Nikon Lenses

ldmelsa said:
for crop factor because it's many times the price of an EFs lens that will do the job

awesome for full frame, though :)
Click to expand...
again, hardly a pointless purchase.

However as far as I'm concerned buying an efs with the certain knowledge that I will be going fullframe eventually would be. ;)
 
Genius, to reply to your questions. At which end of the kit lens do you find yourself shooting more often - long or short? What are the lenses you looked at in the shop?

The R1600 Sigma sounds very much like the 70-300 non-APO, which is not a great lens at all. The APO one is much better (for not much more money) but still not fantastic - quite soft at the long end. Very sharp on the short end though.

Genius. said:
I have alot of family in the UK. Can i pick up a lense there and have them send it down?
Click to expand...

Where in the UK are they? In London there are a handful of good shops. If your family post/courier it, you'll probably end up paying customs and VAT, which will probably make it less than worth while (especially considering the current exchange rate). If someone is coming over and happy to stick it in their suitcase, that's a different matter.
 
ldmelsa said:
well then, there we go - it's for full frame
Click to expand...
No - its for my 400D - well actually it lives on my XTi but that's close enough. :)

koffiejunkie said:
Isn't this typical. We're fighting over Canon lenses one a thread called "Nikon Lenses"
Click to expand...
Yeah, you're right.

Nikon - are they going to me much cheaper in the UK as opposed to here? I didnt think canon were when I looked. Then again I wouldnt think that lens prices would remain at their current levels here for much longer.
 
rabbiddog said:
not 3000 but 300

Not unless Nikon lies (that's what's printed on the lens) . They stuffed the price by more than R4k when I bought the kit. It cost less than the cost that a dealer could get it at.
Click to expand...
Have you got a link people can have a look at? f/1.5 seems like an improbable size to me.
 
rabbiddog said:
koffiejunkie said:
70-3000 f/1.4 ??? :eek:

Don't you mean f/4?
Click to expand...
not 3000 but 300
Click to expand...

Typo, sorry.

rabbiddog said:
Not unless Nikon lies (that's what's printed on the lens) . They stuffed the price by more than R4k when I bought the kit. It cost less than the cost that a dealer could get it at.
Click to expand...

Must be 1:4 (the other notation) - maybe the one dot is missing. A 70-300 f/1.4 lens would cost more like R500k + one of your kidneys, and then you're getting a bargain.
 
Last edited:
Aah, right. I see this mistake often made on eBay. Sometimes I think it's deliberate. I see 50mm f/2 lenses advertised as 50mm f/1.2 and going for huge amounts.
 
SlinkyMike said:
I have a D40 - currently waiting on delivery of my
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/247091-GREY/Nikon_2137_Normal_AF_Nikkor_50mm.html
Reputedly great for portraiture and low light, super very fast and ridonculously cheap.
Really cant think of a better way to blow a grand at this stage!

Edit: I don't 'feel' good about Tamron ans Sigma lenses, just cant bear the nagging uncertainty in the back of my head that something is amiss - futzing with settings cos I see 'something' wrong and knowing somewhere back there that it could be the budget equipment... is that snobby? (or simply stupid).
Click to expand...

Have you got this lens yet? What do you think of it? Would you or anyone who has this lens reccomend it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X