• Facepunch Camera and Lens Review Corner
    56 replies, posted
So there are probably a great deal of people on this site looking into buying a camera, this is a great thread to start off with: [url]http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1089372[/url] < Make sure you read this first However, once you finish reading, you may be leaning towards a couple of specific cameras you aren&#8217;t exactly sure of&#8230;. I made this thread so Facepunch Photographers could come together and consolidate all their reviews on their cameras and lenses into an easy to find archive (because sometimes you need a more personal hands on reference rather a professional one in order to decide). In short, [b]if you own a camera, give your personal view/opinion on it![/b] Anything you add will help! I will make sure everything stays organized so people can research further into the cameras they&#8217;re deciding on. The main goal of this is to give a library of consumer reviews/insights from the small community of photographers in FP (because there are some things the professional reviews don&#8217;t disclose of). If you don&#8217;t know where to start with your review, just follow this handy template and fill out as much as possible (anything helps): Name of the camera/item, be it a DSLR, Film SLR, Lens, Camcorder, etc.: Overall Rating out of 10: [Sample Photos/Work/Videos]: Comments: Pros: Cons: Pricing [Bang for your buck?]: You can add anything you want too. These are sure to help a lot of people weigh their decisions on which camera is more suitable to buy (this would&#8217;ve helped me greatly during my camera buying process, that&#8217;s for sure). Also, this should reduce the, &#8220;Should I Get This Camera&#8221; threads that pop up occasionally. I will be keeping the evaluations organized while people post them, if you find a review helpful, make sure to rate informative or useful accordingly so people know the quality of the assessment. Hopefully we can collaborate and make something great out of this. Links to commonly used review sites: [url]http://www.dpreview.com/[/url] [url]http://snapsort.com/[/url] [url]http://the-digital-picture.com/[/url] - [i]Great review site for Canon stuff, I haven't really looked at Nikon's but I assume they have a bit as well.[/i] [Credit to pure.Joseph] [url]http://www.photozone.de[/url] [i]Useful link for lenses.[/i] [Credit to Fake-XM] [url]http://lenshero.com[/url] [i]If anyone is interested in the lens version of Snapsort. It's a decent site for lens reviews.[/i][Credit to Combine_dumb] [Feel free to suggest others] [b]Submitted Reviews:[/b] [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1148115?p=33857435&viewfull=1#post33857435] Sony A580[/url] Review by Me! [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1148115?p=33859028&viewfull=1#post33859028] Pentax MX[/url] Review by communistcat [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1148115?p=33893135&viewfull=1#post33893135] Sigma 30mm f1.4 lens[/url] Review by DoubleDD [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1148115?p=33973520&viewfull=1#post33973520] Tamron 17-50 2.8 NON VC[/url] Review by MisterM [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1148115?p=34015246&viewfull=1#post34015246] Canon FL 55MM f1.2 Lens[/url] Review by Trogdon [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1148115?p=34138872&viewfull=1#post34138872] Canon G12 Advanced Compact Camera[/url] Review by MasterBacon [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1148115?p=34152546&viewfull=1#post34152546] Panasonic 20mm f1.7 Lens[/url] Review by ep9832 [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1148115?p=34319075&viewfull=1#post34319075] Olympus OM-1N Body + Olympus Zuiko 50mm f1.4 Lens [/url] Review by ep9832 [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1148115?p=34323053&viewfull=1#post34323053] Canon 50mm f/1.8 II[/url] Review by cueballv2themax [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1148115?p=34325741&viewfull=1#post34325741] Olympus E-PL1 Body[/url] Review by ep9832 [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1148115?p=34364131&viewfull=1#post34364131] Pentax K1000 Body[/url] Review by ep9832 [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1148115?p=34400522&viewfull=1#post34400522] Sony VCLECF1 Fisheye Conversion Lens[/url] Review by Trogdon [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1148115?p=34812833&viewfull=1#post34812833] Sigma 50 f/1.4 EX DG HSM[/url] Review by pure.Joseph [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1148115?p=34850220&viewfull=1#post34850220] Panasonic Lumix G10[/url] Review by MrEndangered [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1148115?p=34888076&viewfull=1#post34888076] Canon Canonet 28 (1971 Verison)[/url] Review by ep9832 [b][Last Updated: 03/01/12][/b] [b]Requests:[/b] Lumix GF2 Sony Alpha 50mm 1.4 Lens [editline]1[/editline] I just thought of this, if anyone wants to request a review on anything, go ahead and post what you would like to see. I'll be sure to pin it on the first post and if anyone feels like taking up the task they can go ahead and give their evaluation!
