.8 which gets great reviews just about everywhere and can be had for £250....

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=187&sort=7&cat=43&page=1

http://www.warehouseexpress.co.uk/arouse/Tamron_2875mm.html

[puddleduck]

Another possible is the Tamron SP AF 28-75mm Di f2.8 which gets great reviews just about everywhere and can be had for £250....

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=187&sort=7&cat=43&page=1

http://www.warehouseexpress.co.uk/arouse/Tamron_2875mm.html

yeah, as cheaper alternative to the 28-70 Nikkor it sounds ideal.

I assume you are looking for a decent portrait type lens with decent bokeh here? (with "people" shots being your area?) If so I'd thought that Tamron would be ideal, and optically if its anywhere close to the 90mm macro, it should be very nice. Do you have a friendly retailer who let you have a demo? It might be handy to try it out if possible - I've found the D200 pretty unforgiving on lenses...

[Radiohead]

That's exactly why I;m after it Andy, and as much as I'd love the 17-55mm Nikkor there's no way I can afford that this year.

It gets good reviews at Nikonians

http://www.nikonians.org/html/resources/non-nikon_articles/tamron/2875-f28/2875-1.html

with a caveat about inconsistent sample quality. Distance Selling regs would come in handy if I didn't like it on the D200, but it does seem to be a very sharp lens. £250' ish as well, and the idea of a compact and lightweight medium-zoom that fast throughout is appealing, as does the macro mode if needed at a push.

[puddleduck]

That's exactly why I;m after it Andy, and as much as I'd love the 17-55mm Nikkor there's no way I can afford that this year.

It gets good reviews at Nikonians

http://www.nikonians.org/html/resources/non-nikon_articles/tamron/2875-f28/2875-1.html

with a caveat about inconsistent sample quality. Distance Selling regs would come in handy if I didn't like it on the D200, but it does seem to be a very sharp lens. £250' ish as well, and the idea of a compact and lightweight medium-zoom that fast throughout is appealing, as does the macro mode if needed at a push.

I think this is probably the lens for you, given your shooting preferences.

The Sigma 18-50 might be a bit on the short side for portraits - and you don't need the wide, as you'll have that covered by the 18-200 already, and landscapes arn't your thing.

The Sigma 24-70 covers a similiar range to the Tamron. But the Sigma is really huge IMHO for its range. Also I have a feeling this is one of the lenses with D200 exposure issues?

The Tamron gets stellar reviews and I don't think the 28mm at its widest will be an issue for you, again because you'll have that covered by the 18-200. The 28-70mm range coupled with its reportedly excellent bokeh just about sounds ideal all round.

Bearing in mind I'm bizarre, eccentric and this forums's very own Ken Rockwell so you may want to get some other opinions than mine :)

[sideshowbob]

What about the Tokina 28-80 AT-X Pro?

http://www.tawbaware.com/sigma_tokina_test1.htm

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=236

[Radiohead]

Another one to consider!

[Radiohead]

I think this is probably the lens for you, given your shooting preferences.

The Sigma 18-50 might be a bit on the short side for portraits - and you don't need the wide, as you'll have that covered by the 18-200 already, and landscapes arn't your thing.

The Sigma 24-70 covers a similiar range to the Tamron. But the Sigma is really huge IMHO for its range. Also I have a feeling this is one of the lenses with D200 exposure issues?

The Tamron gets stellar reviews and I don't think the 28mm at its widest will be an issue for you, again because you'll have that covered by the 18-200. The 28-70mm range coupled with its reportedly excellent bokeh just about sounds ideal all round.

Bearing in mind I'm bizarre, eccentric and this forums's very own Ken Rockwell so you may want to get some other opinions than mine :)

All very valid points Andy, even the Ken one ;)

[puddleduck]

Also Tokina are supposed to be bringing out a 17-55 DX soon... maybe still on the short side for portraits...

(see last post here)

http://www.nikonians.org/dcforum/DCForumID17/15166.html

[sworrall]

As you know id recommend teh Sigma 18-50 as ive had some very good results with mine but it does seem like its out of your focal range for whta you need it for. As a side note I read on the dpreview forums recently that the focus issues on these cameras was mostly happening on Canon mounts and not Nikons. Dont know the truth in that though as it was just what was being discussed on there.

