If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Rapid camera tech changes create whole new mindset amongst users
On 2014-04-11 19:02:18 +0000, nospam said:
In article , Paul Ciszek wrote: go find something that comes close to nikon's 14-24mm. you can't. even nikon said it's better than all fixed focal length lenses in its range (namely the ones made 20+ years ago) and independent tests confirm it. the real kicker is that it's a zoom lens that's better than a bunch of fixed focal length lenses, busting that myth too. How does it compare for aperture? it's a constant f/2.8 Do you actually understand what that constant f/2.8 means? That is the maximum aperture which can be maintained over the entire zoom range. That fine Nikkor can be stopped down to f/22. -- Regards, Savageduck |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Rapid camera tech changes create whole new mindset amongst users
In article 201404111226536915-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, Savageduck
wrote: go find something that comes close to nikon's 14-24mm. you can't. even nikon said it's better than all fixed focal length lenses in its range (namely the ones made 20+ years ago) and independent tests confirm it. the real kicker is that it's a zoom lens that's better than a bunch of fixed focal length lenses, busting that myth too. How does it compare for aperture? it's a constant f/2.8 Do you actually understand what that constant f/2.8 means? yes. That is the maximum aperture which can be maintained over the entire zoom range. That fine Nikkor can be stopped down to f/22. of course it can, as can just about any lens, and certainly ones in that range. there are lenses that go no further than f/16, while some can go to f/32, f/45 or even f/64, depending on the lens (and format). diffraction might be an issue though. the smallest aperture is not the limiting factor. the widest aperture is, which is why lenses are specified by their fastest aperture. people pay a premium for fast lenses, sometimes for good reasons and other times just to brag. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Rapid camera tech changes create whole new mindset amongst users
In article 201404111226536915-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, savageduck1
@{REMOVESPAM}me.com says... On 2014-04-11 19:02:18 +0000, nospam said: In article , Paul Ciszek wrote: go find something that comes close to nikon's 14-24mm. you can't. even nikon said it's better than all fixed focal length lenses in its range (namely the ones made 20+ years ago) and independent tests confirm it. the real kicker is that it's a zoom lens that's better than a bunch of fixed focal length lenses, busting that myth too. How does it compare for aperture? it's a constant f/2.8 Do you actually understand what that constant f/2.8 means? That is the maximum aperture which can be maintained over the entire zoom range. That fine Nikkor can be stopped down to f/22. But it will never hit 1.4 or 1.2 or 1.0 or .95. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Rapid camera tech changes create whole new mindset amongst users
On 2014-04-11 21:50:52 +0000, "J. Clarke" said:
In article 201404111226536915-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, savageduck1 @{REMOVESPAM}me.com says... On 2014-04-11 19:02:18 +0000, nospam said: In article , Paul Ciszek wrote: go find something that comes close to nikon's 14-24mm. you can't. even nikon said it's better than all fixed focal length lenses in its range (namely the ones made 20+ years ago) and independent tests confirm it. the real kicker is that it's a zoom lens that's better than a bunch of fixed focal length lenses, busting that myth too. How does it compare for aperture? it's a constant f/2.8 Do you actually understand what that constant f/2.8 means? That is the maximum aperture which can be maintained over the entire zoom range. That fine Nikkor can be stopped down to f/22. But it will never hit 1.4 or 1.2 or 1.0 or .95. I guess that's what maximum aperture means in this case, f/2.8. -- Regards, Savageduck |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Rapid camera tech changes create whole new mindset amongst users
In article ,
RichA wrote: Good luck to ANY company in matching this lens. Couple it to an adapter and you can use it on m4/3rds. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc..._0_ED_SWD.html nikon 24-70 f/2.8 on a full frame camera, which is effectively 1 stop *faster* (f/1.4 equivalent on 4/3rds), and it's *cheaper* too. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Rapid camera tech changes create whole new mindset amongst users
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Rapid camera tech changes create whole new mindset amongst users
In article 2014041200132099509-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
says... On 2014-04-12 06:37:29 +0000, "J. Clarke" said: In article 2014041115085031216-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, says... On 2014-04-11 21:50:52 +0000, "J. Clarke" said: In article 201404111226536915-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, savageduck1 @{REMOVESPAM}me.com says... On 2014-04-11 19:02:18 +0000, nospam said: In article , Paul Ciszek wrote: go find something that comes close to nikon's 14-24mm. you can't. even nikon said it's better than all fixed focal length lenses in its range (namely the ones made 20+ years ago) and independent tests confirm it. the real kicker is that it's a zoom lens that's better than a bunch of fixed focal length lenses, busting that myth too. How does it compare for aperture? it's a constant f/2.8 Do you actually understand what that constant f/2.8 means? That is the maximum aperture which can be maintained over the entire zoom range. That fine Nikkor can be stopped down to f/22. But it will never hit 1.4 or 1.2 or 1.0 or .95. I guess that's what maximum aperture means in this case, f/2.8. The question was "how does it compare to fixed focal length lenses" not "what is the smallest aperture it can use". From time to time I will make a gesture of silliness in my remarks and I will suffer the ignominy of being misunderstood by others. That said. the Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8 is one of the finest lenses a Nikon DSLR owner could possess, fixed focal length or zoom. That may be true, but if if you need a wider aperture than 2.8 then it won't do the job for you. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Rapid camera tech changes create whole new mindset amongst users
On 2014-04-12 13:11:41 +0000, "J. Clarke" said:
In article 2014041200132099509-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, says... On 2014-04-12 06:37:29 +0000, "J. Clarke" said: In article 2014041115085031216-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, says... On 2014-04-11 21:50:52 +0000, "J. Clarke" said: In article 201404111226536915-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, savageduck1 @{REMOVESPAM}me.com says... On 2014-04-11 19:02:18 +0000, nospam said: In article , Paul Ciszek wrote: go find something that comes close to nikon's 14-24mm. you can't. even nikon said it's better than all fixed focal length lenses in its range (namely the ones made 20+ years ago) and independent tests confirm it. the real kicker is that it's a zoom lens that's better than a bunch of fixed focal length lenses, busting that myth too. How does it compare for aperture? it's a constant f/2.8 Do you actually understand what that constant f/2.8 means? That is the maximum aperture which can be maintained over the entire zoom range. That fine Nikkor can be stopped down to f/22. But it will never hit 1.4 or 1.2 or 1.0 or .95. I guess that's what maximum aperture means in this case, f/2.8. The question was "how does it compare to fixed focal length lenses" not "what is the smallest aperture it can use". From time to time I will make a gesture of silliness in my remarks and I will suffer the ignominy of being misunderstood by others. That said. the Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8 is one of the finest lenses a Nikon DSLR owner could possess, fixed focal length or zoom. That may be true, but if if you need a wider aperture than 2.8 then it won't do the job for you. What job would that be, considering the capabilities of the current generation of DSLRs? The majority of great fixed focal length fast glass of the past were designed in the age of film where the photographer had to live within the limitations of film sensitivity, and at times the only answer in questionable light was to seek out fast glass. Usually at a relatively high cost. Narrow DoF with the resulting bokeh being a secondary result can certainly be considered a characteristic of many images produced with such lenses. However, that is not unattainable with some of today's lenses. The 14-24mm f/.2.8 mounted on a Nikon F film body is not going to compare with an f/1.2, or f/1.4, but we are having this discussion in rec.photo.digital. The point regarding the high regard which the *Holy Trinity* of Nikkor f/2.8 lenses (14-24mm, 24-70mm, & 70-200mm) is held, is they are zoom lenses capable of extraordinary performance even when compared to the great fast glass of the past. The flexibility, and shot-to-shot adjustability of sensor sensitivity found in recent DSLR cameras permits a degree of latitude, and performance in poor light conditions only dreamed of with film and an f/1.4, or f/1.2 lens. Regarding narrow DoF, most f/2.8 lenses are able to deliver, with in mant cases all the bokeh you can stomach. ....but I will concede, if you really "need" a wider aperture than f/2.8, you will be SOL with that particular 14-24mm. -- Regards, Savageduck |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Rapid camera tech changes create whole new mindset amongst users
In article 2014041208105856151-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote: From time to time I will make a gesture of silliness in my remarks and I will suffer the ignominy of being misunderstood by others. That said. the Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8 is one of the finest lenses a Nikon DSLR owner could possess, fixed focal length or zoom. That may be true, but if if you need a wider aperture than 2.8 then it won't do the job for you. What job would that be, considering the capabilities of the current generation of DSLRs? The majority of great fixed focal length fast glass of the past were designed in the age of film where the photographer had to live within the limitations of film sensitivity, and at times the only answer in questionable light was to seek out fast glass. Usually at a relatively high cost. Narrow DoF with the resulting bokeh being a secondary result can certainly be considered a characteristic of many images produced with such lenses. However, that is not unattainable with some of today's lenses. The 14-24mm f/.2.8 mounted on a Nikon F film body is not going to compare with an f/1.2, or f/1.4, but we are having this discussion in rec.photo.digital. with film, you had to have fast glass if you wanted usable results. with digital, you can shoot at iso 1600 or 3200 with barely a hint of noise, so needing f/2.8 is not a big deal and faster apertures even less so. even higher isos can be usable in many situations. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
More speculative camera tech, pt. II | Martin Brown | Digital Photography | 1 | October 9th 13 02:55 PM |
Linhof Tech. 70 and/or Tech. IV differences | Alex Tutubalin | Large Format Photography Equipment | 5 | January 16th 04 08:49 AM |
FA: Omega Rapid M (medium format camera) | Angelo P. | General Equipment For Sale | 0 | December 31st 03 11:38 PM |
FS: Omega Rapid M (medium format camera); us$ 280 | Angelo P. | Medium Format Equipment For Sale | 0 | December 16th 03 01:18 PM |
FS: Omega Rapid M (medium format camera) | Angelo P. | Medium Format Equipment For Sale | 0 | December 8th 03 09:19 PM |