Jump to content

Welcome to NikonForums.com
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

wide zoom options

zoom wide uwa d800 fx

  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#1
Wired

Wired

    Senior Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 170 posts
  • LocationAlberta, Canada

I've been hired long term to shoot for a local cyclist blog/newspaper/community and have figured that a wide zoom would be an important thing to have in the kit. It's a good excuse to get a new lens of course.

 

I've got a $700 Canadian budget to work with right now for this new lens, which is a bit limiting, especially with the options available. The biggest issue is the first shoot is this Saturday (I was hired yesterday).

 

I think I got it down to two options:

 

Nikon 18-35mm 3.5-4.5 G

Tokina 16-28mm f2.8

 

 

I've been having a heck of a time deciding on which lens to go with, both are in stock, and I have two specific samples on hold that I've test shot with already. The lens are both sharp across the frame once stopped down to f4-f8 but both have serious diffraction issues around f11. I will probably live around f8 most of the time anyways so that's not an issue.

 

I plan on doing both video and stills.

 

Here are my theories:

 

Nikon: lighter, smaller, able to fit a filter. inconsistent aperture, and slower than the Tokina. This will allow me to do low angle rollers easier, fit a filter that will protect the front element against anything the bikes may spit up. The longer reach could also be more useful.

 

Tokina: heavier, but sharper at 3.5 than the Nikon. Constant faster aperture could make it a useful tool for low light photography or for shooting live music (another common job for me). the big thing that shies me away from this lens is the fact I can't fit a filter to it.

 

Any other opinions or options I should look at? I'm in Edmonton Alberta Canada and I only deal local, I don't deal online...that alone could hurt my odds of finding "the lens". :)

 



#2
Merco_61

Merco_61

    Nikonian

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,587 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationUppsala, Sweden

Site Supporter

Have you looked at the Tokina 17-35/4? It is built like a tank, like most Tokinas and uses 82 mm filters.

If the Nikon lens had been the old D version without AF-S, the Tokina is sharper. The G version is better than the old one, but I don't know how much.

I personally don't like the plastic feel of the Nikon, but I might be spoiled a bit by the Nikkor 17-35/2.8 I use...

/Peter



#3
Wired

Wired

    Senior Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 170 posts
  • LocationAlberta, Canada

I will be looking into that f4 17-35 for sure. I like the constant aperture and the fact its almost half the weight of the f2.8 variant. Thanks!



#4
Daniel

Daniel

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 512 posts
  • Country Flag

Site Supporter

Hey Wired not to sure if your looking for a full frame or DX lens but if your looking for a DX lens then the new Sigma 18-35 F1.8 might be a good one.

 

Congrats on the job, and what is the name of the cyclist Blog/newspaper/community you are shooting for? I am in E-town just about every week  and would it like to check out some of your work.



#5
Wired

Wired

    Senior Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 170 posts
  • LocationAlberta, Canada

It's a new startup from a friend of mine, I don't even know what its called, but I do believe it will be promoted by Red Bike. He is still finalizing all his sponsors, but he's already got it snowballing. It's peanuts pay to start as it's going to be use to promote my work on his site and direct some traffic to my site, but he will be giving me a portion of the sponsor and advertising money he gets.

 

Its for sure got to be FX lens. However, where the Sigma comes in I do have one on order for my K mount kit already. :)



#6
Daniel

Daniel

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 512 posts
  • Country Flag

Site Supporter

K-mount is that pentax?



#7
Wired

Wired

    Senior Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 170 posts
  • LocationAlberta, Canada

yup. I've been a Pentaxian since high school and learned photography on Pentax film cameras, came to this forum via Pentaxforums. When I started making money from this hobby of mine I ended up buying into Nikon because of the flash system and AF system



#8
Daniel

Daniel

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 512 posts
  • Country Flag

Site Supporter

Cool I just bought the Pentax K-3 the first day it arrived in Edmonton as a winter camera and got the 18-135mm lens at the same time. I haven't used it much because of this deepfreeze we've been having. So I am still not up to date on the terminology Pentax uses. I saw the Sigma 18-35 1.8f for Nikon in Calgary last week but this guy at the camera shop would not let me test it on the D7100 so I didn't buy it. But will probably have one by spring.