[kez]

i have the tamron 28-75 2.8, and it's very good.

[Radiohead]

Thanks for that - what camera are you using it with kez, and is it sharp? What's the AF like?

[Radiohead]

As you know id recommend teh Sigma 18-50 as ive had some very good results with mine but it does seem like its out of your focal range for whta you need it for. As a side note I read on the dpreview forums recently that the focus issues on these cameras was mostly happening on Canon mounts and not Nikons. Dont know the truth in that though as it was just what was being discussed on there.

I think you're right. As I'll have the 18mm end covered by the soon-to-arrive Nikkor, the 28-75mm Tamron is looking the best bet for the amount I have to spend (ie. £300 or thereabouts).

[Sprout Crumble]

The 24mm of the Sigma may be useful. I find 24mm a good natural length for that kind of subject.
I can have a look again, if you like, but my local Jessops had a 24-70mm f2.8 DG Nikon version on clearance at £199.95. Tried to get a Canon one myself to replace a 28-105 USM but it was Nikon only. I'd rather a 24-105L but at that price I ain't quibbling especially as I have the higher end covered a couple of times with primes. I just don't find 28mm that useful in comparison.

[kez]

Thanks for that - what camera are you using it with kez, and is it sharp? What's the AF like?

i use it with a 300D, and yeah it's sharp. i much prefer it to my canon 28-135.

the few times i've used the AF it's been fine. haven't tried in tricky situations though.

seems to get good reviews, though, so if the focal length is right for you, i'd say, "go for it"

[Radiohead]

I've ordered one today - should arrive tomorrow, and if it's as good as the reviews suggest it should be a very useful addition. Thanks all.

[sideshowbob]

I've got the Tokina 28-80 ATX Pro coming too (s/h), so we can do a remote compare and contrast jobbie.

[Radiohead]

Hey you got it - excellent news mate.

[sideshowbob]

I only hope my other bit of sleuthing pays off for you tomorrow (fingers crossed) ...

[Radiohead]

I'll owe you if it does....

[Radiohead]

The Tamron 28-75mm has just arrived.

The AF is lightning fast - much quicker than the 18-70mm. Nice solid feel to the focus ring and it's nicely weighted. Should be ideal for my needs.

[puddleduck]

The Tamron 28-75mm has just arrived.

The AF is lightning fast - much quicker than the 18-70mm. Nice solid feel to the focus ring and it's nicely weighted. Should be ideal for my needs.

Cool - any chance of a few full size unsharpened samples when you get a few shots off?

I sold my 18-70 with my D70s, so I don't have any zoom at all right now, this Tamron is tempting me.

Quite surprised the AF is faster - I assume its the combo of f/2.8 and the stronger motor on the D200.

[Radiohead]

I'll try and get some shots at lunch and post them this evening, with and without USM.

It may well be that combo - nice and bright through the viewfinder as well.

[puddleduck]

I'll try and get some shots at lunch and post them this evening, with and without USM.

It may well be that combo - nice and bright through the viewfinder as well.


Cheers - I tend to find my sharp lens don't need USM (although I do use +1 in-camera) - so it'll be interesting to see a before and after :)

[Radiohead]

bear in mind I'll have everything off in-camera, shooting RAW with sharpening to None.

[sideshowbob]

Cheers - I tend to find my sharp lens don't need USM (although I do use +1 in-camera) - so it'll be interesting to see a before and after :)

What is +1 (in camera) equivalent to in USM terms? - if you get my drift.

[puddleduck]

What is +1 (in camera) equivalent to in USM terms? - if you get my drift.

Aparently its somewhere between 50 and 60 in Nikon Capture terms for NEFs.

For JPG's I'm not sure - probably the same ballpark?

Really sharp lens such as the Tamron 90mm look great (better?) with no sharpening - they are brutally sharp already - too sharp for portraits for example, so I tend to use no sharpening for those.

If RH's Tamron comes close to the 90mm (which I hope and expect it will), I think this could plug my zoom gap.. :)

[sideshowbob]

So, you'd have the 10-20mm, 28-75mm ... but above 75??

[puddleduck]

So, you'd have the 10-20mm, 28-75mm ... but above 75??

No idea yet..

