Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by Phillip Ino, Aug 19, 2008.
If so, please share!
I have one small gallery online which was posted for some other reasons lol. But all shots straight out of camera wide open. Twelve images total:
I'll find some better examples, as these just had a common "theme" :biggrin:
Here are some quick finds at f/1.8, f/2.2 and the last one f/8. These small pics look like they have been post-processed though. I should have a full series of night time images from a busy railway switching yard, I keep looking.
Wow, Peter! Thanks! All these images are very nice, and the bokeh doesn't look as confusing as the 24/1.8. Do you find that it performs okay wide open? Thanks a lot for searching for these! I really appreciate it! :biggrin:
I shoot it almost exclusively wide open, I have no problems with vignetting or sharpness. I don't have a D700 yet though, but with film the lens performs well.
One should notice that "wide angle" and "bokeh" in a same sentence is almost an oxymoron, at least with a DX camera like I have been using it. At f/2.8 or so the dof is nearly infinite, so you'll not be able to achieve any background blur. With FX the situation changes somewhat though.
The lens has good center sharpness and the edges and corners are okay. There is some field curvature though, meaning that when you focus with center focus point the corners look soft, not because the lens is soft but because the corners are out of focus. If you use one of the outer focal points you'll achieve sharp corners but the center might be out of focus. Not as much as the Nikkor 17-55/2.8 at 17 mm wide open, but noticeable though.
It does not bother my style where the idea of using a wide angle wide open is to always get really up close and personal, resulting everything else but the subject is always out of focus anyway. The lens is not well suited for shooting newspaper pages wide open. At f/2.8 or with longer lens-to-subject distances the deeper dof masks the field curvature and the lens can be used for building facades without problems.
Focus and recompose strategy does not work well with lenses that have some field curvature. Better strategy is to use the appropriate focus point without recomposing and you'll achieve sharp, contrasty and well saturated images.
The lens is big, heavy and unfortunately uses 82 mm filters, but the close focusing capability and the wide f/1.8 aperture more than make up those little shortcomings.
Cant wait to glue this lens to my D700.
Wonderful, Peter! You've given me tons of very useful information here. I've stopped using the focus-then-recompose technique and exclusively rely on adjusting the focus point or a crop in PP to get the desired results. I can't thank you enough for this valuable knowledge :biggrin:
Phillip, I think you are searching for the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow here, The 20mm f1.8 isn't going to be that pot of gold for bokeh over the 24mm f1.8, I bet it performs almost exactly the same.
In fact barring the Extremely expensive Nikon 28mm f1.4 I doubt you will be able to find a better wide lens than the one you have for soft OOF areas.
The Sigma 24mm f1.8 is fantastic except for flare, I would keep it and not worry so much about the little things.
It's too late now, there's no going back. :wink:
Haha, ok. Well good luck!
I liked the flower shots, and even the one ghostly bokeh. I plan on keeping my 24mm, Its a fun lens to use for me
man u gotta love the cafe` and photogs like Peter. whata wonderful condenced and trustworthy review. thanks for your efforts!
I had the lens for a brief period (about 2 weeks). I ultimately decided it wasn't for me due to it's large size and weight (1.5 lbs, 82mm threads). I loved the color and contrast, I hated its mechanics. I got some nice images with it. Not as nice as Peter's, but nice enough for me.
I sent it back and sighed.
1/400 @ f/8, ISO 400
1/15 @ f/5.6, ISO 100, SB-800
And one wide open:
1/15 @ f/1.8, ISO 100, SB-800
Hope that helps.
Indeed! I wholeheartedly agree :biggrin:
Thank you, Rich. Those images are spectacular! I especially love the colors in the first one. Are you sort of missing the lens now? I hardly ever use filters, so the large filter size isn't a problem for me. Nor is the weight and size....just as long as it's not as heavy as the Beast lol. And by mechanics, you mean the way it had to be pushed/pulled for manual and auto focus? I think I can live with that feature. Thanks again for sharing! :smile:
Damn, I bid on one of these last night before I went to bed on ebay, woke up today to see it went for £102, which was £2 higher than my max bid! grrrrr
D'oh! Don't fret....I find that if you wait a while, a similar deal will come along. Wish I had that kind of patience :tongue:
Thanks for the compliments!
I don't miss the lens because I got a Nikon 20mm f/2.8 to take it's place. It's much smaller and lighter and that's what I wanted. I find that any lens is a compromise. If I had my way, I would take the Nikon's size and wide open performance with the Sigma's color and contrast. For me, the size was the deciding factor.
By mechanics, I do mean the push/pull mechanism. It's not like the Tokina and Tamron push/pull switch between auto focus and manual focus. All it does is disengage the barrel from the focusing mechanism during Auto focus. In other words, you still have to switch both the lens AND the camera to switch between AF and MF. If the lens is in AF, and the camera in MF, you CANNOT focus. I found that immensely annoying. YMMV.
And has any one noticed the raise in prie in this lens lately? When I got mine a month ago from Amazon it was $399 everywhere. Now it's $459.
Please consider disabling your ad blocker for our website.
We rely on ad revenue to pay for image hosting and to keep the site speedy.
Or subscribe for $5 per year to remove all ads and support our efforts.