Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-15-2009, 05:23 AM   #31
Veteran Member
-=JoN=-'s Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,000
j, your nikon 35, is it a dx or fx lens

(i'd do a quick search but im at work...cant surf much)

04-15-2009, 07:36 AM   #32
Veteran Member
RBellavance's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Near Montréal, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,716
QuoteOriginally posted by -=JoN=- Quote
j, your nikon 35, is it a dx or fx lens

(i'd do a quick search but im at work...cant surf much)
I'm obviously not Jay, but I can answer this anyway: the Nikkor 35/1.8 is a DX lens. Nikon also makes a 35/2 that is FX (but not AF-S).

Last edited by RBellavance; 04-15-2009 at 09:51 AM.
04-15-2009, 09:07 AM   #33
Forum Member




Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Utah
Posts: 51
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
No, the lens is performing optimally, as far as I can tell - I only have one sample of the lens, of course, but my output is matching or better than other full-sized image samples I've been able to download from dpreview and elsewhere.
Jay, I didn't really think the lens was a dog. Of course, I don't think all things were equal. I would venture to say that if they were, people would have a difficult time telling the difference between the two. That shot of the Carcassonne text seems to really paint the lens as a dog. That's why I don't believe all was equal. Very nice shots by the way.

QuoteOriginally posted by axl Quote
It's always easier to retrieve detail from darker shot than get back burnt highlights.BR
Mostly true. But it depends on how over or underexposed you are. You really have to drag the highlights back in ACR from a D90 image to believe just how much detail it preserves. It really does perform very well. Of course, if you are consistently over or underexposing your images to your dislike, you really need to learn more about photography. And the crazy thing is, you don't have to learn that much. I really don't understand why people keep pointing to this. Before I got my K20D, I read everywhere about how people were annoyed (some overjoyed) that it underexposed by about 2/3 of a stop. I thought, that's no big deal AT ALL. All of these enthusiast level cameras have the ability to set the EV to plus/minus whatever the photographer feels like. If you don't like the underexposure of the K20D (and it is to an extent a matter of taste) you just adjust the EV setting. The D90 is no different. It is so easy to set it. There's an EV button right next to the top display. You push it and adjust it to taste. If people are overexposing and getting ticked about it, they simply need to check out their camera's basic abilities. I really feel like this is a silly argument for or against these cameras. You can get very good exposure results from both, and it's a matter of a VERY SIMPLE adjustment. And quit knocking the D90's blown highlights until you pull them back yourself in ACR. You'll poop your pants. After adjusting many images in ACR taken with a K110D, K200D, and K20D, and then adjusting images from a D90, I was pretty blown away by the D90's preserved highlight details. It performs very well. They didn't make a dud of a camera by any means.
04-15-2009, 10:09 AM   #34
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by brucestrange Quote
Mostly true. But it depends on how over or underexposed you are. You really have to drag the highlights back in ACR from a D90 image to believe just how much detail it preserves. It really does perform very well. Of course, if you are consistently over or underexposing your images to your dislike, you really need to learn more about photography. And the crazy thing is, you don't have to learn that much. I really don't understand why people keep pointing to this. Before I got my K20D, I read everywhere about how people were annoyed (some overjoyed) that it underexposed by about 2/3 of a stop. I thought, that's no big deal AT ALL. All of these enthusiast level cameras have the ability to set the EV to plus/minus whatever the photographer feels like. If you don't like the underexposure of the K20D (and it is to an extent a matter of taste) you just adjust the EV setting. The D90 is no different. It is so easy to set it. There's an EV button right next to the top display. You push it and adjust it to taste. If people are overexposing and getting ticked about it, they simply need to check out their camera's basic abilities. I really feel like this is a silly argument for or against these cameras. You can get very good exposure results from both, and it's a matter of a VERY SIMPLE adjustment. And quit knocking the D90's blown highlights until you pull them back yourself in ACR. You'll poop your pants. After adjusting many images in ACR taken with a K110D, K200D, and K20D, and then adjusting images from a D90, I was pretty blown away by the D90's preserved highlight details. It performs very well. They didn't make a dud of a camera by any means.

No, it's by no means a dud of a camera, and the highlight details can mostly be pulled back with ACR - it's more of an annoyance with me than anything, because to get the most out of the D90 I have to shoot RAW now and work to recover highlights. With the K20D, not so - I can shoot jpeg all day long and do minimal PP to get the look I like.

I can and do adjust EV with the D90, also, but that sometimes causes matrix metering to underexpose too much depending on the lighting, in which case I have to drop it into center-weighted, which defeats the purpose of having matrix.

Again, not too much of a problem if I'm shooting RAW.

So, no show-stoppers, just annoyances that cramp my personal shooting style. (and other's, judging by all the negative comments on dpreview re matrix metering.)

.

04-15-2009, 06:41 PM   #35
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
Original Poster
A tale of 4 crocuses

.