Probably either a Sigma 70-200 (doh!! never thought I'd sell that 120-300!)
or maybe a Sigma 100-300 - I really need to be able to get back to 400ish again which I had with either the 70-200 with a 2x TC and the 120-300 with a 1.4x.

I'm tempted by a Nikkon 300mm f/4 AF-S which is supposed to be as sharp as the 120-300 and quite a lot lighter and get a Nikkor 1.7x TC.

I'm even considering a Bigma but I think it's going to be too slow for my 5am bird hunts in the summer. (the f/2.8 of the Sigma was great for that)

So really, I have no idea! But I'm not in a rush, as the light is too crap right now for any longer zoom-y type stuff!

[Boink!]

Bearing in mind I'm bizarre, eccentric and this forums's very own Ken Rockwell so you may want to get some other opinions than mine :)
I had thought that.. ;)

I'm getting lens envy. :(

[puddleduck]

I had thought that.. ;)

I'm getting lens envy. :(

I really need to make that my signature!

One week ago, I never had lens envy - now I've sold all my decent glass I'm about this ( :p ) colour!

[Radiohead]

Andy - how did you find the 70-200 with the 2x TC?

[puddleduck]

Andy - how did you find the 70-200 with the 2x TC?

About this good...

http://odysseus-software.co.uk/photos/albums/Japan/DSC9085_web.jpg


http://odysseus-software.co.uk/photos/albums/Japan/DSC9050_web.jpg

I thought it was nice and sharp, but lost a bit of constrast on the corners.

[Radiohead]

That'll do for me then.

Chhers

:thumbs:

[Boink!]

Well, you did have some very nice glass in your collection (and a large camera bag to hold it all), then you went and offed it all when the D200 got too hard to resist.
What you got left now, Andy?

Jon

[puddleduck]

Well, you did have some very nice glass in your collection (and a large camera bag to hold it all), then you went and offed it all when the D200 got too hard to resist.
What you got left now, Andy?

Jon

LOL! Well I've clucked up big-time glass wise.

I bought a Sigma 70-200 to take to Japan, as the 120-300 was too big, and planned to sell it when i got back, to use the 120-300 again!

So I sold the 70-200 and started using the 120-300 and really struggled with the size /weight. So when someone offered my £1k for the 120-300 I bit. Good news - about £1.4k to put towards new glass. Bad news - don't know what to buy!

I've still got the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 ( :luv: ) and the Tamron 90mm ( :luv: ) - just lacking a bit on the length (fnarr!)

[Radiohead]

How about another 70-200 and the 17-55DX, or the Tamron 28-75mm and the Nikkor 70-200mm VR?

Did you get rid of the 10-20mm as well?

[sideshowbob]

You can buy the 70-200mm back off me if you want, Andy.

[puddleduck]

How about another 70-200 and the 17-55DX, or the Tamron 28-75mm and the Nikkor 70-200mm VR?

Did you get rid of the 10-20mm as well?

Not got rid of the 10-20 yet - I'll probably do it as soon as I get something wider than the Sigma 30mm sorted.

I like all your suggestions about - I'd probably need to keep the 10-20 if I got the Tamron as its not much wider than the Sigma 30mm. If I got the 17-55 DX (which I think is overpriced), I could lose the 10-20 quite happily. It does seem expensive though!

As to zoom, well I really like the 70-200 with the 1.4x and 2.0x combo so maybe that again (I still have my TCs)

No rush though - its not going to be good enough light for wildlife until May.

[Radiohead]

I agree about the 17-55DX, as nice as it is it's a lot of money.

28mm is now my widest until I get the 18-200mm (if they ever ship any more to the UK).

[puddleduck]

I agree about the 17-55DX, as nice as it is it's a lot of money.

28mm is now my widest until I get the 18-200mm (if they ever ship any more to the UK).

Thats my problem - nice as it is, it doesn't do anything I don't or didn't already have.

I could justify £1k on the 120-300 as that allowed me to do things I couldn't otherwise (ie 600mm @ f/5.6 etc) but £1k on a 17-55... its a HELL of a lot for one lens.

[puddleduck]

This new Sigma looks interesting... 17-70mm..

http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/english/news/17_70_28_45_dc.htm

[Radiohead]

£170 or so? Maybe a little more, but I'd have kept the Nikkor 17-80mm over that to be honest. I'd rather have the constant f2.8 of the 17-50mm or 28-70mm.