woo looking forward to this thread, if anyone wants lens reviews of the following let me know. can shoot them in digital and film Canon FD 50mm f1.8 Canon FD 70-150mm f4.5 Canon FL 28mm f3.5 Canon FL 35mm f3.5 Canon FL 50mm f1.2 Canon FL 100-200mm f5.6 Minolta 35-80mm f4-5.6 Minolta 50mm f1.7 Sony E 16mm f2.8 Vivitar FD 28-200mm f3.5-5.6 Vivitar FD 500mm f8 mirror
I'll add in my experience, opinions and short review with the following as well. Nikon D5000 Nikon 18-15 kit lens, Nikon 55-200. Canon 7D Canon 5D mark II Canon 60D ( a few hours of experience ) Canon T2i ( shot this for a whole day while my buddy used my 5D ) Canon 28-135 IS Canon 24-105 f/4L IS Canon 16-35 f/2.8L II Canon 70-200 f/4L IS Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS II ( Have some decent experience with ) Canon 100 f/2.8L IS Macro Canon 85 f/1.8 Canon 50 f/1.8 ( Friends lens, good experience with ) Sigma 50 f/1.4 Canon 580 EX II Filters: B+W Various ND Hoya Tiffen Calumet While not a camera, it's still related to photography. Canon 9500 pro mark II photo printer. Also have some "brilliance" paper to go with it bought from calumet. I can also provide some example shots on either my crop or FF camera. I don't own the Nikon's anymore sadly. A review i frequent is, [url]http://the-digital-picture.com/[/url] Great review site for Canon stuff, I haven't really looked at Nikon's but I assume they have a bit as well.
I can't really speak so much about the Nikon D3000, 18-55 VR kit or 50 1.8 I used to have. I can however go in depth with the following: Nikon D7000 Nikon SB-700 Tamron SP AF 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di II LD IF (I won't give it 10/10 because of the name). Ask away and I'll get around to a writeup.
[QUOTE=MisterM;33748535]I can't really speak so much about the Nikon D3000, 18-55 VR kit or 50 1.8 I used to have. I can however go in depth with the following: Nikon D7000 Nikon SB-700 Tamron SP AF 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di II LD IF (I won't give it 10/10 because of the name). Ask away and I'll get around to a writeup.[/QUOTE] Sweet, I'd love to hear what you have to say on the Nikon gear. And especially that 17-50 as there's a canon mount version which seems fairly popular.
Name: Sony A580 (Yes I use Sony...) Overall Rating out of 10: In my opinion, I'd give it a 9/10 for what it's worth Comments: I found this camera to be loaded with numerous features, Panorama, Hand Held Twilight, built in HDR among other things (Are they trying to hide something with all this stuff?). As a first DSLR camera, this seriously impressed me, not just for the features but the general quality of the pictures. I found certain things a bit confusing at times though; personally I'm not too fond the button/menu layout that it's set with, but that's my preference I guess. I'm not sure why this model was discontinued so soon, perhaps Sony is just dumping the whole mirror thing away and bringing in more mirrorless technology... Anyways, this seems to fit my needs very well, if not perfectly. Pros: Preset scene helpers for quick shooting Loads of things for a beginner to grow into HD Recording In camera panoramic stitching Diggin the quality it spits out God damn, the noise reduction Cons: Button layout is kind of wonky, the aperture control isn't very comfortable. Buffer can get filled fast but doesn't pose much of a practical problem. Pricing: I felt that I got what I paid for and if not, more. I paid about $700 for the body and a basic 55mm what a deal! If you're looking at the A55 and the A580, The A55 is 50 bucks cheaper but in my opinion it's a smaller SLT version of this guy so I would definitely go the extra 50 and get this camera. Hope this helps, feel free to ask questions. Images: [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/mshoo/6672129145/][img]http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7023/6672129145_d1ffc63444.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/mshoo/6672129145/]Precious Liquid[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/mshoo/]Mshoo[/url], on Flickr [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/mshoo/6672127571/][img]http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7146/6672127571_a7a7ef777a.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/mshoo/6672127571/]Up[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/mshoo/]Mshoo[/url], on Flickr [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/mshoo/6651850175/][img]http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7004/6651850175_9a00c13c59.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/mshoo/6651850175/]Pier#[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/mshoo/]Mshoo[/url], on Flickr [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/mshoo/6672129667/][img]http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7152/6672129667_bd21f58fc2.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/mshoo/6672129667/]Leanin'[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/mshoo/]Mshoo[/url], on Flickr
maybe a useful link for lenses: I use [url]http://www.photozone.de[/url] (.de, but it's in english) I own a Canon 450D and I'd say if someone is on a tight budget it's a great buy, about 400€ used with the kit 18-55IS (which is very sharp btw!). But there are tons of reviews about the EOS cameras anyway.
