File :-(, x, )
heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
Hey /p/. Last lens purchase for my 5D... I need a wide.

Nikon 20mm f/2.8 AIS, or Canon 17-40L?
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS 5DImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2008:08:18 16:08:06Exposure Time1/50 secExposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating250Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryRenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Anonymous
Nikon. Canon ef. DOES NOT COMPUTE.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
shit sucks

get this bad boy

Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop 7.0Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution400 dpiVertical Resolution400 dpiImage Created2005:11:01 01:17:12Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width800Image Height537
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
I actually currently use all Nikkor primes on my 5D. This L lens would be my first actual EOS mount lens (aside from the Lensbaby, which hardly counts).
>> Anonymous
Frankly, you can trust Nikon gear. The same goes for high end Canon gear. It's reliable. It's sturdy. It will take the abuse that goes with professional rigors. You can pick up a Nikon every day, and use it, just like you use a tool. Hell, you can drive nails with old Nikons. That's the quality we're talking about here.

When you make your livelihood, you don't choose the brand that offers an equivalent, even similar system, you choose the brand that is a trustworthy and time-tested tool. Thus, Nikon. There are always distinctions to be made between Nikon and Canon, but I've often heard this statement, and I believe it: Canons are the best cameras made by engineers, but Nikons are the best cameras made by photographers. It's a generalization, but that feels very true to me.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>238012
>> Anonymous
>>238012Nikons are the best cameras made by photographers. It's a generalization, but that feels very true to me.

you're a fucking faggot
>> Anonymous
20.

- Complete your doing-it-right/old-school awesomeness.
- Faster, seriously, f/4 maximum aperture for photojournalism?
- If it's the same optical formula as the AF 20/2.8 David Alan Harvey uses, it's a pretty beautiful lens.
>> Anonymous
>>238017
and your a new faggot!
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
>>238018
Yeah, I've often thought about DAH's shots with the 20... it seems about as wide as I'd want to go. Everything wider than 20 that I've seen kind of looks... weird. Surreal.

I guess I should. I mean, I already have the adaptor for it. Heh.
>> Anonymous
>>238012Nikons are the best cameras made by photographers. It's a generalization, but that feels very true to me.

this is just embarrassing...
>> Anonymous
>>238025
Well, he's shooting on a DX sensor. Always has since he went digital. IIRC, he had the D70, then D200, and D300. I don't think he's ordered a D700 and I can't imagine DAH shooting with a D3.

It's also a little weird he used it as his main lens when shooting Nikon on film and then just went and kept using it despite being an entirely different field of view on DX. Guess he just really likes it.

You also might want to look at the Sigma 20/1.8. While I doubt it's as good of a lens, I'm sure it's not going to be as good as far as build quality goes, and I know it's huge, I bet it's the "when you absolutely, positively have to fit every motherfucker in the frame in a pitch black room, there is no substitute" lens.
>> Anonymous
>>238036Sigma 20/1.8
I don't think the one stop is worth the hassle, weight, expense, and decrease in quality.
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
>>238036
I've heard it called unusably soft at 1.8. Also, I just don't like Sigmas. I'd never forgive myself for spending the money if it sucked.
>> Anonymous
>>238040
Makes sense. I'd get the Nikkor myself, just throwing that out since I know you love shallow depth of field and often shoot in low light, etc.
>> Anonymous
I've got the 17-40L but it's on a crop. I like it and from what I've heard it's a completely different (better) lens on a full frame.

The question is whether you need the zoom or the extra stop.
>> Anonymous
the 17-40 is the best lens i have

i have 18-55 is
75-300
50mm 1.4
>> Anonymous
>I don't think he's ordered a D700

Whoops, I was wrong, I just went to his blog and looked at the EXIF on the top image. D700, 50/1.8.

Weirldly, the image right below it is with that same D300, 20/2.8 combination.

Maybe he was borrowing someone's camera, just picked it up? DAH with a fifty is pretty rare.

Saging myself for the photography equivalent of Entertainment Weekly.
>> $19.99 !OSYhGye6hY
I think we all know what you should do...

16-35mm 2.8!
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
>>238061
I'd love to, but I can't afford it.
>> Anonymous
>>237989
the one that will make you take good photos!

oh wait...
>> Anonymous
I see the 105/2.5 in another thread, did you ever get the 24/2 and 28/2 like you were talking about?
>> Anonymous !SDPEsPMnww
>>238167
The 17-40 f/4L has been very nice to me, but I do mostly landscapes. But it's still a nice lens regardless of how you use it.
>> thefamilyman !!rTVzm2BgTOa
     File :-(, x)
I've long term borrowed the AF version of the Nikkor 20mm.
its a fantastic lens, but i found it was more forgiving on my F5 than D70. The digital body seemed to pronounce the flaws (well flaws for todays pixel peepers, more like lens character to me).
I'm pretty sure the AF and the Ai-s versions have the same lens make up from each other so i can assume the outcome of the AIS lens. It has quite a bit of light fall off when wide open and the corners are quite soft, center sharpness was pretty good i thought when wide open.
I feel these days people want too much perfection, when this lens came out the photographers of those days can turn these lens characteristics into something beautiful and i greatly appreciate this. Plus if you ever decide to move to a D700 the nikkor will be right at home. Also its small!!!

I cant say much for the canon as i have not used it, but i can assume its a fantastic lens.

Pic: Nikon F5
Nikkor 20mm f/2.8
Cokin 131 filter (filter holder is not designed for the wide lens lol)
Fujifilm Neopan SS 100
>> Anonymous
>>238314
interesting. The 20/2.8's flaws you mention - light fall-off, and soft in the corners are LESS visible on a smaller frame (ie your D70) than on an F5, also the typical Nikon barrel distortion is less on a D70
>> thefamilyman !!rTVzm2BgTOa
>>238320
i mean, what you can see, the D70 is less forgiving. I think its more due to the absolute resolution of a digital sensor. On my F5 the film 'antialiases' and dithers the soft corners into a more pleasing effect. Where as on digital, the soft corners feels uncomfortable and uneasy.
I hope i make sense.
>> Anonymous
>>238321
We very well might be talking about the same effect from two different angles, but digital sensors handle the same light differently than film, which leads to some corner quality problems, for some reason especially on ultrawides. That's why Nikon went with all-DX in the first place, part of the rationale behind Four-Thirds, and why the M8 can't be full frame; apparently (obviously) technology has marched on enough the effect is minor enough it doesn't really matter much anymore for SLRs with their large flange focal distance.

Un
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
>>238194
Yeah, the OP pic is with the 28 f/2. Didn't get the 24 f/2 as it's hella spensive.
>> thread hijack~ Anonymous
Hey heavyweather, do you have a D2X kicking around at the paper? Would you mind posting a couple hi-res samples?
I've been poking around flickr and pbase but all the shots are either useless or postage stamp sized.
>> Anonymous
>>238017
>>238027
Successful troll is successful.
>> Anonymous
>>237989
can you post original please?
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
>>238373
A few folks have D2Xs of their own, but the paper only has a D2h and a bunch of D200s (soon to be D300s). It's a sick camera though, I've shot with one and a Tokina 12-24 before.
>> Anonymous
>>238373
What the hell do you need a D2x sample for? It produces better images than you will ever have any need for.
>> Anonymous
>>238410
1/10
Trolling is dead