#9
Wired

Wired

    Senior Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 170 posts
  • LocationAlberta, Canada

Yea, I got the K3 the first day McBain got them in Edmonton (Oct 31) and I got a respectable collection of glass. I pretty much use Pentax for all my personal day to day shooting and take the D800 out for anything that matters. :)

 

The K3 is amazing, I have used it almost every day since I got it, even did a bogus move and left it in my car on a -30 Celsius day and shot with it right after and it worked just fine. Screw drive lens though.



#10
Daniel

Daniel

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 512 posts
  • Country Flag

Site Supporter

Wow I guess I'm babying my Cameras a little too much. I bought my D7100 and D800E from McBain's, but got my Pentax from somewhere else. I like McBain's a lot though and buy most of my gear from them. I do photography by hobby though and not a profession.



#11
K-9

K-9

    Jamie

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 883 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationNew England

Site Supporter

For moving cyclists and indoor scenes I would go with a lens with at least an f2.8 maximum aperture.



#12
Wired

Wired

    Senior Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 170 posts
  • LocationAlberta, Canada
The cycling will all be outdoors and probably f4-f8 range. Indoors I see a huge advantage to having a 2.8 for live bands tho

#13
alden

alden

    Nikonian

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,226 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationHiding in the hallway

If you want to save money just get the 18-55mm Nikkor 3.5-5.6 GII ED -- sometimes called a "kit" lens as it is often included in bundle packages when you buy a new Nikon. I love mine. Very light, super fast autofocus on my D7100, super sharp.

 

The only downside I know of is that the mounting surface is plastic instead of steel, but I have several old lenses with plastic mounts and never had any issue. Just don't hurl them against rocks. 



#14
Wired

Wired

    Senior Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 170 posts
  • LocationAlberta, Canada

Another concern is that it's not covering the 35mm image sensor.



#15
alden

alden

    Nikonian

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,226 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationHiding in the hallway

Yes, that is a DX lens. I missed where you said it had to be an FX lens. Sorry. 



#16
Thumper

Thumper

    Nikonian

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,289 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationTexas

Site Supporter

I'll second what K-9 said. I would go for the 2.8 max aperture. It gives you a more versatile lens.

#17
Wired

Wired

    Senior Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 170 posts
  • LocationAlberta, Canada

To be honest the 16-28 f2.8 has dropped to third place. It has everything to do with the main reason why I'm buying a wide angle lens in the first place. I wouldn't be buying this style of lens if it wasn't for the job I've been hired to do and the plans I have for the shoots. The more I think about it the more I find this lens not fitting my situation.

 

First things first, I'm very worried about the front element getting damaged. I will be shooting cyclists moving on average 30-40kph, but in some conditions upto 80kph (theres one downhilll we are planning on shooting this spring where it has been known cyclists can get up to these speeds). At any case I plan on being very close to the bike getting some low point of view "roller" shots. Even at slower 10-15kph speeds this can send rocks, gravel, sand, ice, etc flying at pretty good velocities that could damage the front element. The 16-28 does not permit a filter to be attached therefore I worry about the lens lasting for a longer period of time.

 

Second major concern is the weight, and this is where there Nikon jumps to head of the pack. I will be taking video and stills with this kit, the D800 is very unbalanced with a lens weighing nearly a kilogram on the front of it, which is odd because the camera itself is very similar in weight. The lens is just front heavy that affects the center of gravity I'm sure. The problem with this is two fold. First it will make it harder to control while squatting to get the panning shots I want. Secondly, as I will be cycling myself, this 2 kilos of weight in one lens and body alone is going to add a lot of unwanted ballast. 