Pentax MX (Film SLR) Overall Rating out of 10: 8 Sample Photos: [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/communistwolf/6554731587/][img]http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7154/6554731587_84520f8d2e.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/communistwolf/6554731587/]Swing Bridge[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/communistwolf/]CommunistWolf[/url], on Flickr [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/communistwolf/6554723999/][img]http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7163/6554723999_963c16e1f8.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/communistwolf/6554723999/]End of the line[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/communistwolf/]CommunistWolf[/url], on Flickr Comments: Its a lovely little SLR, infact compared to a Zenit its tiny while still having all the controls of a normal slr Pros: 5 L.E.D. exposure meter Easy to load Bloody huge viewfinder (95% coverage) Cons: All the controls are tightly packed so its rather difficult to change shutter speeds looking through the viewfinder Pricing: As a well known film SLR they go for over £50 with the kit lens a 50mm f/1.7. I got mine for free and absolutely love it, but if I knew what it was like I would have paid the £50 for one
I want to buy a Canon 50mm lens but I'm torn between getting the cheaper f/1.8 or saving up a little and getting the f/1.4. Any suggestion?
[QUOTE=Tokii;33871786]I want to buy a Canon 50mm lens but I'm torn between getting the cheaper f/1.8 or saving up a little and getting the f/1.4. Any suggestion?[/QUOTE] I also would second this.
[QUOTE=Tokii;33871786]I want to buy a Canon 50mm lens but I'm torn between getting the cheaper f/1.8 or saving up a little and getting the f/1.4. Any suggestion?[/QUOTE] I think if you're not in a rush then you should just save up the extra bit of cash to buy the f/1.4. But at least go try out both at a camera shop to get a feel for them to see if the extra money you pay is worth it for the f/1.4.
If anyone is interested in the lens version of Snapsort. You can go to [url]http://lenshero.com[/url]. I think it's a decent site for lens reviews.
[QUOTE=Tokii;33871786]I want to buy a Canon 50mm lens but I'm torn between getting the cheaper f/1.8 or saving up a little and getting the f/1.4. Any suggestion?[/QUOTE] The big kicker between the two is the extra DoF you get with the 1.4, and the extra aperture blades. Image quality between the two will be similar with a nod to the 1.4 up into the 5.6 apertures, which they will be indistinguishable , or with a slight nod to the 1.8 actually. But with the 5 aperture blades on the 1.8, you are really at a loss when it comes to background defocusing, because you will get pentagon shaped bokeh instead of a more hexagon shape. For me this is a HUGE difference between the lenses. On the 1.4 you are also getting better construction with a METAL mount (1.8 only has plastic, this is an issue), and slightly better coating. Whether the price difference is worth it to you is up to these factors, as they will both take great photos, but if you get the 1.8 you are losing on these key elements loss of light (2/3rds of a stop) not as shallow DoF Slight loss of sharpness in wide apertures worse bokeh circles (pentagon shapes) plastic
[QUOTE=Trogdon;33873391]The big kicker between the two is the extra DoF you get with the 1.4, and the extra aperture blades. Image quality between the two will be similar with a nod to the 1.4 up into the 5.6 apertures, which they will be indistinguishable , or with a slight nod to the 1.8 actually. But with the 5 aperture blades on the 1.8, you are really at a loss when it comes to background defocusing, because you will get pentagon shaped bokeh instead of a more hexagon shape. For me this is a HUGE difference between the lenses. On the 1.4 you are also getting better construction with a METAL mount (1.8 only has plastic, this is an issue), and slightly better coating. Whether the price difference is worth it to you is up to these factors, as they will both take great photos, but if you get the 1.8 you are losing on these key elements loss of light (2/3rds of a stop) not as shallow DoF Slight loss of sharpness in wide apertures worse bokeh circles (pentagon shapes) plastic[/QUOTE] You've bought me, now i'm definitely gonna save up for the f/1.4. You should be a salesman or something.
