|
needtolearnhowtoclimb
Jul 26, 2003, 10:26 PM
Post #1 of 10
(1822 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 24, 2002
Posts: 216
|
I have a nikon F-100. I am looking around for a new telephoto lens, any suggestions would be helpful. thanks.
-JOsh-
|
|
|
|
|
tim
Jul 26, 2003, 11:07 PM
Post #2 of 10
(1822 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 4, 2002
Posts: 4861
|
You're not being very specific. If you're just looking for a do-it-all tele zoom, the 80-200 AF-D is a very popular choice, although it's odd for someone to purchase an F100 without already owning a stable of lenses.
The 180mm f/2.8D is smaller but doesn't focus as fast. The superteles are more expensive and I surely would not want to lug a 300/2.8 in to the Needles, for example. Then again, I don't much like lugging around an 80-200, which is why I sold mine. I do like the 85 f/1.4D a great deal, and was surprised to find that Greg Epperson (!) also loved that prime. It's a real winner if you can afford to pay a premium for an ultra-sharp short tele, and with the F100, it practically focuses itself -- *zzzzap* there's a pinecone 3 feet away, *zzzzap* there's a climber 400 feet away. The 80-200 zooms also focus fast, but they're so heavy that I grew to dread using them.
Just some thoughts. The f100 is a great body, perhaps you might want to rent some lenses before making a purchase. You kind of owe it to yourself, and besides, you'll have the slides from all of them after you're done making up your mind!
|
|
|
|
|
rcaret
Jul 27, 2003, 1:20 AM
Post #3 of 10
(1822 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 30, 2002
Posts: 227
|
I own several Nikon cameras and have to my own preference found using the 28mm -70mm F2.8 Sigma to work the best for all around use , There is no one lense that dose it all , Subscribe to A photography magazine as they have articles on various lenses that will help you decide.
|
|
|
|
|
tradmanclimbs
Jul 27, 2003, 2:01 AM
Post #4 of 10
(1822 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599
|
I am a working pro and use the f100 to make a living. I am not a glamerous magazine shooter but shoot horse shows in summer and skier/ snowboarders in winter. I sell prints so I shoot print film. I use the cheap fuji 400 superia and sell tack sharp 20X30 posters. I allmost never use my 80-200 2.8d anymore as it is soooo heavy. I bought a 70-300 nikon ED-D 4.5 to 5.6 lens and love it. Is was only $250.00 with rebate $300.00 if the special is not avalible. Wicked sharp, very light the only downside is it dosen't look cool and it is slow. The slow part is only a factor if you shoot crome all the time. In good light though 5.6 is fine with provia or Ectacrome 100. for climbing I like 28-105 or 24-85. I no longer waste money on aftermarket lenses. You will lose your shirt when you try to resell them and they are not as tough as the nikon stuff. Aftermarket has good optics but they break easy.
|
|
|
|
|
needtolearnhowtoclimb
Jul 27, 2003, 6:45 PM
Post #5 of 10
(1822 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 24, 2002
Posts: 216
|
Well, i didnt buy the f-100 body, it was a birthday gift from my father. and it has a lens on it, a nikkor 105mm micro. We mostly go bouldering, and i am looking for a lens where i can be relatively close to the boulder and still get some of the angles that i love taking, but with this lens alot of those angles are sacrificed because i have to be farther away from the boulder. mabey i should get 2 new lenses, like a regular 35mm for pooping around the boulders and a telephoto for the longer climbs.
-JOsh-
|
|
|
|
|
tim
Jul 27, 2003, 8:28 PM
Post #6 of 10
(1822 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 4, 2002
Posts: 4861
|
It sounds like what you really want is a wideangle. The 18-35mm is relatively cheap ($399) and a fantastic lens for taking pictures right in the middle of the action. I bought one recently (after selling my older 20-35mm lens in Argentina, and missing it rather a lot) and I love it! Light, and wide.
What you're describing (the lens 'pushing you' too far away from the action) is best addressed with a wideangle. A 35/2 is about $300, for an extra $100 you could pick up an ultrawide-to-wide zoom that will give you much more versatility when you're pressed for time and trying to catch a decisive moment. Buying a different telephoto would simply vary the amount you are 'pushed back'; something under 50mm helps you get smack in the middle of things, which often makes for much more exciting pictures.
A lot of people have been happy with the old 24-120mm zoom, recently re-released as an AF-S (grab the lens barrel to focus manually, no switches to flip) lens with vibration reduction. My father adores his and tried the new one recently; he says it is better in every way than the lens it replaces. If you have five or six hundred dollars to burn, that would be worth a look.
As previously mentioned, renting a variety of lenses while you are deciding is a great way to make an informed purchase. Nothing speaks more highly of a lens than its value in helping you get the shots that you want from your camera. That's really the only way to judge whether a piece of equipment like a lens is worth buying: by your results.
As far as 'longer lenses for longer climbs' -- remember that you have to carry said longer lens on the climb, or find someone else to! Oftentimes the same things that make wide-angle shots compelling for small boulders (their tendency to exaggerate the distance between the foreground, eg. the climber, and the background, eg. the ground or the surroundings) produce truly spectacular results when you position yourself in an opportune spot (overhang, adjacent climb, ledge above a crux) and use the foreshortened perspective to convey the exposure of a route. A great example of this is Joe's signature shot from Indian Creek:
http://www.rockclimbing.com/...p.cgi?Detailed=10232
Granted not everyone climbs as hard or as often as Joe, and not everyone is going to get pictures like that, but it's a good example of what's possible.
|
|
|
|
|
thomasribiere
Jul 27, 2003, 8:38 PM
Post #7 of 10
(1822 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 24, 2002
Posts: 9306
|
what does the word aftermarket mean?
|
|
|
|
|
tim
Jul 27, 2003, 9:56 PM
Post #8 of 10
(1822 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 4, 2002
Posts: 4861
|
In reply to: what does the word aftermarket mean?
produced by a company other than the camera manufacturer.
eg. Sigma, Tokina, Tamron, etc. are all considered aftermarket.
The problem with lenses from non-camera manufacturers is that they don't hold their resale value. Almost every Nikon lens I've bought, I have later sold for more than I originally paid (yes I tend to shop on eBay). That would be hard to pull off with a bunch of Sigmas or Quantarrays, regardless of their optical quality and construction.
|
|
|
|
|
rongoodman
Jul 28, 2003, 2:23 AM
Post #9 of 10
(1822 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 17, 2003
Posts: 82
|
I just got the new Nikon 24-85 AFS for my all purpose zoom. I'll probably just take it and the 180 on my upcoming Tetons trip, along with my Stylus Epic of course. The AFS focusing is very quiet and fast and the lense is quite compact.
|
|
|
|
|
krillen
Jul 31, 2003, 1:23 PM
Post #10 of 10
(1822 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 19, 2001
Posts: 4769
|
Prime or fixed lenses tend to be cheaper for speed. i.e- buying a fixed length lens with a max aperture of 2.8, vs. buying a zoom with a max. aperture of 2.8.
But if you have cash to through at the problem then zoom might work for you. Just remember, no zoom is a replacement of getting up and INTO the action. Zooms simply allow you to be lazy...so it's your decision....personally I went the hard route ;)
|
|
|
|
|
|