[puddleduck]

Yep, I think you are right - for some reason I'm trying to be cheap in this area, mainly because I rarely used my 18-70 DX in practice.

The Tamron is definately the one that's interesting me the most - I'd like constant f/2.8 as well.

[Radiohead]

And for just £260 delivered. Should get some samples up this evening.

By way of comparison though, the 18-70 was on my D70 a lot.

[puddleduck]

And for just £260 delivered. Should get some samples up this evening.

By way of comparison though, the 18-70 was on my D70 a lot.

I hardly ever used mine at all - for me it was Sigma 30mm and walk forward a bit to "zoom", or the 70-200mm and walk back a bit to fit it all in!

I do go through a lot of pairs of shoes though :thumbs:

[Radiohead]

:lol:

SSB has tracked down a Nikkor 18-200mm VRII for me, and it should arrive tomorrow. Along with a mint Sigma EX 2x TC for the 70-200mm on Thursday. An expensive week, but all paid for with eBay sales and the sales of my Sigma 10-20mm and Tamron 90mm. Phew!

[JoePrecious]

Just to add some comments here, I've been so impressed with the Tamrom 28-75 that I'm seriously considering a 17-35 to give me a little bit more at the wide end.

However, having just got a 20D and 300mm F4, money is a bit tight at the moment!

[Radiohead]

Right - didn't manage to get out at lunch today so had to get a couple of quick snaps indoors this evening, purely to put up sample for Andy:


Full-size versions:

No USM - http://www.guycollier.net/images/D200/2875/nic_no_usm.jpg

USM applied in Capture - http://www.guycollier.net/images/D200/2875/nic_usm.jpg

Smaller versions

No USM - http://www.guycollier.net/images/D200/2875/nic_no_usm_s.jpg

USM applied in Capture - http://www.guycollier.net/images/D200/2875/nic_usm_s.jpg

Exif - 75mm @ f/4, 1/60s, ISO 400. Shot as NEF with all in-camera parameters turned off, and then converted straight to JPG. Thanks to Mrs Radiohead for posing, and if she sees these shots here I'm a dead man.

Cack light, so less than impressive, but you get the idea. Oh how I long to see the sun again.

[kez]

Just to add some comments here, I've been so impressed with the Tamrom 28-75 that I'm seriously considering a 17-35 to give me a little bit more at the wide end.

that's what i've got.

tamron 17-35 & 28-75

along with:

canon 70-300 do is (which i've not even used properly, yet :eek: )
canon 50 1.8 & 28-135 (which will both be going up for sale after i get back from holiday)

sigma 30mm is on it's way from OneStop Digital (http://www.thedvdforums.com/jump2.php?url=http://www.onestop-digital.com/)

that should cover all bases :thinking:

[puddleduck]

Right - didn't manage to get out at lunch today so had to get a couple of quick snaps indoors this evening, purely to put up sample for Andy:


Full-size versions:

No USM - http://www.guycollier.net/images/D200/2875/nic_no_usm.jpg

USM applied in Capture - http://www.guycollier.net/images/D200/2875/nic_usm.jpg

Smaller versions

No USM - http://www.guycollier.net/images/D200/2875/nic_no_usm_s.jpg

USM applied in Capture - http://www.guycollier.net/images/D200/2875/nic_usm_s.jpg

Exif - 75mm @ f/4, 1/60s, ISO 400. Shot as NEF with all in-camera parameters turned off, and then converted straight to JPG. Thanks to Mrs Radiohead for posing, and if she sees these shots here I'm a dead man.

Cack light, so less than impressive, but you get the idea. Oh how I long to see the sun again.


Thanks for doing that - much appreciated!

Out of interest I assume these were done on the D70s? The USM'd ISO400 version looks very noisy to me.

[sideshowbob]

Your USM'd version is certainly alot different to mine (created using your no_usm version). What settings did you use in NC? Mine were .55 radius, 100%, 0 clipping (in PSP X)

[JoePrecious]

that's what i've got.

tamron 17-35 & 28-75

along with:

canon 70-300 do is (which i've not even used properly, yet :eek: )
canon 50 1.8 & 28-135 (which will both be going up for sale after i get back from holiday)

sigma 30mm is on it's way from OneStop Digital (http://www.thedvdforums.com/jump2.php?url=http://www.onestop-digital.com/)

that should cover all bases :thinking:

What are your thoughts on the 17-35? It certainly seems to get some good reviews. Also, what camera are you using? I've got a 20D and I think it should be wide enough for me (don't really do a lot of wide angle shots but just need something wider than the 28-75).

