I drove 2.5 hours north of my home around 5:00 am on Thursday in search of some decent fall colors. Unfortunately, the colors were muted at best... We are having a late fall in MN, and I fear that the drought and record heat has negatively impacted what is normally a vibrant show.
Anyway here is my take... some decent stuff, but definitely not my best work :|
Jay Cooke State Park, MN
NIKON Z 6_2NIKKOR Z 17-28mm f/2.8 lens23mmf/16.08s100 ISO0.0 EV
Jay Cooke State Park, MN
NIKON Z 8NIKKOR Z 70-180mm f/2.8 lens145mmf/16.02s100 ISO0.0 EV
Jay Cooke State Park, MN
NIKON Z 8NIKKOR Z 70-180mm f/2.8 lens115mmf/16.02s32 ISO0.0 EV
Banning State Park, MN
NIKON Z 6_2NIKKOR Z 17-28mm f/2.8 lens26mmf/16.030s640 ISO0.0 EV
OwlsEyes wrote:
I drove 2.5 hours north of my home around 5:00 am on Thursday in search of some decent fall colors. Unfortunately, the colors were muted at best... We are having a late fall in MN, and I fear that the drought and record heat has negatively impacted what is normally a vibrant show.
Anyway here is my take... some decent stuff, but definitely not my best work :|
BPsmith511 wrote:
Excellent use of those “budget” Nikon lenses Bruce!
Thanks... I am really liking the 17-28 and 70-180. While they don't have the bells and whistles of the "S-series" lenses, they are capable optics. I am considering the purchase of the 28-75 f/2.8 as well even though it is the "lowest" rated of the series. The fact that all three of these lenses are compact, are f2.8, and have a 67mm thread makes them extremely convenient and easy to carry on long hikes.
OwlsEyes wrote:
Thanks... I am really liking the 17-28 and 70-180. While they don't have the bells and whistles of the "S-series" lenses, they are capable optics. I am considering the purchase of the 28-70 f/2.8 as well even though it is the "lowest" rated of the series. The fact that all three of these lenses are compact, are f2.8, and have a 67mm thread makes them extremely convenient and easy to carry on long hikes.
cheers,
bruce
My thoughts exactly, for hiking and landscape use the weight and matching filter thread are very much under rated. Sharp as require when stopped down for landscape but wide aperture allowing for creativity when needed. Undoubtedly the S-line is sharper and with slightly more contrast but for 95% of non-critical work, most will never notice.
OwlsEyes wrote:
Thanks... I am really liking the 17-28 and 70-180. While they don't have the bells and whistles of the "S-series" lenses, they are capable optics. I am considering the purchase of the 28-70 f/2.8 as well even though it is the "lowest" rated of the series. The fact that all three of these lenses are compact, are f2.8, and have a 67mm thread makes them extremely convenient and easy to carry on long hikes.
cheers,
bruce
Do you mean the Tamron 28-75/2.8 or the actual Nikon 24-70/2.8?
RoamingScott wrote:
I thought maybe I missed a lens release
I don't think Nikon needs any more lenses in that range... 24-70 f2.8S, 24-70 f4S, 28-75 f2.8, 24-120 f4S, 24-50 f4-6.3... I'd say they are well covered in the "standard zoom" area
I'll add that I absolutely loved the 24-120 f4S, but it and the 70-180 took up too much space and had critical overlapping focal lengths. If I did not want to carry both the 800PF and 400 f4.5 90% of the time, I'd have kept the 24-120. Furthermore, if I was more of a landscape photographer than wildlife, I'd have biased my kit with the f/2.8S-series zooms and added the 180-600 to cover reduced wildlife interests. However, my photographic pursuits are more strongly biased towards wildlife, so I am less willing to compromise my long glass quality than my wider stuff.
Love the rendering of these! With 35APO, I was expecting a bit harsher bokeh and abrupt focus transition, but from I can see, it isn’t bad at all while you get the phenomenal ’as if I am there’ clear rendition. Impressive.
akul wrote:
Love the rendering of these! With 35APO, I was expecting a bit harsher bokeh and abrupt focus transition, but from I can see, it isn’t bad at all while you get the phenomenal ’as if I am there’ clear rendition. Impressive.
Luka
Yeah, I'm really pleased with it too. If you zoom in on specular highlights, they are far from perfect, but in most situations I quite like the rendering, and in general, transitions are pretty smooth...just some outlining on highlights. In other ways, the lens is brilliant. Tack sharp across the frame from wide open, excellent CA control (as you'd expect), though you can see a little purple fringing in some scenarios, but it's minor. That awesome Voigtlander contrast profile. The aperture iris is interesting too - some funky star shapes at some apertures, perfectly circular at f/2, f/2.8 and f/5.6, and straight bladed at f/11 for good sunstars.