One crocus, actually, from 4 very different lenses. Just for the heck of it.

(traditionally the 1st flower that pops up in my yard, so it gets shot a million times
before the rabbits eat it.)


Nikon 35 1.8 G at f/2.8:


Sigma 100-300 f/4 at 300mm wide-open minimum distance:


next 3 - DA 35 2.8 at f/2.8:




Cosina 55 1.2 wide-open (yes, I bought another)

04-15-2009, 06:57 PM   #36
Veteran Member
RBellavance's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Near Montréal, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,716
Yikes ! I thought the Nikkor's bokeh was ugly until I got to the photos made with the Cosina
04-15-2009, 07:06 PM   #37
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
Original Poster
eye of the beholder

QuoteOriginally posted by RBellavance Quote
Yikes ! I thought the Nikkor's bokeh was ugly until I got to the photos made with the Cosina


UGLY!? It's beautiful!




.
04-15-2009, 09:34 PM   #38
Forum Member




Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Utah
Posts: 51
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
No, it's by no means a dud of a camera, and the highlight details can mostly be pulled back with ACR - it's more of an annoyance with me than anything, because to get the most out of the D90 I have to shoot RAW now and work to recover highlights. With the K20D, not so - I can shoot jpeg all day long and do minimal PP to get the look I like.

I can and do adjust EV with the D90, also, but that sometimes causes matrix metering to underexpose too much depending on the lighting, in which case I have to drop it into center-weighted, which defeats the purpose of having matrix.

Again, not too much of a problem if I'm shooting RAW.

So, no show-stoppers, just annoyances that cramp my personal shooting style. (and other's, judging by all the negative comments on dpreview re matrix metering.)
To each his or her own, I guess. I shoot exclusively in RAW and manual mode, and I actually really enjoy PP in ACR. It's part of the fun for me. Rarely is a photo done after I've pushed the shutter button. I like pushing and pulling various aspects of the photo to my liking.

04-16-2009, 06:01 PM   #39
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 484
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
UGLY!? It's beautiful!




.
I agree! A very "painteresque" effect to it.
04-16-2009, 07:53 PM   #40
Veteran Member
-=JoN=-'s Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,000
the cosina's bokeh is....mesmerizing....
04-16-2009, 08:38 PM   #41
Senior Member




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Grand Rapids, MI. USA. Earth.
Posts: 139
QuoteOriginally posted by RBellavance Quote
Yikes ! I thought the Nikkor's bokeh was ugly until I got to the photos made with the Cosina
Dude, it's 1.2, practically the gaping eye of hell. If you're not into extreme bokeh, nothing at that aperture is going to be satisfying.
04-16-2009, 09:11 PM   #42
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by ILoveVerdi Quote
Dude, it's 1.2, practically the gaping eye of hell. If you're not into extreme bokeh, nothing at that aperture is going to be satisfying.

ROFL.


Here's a few more from the Gaping Eye of Hell taken this evening. Avert
your eyes and say a couple Hail Mary's.






04-17-2009, 04:49 AM   #43
Veteran Member
rparmar's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,783
QuoteOriginally posted by ILoveVerdi Quote
Dude, it's 1.2, practically the gaping eye of hell. If you're not into extreme bokeh, nothing at that aperture is going to be satisfying.
Ha! That's quite funny!

Though not true. I have the Cosina and hate the bokeh. I also have the K50/1.2 and love the bokeh. They are night and day. The Cosina can be quite sharp, however, and is good value.

But bokeh is definitely in the eye of the beholder. All the Russian lenses and the Cosina with the dancing swirling effects at the "gaping eye of hell" -- those I can do without.
04-17-2009, 05:32 AM   #44
Veteran Member
RBellavance's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Near Montréal, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,716
QuoteOriginally posted by ILoveVerdi Quote
Dude, it's 1.2, practically the gaping eye of hell. If you're not into extreme bokeh, nothing at that aperture is going to be satisfying.
To each his own, I guess. That bokeh is so busy it almost makes me dizzy I'm more into the smooth, buttery kind.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
crop, crops, d90, detail, k-mount, k20d, nikon, pentax, pentax lens, shot, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Do I need Pentax K-x, if I have Nikon D90? Jaleel Pentax DSLR Discussion 31 12-26-2009 07:04 AM
K20D vs Canon 50D & Nikon D90 Art Vandelay II Pentax DSLR Discussion 139 01-30-2009 08:54 AM
For Sale - Sold: K20d, 50-135*, 16-45, 43ltd, 35ltd macro, Voigtlander 58/1.4, maybe 77ltd nostatic Sold Items 8 01-24-2009 10:07 AM
Tempted by Nikon D90 hinman Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 29 10-06-2008 06:11 PM
new nikon D90 ?? HD movie mode txsbluesguy Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 12 08-28-2008 12:38 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:26 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top