[Radiohead]

Thanks for doing that - much appreciated!

Out of interest I assume these were done on the D70s? The USM'd ISO400 version looks very noisy to me.

No - D200, but I think I overdid the USM as I've just realised I had it at 100% in error, and with a 10% radius.

:doh:

EDIT - christ, that's dreadful isn't it. Ignore mine Andy, I arsed the USM settings up totally there. I'm so used to Rawshooter now.

[kez]

What are your thoughts on the 17-35? It certainly seems to get some good reviews. Also, what camera are you using? I've got a 20D and I think it should be wide enough for me (don't really do a lot of wide angle shots but just need something wider than the 28-75).

haven't used it much, yet, but will do on holiday.

i too wanted something wider, but didn't want to stump up the extra for the canon 17-40L, or 16-35L

using it on a 300D

the only quirk is that the zoom ring on the tamrons goes the opposite way to the canons. takes some getting used to :)

oh, and 77mm hoya pro-1 filters aren't cheap! ;)

[Radiohead]

My 18-200VRII has just arrived (£506 delivered from Camera Centre Cardiff - ordered at 4pm and delivered at 8.25am today, superb service).

Initial impressions are that the VR is amazing (my first stabilised glass). Just took a shot across the office at 200mm and ISO 200 which gave me 1/8s - with VR off the shot was as blurred as you'd expect, and with it on normal the lens settles (quickly as well) as you lightly touch the shutter release. The shot was tack-sharp at 1/8s. Awesome stuff. Out of interest it's almost exactly the same size as the Tamron 28-75mm, maybe 5mm longer.

[puddleduck]

Interesting - sounds good!

[kez]

that's what i like about my canon 70-300 do is. i can hand hold at full zoom in less than perfect light, and get a useable image.

plus, it's smaller and lighter than a 70-200L

[Highlander]

I wish Canon would do a 18-200mm IS lens.
Anyone know if there are any plans to?

[ps2user]

that's what i've got.

tamron 17-35 & 28-75

along with:

canon 70-300 do is (which i've not even used properly, yet :eek: )
canon 50 1.8 & 28-135 (which will both be going up for sale after i get back from holiday)

sigma 30mm is on it's way from OneStop Digital (http://www.thedvdforums.com/jump2.php?url=http://www.onestop-digital.com/)

that should cover all bases :thinking:

Slight change of topic but could you let me know how much you want for the canon 50 1.8? And i been thinking of buying the 28-135 but are you changing because the tamron 28-75 gives better images and also with the bigger aperature f2.8?

[kez]

Slight change of topic but could you let me know how much you want for the canon 50 1.8? And i been thinking of buying the 28-135 but are you changing because the tamron 28-75 gives better images and also with the bigger aperature f2.8?

changed from the 28-135 because of two reasons. the fixed lower aperture, and the size / weight.

don't get me wrong though, i got great results from the 28-135. it just doesn't fit anywhere in my lineup anymore. maybe if i could only take one lens, then it'd be that, but i'd probably take the tamron, and use andy's method of foot-zooming.

i guess it depends on what other lenses you have & what you want to shoot.

as for the 50 1.8, i'd be looking for £55-ish delivered. i don't still have the box, but it's complete with front / rear lens caps, lens hood, and a kenko filter, and would be send with adequate insurance.

[puddleduck]

maybe if i could only take one lens, then it'd be that, but i'd probably take the tamron, and use andy's method of foot-zooming.

Its good exercise too! ;)

Seriously, I think if I could keep just one lens it would be the Sigma 30mm (which I see you've now ordered) - I like glass that allows me to do stuff that I can't do with other lenses - as its a stellar performer wide open, set yourself up @ ISO400 you can just walk the streets at night @ f/1.4 without flash.

Its very sharp too so if the old "walk forward to zoom" trick doesn't work a 50% crop can get you closer.

[sideshowbob]

Received my second hand Tokina 280AF ATX Pro today. Built like a tank.