just like helping people make informed decisions :)
what about third party lenses? I've poked around and i've seen mixed reviews, like, some people say they're absolute shite, while others say they're really good.
Sigma and Tamron are the two most reputable 3rd party brands I believe, and they won't be as good as first party when pixel peeping, but will certainly get the job done. 3rd party lenses sometimes vary in quality, such as one might be better than the other for seemingly no reason. I have read about that happening, but I am unsure if it is a common thing. People speak highly of the sigma 30mm f1.4 lens, which I have heard is very sharp in the center, and very good wide open. Corners are soft though at most aperture ranges.
[B]Sigma 30mm f1.4 lens[/B] [IMG]http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/31HA2PJWMFL._SL500_AA300_.jpg[/IMG] Overall Rating out of 10: 8 [B]Sample images I shot with it:[/B] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/ndehaan/6067135234/][img]http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6078/6067135234_e17b04fc41_z.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/ndehaan/6060355526/][img]http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6075/6060355526_4ce77c81d6_z.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/ndehaan/5787660865/][img]http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5265/5787660865_ebc73287d9_z.jpg[/img][/url] The above pictures were all taken at an aperture of f1.4 As you can see the pictures are very sharp. I didn't use any sharpening with photoshop on these. When browsing the photography forums, I can see there is a lot of interest in this lens, mainly because of the f1.4 aperture and how it handles like a standard lens with a crop-sensor body. Therefor, I give you this review A small rundown of the lens: It's a lens designed for the APS-C sensors, meaning the cropsensors. It won't work on a full-frame camera. Keeping the cropfactor in mind, the lens becomes either a 45mm lens(Nikon 1.5 cropfactor) or 48mm lens(Canon 1.6 cropfactor) This means it's a standard prime lens like those 50mm's you used to have back in the days with the 35mm film camera's. Being a standard lens means it's suitable for a lot of things, be it portrait photography, street photography and even landscape photography. It's not zoomed-in too much and neither is it too wide. [B]Sharpness[/B] As you might've seen from my example pictures, the lens is pretty sharp wide-open. Like Trogdon said, the center is very sharp even wide open and corners usually are about 2-3 stops softer than the center. [B]Focus speed[/B] The focus speed is decent. It's not the fastest lens there is but it certainly isn't the slowest. Good enough. [B]Build Quality[/B] The lens feels great on your camera. It's weight will not give you a whiplash but it just feels nicely placed on your camera. It has a metal mount and the focusring turns smoothly. It also has full-time manual focus or whatever it's called. This means you don't have to flick a switch to put it in manual focus, you just take the focus ring and twist. [B]Some side notes[/B] Colorfringing is pretty well controlled. At f1.4 it is visible with white edges but nothing too serious. Flaring is handled very nicely, even when looking at direct sunlight. Vignetting is there, thought nothing too serious. Maybe 1-2 stops. [B]Pros:[/B] -Sharp, even wide open -Not a lot of visible errors like color fringing, flaring etc. -Handles like a 'standard' lens on a crop-sensor dslr -Good build quality -Full-time manual focus -F1.4 means it's very good in low-light situations [B]Cons:[/B] -Focus speed isn't the fastest -Vignetting visible -Not really a lens fault, but Sigma's Quality Control isn't the best, meaning you can get a lens where the focus is off, eventhough it says it is in-focus. If you have a camera body that can tweak the focus-offset then it is usually not a problem. If you don't then you might risk having to send it back. [B]Pricing:[/B] Bought it for about 450 Euro's I believe. If I had to choose one lens for my Canon 7D, it would be this one.
