![]() | |
Originally Posted by ntomer
(Post 2755785)
Now is the time to upgrade my gear, and I have got a good deal on a D300 (with MB-D10 grip, less than 10000 shots) and I am buying that. I also want to upgrade lenses and want to buy a good UWA and a good walk-around lens. I had decided upon Nikon 16-85 and Tokina 11-16 but then came the twist in the tale... Tokina isn't available in India with bill and warranty. And I don't want to spend 36.5K without that assurance. So I am gravitating towards Sigma 10-20, which is available for 28K. Tamron 10-24 is available for 1K less, but is reportedly inferior to Sigma. Now comes the more confusing part. I was decided upon Nikon 16-85, but the more I read about it, the more doubts I have. People say it's no great shakes and not at all value for money. Build quality is definitely good and it has a metal mount but how much would that matter. Please tell me how goodis Tamron 17-50 F/2.8 in comparison to Nikon 16-85? And are there any other good walk-around lenses in this range (less than 35K)? \N |
Originally Posted by shajufx
(Post 2755942)
Does it really matter ? When it comes to real life situations, nobody cares if you carry a golden ring or red ring or no ring, images speak for itself and its very very rare people ask if you had a ring on the lens. Frankly I dont mind having golden & red on a single lens :D |
Originally Posted by MindSpeeDs
(Post 2755975)
I do feel that canon has finally gone ahead in the AF department which was Nikon forte. |
Originally Posted by clevermax
(Post 2756253)
By looking at the raw images, NEX5N has got better iso performance than even A77! |
Originally Posted by R2D2
(Post 2756390)
That inconsistent quality is what puts most serious amateurs (me included) and pros off 3rd party. I had an experience with Tamron in the early 2000s. I hasten to add Zeiss lenses are an exception but their prices are, well, sky high |
Originally Posted by R2D2
(Post 2756390)
You did come across as on in your first post but now that you've articulated your thoughts further, no you don't |
Originally Posted by R2D2
(Post 2756390)
The NEX5 and 7 are very good cameras but IQ wise the Nikon V1 is good too. If I had to buy an EVIL camera today, Nikon-1 (can use my FX lenses and other accessories) and the Sony NEX would be on the top of my list followed by Fuji If there's a company that will give the Canon/Nikon duo a run for their money in imaging tech it is Sony. It's quite simple, when you make sensors the kind that Sony makes and with their expertise in electronics albeit consumer, it won't be long before it is snapping at the heels of the big two. Another reason why Canon needs to pull up its socks and get into the EVIL segment like Nikon did with the Nikon-1 system. The reflex mirror has is its days numbered. They only need to sort out the immediacy/lag time and other issues with EVs. But as things stand today I prefer the optical viewfinder. I am not a fan of PNS style small cameras as the ergonomics are bad and camera shake is an ever present issue especially with telephoto lenses. The pro level cameras are superb in ergonomics but their size and weight are a big problem. If they can shrink the size of the say 1D and D3/D4 bodies to the D800/5D size by incorporating an EV it would be welcome. |
Originally Posted by MindSpeeDs
(Post 2757018)
A77 would have the NEX7 sensor. Probably even 7 would have better ISO performance than A77 because the 77 has a translucent mirror. I've read that it does make a difference |
Originally Posted by white-rabbit
(Post 2765830)
Why do I see blurred edges always in the photographs?Is it because of the uv filter I am using? when I zoom,I could see all the edges blurred. |
Originally Posted by W.A.G.7
(Post 2765849)
If I know correctly, the UV filter doesn't have anything to do with the blurriness. From the photo posted above I think you have opened the aperture wide enough. You should try changing the aperture from wide open to something smaller say F8 or F10 and then check the same shot again. |
Originally Posted by white-rabbit
(Post 2765920)
Could you please explain it more?Will opening / closing Aperture effect the object defenition? May be the attached Exif for first photo helps.please: |
Originally Posted by R2D2
(Post 2765980)
Yikes! The EXIF shows the aperture at F22! It is stopped way down and diffraction begins to set in. To read more about diffraction and understand what it is check these links. Understanding Lens Diffraction Diffraction Diffraction Limited Photography: Pixel Size, Aperture and Airy Disks Put the camera in aperture priority mode, open the lens up to f4 or f/5.6 (or F8 if you want more DOF) and try again. Not sure what kit lens you are using. But if the UV filter is one of those Marumi plain glass ones take it off as well. |
Originally Posted by ampere
(Post 2766020)
I think the problem as R2D2 mentioned is F22. Many landscape tutorials online advocate use of high F numbers for good landscape captures. (As they want you to get everything in focus) Some how they never mention that diffraction would set at some point in time above a certain F-stop. For full frame it would better. But for 1.6X crop sensor anything above F11 would not give good results. I have felt this with my own 550D. |
Originally Posted by white-rabbit
(Post 2766071)
Thanks for shedding some light.So aperture is the villan here.Let me see how to master it. So in general,for land scapes,lower f numbers will do,right? |
Originally Posted by white-rabbit
(Post 2766071)
So in general,for land scapes,lower f numbers will do,right? |
All times are GMT +5.5. The time now is 12:52. | |