Very soft at f2.8, but sharpness from f4 onward is much better, which I'd expected given the reviews I'd read. Anyway, you can judge for yourselves. All processed as follows:

Soft look USM, 100%, 2 levels (Capture One LE)
Cropped to the same position / shape (PSP X)
Smart resize to 31% (PSP X)

Anyway, I call this the Babycham test.

28mm

f2.8 (http://www.bobweb.co.uk/D200/tokina280AF/28mmf2_8.jpg) (CA on top of bottle cap?)
f4 (http://www.bobweb.co.uk/D200/tokina280AF/28mmf4.jpg)
f5.6 (http://www.bobweb.co.uk/D200/tokina280AF/28mmf5_6.jpg)
f8 (http://www.bobweb.co.uk/D200/tokina280AF/28mmf8.jpg)
f10 (http://www.bobweb.co.uk/D200/tokina280AF/28mmf10.jpg)

50mm

f2.8 (http://www.bobweb.co.uk/D200/tokina280AF/50mmf2_8.jpg)
f4 (http://www.bobweb.co.uk/D200/tokina280AF/50mmf4.jpg)
f5.6 (http://www.bobweb.co.uk/D200/tokina280AF/50mmf5_6.jpg)
f8 (http://www.bobweb.co.uk/D200/tokina280AF/50mmf8.jpg)
f10 (http://www.bobweb.co.uk/D200/tokina280AF/50mmf10.jpg)

80mm

f2.8 (http://www.bobweb.co.uk/D200/tokina280AF/80mmf2_8.jpg)
f4 (http://www.bobweb.co.uk/D200/tokina280AF/80mmf4.jpg)
f5.6 (http://www.bobweb.co.uk/D200/tokina280AF/80mmf5_6.jpg)
f8 (http://www.bobweb.co.uk/D200/tokina280AF/80mmf8.jpg)
f10 (http://www.bobweb.co.uk/D200/tokina280AF/80mmf10.jpg)

I'll post full size links later (to be used sparingly!!!!)

[raymondlin]

I wish Canon would do a 18-200mm IS lens.
Anyone know if there are any plans to?


I highly doubt that will ever happen, it'll cover 90% of shots taken. To make it good it'll be hugely expensive and they'll lose out so much by people not needing the lenses that cover the range in between.

[kez]

Seriously, I think if I could keep just one lens it would be the Sigma 30mm (which I see you've now ordered) - I like glass that allows me to do stuff that I can't do with other lenses - as its a stellar performer wide open, set yourself up @ ISO400 you can just walk the streets at night @ f/1.4 without flash.

yeah, i'm off to goa in a few weeks, so wanted something i could use without having to lug a tripod / flash about. i'll take the tripod anyway, as i'm expecting to get some cracking sunsets.

i'm hoping the 30mm will suit my needs more than the 50mm (hence the plan to sell it)

[Radiohead]

Received my second hand Tokina 280AF ATX Pro today. Built like a tank.

Very soft at f2.8, but sharpness from f4 onward is much better, which I'd expected given the reviews I'd read. Anyway, you can judge for yourselves. All processed as follows:

Soft look USM, 100%, 2 levels (Capture One LE)
Cropped to the same position / shape (PSP X)
Smart resize to 31% (PSP X)

Anyway, I call this the Babycham test.

28mm

f2.8 (http://www.bobweb.co.uk/D200/tokina280AF/28mmf2_8.jpg) (CA on top of bottle cap?)
f4 (http://www.bobweb.co.uk/D200/tokina280AF/28mmf4.jpg)
f5.6 (http://www.bobweb.co.uk/D200/tokina280AF/28mmf5_6.jpg)
f8 (http://www.bobweb.co.uk/D200/tokina280AF/28mmf8.jpg)
f10 (http://www.bobweb.co.uk/D200/tokina280AF/28mmf10.jpg)

50mm

f2.8 (http://www.bobweb.co.uk/D200/tokina280AF/50mmf2_8.jpg)
f4 (http://www.bobweb.co.uk/D200/tokina280AF/50mmf4.jpg)
f5.6 (http://www.bobweb.co.uk/D200/tokina280AF/50mmf5_6.jpg)
f8 (http://www.bobweb.co.uk/D200/tokina280AF/50mmf8.jpg)
f10 (http://www.bobweb.co.uk/D200/tokina280AF/50mmf10.jpg)