 

Nikon 385g

16-28 950g

17-35 600g

 

Third concern is the focal length. I fear 28mm may be just too short and that 35 would give me the most versatility. 

 

Sure, the huge pro is that f2.8 constant. But it's not a huge advantage for the primary use for this lens. I would rather get a more useful focal length zoom for my live band work, that being the Tamron 24-70 f2.8 XR Di VC. The 2.8 constant isn't also a huge advantage when I will be primarily shooting outdoors, and if needed using flash to freeze the action.

 

I know I originally suggested this lens, but the more I think about it and the more I research it the more I think it's far from the right lens for the job.

 

Right now it's between the Nikon and the Tokina 17-35. I haven't tested the 17-35, but its in stock and I will give it a whirl tomorrow. It is very promising. 

 

Pro's for the 17-35 f4:

Constant f4 aperture

can take a filter

metal construction

 

cons for the 17-35 f4:

Still has a lot of weight

82mm filter thread  (I already own a 77 for the Nikon)

 

both lenses are very similar in physical dimensions otherwise, and AF speed in theory should be similar. Price is almost the same too. So it will come down to weight and handling of the lens as well as optical quality of the copy they have on hand. 



#18
alden

alden

    Nikonian

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,226 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationHiding in the hallway

FWIW I have used an extreme wide angle Tokina lens and I was very impressed with it. 

 

Solid built, very sharp. 



#19
Wired

Wired

    Senior Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 170 posts
  • LocationAlberta, Canada

yea I'm leaning towards the Tokina f4



#20
Wired

Wired

    Senior Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 170 posts
  • LocationAlberta, Canada

Ended up with the Tokina 17-35mm f4. It was a tough call, I spent a good hour in the store working between the Nikon 18-35 3.5-4.5 and the Tokina, I even gave the 2.8 Tokina a try as well to see if my suspicions of handling were correct...Here is what I found in my store tests and what lead me to the 17-35 f4

 

The 2.8 is just too big and heavy for squatting low and keeping the camera steady as suspected. As I remember from trying it the other day, it is very front heavy which scares me a bit as I'm worried that it would tip on me if my grip wasn't sound enough. I also found the zoom range wasn't wide enough which limited its versatility for me. However, that being said the rendering is bloody fantastic and it's a solid piece of kit. I would not hesitate to buy this lens if the sole reason for buying a wide angle zoom lens was for doing landscape or street photography. It's a killer lens. it was also the most expensive....

 

I mounted up the f4 next, and was immediately greeted with a camera that was much easier to handle. The balance is essentially perfect with the center of gravity feeling light its just in front of the lens mount. it was also noticeably lighter than the f2.8.  The zoom range is exactly what I was hoping for, and the detail and contrast seem to be just as good as the f2.8 from what i could tell from the back of the LCD screen. 

 

Just taking the Nikon out of the box felt like i was handling a plastic toy in comparison to the two Tokinas. Its super light, and the center of gravity feels like its right on the lens mount. Handing it was just as easy as the F4, but I felt i had a little less control due to the weight difference. The big thing that overpowered me though was the variable aperture. I didn't think it would bother me, but having the ability to "set and forget" at f4 vs having the aperture adjusting constantly quickly showed how much of a nuisance it could become. The autofocus was also a little more hesitant on the Nikon model. So it lost out. Image quality is just as good if not slightly better on the Nikon.

 

So there you have it. @Merco_61 thank you very much for this recommendation 

 

this thread is useless without pics:

 

11975104614_bfb8d2b5ee_b.jpg
hangers by LK_335, on Flickr
 

11974991223_1b295a8621_b.jpg
down low by LK_335, on Flickr
 

11974700975_613df5bcf5_b.jpg
dial tone by LK_335, on Flickr
 

11974702835_f74b4735a0_b.jpg
crunchy by LK_335, on Flickr
 

11974998693_8ec719fb44_b.jpg
a wee book by LK_335, on Flickr
 
just a few on the way home






Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: zoom, wide, uwa, d800, fx