To the best
of my knowledge and experience, I will try to answer on this page
most of the frequently asked questions regarding Nikon cameras and
lenses. You must also check Nikon's
website in their FAQ section.
Q-
George,
this is a nice website. I camera accross during a search on the web.
I noticed you have used quite a lot of lenses during your career.
What is the worst lens you have ever used?
James
from Alabama
A-
Thank you very much James, looking forward to add more stuff to the
site, it will take time because this site is literally new and
manaining it is time cosuming and a labour of love. As for your
question, the worse lens I ever used is the Sigma 170-500 APO. The
lens is very slow without HSM and @ 6.3 on the long end, and to make
things worse it suffered from severe ghosting. If that is what I've
got using 35mm trasparencies, I don;t want to imagine that thing on a
DSLR. BTW, I tried 2 copies of it and gave up. Just in case, stay
away from it although Sigma claims better ghosting handling with the
new 'DG' version. IOne should try the fondly called 'Bigma' 50-500mm,
I've heard good things about it from fellow users. From what I've
heard, it is a lot better than the 170-500. Good luck my friend!
Q-
I
have seen your pictures with your fisheye 10.5 and the colors are
amazing, do you use any filters on it?
A-
Thanks for your compliment, the answer to your question in no. The is
no way to attach a filter on a fisheye at least on front of it.
However, a slot is built-in and you can use gel filters, something I
myself have never done in all these years. My Sigma 14mm recti-linear
and 15mm F/2.8 Fisheye have this 'slot' as well but never used them.
Sigma's includes a metal plate to use as a stencil to cut the
filters, Nikon only provides with a paper template printed on the
user manual. You can se the slot I've been referring to if you click
the thumbnail below.
Thought you may wanted to know,
the new Tokina 10-17 fisheye/wide angle lens does not have a gel
filter holder. IMHO, no big deal.
Q-
I
have been looking at the subjects: Prime Lenses vs. non primes.
I.E., a 50mm 1.4 versus a lens with a range like a 17-55mm. While
many range lenses offer us versatility there is a strong argument
regarding primes and their superior performance. Yet, in viewing your
shots I see no difference in viewing a portrait taken with a 17-55mm
or a 50 mm 1.4. I guess it is somewhat of a moot point.
What
is your spin on that?
A-
Hello again José! I totally understand what you mean. In the
past, zooms as good as they were, they were regarded as ''so-so''
performers when compared to its prime counterparts. Today's
technology has changed that concept considerably and a zoom lenses
have not much to envy
his prime brothers. There could be slightly better overall sharpness
when compared to a zoom if you blow your prints to 20x30 or 24x36 but
depending on the zoom you are shooting with, not much to run to your
local store for a set of primes. Because the pictures you are seeing
here with primes are resized for the web, it is hard to see any
difference in favor of the primes. People buy primes expecting
miracles, and many of them end up disappointed.
OK, You may
wonder if I have a 17-55 AFS F/2.8
and it is almost as sharp as a prime, why the heck I own a 35 and
50mm prime lens?
The answer is
simple José, prime lenses are a great complement to your zoom
lenses. While I have a fast
17-55 @
F/2.8, this aperture is sometimes not fast enough. There are no 1.4
or 1.8 zooms lenses. This is when the extra speed is really handy and
a prime comes to the rescue. See the sample picture below, it shows
shutter speeds to be considered when available light is poor and
flash is not allowed, or simply you wouldn't like to use the flash
and use ambient light. These sample pictures are to give you an idea.
In real world shooting, the extra speed you gain from the prime could
mean nailing the shot or loosing it.
Nikon 50mm
F/1.8 or F/1.4? That little 50mm 1.8 is the heck of a bargain for
$100 (aprox). But the 1.4 has a bit of extra speed, slightly better
build and usually sharper at 1.8 than the 1.8 wide-open.
For the record,
the picture above of the 50mm prime shows better bokeh at 2.8 with
the Nikon 17-55 than the same lens shot with 50mm @ F/1.4. This
happened because the 17-55 has a better magnification ratio whilst
the 50mm F/1.4 minimum focus distance is around 3 feet.
Q-
Are
you bringing this site because you are sponsored by Nikon?
A- Not
at all. This is just a way to showcase some of my images taken with
Nikon cameras, lenses and speedlight flashes. There are plenty of
nice and stunning images with Nikon gear in photo sharing sites.
Unfortunately, they might get less exposure (if any); instead of
paying for a membership at photo sharing sites, I recommend to get a
domain and build your own site (in many cases is even cheaper to
build your own site). It is more personalized in my opinion. We have
NO ties with Nikon whatsoever, I'd be testing a D300 relentlessly if
they let me ;o)
Q- I'm
considering a Tamron 17-50 over Nikon's more expensive 17-55 AFS,
what do you think?