I hope this question is in the right place. If I wanted to use my T2i for a short film (video recording) what lens would be best? I was thinking some sort of a wide angle lens and maybe a macro?
[QUOTE=Silentwisher;33969751]I hope this question is in the right place. If I wanted to use my T2i for a short film (video recording) what lens would be best? I was thinking some sort of a wide angle lens and maybe a macro?[/QUOTE] Better suited for threads like the 'Wich camera is right for me' and Gear discussion thread, but since we are on it: wide angle lenses are the easiest because you have more in focus and so you won't have to hassle with focussing it a lot. Lenses with vibration reduction also help a lot to get smooth videos.
[QUOTE=DoubleDD;33971391]Better suited for threads like the 'Wich camera is right for me' and Gear discussion thread, but since we are on it: wide angle lenses are the easiest because you have more in focus and so you won't have to hassle with focussing it a lot. Lenses with vibration reduction also help a lot to get smooth videos.[/QUOTE] Alright I will post there next time. Thanks for the info tho. Do you know of a good but cheap wide angle lens? That you would recommend? Cause right now I have a 18-55mm and it doesn't really cut it.
good cheap wide angle? no save yer bucks and buy a 10-20mm
Tamron 17-50 blah blah 2.8 NON VC Overall Rating out of 10: 8 [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/kelvinharron/6281411137/][img]http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6118/6281411137_c92a32de3a.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/kelvinharron/5863077835/][img]http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2727/5863077835_64d204e912.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/kelvinharron/5864116764/][img]http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5230/5864116764_c4cef8cf25.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/kelvinharron/5850546623/][img]http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2797/5850546623_145d9297d9.jpg[/img][/url] [B]Comments:[/B] The best bang for buck ever. A great walk about zoom range, stellar quality for the price all at a constant 2.8. Build quality is sufficient, weight isn't too much but you defiantly feel it with all the glass. Its been the only lens I've had on my D7000 since I bought it because I have no others, due to this doing it all for me. [B]Pros:[/B] 2.8 creates good bokeh Chromatic abbreviation pretty well controlled Quite sharp at 2.8, very sharp at f5.6. Solid Weight can balance out a heavier body. Decent hood comes boxed [B]Cons:[/B] Slight, correctable vignetting at 2.8 at the ends of the zoom range. Distortion at wider range. Correction the distortion has resulted in things being cut out of the frame. Its not exactly severe but I do notice it at the wide end correcting my photos. Build quality is sufficient, handle better lenses and you'll notice it could be better. Focus can hunt a bit especially in low light. I got the Nikon mount version from Procamerashop.co.uk for about £220 or so. Nikon D7000 [B]Overall Rating out of 10:[/B] 9 See above and most of my [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/kelvinharron/]Flickr.[/url] [B]Comments:[/B] Second DSLR body I've owned and the most solid, impressive piece of camera kit I've ever used. I've treated it carefully despite it being so solid that it would take a beating. Grips very nicely in the hand and the controls I was sort of used to, now its second nature as it all makes sense to me. I've only used the 50 1.8 and Tamron 17-50 and the image quality was very good. [B]Pros:[/B] Built very well, makes everything else feel like a toy to hold. Image quality is very good, high resolution and detailed images. ISO 6400 is very usable, I always shoot RAW and apply noise reduction in Lightroom 3. Rarely go up to 25600/HI2 but its nice to have. Screen built in to right of viewfinder is very nice to have. Controls are quite solid, interface makes sense to me. 100% viewfinder is nice to have, bright and clear. Lots of autofocus points are nice to have, but I generally use the one. Twin SD card slots means you never have to worry about running out of space. Option to duplicate to JPEG, overfill or shoot video to one specific card is great. Battery life is insanely good. [B]Cons:[/B] Weight and bulk become a real hassle for long periods of using. I have a routine to go through putting it in/taking it out my camera bag and I just wish I had something smaller and handier carried about. I'm looking into a compact solution as I'm a bit anxious carrying it around London all day you can understand. Video mode isn't great. I don't shoot video as I don't have a decent video tripod/steadicam setup, but I understand Canon to be better for video. No 50/60p for 720p for example. Tends to overexpose on sunny days when it reads it as a balanced, correct exposure. 6fps lasts for just a few seconds at large RAW file sizes. Wish I had a scroll wheel for navigating, as tapping is a bit of a pain but zooming out when viewing photos and videos means its not so bad. As for the Nikkor 18-55 VR kit lens, it was very sharp for what it was. A great lens to start out with but you'll find yourself wanting more light and better bokeh. The 50 1.8 was incredible sharp stopped down and quite good wide open. Bokeh is sublime, although CA wasn't very well controlled. Bargain at £100. I got it with only one year warranty from Procamerashop.co.uk for £830 body only, which is a lot less than the likes of Amazon.
