Nikon Lenses

I'd also rather use an aperture ring, but Nikon won't let me. You say Pentax does, what about Canon? And the pro Nikons?
 
SlinkyMike said:
EDIT: can some genius clarify the use of the word 'fast' in this context (funny **** as I am the one who said it right?) - I always get confused between aperture and autofocus whenever I talk to people about this. A mate who has this lens (and whose lens I spent a weekend with) was raving about the speed - I nodded sagely thinking: WTF? Assuming that he meant autofocus (something which my camera does not do with this lens).
Click to expand...
well I'm no genius but when I refer to my 50mm f/1.8 as being fast I'm talking about the aperture and not the auto focusing speed. :)
 
Drunkard #1 said:
I'd also rather use an aperture ring, but Nikon won't let me. You say Pentax does, what about Canon? And the pro Nikons?
Click to expand...

Just so I know we're talking about the same thing - the Pentax K1000 is a completely mechanical, completely manual camera. There is no other way to set aperture but with the aperture ring. I don't know how it works on the Pentax DSLR bodies. I had only two lenses to play with, the Pentax-M, and the kit lens, which doesn't have an aperture ring. Many of their lenses have a ring with an "A" setting, so I imagine it should work both ways. Canon did away with the aperture ring a long time ago, and the focus ring on some of their cheaper lenses (50mm f/1.8 for example) are so thin, it can be uncomfortable to use.

Why doesn't it work on the Nikon?

bwana said:
the poor guy already has to focus it himself. :D
Click to expand...

Never killed anyone :)
 
bwana said:
well I'm no genius but when I refer to my 50mm f/1.8 as being fast I'm talking about the aperture and not the auto focusing speed. :)
Click to expand...
Got it - cheers. :)

koffiejunkie said:
Never killed anyone :)
Click to expand...

Too right - when I was stuffing about with it I actually quite enjoyed being 'chucked into the deep end'... when I came out and put my kit lens back I switched it to full manual for the first time so one way or another it was quite an inspiring lens to use. :)
 
Drunkard #1 said:
It's a great lens, but shooting on film
Click to expand...

that's exactly why i got one - for my 35mm cam (the lens is fast - need that for my iso200)

on a crop cam it becomes 75(80 for canon)mm
now it's not a "normal" lens or a portrait lens

isn't a 30mm on a crop cam more useful as a "normal" lens?
 
I have to say, manual focus is loads harder on today's cameras with their tiny viewfinders and clear focus screens.
 
ldmelsa said:
isn't a 30mm on a crop cam more useful as a "normal" lens?
Click to expand...

Yes. That's why I bought the 35mm f/2. I'm still looking, might get myself one of the 24mm primes. 35mm is still to narrow for my tastes. The 28mm and 35mm on the film body is just right for me. So that's in the 18-22mm range on crop. The only problem is, primes in that range that are faster than f/2.8, costs loads.
 
The newer Nikons won't shoot unless the aperture ring is set to min (f/22 or f/16 or whatever), most even have a lock at that setting. You have to set the aperture on the body. It's that way on my 4004, which must be 15 years old at least.
 
koffiejunkie said:
Yes. That's why I bought the 35mm f/2. I'm still looking, might get myself one of the 24mm primes. 35mm is still to narrow for my tastes. The 28mm and 35mm on the film body is just right for me. So that's in the 18-22mm range on crop. The only problem is, primes in that range that are faster than f/2.8, costs loads.
Click to expand...

just use your digital
the 40d is great & velvia is to expensive :p
 
koffiejunkie said:
Yes. That's why I bought the 35mm f/2. I'm still looking, might get myself one of the 24mm primes. 35mm is still to narrow for my tastes. The 28mm and 35mm on the film body is just right for me. So that's in the 18-22mm range on crop. The only problem is, primes in that range that are faster than f/2.8, costs loads.
Click to expand...
even though I've been using my 16-35mm f2.8 aplenty I can't say I'm particularly fond of it. Maybe it still needs to grow on me.
 
bwana said:
even though I've been using my 16-35mm f2.8 aplenty I can't say I'm particularly fond of it. Maybe it still needs to grow on me.
Click to expand...

dude!
that's a full frame lens for ultra wide (pointless on 1.6x)
just stick it on an FF cam
you didn't buy it for the 400d, did you?
get a 5d - that lens will rock ;)

koffiejunkie said:
One of these two might do nicely.
Click to expand...

canon 17-40 ;)
 
I have the Nikon 70-300 F/4 which is good for game drives etc. and a 170-500 F/5 which is good for sport
 
Last edited:
ldmelsa said:
dude!
that's a full frame lens for ultra wide (pointless on 1.6x)
just stick it on an FF cam
you didn't buy it for the 400d, did you?
get a 5d - that lens will rock ;)



canon 17-40 ;)
Click to expand...
How is it pointless? :confused: It gave me what I needed at the time - ie a fast, slightly wider than the kit lens, without the distortion and it will be great on a fullframe down the line.

I'm not saying its a bad lens - it isnt - but shooting recreationally with wide angle doesn't do it for me.
 
Before you say wide angle isn't for you, have you tried your lens full frame. I used to say tele isn't for me, but once I tried my 200mm on a digital (300mm equivalent) I saw that it just wasn't long enough, now i use it more often (and want a 400mm for film).
 
ldmelsa said:
canon 17-40 ;)
Click to expand...

That's f/4 - I thought we were talking about crop body replacements for a fast 50mm?

That said, I am seriously perving over the 17-40 f/4. I almost bought it in Hong Kong, and I might just get it before the end of the year (depending, of course, on what Steve Jobs has to say today) :)

rabbiddog said:
I have the Nikon 70-300 F/1.4 which is good for game drives etc. and a 170-500 F/1.5 which is good for sport
Click to expand...

70-3000 f/1.4 ??? :eek:

Don't you mean f/4?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X