Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       end
  

Archive 2012 · Is that patented 16-35 F2.8VR coming?
  
 
Lance B
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · Is that patented 16-35 F2.8VR coming?


I just want to make the statement that I am not trying to put forward the notion that the 16-35 is better than the 17-35 or visa versa and I didn't mean for this to get into a pi55ing contest. I am just pointing out the ways in which you can utilise the 16-35 in certain situations so as to be able to use it when you need to stop action due to the fact it is f4 rather than f2.8. If people really need f2.8 then so be it, but there are ways around not having a fast enough shutter speed in certain situations when using the 16-35. Some may find the VR of the 16-35 more of an advantage than the f2.8 and others the benefit of f2.8 more of an advantage. Let's face it, I am sure this is why Nikon is still making the excellent 17-35 f2.8! I also agree that f2.8 is very handy in many shallow DOF situations and would rather the 16-35 was a f2.8 and therefore would love if Nikon made the 16-35 f2.8 with VR.

So, like you, Andre (and many others), I hope Nikon does make a 16-35 f2.8 VR as it would marry the best of both the 16-35 f4 VR and the 17-35 f2.8. If it is as sharp across the board as the 14-24, then we will really have a sensational lens!



Nov 29, 2012 at 12:12 AM
Carl Feather
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · Is that patented 16-35 F2.8VR coming?


I love my 16-35 and don't consider the f/4 a problem. I use it on a D700 and D800. In the real world, the f/4 is not an issue.

Had the 14-24 and it is worth the money, but the range is not all that useful.

The 17-35 seems soft to me. The 16-35, if you get a good copy, is great. I also had a dreadful copy.

Clear as mud



Nov 29, 2012 at 03:24 AM
MarcG19
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · Is that patented 16-35 F2.8VR coming?


Cool, Loren. Congratulations on your coming graduation, and good luck in the job market!

In your case, I'd honestly keep the D7000 for now. It should be good enough for your internship needs, and I really don't think you'll get more out of a D600 than a stop or two better high ISO performance. As seen in this thread, this can be important, but some will say that people make too much of it.

If you're looking to do photojournalism, IMO the Nikon camera you should be lusting for is the D4. From what little I know of that business, I would want nothing else these days - the ergonomics of the D2/3/4 bodies are awesome, they're very tough, the D4's buffer lasts for like 15 seconds (so when the paparazzi catch a a celebrity they can just hold the button for as long as they can see the celeb), video capabilities are strong, and apparently it's very easy to send your stuff wirelessly to your editor (so the paparazzi can instantly transmit the photo to the editor and the pub can be the first to publish the shocking celeb pic online. ) When I visit Washington most of the press folks I see use D3s' or D4's or their Canon equivalents. The D600 IMO would be second rate in comparison for this purpose.



Nov 29, 2012 at 08:24 AM
Loren E
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · Is that patented 16-35 F2.8VR coming?


MarcG19 wrote:
Cool, Loren. Congratulations on your coming graduation, and good luck in the job market!

In your case, I'd honestly keep the D7000 for now. It should be good enough for your internship needs, and I really don't think you'll get more out of a D600 than a stop or two better high ISO performance. As seen in this thread, this can be important, but some will say that people make too much of it.

If you're looking to do photojournalism, IMO the Nikon camera you should be lusting for is the D4. From what little I know of that
...Show more

Thanks Marc! Yeah the D7000 is a capable camera for sure. I agree that the ISO improvement of going to the D600 isn't reason to make the switch on its own. I shoot a lot of night tight-quarters night stuff where a 24mm F1.4 on an FX sensor would beat the hell out of the 2.8 I am stuck with on my (loved) Tokina 11-16, but I can limp through. The other draw of DX is that I would go from a 6 lens kit to a 4 lens kit though to cover most of the same stuff. Instead of having 11-16/2.8, 17-55/2.8, 70-200/2.8, 24/1.4, 50/1.4, 85/1.4 I could downsize to 17-35/2.8, 70-200/2.8, 24/1.4, and 85/1.4 and cover pretty much all those same focal lengths at the same apertures. (I sprung for the 24/1.4 because it was a rare deal but if I do stick with DX it will likely make sense to use the Sigma 30/1.4 instead based on the price difference)

You're a bad influence to even mention the D4 though! Ha maybe if I end up with a dream job where I am provided a D4...but the price tag is pretty crazy.

happy shooting -Loren



Nov 29, 2012 at 01:39 PM
1      
2
       end




FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Retrive password