Just a friendly suggestion that you may want to consider. Rather than arguing what lens is best, maybe let people know what lens you prefer and for what reasons. There really is no "best" lens at anything unless you clearly define what you are comparing. (ie, sharpness, af speed, build quality, price etc) If you add multiple variables to define what is the best, then that muddies the water further and for subjective qualities like bokeh, you can't define "best". Add too many variables for comparison and it quickly becomes an argument of semantics.
eke2k6 wrote:
Interesting thought. Perhaps apply it to yourself.
Your sarcasm is noted, and (now) re-directed.
eke2k6 wrote:
You chastised the guy for bringing in other lenses into the 28E vs 28D debate, but you've repeatedly tried comparing the 28E's bokeh to that of wider and tighter lenses like the 24mm and 35mm, when even an amateur would know that even 4mm of extra compression on the wide end is quite significant (see Elijah's recent take on why he returned the 28E for the 35G).
Thank you for the recap, according to you. The world needs plenty of people who can re-state what's already been said.
Perhaps you want to apply the above to yourself as well.
eke2k6 wrote:
My interactions with you in the 135mm Art thread have shown you have a very pointed tongue when discussing lenses you've neither seen nor touched, much less used. Especially confusing is the matter-of-fact pseudo-scientific tone you take when picking apart another person's preferences.
Yes, I can be passionate and opinionated. Sorry about that (better than wishy-washy, IMO).
"Pseudo-scientific?" Don't ever recall bringing science into a discussion of optics.
Harkening back to your original line, of what use are your own comments here, other than to police my own?
eke2k6 wrote:
Perhaps reconsider your approach, or justify it by acquiring the lenses you have such strong opinions about and conducting your own tests.It will garner a good bit more respect for your opinion - at least from me.
Regarding the 135mm, I have the Zeiss Apo f/2 Sonnar T*,
As far as 'garnering your respect,' I haven't the foggiest idea who you are, so earning your respect isn't exactly a priority.
Perhaps if you could post something relevant to the thread topic ... or not post ... you would gain my respect.
FYI, I am planning on purchasing many (if not most) of Nikon's 'E' lenses, so they are of particular interest to me. Hence my presence here.
If you prefer the D, perhaps you can post over on that thread topic.
If you own both the 28 D and E yourself, perhaps you could post your findings.
If you don't own either, then you are the proverbial pot calling the kettle "black."
Gents, a little more positivity - por favor.... this is The Fred Miranda Forum, we are all family.
I'll start. The 28 is a nice compliment to the 58, especially for getting ready. it's wide enough for sure.
so let's say you love the 58 and the 105
you rock 28 58 105
28 58 indoors
58 105 outdoors
20 28 58 105 would make a great kit.
check out number 5. I'm standing on the front ledge of the tub. still got them in the shot at the sink. I could touch his shoulder.
So while it's wide enough for times like this, distortion is limited, so it's safe for people.
REALLY great FL for PJ style indoors man. just in love.
nothing spectacular here, just real world images shot with the 28e
all shot at f1.4, sharp even with the big files from the d810
I had the 58 on my d750, so it was just sublime.
If you really love the 58, I would say the 28 is a no brainer vs. the 35 (a little more gap making a more versatile pairing).
I think the one thing spoiling the 28mm FL (any version) for me is the excessive images I've seen from smartphones.
Anyways, keep the images coming folks. Appreciate all the contributions.
I have got this lens and it is absolutely amazing in regards of image quality. I am only using it with the aperture wide open, mainly for environmental portraits and but I do find that the autofocus is hunting quite a bit sometimes, especially if the subject is further away, maybe full or three/quarter body shots and that there are more images that are not in focus than with lenses that are less wide (there are still plenty though which are pin sharp). The results were much worse with the 24mm 1.4ED. I do understand that it is harder for this lens to lock the focus accurately as the subject is obviously much smaller due to the wide angle and that this might be the reason. I have the D810 body set to AF-C S (Matrix metering set to face recognition). Is that the right setting in your view? It works very well with all my other lenses. Any suggestions and advice are very welcome, thanks.