You said shooting at 6 fps only lasts for a few seconds but this has more to do with the memory cards you use. The writing speed of your card is probably too low to handle big files for a long burst. So not really a camera fault ;)
I can review some things i guess if anyone wants D80 SB-800 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 VR and a wireless flash transmitter
[QUOTE=DoubleDD;33975374]You said shooting at 6 fps only lasts for a few seconds but this has more to do with the memory cards you use. The writing speed of your card is probably too low to handle big files for a long burst. So not really a camera fault ;)[/QUOTE]Class 10 16GB, it was something I was aware of when I was reading reviews, specifically from CameraLabs I believe. Its to do with the cameras buffer rate, as a faster card will empty it quicker but not increase it. Not a major problem but it won't be the greatest sports camera, ie its not a Nikon 1! :v:
[B]Canon FL 55mm f1.2 lens[/B] [IMG]http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5106/5620270389_0dfd491238_z.jpg[/IMG] Overall Rating out of 10: 8 [B]Sample images I shot with it:[/B] [img]http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7024/6578344193_10fbc7650d_z.jpg[/img] [img]http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6169/6183095309_87c15ce4ee_z.jpg[/img] [img]http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6152/6183582700_bf8b12118b_z.jpg[/img] The pictures taken are with my Sony nex 5, i have not developed any pictures using this on a film camera. At first glance it might be confusing as to why people would even buy a lens from the 60's that doesn't even naturally fit on a single digital body natively. This lens is sought after for being one of the cheapest 1.2 lenses ever produced by a first party company, and the mount has been adapted to digital often thanks to the bulky FD attachment being easy to rip off and mount it to the mount of your choice. If you want f1.2 glass, this is probably the cheapest way to get it, though it comes with some obvious drawbacks [B]Sharpness[/B] at 1.2 this thing is painfully unsharp. Even the infocus areas manage to be fairly dull, with the other areas becoming hazy. At f2 this thing is insanely sharp. This is without a doubt my sharpest lens and at f2 it seems to be as sharp as any of the only other apertures. Can't really tell a difference in sharpness from 2 upwards, making the only reason to stop down to get more in focus. Sharpest lens I have ever shot at f2, which makes it still a great lowlight performer for sharp shots. [B]Focus speed[/B] Being a manual focus lens, the speed of focus is up to you. There are markers to gauge focus at specific apertures which is nice for video, and the lens is much more resistant to turning than say an FD lens. This could be good or bad, better for video but it also means you have to spend more time adjusting focus. Mine makes slight noise while turning as well. [B]Build Quality[/B] Build quality of this thing is crazy. It's big, it's heavy, and it's ALL metal. It's just a huge unsightly hunk of metal and glass. It is a pretty ugly lens, and it is very heavy. Much heaver than most of my lenses, makes for an unusual balance on my nex 5, you pretty much don't even hold the body of the camera at all. [B]Some side notes[/B] In direct sunlight, f1.2 is unusable due to color fringing and flaring. This sucks, because one of the best things about lenses like this is making the field of focus extremely shallow. Basically if sunlight is involved in a scene, there is going to be purple fringing and it will ruin the picture. The in focus areas will also be pretty hazy at f1.2 in direct sunlight, making it look like your front element is just extremely dirty. This is not an issue indoors or where the sun is not, which makes it so that the benefit of the 1.2 is pretty much only to gather more light, you won't be able to take advantage of the more shallow depth of field. You would want to consider a 1.4 50mm FD lens if you are looking for a more shallow depth of field, as this lens is not as good for direct sunlight as that is. It should also be noted that this does not have half step increments, making you go from f1.2 to f2 which is a bit disappointing. However