Anyone on here shoot Nikon?

[iscariot]

All this Canikon talk makes me gald I walk to the beat of a different drummer!

Sony A900 Always outnumbered, never out gunned!

Doesn't Sony make the bodies, sensors, and lenses for Nikon?

[Lonnie]

Doesn't Sony make the bodies, sensors, and lenses for Nikon?

SHHHH! Don't tell anyone...

Just the sensors I think...

[Lonnie]

(but Lonnie, at the end of the day, i DO think there's a reason that you don't see any photojournalists/pro's shooting sony, I just don't know what it is)

Two things. The biggest was Sony was late to the game. It's the legacy minolta thing. Minolta basically quit the biz and I think that caused a bunch of folks who were legacy minolta shooters to jump ship. Sony picked up the minolta line and is bringing it back from "the dead".

And two, availability as you have mentioned. Sony is coming out with some serious gear tho, and I think it will cause people to reconsider. There zeiss glass is 2nd to none, but you don't have all the options you do with canikon. Personally, I'd love a 70-200 F4 for hiking, and some more primes, but they have been promised to us. The A33, A55 and A77 (when it's released) are going to change the way people shoot. 10 FPS (the A77 is rumored to be more than 15fps! )at 16 MP on a crop sensor for under $1000? Talk to me baby.

And I'll disagree with you on the over priced part. Tell me how much a FF canon or nikon with a 20+ MP sensor costs compared to my A900???

But at the end of the day, all of this is just dickwaving. Shoot what you like/feel comfortable with and what you can afford.

[gholman12]

Fair enough, and you're right about the dickwaving. That A77 sounds like a solid body for the money actually.

And while I guess at $2300 the A900 is the the same price as the 5d mk ii (21mp), we canonites do get the glory of HD video and live view mode, and you're stuck with justin timberlake in your tv commercials, so HA!

[Lonnie]

Fair enough, and you're right about the dickwaving. That A77 sounds like a solid body for the money actually.

And while I guess at $2300 the A900 is the the same price as the 5d mk ii (21mp), we canonites do get the glory of HD video and live view mode, and you're stuck with justin timberlake in your tv commercials, so HA!

As bad as JT sucks, I'd rather have him than Ashton Kutcher!


Back to your regularly scheduled dickwaving...

[pointedem]

There zeiss glass is 2nd to none, but you don't have all the options you do with canikon.

The A77 (when it's released) are going to change the way people shoot. 10 FPS (the A77 is rumored to be more than 15fps! )at 16 MP on a crop sensor for under $1000?

All Zeiss glass owns. Granted you get AF.
and
Vaporware.

The IS/VR that is built into the sony sensors is pretty sick.

[jm2e]

I'm thinking of a switch to Canon. I'm really early in the game. When you ask people for advice, you often here "go with the one that has the features and feel that works for you that you'll want in the long run". And I don't know shit about what feels good or what I want. I need to experience it. Well, you can't figure that out in the shop with some douchebag standing there affraid to let you move a millimeter from the counter and treating multiple bodies like fucking engagement rings you might slip into a pocket. The used D90/50D market is only going to get better in the coming months so why not just buy a 50D and shoot it for a year then move back if it never feels right. Just like with skis, right? Owning and riding for a few days/weeks beats the shit out of riding a demo with demo clamps afraid to damage them for half a day before choosing.

[Mathematics]

Well, my switching idea may have died a quick death... I went to a local shop a little while ago and played around with the D90. I'm not sure I like the feel and the controls so much. I think I'll just re-do my lenses with Canon.

I'd go check out a D300s or D700 before you write off nikon...those are the bodies you'd end up upgrading to sooner or later anyways. I upgraded to a D300 from a D60 and its a big difference in feel.

I obviously shoot nikon, have the 28-75 tamron 2.8, 70-200 2.8 VR1, and my new favorite the 50mm 1.4.

GF shoots canon so I get to play with those too, seems both lines are pretty similar but in my opinion nikon absolutely kills it in any low light high iso kind of shooting.

[aepeak]

can I collect reviews, inputs, and impressions on the Tamron SP AF70-200mm F/2.8 Di. I am going to use the lens on my Nikon D60. I am shooting inside a "bubble" - indoor track complex, so it is a low light environment. Am I correct that this lens will autofocus on my D60. And how is the speed of this lens. My friend is willing to lend me the lens, so no worries of dropping cash on this. I was just curious about the performance of the lens.



photo of the environment I'm shooting in.
EXIF
1/160
f/4.0
iso800

[deciblast]

Well for video I can use any lenses.. the body changes...... the lenses are more important.

I just bought an Olympus 28mm f/3.5 and a Pentax SMC 50mm f/1.4.