80mm

f2.8 (http://www.bobweb.co.uk/D200/tokina280AF/80mmf2_8.jpg)
f4 (http://www.bobweb.co.uk/D200/tokina280AF/80mmf4.jpg)
f5.6 (http://www.bobweb.co.uk/D200/tokina280AF/80mmf5_6.jpg)
f8 (http://www.bobweb.co.uk/D200/tokina280AF/80mmf8.jpg)
f10 (http://www.bobweb.co.uk/D200/tokina280AF/80mmf10.jpg)

I'll post full size links later (to be used sparingly!!!!)

Gets even better at f/5.6 onwards doesn't it. Looks like most zooms of this ilk in that they're at their softest at their extremities wide open. The Tamron seems the same, and I guess that's why the Nikkor 17-55 and 28-70 are £960 and £1150 respectively.

[kez]

I highly doubt that will ever happen, it'll cover 90% of shots taken. To make it good it'll be hugely expensive and they'll lose out so much by people not needing the lenses that cover the range in between.

they do a 28-300 L, though. bet it's heavy!

[puddleduck]

Gets even better at f/5.6 onwards doesn't it. Looks like most zooms of this ilk in that they're at their softest at their extremities wide open. The Tamron seems the same, and I guess that's why the Nikkor 17-55 and 28-70 are £960 and £1150 respectively.

Agreed - f/5.6 looks the sweet spot. The f/2.8 looks good enough that if you need the extra light in a pinch, the slight softness would be much more preferable than camera shake that those 2 stops less at f/5.6 gives you, if needed.

My Sigma 120-300 was quite sharp at f/2.8 (and these below are unsharpened), but as you say, you have to pay for that!

http://www.odysseus-software.co.uk/albums/UVFilterTest/uvfilter-off.jpg

http://www.odysseus-software.co.uk/albums/UVFilterTest/uv-test-full.jpg

Like you say, you pay big money - those Nikkors look lovely, but not £1k lovely...!

[sideshowbob]

That sigma's leagues sharper at f2.8. But there again, the Tokina only cost me £160 ... so not exactly in the same ball park price wise. I'll just have to keep an eye on the aperture when I'm shooting.

[puddleduck]

for what you paid, you got a bargain. I really think you need to pay a LOT more to see a significant increase quality-wise. You've got the f/2.8 if you need it - fast glass is hard to beat. I suspect if you do portraits where you don't necessarily want every wart, line and pimple showing, it should be just fine.

[Radiohead]

Worth mentioning here - as I have an 18-200mm now I need to cancel my pre-order with AJ Purdy (£499). If anyone here is after one and hasn't preordered I can keep that order going to get them to the top of a queue.

Let me know. If I haven't had a taker I'll cancel on Friday.

[sideshowbob]

It's certainly a whole lot different to the 18-70 to hold. The AF/MF clutch is nice, very easy to manually focus using that. I'll have to try some <s>dog</s> people things with it (which is what I bought it for), assuming this solar eclipse they call the weather ever goes into remission.

A couple of 100% crops with and without USM ...

No USM (http://www.bobweb.co.uk/D200/tokina280AF/roxyeyenousmf5_6.jpg)

With USM (http://www.bobweb.co.uk/D200/tokina280AF/roxyeyewithusmf5_6.jpg)

[Radiohead]

Here are some samples of the 18-200 VRII

Across the office

VR Off - 200mm, ISO200, f5.6, 1/13s

http://www.guycollier.net/images/D200/18200/18200_1_vroff.jpg

VR On - 200mm, ISO200, f5.6, 1/10s

http://www.guycollier.net/images/D200/18200/18200_1_vron.jpg

(Note calendar in background showing one of yours truly’s published last year – albeit on wrong month)

Teatime

VR Off - 200mm, ISO400, f5.6, 1/13s

http://www.guycollier.net/images/D200/18200/18200_2_vroff.jpg

VR On - 200mm, ISO400, f5.6, 1/10s

http://www.guycollier.net/images/D200/18200/18200_2_vron.jpg

Check the old advert

VR Off - 200mm, ISO200, f5.6, 1/13s

http://www.guycollier.net/images/D200/18200/18200_3_vroff.jpg

VR On - 200mm, ISO200, f5.6, 1/10s

http://www.guycollier.net/images/D200/18200/18200_3_vron.jpg

Finally, a couple of 100% crops of the top image. Focus point was right on the ear.