A-
Although I don't own this lens, it has a good reputation of being
razor sharp even wide-open. However, QC issues among users is the
order of the day. It is known that many buyers had to go over 3 or 4
sample copies to get a properly working one. Front focusing, focus
hunting and yellow cast are known problems. Another issue with this
lens is improper exposure when used with Nikon flash speedlights (one
of the many reasons I shoot Nikon). And that's my friend something
that I'm not going to settle with. One of the beauties of the Nikon
system is their consistent flash system, always spot on. I wouldn't
like to be messing with EV's especially during an important event
like a wedding when there are no second chances. Some times it take
days, weeks, months or even years to appreciate all the nuances of a
good lens more over, understand why they are so expensive. In the
long run, most of the money you saved on a 3rd party lens was no
savings at all. Many folks especially newbies, take sharpeness as a
whole. It is not about sharpness, for what is good a sharp lens that
produces color cast or starts a fight with the Auto Focus system of
your cameras when you least expect it or need it? Even if you don't
shoot for money, try and do your best to go for original lenses. They
retain their value a lot more and if you decide one day to quit the
hobby, you'll get a fair amount back from your initial investment.
If you can
afford it, don't
cut corners with the lens that produces 80-90% of your pictures.
Of course
there are exceptions out there like Tamron's
90mm Macro F/2.8 and Tokina's
12-24 F/4 for example.
Q- I
see you have a film based Nikon F5, do you still use it?
A-
Yes indeed, however not as often as I use my D200. There are many
scenes I visualize in Black & White and my Nikon F5 is always
loaded with Ilford Delta 400 or XP2. Also I love Fuji Velvia 50 and
still use it every now and then. Yes I know that I can change my D200
to Black and White. But I visiualize and materialize with the real
thing instead of Photoshop. I seldom use my Nikon D200 in
B&W mode, I do but not that often.
Q- I
never used film before, but I'd like to give it a try. Which camera
do you recommend?
A-
Because Nikon recently ceased production of film based cameras, you
only have two choices. Nikon's flagship F6, and the full
manual FM10. Also there is still stock available of the Nikon N80 (F80
in Europe) which is a great entry level camera. Very important, if
you only have DX lenses, they will not be 100% compatible with
any Nikon film based cameras. A Nikon 28-105 zoom lens will be
an affordable jump start.
Q- Sorry
this question in not photography related, but what program did you
used to create this site?
A-
A pleasure to answer that question. I've been using this program for
several years (around 6) and have created a few websites with it. It
is easy, to work with and understand even a 10 years old can build a
site. It is called Web Express, I bought my copy at Best Buy,
but you can find the software at MVD.com.
Q- Why
do you prefer Nikon over a Canon system?
A-
Every photographer works with the system that better suit his/her
needs. I see so many senseless fights about this mostly by
misconceptions gathered from the web. Both system are capable of
professional results and both are used by professionals. The most
common debate nowaday is the noise performance on Nikon's DSLR vs
Canon's. Indeed there is an advantage on this area favoring Canon.
But I have observed that those that mostly 'brag' about the feature,
barely go beyond ISO 400. Those who really need the features, get the
system they need and concentrate on shooting not arguing/bragging at
large on the web. My decision was based on ergonomics and flash
system; While there is slight advantage on Canon's noise performance,
there is a HUGE advantage over Canon in flash photography on the
Nikon camp. Actually, I gave up slightly better noise performance for
a system that fits in my hands like a custom made glove and state of
the art flash system. The choice is yours, buy what you really need,
not what this or that photographer is using. Get all the advice you
need, but when opening your wallet, let the final decision be as
personal as your tooth brush. No system is perfect, nor will make you
better shooter, it is the person behind the camera, not the brand.
Q- I
own a Nikon D50, I'd like to play around with flash photography.
Which one, SB-600 or SB-800?
A-
It all depends on what do you mean to ''play around'' with flash. If
you want better results than the one you get out of the built-in
pop-up flash, then you should start looking for a Nikon external
speedlight unit. The Nikon SB-800 speedlight is the current
flagship in the flash line followed by the Nikon SB-600
speedlight flash. The later one being a very good start for flash
photography with your Nikon D50. You can start playing with
CLS right away using Nikon's i-TTL already in your Nikon D50.
If you want something better than te pop-up flash and you'll be
using it every blue moon, the new Nikon SB-400 is a good
compact and affordable alternative for $129 (approx) street price.
More
questions with answers will be posted here soon. If you have a
question, feel free to contact
me here.
I will do my
best to answer them in a timely manner. |
