Lens i got, what do u think?

avery

avery

Active member
I just bought a Nikon Nikkor 50mm f/2 AI Manual Focus Lens for my HPX170 with a LetusElite...this a good lens to buy?
 
You should have asked this question before buying it.
It's a good lense, but a faster lense like the 50mm 1.4 is a better choice for light-eating adapters. Plus, you can get shallower depth of field...
 
SaN said:
You should have asked this question before buying it.
It's a good lense, but a faster lense like the 50mm 1.4 is a better choice for light-eating adapters. Plus, you can get shallower depth of field...
Click to expand...

Agreed. I used to shoot with an adapter before I got my Canon 7D and fast lenses are key to success. Those 35mm adapters eat light for breakfast and if you're not careful with your lens selection you'll find yourself blasting sets with light just to get minimum exposure.
 
Finnegan said:
Agreed. I used to shoot with an adapter before I got my Canon 7D and fast lenses are key to success. Those 35mm adapters eat light for breakfast and if you're not careful with your lens selection you'll find yourself blasting sets with light just to get minimum exposure.
Click to expand...

The "speed" issue is still bizarre to me because you can purchase lenses like a 50mm at 1.8 (the standard) for dirt cheap (like 50 bucks), and yet you end up spending way more for a different lens at 2.4...? Why?
 
The sharpness difference is negligeable when pitted against the advantage of not having to change lenses and being able to frame the shot perfectly on the fly. I think a set of zoom lenses will always outgun prime lenses on a production.

Just to give you an example. Your zoom lens is too tight, so you set it to where the image fits. Great. You've got the perfect shot. Now do you seriously believe I will check whether it is in the 50mm range and remove the zoom to replace it with a prime? No way. The zoom stays on.

On the other hand, my 50mm lens is too tight. I have the choice between moving the camera back, fiddling with smaller prime lenses and having to move the camera forward, or just sticking on a zoom and getting the shot right without hassle. Which option is the best? Obviously it's a no brainer.

Save the money you were going to spend on the primes and get a zoom. That is my advice.
 
Mbala said:
The sharpness difference is negligeable when pitted against the advantage of not having to change lenses and being able to frame the shot perfectly on the fly. I think a set of zoom lenses will always outgun prime lenses on a production.

Just to give you an example. Your zoom lens is too tight, so you set it to where the image fits. Great. You've got the perfect shot. Now do you seriously believe I will check whether it is in the 50mm range and remove the zoom to replace it with a prime? No way. The zoom stays on.

On the other hand, my 50mm lens is too tight. I have the choice between moving the camera back, fiddling with smaller prime lenses and having to move the camera forward, or just sticking on a zoom and getting the shot right without hassle. Which option is the best? Obviously it's a no brainer.

Save the money you were going to spend on the primes and get a zoom. That is my advice.
Click to expand...


This is partly true, but Sharpness is not the only factor, but also brightness and DOF control,
The zooms that I use are all f2.8. And I wish i can afford AND find a more faster zoom.

If you cannot afford a zoom that is fast then a fast prime is better than a slow zoom.

That said, I use to take several primes in my kit for outside the studio shoot.

they are;
50mm f1.4, 80mm f1.9, 105mm f2.8.

I replaced the 80 and 105 with an 80-200 f2.8.

For the wides, I also use zooms,
a tokina 11-16 f2.8, a sigma 20-40 f2.8.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top