25mm TOC 0901 pictures

[ex-Sup]

You can't really compare a crop sensor consumer lens to a full frame L series professional lens.  You are comparing the kia rio to a space shuttle at this point.  Whenever Nikon updates their professional Prime lenses to af-s/g I'll switch the same day.  As in when they update the 85mm f1.4D to G or the AI-S 35mm 1.4.  Not their crop sensor kit lenses.  They do make an amazing full frame zoom lens though, it is just fast primes where they are lacking.

Well, I wasn't trying to compare the really high end lenses (besides, I know jacsh@t about Canon...I'm a Nikon guy  ;D). As you probably know, most people cannot afford/are not willing fork out the cash for some of the top end lenses ie. I'd love a Nikkor 200-400, but I don't have $7000 to drop on it. My suggestion of the 35mm DX was to replace something like a 50mm 1.8 FX for the average user. Maybe Nikon is lacking in some areas and ahead in others...I guess they all have their niches. I did notice that there is a AFS 50 1.4G that would be close to a 85mm FX for DX cameras.
Oh well! When I win the lottery and buy my D3x and 200-400 et al, I'll do a full review of what Nikon needs to update. 

 

[deh]

Well, I wasn't trying to compare the really high end lenses (besides, I know jacsh@t about Canon...I'm a Nikon guy  ;D). As you probably know, most people cannot afford/are not willing fork out the cash for some of the top end lenses ie. I'd love a Nikkor 200-400, but I don't have $7000 to drop on it. My suggestion of the 35mm DX was to replace something like a 50mm 1.8 FX for the average user. Maybe Nikon is lacking in some areas and ahead in others...I guess they all have their niches. I did notice that there is a AFS 50 1.4G that would be close to a 85mm FX for DX cameras.
Oh well! When I win the lottery and buy my D3x and 200-400 et al, I'll do a full review of what Nikon needs to update. 

I'll have a Ken Rockwell moment and say the best camera and lens lineup in the world is the one that gets you out and shooting.  Some people like nikon some like canon, some like primes others swear by zooms, some are  nuts about available light and others prefer flash.  No point really discussing the ins and outs of it all, by the time you are done arguing on the internet there is no time left to get out and shoot.

The difference between a mastercraft and a snap on wrench means nothing if the guy turning it is an idiot, eh?

 

[FormerHorseGuard]

I have been shooting Nikon since the late 1986, Nikon Fm then upgraded to the F801 auto focus with all sorts of bells and whistles in 1990. 2008 I went out and got the Nikon D60, I have not looked back, only other digital camera I had used was the Canon G5 it was only  a 5 mega pixel. I was not overly impressed by  it. The D60 handles more like a  highe rend  35mmSLR. When I was shooting 35mm which I still do time to time. I used a mix  of sigma and nikon glass.
I like the fact my older nikon mounted glass fits my  new camera, does not have all the features that  the DX lenses offer but I can save some cash for later purchases. After I get  back from a job and have more money in the bank I will be upgrading my glass to more DX lenses.
But I guess everyone has an opinion on what  camera works for them. I perfer Nikon, you have Canon, both take good pictures. 
i would post my  pictures here but they  are not military  related any more.  I shoot things made at the same plant as the LAVS, Cougars, Grizzlys, Bisons, and other Light armoured wheeled vechiles, but the line they make there that  I like are bigger, still have bullet proof windowss if ordered, have more steel , smaller crews, have water cooler, micowave ovens, hot plates and 12 wheels , 200 000 pounds  and 4000 plus horse power depending on model ordered. Locomotives.
keep the posting of the range firing up, I still find it interesting

 

[deh]

I have been shooting Nikon since the late 1986, Nikon Fm then upgraded to the F801 auto focus with all sorts of bells and whistles in 1990. 2008 I went out and got the Nikon D60, I have not looked back, only other digital camera I had used was the Canon G5 it was only  a 5 mega pixel. I was not overly impressed by  it. The D60 handles more like a  highe rend  35mmSLR. When I was shooting 35mm which I still do time to time. I used a mix  of sigma and nikon glass.
I like the fact my older nikon mounted glass fits my  new camera, does not have all the features that  the DX lenses offer but I can save some cash for later purchases. After I get  back from a job and have more money in the bank I will be upgrading my glass to more DX lenses.
But I guess everyone has an opinion on what  camera works for them. I perfer Nikon, you have Canon, both take good pictures. 
i would post my  pictures here but they  are not military  related any more.  I shoot things made at the same plant as the LAVS, Cougars, Grizzlys, Bisons, and other Light armoured wheeled vechiles, but the line they make there that  I like are bigger, still have bullet proof windowss if ordered, have more steel , smaller crews, have water cooler, micowave ovens, hot plates and 12 wheels , 200 000 pounds  and 4000 plus horse power depending on model ordered. Locomotives.
keep the posting of the range firing up, I still find it interesting