I will mention I have used this at 1.2 in videos, and the fringing is definitely not as big of a problem. If you are moving with the lens you will not notice fringing and it will appear sharp, making the 1.2 aperture having an excellent effect and giving you incredibly shallow DoF videos. It may seem like mostly cons on this thing, but I have to say the colors that this lens produces are incredible. Better than any other lens I own by a significant margin. If I am taking portraits or scenery this is my go to lens because I don't have to worry about processing the images afterwards. I almost never process images shot with this lens, they come off the camera exactly as I imagine them to. Most of the things I dislike about this lens are alleviated when I look at the overall end product of the images, shooting this at f2 will produce some magical images. Extremely easy to focus on the nex system, and an effective 82.5mm equiv makes it great for portrait shots. If I were doing serious shooting I would take this lens over any and just shoot at f2, because the results you get are pretty astounding. [B]Pros:[/B] f1.2 is good for night shots Very well built colors are absolutely to DIE for f2 is incredibly sharp excellent for video at 1.2 8 blade apertures means stopping down doesn't affect bokeh significantly. At f2 it is still round shapes [B]Cons:[/B] f1.2 unusable during direct sunlight because of purple fringing (potentially dealbreaking issue) prices of this these are increasing, now it's normal to see them for upwards of $300 bulky and heavy. This is a major problem considering this lens is useless at f1.2 for some scenarios, making it easier to pop on the insanely lighter and cheaper f1.8 FD lens, which is an excellent performer at 1.8 focus pulling makes noise that affects video Manual focus and aperture setting on digital, can have automatic exposure on AE-1P cameras but does not seem to work as well as FD lenses. When stopping down manually on AE-1P, exposure readings are affected. You have to get your exposure reading done at f1.2, and then stop down the lens. [B]Pricing:[/B] Bought mine for $30, was a no brainer. If you can get this for less than $300 then it is an excellent buy, but definitely consider the f1.4 Canon FD lens if you are planning on shooting in direct sunlight. That is pretty much the make or break for this lens. If you are a lens adapter dying for more light than f1.4, then this is the cheapest way you will get some quality. If you are looking to spend a bit more, the Minolta 58mm f1.2 lens is higher quality and will perform better wide open. If the extra speed is not that important to you then shooting at f2 is an absolute dream, because you will get incredibly crisp images with gorgeous colors. The cons of this image are pretty big ones, though for me personally are outweighed due to the images I get from it at f2.
Has anyone here ever had any Lensbaby lenses? they seem pretty interesting but I don't know if that's the same opinion here. [editline]4th January 2012[/editline] Also, anyone know if the Peleng 8mm fisheye is good?
MisterM, though you say the D7000 isn't the best for video, is it still decent? Or would it be worth it to wait for the next round of new Nikons if I don't really [I]need[/I] to upgrade right now?
[QUOTE=cmrna;34052890]MisterM, though you say the D7000 isn't the best for video, is it still decent? Or would it be worth it to wait for the next round of new Nikons if I don't really [I]need[/I] to upgrade right now?[/QUOTE] I think overall it could be classed as very decent or even good, but there's better alternatives. I wouldn't buy a D7000 for just video unless you have a lot of Nikon gear already. The D800 coming out in the next few months should have really good video features as a competitor to the 5D Mark II and coming Mark III. Canon and Sony have more features and have a stronger focus in video from what I understand. D7000 owners agree its not that great so maybe I'm being harsh. If you had a rig setup (steadicam etc) and a good mic setup I think it would be very good, but its currently quite fiddly without accessories. What is your budget? I think if you're considering a D7000 a D800 would be too much?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.