VR off

http://www.guycollier.net/images/D200/18200/vroff_100.jpg

VR on

http://www.guycollier.net/images/D200/18200/vron_100.jpg

All shot in RAW, then 65% sharpening applied in Capture, resized and saved as JPG.

Pretty effective then

[puddleduck]

VR clearly works!

I'd say sharpness was more than acceptable, doubly so given the obscenely low shutter speed @ 200mm.

Impressive - most impressive!

[sideshowbob]

That's pretty bloody good.

Keep that AJPurdy pre-order ... you can get me that as a thank you for finding yours for you. ;)

[Radiohead]

I'm blown away by what you can get away with hand-held!

[Radiohead]

That's pretty bloody good.

Keep that AJPurdy pre-order ... you can get me that as a thank you for finding yours for you. ;)

I wish I could mate. You sure you can't be tempted?....

[sideshowbob]

Temptation is not my problem, it's castration and homelessness that concerns me ...

[Boink!]

Damn, I was just about to ask for examples of VR off & on and that has impressed on all fronts. :eek:

[Radiohead]

Pretty impressive isn't it. I've also caved in today and ordered a MB-D200 grip. That's going to be very useful for people work as well.

[Matholwch]

Very impressive Radiohead, how much did that lens set you back? With a pretty damn impressive range. Hmm, could even tempt a Canon owner to the dark side... :suspect:
Is it a heavy lens? Need to look at the Canon equivalents (if there is any).

[sworrall]

Need to look at the Canon equivalents (if there is any). there isnt with VR/IS/OS on :(

[Matholwch]

:nuts: Nooooooooo :nuts:
EDIT - would've put the mad smiley on, but its currently missing... :suspect:

[Radiohead]

It was £506 delivered (RRP of £549.99). Almost identical in size to the already compact Tamron 28-75mm f2.8

[puddleduck]

I'm getting tempted myself - I was pretty sceptical about image quality from an 11x zoom, but its looking nice. I don't need VR, but I'm starting to want it nevetheless.

Unfortunately when I starting wanting things, I end up owning them! Must stop looking at this this thread ;)

[sworrall]

Unfortunately when I starting wanting things, I end up owning them! Must stop looking at this this thread ;)
mmm, think of all that extra money you have at the moment from the lens sales :nuts:

[puddleduck]

mmm, think of all that extra money you have at the moment from the lens sales :nuts:

I'm trying not to!

I *think* a Sigma 100-300 f/4 will do the job for me - it should hopefully have the weight and IQ of the Sigma 70-200 with (hopefully!) something close to the IQ of the 120-300!

[Radiohead]

I can see the VR being really useful for me personally, and expect this lens to be my main walkaround.

[Boink!]

Unfortunately when I starting wanting things, I end up owning them! Must stop looking at this this thread ;)
:lol: you and your next piece of kit crusade.
Unfortunately you've taken some really excellent photos with the gear you bought, so I can't criticise your shopping habits. ;)

[Radiohead]

The battery grip arrived this morning and I'm very pleased with it. It transforms the feel of the camera and allows me to hold it more steadily, certainly feels more balanced with something like the 70-200mm attached. It has the 2 control-wheels, plus an AF-On button that can be programmed and I've changed to control AE-Lock instead. Shooting verticals is a huge improvement - no more craning an arm over my head to reach the shutter.

[Radiohead]

For anyone interested, some shots of the D200 with grip attached:

http://www.guycollier.net/images/D200/d200grip1.jpg

http://www.guycollier.net/images/D200/d200grip2.jpg

http://www.guycollier.net/images/D200/d200grip3.jpg

http://www.guycollier.net/images/D200/d200grip4.jpg

http://www.guycollier.net/images/D200/d200grip5.jpg

[sworrall]

yum yum goes well with the camera

[puddleduck]

I wish you hadn't posted that!

Not only do I want an 18-200 now, I want a grip as well!

/rushes off to unsubsribe from thread to avoid temptation

[Radiohead]

:lol: