| Moderated by: chrisbet, |
|
|
| LensesDo You have a particular go-to lens ? | Rating: 
|
| Author | Post |
|---|
| Posted by novicius: Tue Apr 9th, 2013 17:17 | 1st Post |
| Hello all :hi:, although I have been a member here for over two years ( incl. the Ol` forum ) , this is my first post , so , for those photogs. who have several lenses , is there a particular lens that You reach for , even when it has been idling on a shelf , but somehow You keep going back to it , if Ye do , is it a zoom or fixed focal , and why do Ye keep going back to it ? Vic
____________________ Back in Danmark I do not use my equipment to make photo`s .. I take photo`s to use my equipment The better I become at photography,the better my camera gets. |
| Posted by Robert: Tue Apr 9th, 2013 18:03 | 2nd Post |
| Welcome Vic, I have noticed your login. Nice to see you posting. My lenses are very much tools, it depends entirely on what I am doing as to which lens I use. Currently my most used lens is my 18-105mm VR, DX lens. My only VR and AFS lens. I am finding the 18-105 mm range is perfect for snapshots and family photography. Much of my photography is done with my 55mm f2.8 MF Micro Nikkor, because one of my main photographic interests is flowers and I find that is the best tool for the job. A wide aperture to give a nice bokeh, manual focus, so I can control the exact part of the flower to be sharp, and what I consider to be a good perspective for a close image of a flower. Wide lenses accentuate the depth of the flower, longer lenses give too great a working distance. For sports I reach for my 300mm f2.8 MF Nikkor. I use it for motor and motorcycle racing and fieldsports like football and Rugby. An example from the D3100 with it's 18-105 Nikkor, The boys larking on their way to school one snowy morning recently. Attachment: Screen Shot 2013-04-10 at 00.07.14.jpg (Downloaded 67 times)
____________________ Robert. |
| Posted by TomOC: Tue Apr 9th, 2013 23:52 | 3rd Post |
| Hi Vic and welcome to the group. I think we all have a go-to lens (that changes by the season  Currently mine is the 24-70 VR and I like it on both APC and FF bodies. It's expensive but it really performs - downside is that it's heavy and not one to walkaround with... still like the good old 50mm 1.4 for that tom
____________________ Tom O'Connell -Lots of people talk to animals.... Not very many listen, though.... That's the problem. Benjamin Hoff, The Tao of Pooh |
| Posted by blackfox: Wed Apr 10th, 2013 04:19 | 4th Post |
| mine virtually never comes off the camera ,its a 300mm f4 afs ,extremely versatile i use it with a 1.4 tc and a 1.7tc and that gives me 300mm,420mm,500mm hand holdable combos the lens has a close focus (full) switch as well and when fitted with the 1.7 tc this still retains the same close focus range ,so in effect it gives a hand holdable pseudo macro lens for summer butterflies and insects .as seen below a 500mm shot and btw its also a very sharp lens with none of the hangups you get with image stabilised lenses.  the flasher !! by blackfox wildlife & nature imaging, on Flickr
|
| Posted by Eric: Wed Apr 10th, 2013 05:41 | 5th Post |
| Welcome back Vic. Some time ago when Lightroom first came out, I used the 'sort by focal length' option and was surprised to find that 80% of my photographs (I had 3-4000 loaded at the time) were within the range 35mm - 80mm. And 70% of those shots were taken with the same TWO lenses. The 24-70 FX AFS and the 18-105mm DX AFS. The former with the D3, the latter with my 'hobby' camera body of the time. (eg D90, D300,). I dont know if my photography was controlled by the attached lens ...or the favourite lens was always attached and therefore controlled the focal length? Not sure which way round it was. But it does seem as though, despite having a good range of lenses fron 14mm - 500mm, I settle for one lens (on each body) for most of my shooting. Of course, as Robert says, if you have a special project eg wildlife, sports, macro you need to use the best lens you have for the job.
____________________ Eric |
| Posted by richw: Wed Apr 10th, 2013 07:10 | 6th Post |
| My favourite type of photograph is a portrait, of my collection my favourite is my 70-200mm f2.8. Attachment: Boxers.jpg (Downloaded 55 times)
|
| Posted by jk: Wed Apr 10th, 2013 07:41 | 7th Post |
| Welcome Vic to the forum. Glad that you are with us and posting! In answer to your question the lens I have that sees most use is dependent on the activity I am photographing but for a do almost everything lens it has to be my Nikon 28-105mm f3.5-4.5 AFD lens. It even has a macro switch on it that allows me to get in a little closer on some occasions when I need it. I f I am shooting in darker condition like for my flamenco photography I use my 24-70mm f2.8 AFS and 70-200mm f2.8 AFS lenses.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by novicius: Wed Apr 10th, 2013 17:10 | 8th Post |
Thank you All for the hearthy welcome  and the Great responses.Robert `s photo is imho a gredit to the H C Bresson style , what a great grab , especially considering yer usual photographic interests , sports photogs have quick reflexes and fast trigger fingers , yet , H B C shooting is a different ballgame . Tom , that 24 - 70 has been on my need/want list for a long time , but alas , that list is rather long , but one day ... Blackfox , that spider looks scary , the concept of using a long lens for macro is not new to me , as I`ve found it keeps me nicely out of harms way , what is new t`me is the amazing sharpness , I wish I had your steady hands . Eric , as I`ve read most of your postings , I realise what an incredible range of lenses you have , yet , that 24 - 70 covers a lot of ground , I rember when only few Mfgrs. had a decent 24mm in their line-up , they`ve come a long way since , and ye also have LR , as I ( LR 3 ) , photoshop scares the pants of me . RichW , that`s a great approach of portraiture , way cool. JK , I can see the need of that 24 - 70 for flamenco , last time I was in Spain ( many moons ago ), I had the man. focus 28 - 45 f4.5 , and I could n`t back - up enough , since then , overhere a Spanish guy opened a bar/res., and had a flamenco evening , I had the 20 - 35 2.8 afd , but even so , I find flamenco is difficult to shoot ( I botched it up ) Only two of my lenses have chips built in , the 20 - 35 f2.8 afd and the 35 - 70 2.8 afd ( fantastic lenses , in every respect ) , all the others are man. focus , yet , I keep on reaching for the 55 mm f 1.2 , it`s Not my " best " lens , it`s wobbly , when focusing left/right or vice versa , the image moves slightly , a bit left or right , yet , without deterioration of quality ( not that I notice ) so why that lens , is it `cause the zooms are hefty ? ..is it `cause it`s comfy ? ,.. I`m not sure , and yes , different tasks require different lenses , but that`s the one I keep reaching for , maybe I`m just an oddball 
____________________ Back in Danmark I do not use my equipment to make photo`s .. I take photo`s to use my equipment The better I become at photography,the better my camera gets. |
| Posted by jk: Thu Apr 11th, 2013 02:57 | 9th Post |
| I have tried to get a 55mm f1.2 for many years but it is MF only and I get lazy in my older age! In reality I think that while the High ISO capabilities of cameras get better all the time which somewhat reduces the need for the lens but I love the tiny depth of field of the lens. I have only had the chance to use one in a studio. I was hoping that Nikon might make an AF version of the lens but I wont hold my breath on this one.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by Robert: Thu Apr 11th, 2013 03:31 | 10th Post |
| The whole attraction of the 55 f1.2 is the fact that it's MF; if it were AF most of the point would be lost. The narrow DoF allows the user to focus were he or she wants the emphasis, AF focus points would make that decision and wouldn't take account of artistic parameters. This is why I love my 50 f1.4, It's not a 1.2 but the best I can manage, it may not be the sharpest knife in the box but that isn't my main criteria. In my opinion the high ISO available in modern bodies does not make fast lenses obsolete from an artistic point of view, what Hi ISO does is help to solve fast subject/low light difficulties.
____________________ Robert. |
| Posted by jk: Thu Apr 11th, 2013 06:22 | 11th Post |
Robert wrote: The whole attraction of the 55 f1.2 is the fact that it's MF; if it were AF most of the point would be lost. The narrow DoF allows the user to focus were he or she wants the emphasis, AF focus points would make that decision and wouldn't take account of artistic parameters.I agree about the new cameras not making the fast lenses obsolete but they reduce the need unless you want the limited DOF. At that point Hi ISO can become a nuisance as in sunny conditions 1/8000 is still not fast enough to expose correctly at ISO 200 and f1.2.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by Squarerigger: Thu Apr 11th, 2013 06:39 | 12th Post |
| Welcome Vic. I have a Nikon 24-70mm attached to my camera at all times. Looking forward to your contributions.
____________________ -------------------------------------------- Gary |
| Posted by novicius: Fri Apr 12th, 2013 17:02 | 13th Post |
Ah yes , contributions ,.. li`ll problem there , for tho` it`s nice to shoot 500 pics on one film , the folder system is a real pita , I spend several hours finding a pic in one folder , looked in another folder , then could n`t find the first pic., something t` do with me forgetting t` name folders , folders in camera and in LR 3 and in photodesk , I need to organise things , one way or another , so far it`s a real headache 
____________________ Back in Danmark I do not use my equipment to make photo`s .. I take photo`s to use my equipment The better I become at photography,the better my camera gets. |
| Posted by jk: Fri Apr 12th, 2013 17:44 | 14th Post |
| Vic, you need to keyword your images as then you can just search by keywords across all your images.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by Eric: Fri Apr 12th, 2013 17:56 | 15th Post |
novicius wrote:Ah yes , contributions ,.. li`ll problem there , for tho` it`s nice to shoot 500 pics on one film , the folder system is a real pita , I spend several hours finding a pic in one folder , looked in another folder , then could n`t find the first pic., something t` do with me forgetting t` name folders , folders in camera and in LR 3 and in photodesk , I need to organise things , one way or another , so far it`s a real headache You are not alone with cataloguing headaches. Most of my clients have agreed with a filenaming system so I can quickly retrieve selected images for use in artwork. But one customer had refused to adopt a simple system. He seriously wanted me to name his images like this... Stainless steel-p325-for-cauliflower-florets-tomatoes-and-lettuce.jpg I avoided doing it. But it presented another problem as after the camera has been round the 10,000 a few times ...telling me he wants DSC3013 means I have to ask...which year?  I have to say I struggle with doing the necessary' housekeeping ' like naming and filing ....I find it a bit boring.
____________________ Eric |
| Posted by Robert: Fri Apr 12th, 2013 18:25 | 16th Post |
| I have a very simple and effective file structure. Easy to maintain and very easy to find particular images. I don't allow Lightroom to ingest my images so I can always access the files, I put edits from Photoshop in an edits folder within the original folder. Attachment: Screen Shot 2013-04-13 at 00.11.39.jpg (Downloaded 25 times)
____________________ Robert. |
| Posted by Squarerigger: Sat Apr 13th, 2013 08:08 | 17th Post |
| I am guilty of not keeping my files as sorted as they should be. The one thing I have found over the years is that unless it is a system I figure out for myself and fully understand the logic or ill logic of, I will never ever be consistent in filing my photos. :-(
____________________ -------------------------------------------- Gary |
| Posted by Robert: Sat Apr 13th, 2013 08:41 | 18th Post |
| Well mine was derived from a slightly complex formula which I think Doug brought to our attention which was a number derived from the date, unless you put the date yy-mm-dd it won't sort chronologically, I find it fairly easy to read it backwards, but found deciphering Doug's code confusing, so that is why I adopted my method. I have a fair idea when things happened, so I just have to go to the appropriate year and scroll down to find the event. On the other hand if I want all my motorcycle photo's or all the pictures with water in them I use a keyword. In my botanic library I have all the images named with the botanic name so I can find all of a particular species. I am about a month into keywording now and probably need to spend another couple of weeks before I feel I have reasonable consistency. Is it worth it? Probably not but if I can't find a particular image, there is no point in having it, nor having taken the image in the first place. So, while it isn't worth it, it has to be done. Bit like washing up, it's one of those waste of time chores that has to be done.
____________________ Robert. |
| Posted by novicius: Sat Apr 13th, 2013 18:30 | 19th Post |
| Yes ,incorporating the date , `fcoz ,.. I`m also having trouble with importing from " photo desk " to LR 3 , I`m thinkin` about investing in " LR 4 " , would it be worth it ? ..what You reckon ?
____________________ Back in Danmark I do not use my equipment to make photo`s .. I take photo`s to use my equipment The better I become at photography,the better my camera gets. |
| Posted by richw: Sat Apr 13th, 2013 19:16 | 20th Post |
novicius wrote:Yes ,incorporating the date , `fcoz ,.. I`m also having trouble with importing from " photo desk " to LR 3 , I`m thinkin` about investing in " LR 4 " , would it be worth it ? ..what You reckon ? I much prefer the editing in Lightroom 4, but the cataloging didn't change much. Main reasons for upgrade would be new features such as books and the new mapping capabilities.
|
| Posted by Robert: Sun Apr 14th, 2013 03:56 | 21st Post |
| I am planning to update from v3.6 to v4.x quite soon. I did download v4 when it was first rolled out but didn't upgrade. I find the Lightroom GPS Mapping a compelling feature. Although my images are usually in descriptive folders, it would also be useful to be able to go to the map and simply click on the location to access images taken at a particular place perhaps on different occasions. My memory is not as good as it was, I want to nail stuff while I can still remember where it was taken. While I had Lr v4 demo I did use the mapping feature quite a bit and found it very useful but our needs obviously vary. Recently I have been using Lr more to process images and am getting more used to it. I really miss the levels feature as it is implemented in Photoshop, it's so simple, in Lr to me it's so messy and non intuitive I still haven't figured how to use levels to get the results I get in Ps so easily, despite Rich showing me how a while back. Rich, do you know a good video or tutorial on the Lr levels feature? I just can't get it to do what I want, in Lr it seems to be split into sections which is a nuisance. I want to be able to spread the entire existing image data across the usable range, not adjust sections of data as seems to be the case in Lr. To me Levels is a very quick and easy way to set the black and white points. I would use Curves to adjust individual sections of the image. As for importing your images from Photo Plus, I don't know that software, I guess it's PC, I don't know much outside of the Mac world. All that Lightroom needs is your images to be in a folder structure within one folder, which I call Pictures. I don't think it matters on a PC where the Pictures folder is, even on an external drive will do. All you have to do is point Lightroom to your dedicated Pictures folder and import. I select 'Add' images, which leaves the images in their folders so you can access them. I select 'Standard' preview and the box 'don't import suspected duplicates' ticked (unless I need them of course). Then import, sit back and have a coffee or two. If Photo Plus has ingested the images like iPhoto does, then you will need to export them from the Photo Plus library at maximum resolution and as TIFF's for best quality. I avoid JPEG except as a final export format to display on my computer or share via the web. There is a loss of image quality with JPEG with every save. If you use NEF's you really need to locate the original NEF files and import them or you won't be able to apply the same level of control if you need to adjust an image.
____________________ Robert. |
| Posted by Robert: Sun Apr 14th, 2013 07:44 | 22nd Post |
| I have stared a new topic on importing images to Lightroom: http://nikondslr.uk/view_topic.php?id=597&forum_id=20 While it's nice to wander I think this deserves it's own topic.
____________________ Robert. |
| Posted by jk: Sun Apr 14th, 2013 13:19 | 23rd Post |
Robert wrote: I am planning to update from v3.6 to v4.x quite soon. I did download v4 when it was first rolled out but didn't upgrade.The GPS functionality doesn't work as well as in v3.x as it used to go out to Google Earth. Now it does its own thing and IMHO doesnt work as well.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by novicius: Sun Apr 14th, 2013 13:54 | 24th Post |
| Robert Thanks , I am glad that Y` have decided t` put this up , I`m convinced this will help many of us , maybe some one can chime in related to PC ( that`s what I have ) I think that digital developer software , growing/changing all the time , requires bright heads t` come out and guide mere mortals like m`self:thumbsup:
____________________ Back in Danmark I do not use my equipment to make photo`s .. I take photo`s to use my equipment The better I become at photography,the better my camera gets. |
| Posted by novicius: Sun Apr 14th, 2013 13:58 | 25th Post |
| Seems I can n`t reply on that thread
____________________ Back in Danmark I do not use my equipment to make photo`s .. I take photo`s to use my equipment The better I become at photography,the better my camera gets. |
| Posted by Robert: Sun Apr 14th, 2013 17:28 | 26th Post |
novicius wrote:Seems I can n`t reply on that thread Seems you got there in the end? (From the times of your posts)
____________________ Robert. |
| Posted by novicius: Sun Apr 14th, 2013 21:57 | 27th Post |
Does that mean I qualify as " Goofball " nr. 1 ?? 
____________________ Back in Danmark I do not use my equipment to make photo`s .. I take photo`s to use my equipment The better I become at photography,the better my camera gets. |
| This is topic ID = 592 | ||
| Nikon DSLR Forums > Camera and Lens Forums > Lenses > Lenses | Top | |
Users viewing this topic |
||
Current theme is Blue
| A small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondsl.uk Thank you. |
Hosted by Octarine Services
Copyright © 2008-2024 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.2226 seconds (68% database + 32% PHP). 170 queries executed.
Copyright © 2008-2024 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.2226 seconds (68% database + 32% PHP). 170 queries executed.