[nufenstein]

I made the switch from Pentax to Nikon. Currently a d300 shooter. I own several of the lenses you mention below, Nikon 18-105 VR, Tokina 50-135 2.8
and the Nikon 35mm 1.8.

I LOVE my Nikon body. Instant controls for practically everything you could want. Great hand feel and 100% viewfinder coverage. Menu system is pretty simple too. Auto-ISO is a fun feature for travel photography. AF system spoils you; you forget about the possibility of out of focus (at least if you use the center AF points). Hands down the best camera I have ever used (and I have shot a fair share of systems).

That being said, I am not a huge fan of the color reproduction of my Nikon compared to my Pentax. The colors from the Pentax just seemed to suit my tastes, it was just everything else about that system that kinda sucked. When I bump the contrast / saturation I lose a TON of highlights. I prefer to keep the colors to the standard muted Nikon feel and boost in post. Wish the OOC images better suited my tastes. May be a problem with the glass more than the camera...

As far as the lenses, here are my .02

Nikon 18-105 VR - Great travel lens, sharp across the range, slow focus, cheapish feel, distorted images at wide angle. I have considered selling this lens but cannot justify it; it just gets too much use.

Tokina 50-135 2.8 - Actually just sold this lens. Painfully sharp at anything above f4. wide open it is still pretty darn sharp. lovely color reproduction in good light. Slow AF. Incredible build quality and nice focus control

Nikon 35mm 1.8 - Good lens for the price. Nothing stellar here. I find my 18-105 just as sharp, this is just faster. Not terribly impressed with color reproduction. Compact and light, prefer the nikkor 24mm 2.8. Want to buy this off of me?

All that being said, I often find myself wishing for lenses in the nikon lineup. There just seems to be a lot of gaps, unless you are willing to fork over the serious $$$. The grass is always greener I suppose.

What would bring you over to the Nikon side? Why did you pick Canon?

I don't ever see anyone on TGR talk about Nikon- does anyone here shoot with a Nikon dSLR?

I'm thinking about making the switch, and have come up with a temporarily ideal set of lenses, along with a D90, that I think would serve me well:

Nikon 18-105 VR
Tokina 50-135 2.8
Nikon 70-300 VR
Nikon 85mm 1.8
Nikon 35mm 1.8

Anyone have any thoughts or use some of these lenses currently? I plan on using the 1.8 and 2.8 lenses to shoot portraits and weddings, and then use a combination of them all to shoot landscapes and skiing.

[3snowboards]

got this today to go on my D90 body
tokina 11-16 2.8

[Hugh Conway]

All that being said, I often find myself wishing for lenses in the nikon lineup. There just seems to be a lot of gaps

What are these gaps?

[nufenstein]

What are these gaps?

Fast wide angle primes that are not $2k

i.e. 24mm or 28mm 1.8

A fast, wide pancake option would be the teeets

[smmokan]

Nufenstein- sorry I didn't get back to your question. I chose Canon because it's what I had, and what I'm used to. I still think Nikon has a better choice of lenses in the range that I use most (15-150mm), but I've got a pretty good setup with Canon that I'm happy with. I may upgrade to the 7D at some point, but right now I'm shooting with:

Canon 50D
Canon 15-85mm IS
Sigma 18-125 OS HSM
Tamron 70-300mm VC
Tokina 100mm f/2.8 Macro

[Hugh Conway]

Fast wide angle primes that are not $2k

i.e. 24mm or 28mm 1.8

A fast, wide pancake option would be the teeets

oh, unicorns.

[nufenstein]

If by unicorns your implying lenses that dont exist well than, yes.

Both Sigma and Canon produce these wide/fast/cheaper lenses...

As far as the wide angle fast pancake, its impossibility is why it would be the teeets...

[splitter]

got this today to go on my D90 body
tokina 11-16 2.8

Fuck me a runnin'... Did you pick that up at Gordon's?

BTW, if you like coffee, go to The Hub, I got stuff hangin' in there...

[3snowboards]

That was me.
And the lens already paid for itself.

Fuck me a runnin'... Did you pick that up at Gordon's?

BTW, if you like coffee, go to The Hub, I got stuff hangin' in there...

[splitter]

That was me.
And the lens already paid for itself.

I've been waiting for that to show up on adorama for weeks...

gordon's usually has nothing I want (filter-wise) and either people that don't know a pile (what's a gnd?) or guys with the same sort of PITA-ness of know-it-all's in ski and bike shops that don't really know how to ski or bike (take pitchers)

but I ended up killing time while the wife went through trader joe's and I'll be a sumbitch, they had that goddamn lens...

You almost didn't get it... I gotta tell ya, I probably fondled that the day before you purchased it...

the girl 'helping' me said they have a line in with tokina so hopefully they'll have another'n soon...

congrats. prick. winkeez.

[3snowboards]

I could swear there were 2 on the shelf