Now those are some shots I'd love to see.  I am fascinated by large scale industry in general and I never miss the assembly line parts of shows like future weapons.  Its cool seeing the skeleton all in place and the stuff all hanging out all over.  Maybe we can start a favourite picture thread or something somewhere on the forums.

I still shoot film as well, another reason I don't like crop sensor lenses.  No digital will ever be able to replace the look and feel of Kodachrome.  Sadly my local photo shop doesn't take it in to process and I have to mail it direct to Kentucky, it is an expensive hobby.

 

[George Wallace]

A very expensive hobby these days......especially if you have larger formats like those used in my Mamiya 645.  I stuck with Pentax and Sigma lenses for my 35mm.

 

[ex-Sup]

I'll have a Ken Rockwell moment and say the best camera and lens lineup in the world is the one that gets you out and shooting.

Couldn't have said it better!

I was just thinking of that while I re-read my post. I guess everyone has their own needs and ideas. I'd love to have some really good primes (and D3x, and...did I already say that?), but I shoot mostly landscapes and lugging a pile of lenses through the bush doesn't work. I have a limited budget; I just spent $2000 on the D90, grip and 12-24 (I'd love to have the Nikkor AFS 12-24, but I didn't think that the AFS was worth $600). I picked up a new pack (Lowepro Micro 200) to carry some gear when I'm with the family, but I now realize that I need to replace some of my other gear. Last year I bought a military style tac vest to carry all my hiking gear (camera, 80-200 2.8, lens, filters, water, tripod, GPS et al) and now the D90+grip does not fit into the topload bag I attach to it. Oh well, it's just money right?

The whole brand thing is just semantics anyway. My first camera ('94) was a MF Minolta X-700; I bought Minolta because my brother had the same one. I later bought another Minolta (one for film and another for slides) and it was great as used lenses were cheap. I took the plunge into AF in '98 when I bought a Nikon F70 (I worked at Black's and we could buy equipment right from the company at cost). The only reason I went Nikon was because a bunch of my colleagues were Nikon guys. Another F70, a F80, a D70 and this is where I am. Too bad I can't still buy at cost...that $1700 80-200 2.8 cost me $1200  ;D

Anyway, here's to happy clicking!

 

[ex-Sup]

I still shoot film as well, another reason I don't like crop sensor lenses.  No digital will ever be able to replace the look and feel of Kodachrome.  Sadly my local photo shop doesn't take it in to process and I have to mail it direct to Kentucky, it is an expensive hobby.

Gee, we just can't seem to agree...Velvia 50 man!
I think I might take my F80 out of retirement the next time I shoot some waterfalls. I think I have...yup, I have 8 rolls of Velvia still in the freezer.
The only argument that can be made for DX lenses is that when you shoot landscapes like I do, those FX lenses are not wide angle anymore ie. my Tokina 28-70 2.8 is now a 42-105. Makes a huge difference when you're standing on a waterfall with no room to spare trying to get everything in the frame. We'll see how the 12-24 works out...I've never had something eqiv to a 18mm.

 

[deh]

Gee, we just can't seem to agree...Velvia 50 man!
I think I might take my F80 out of retirement the next time I shoot some waterfalls. I think I have...yup, I have 8 rolls of Velvia still in the freezer.
The only argument that can be made for DX lenses is that when you shoot landscapes like I do, those FX lenses are not wide angle anymore ie. my Tokina 28-70 2.8 is now a 42-105. Makes a huge difference when you're standing on a waterfall with no room to spare trying to get everything in the frame. We'll see how the 12-24 works out...I've never had something eqiv to a 18mm.

Very true, even for some of the shots from TOC i was using a EF-s 10-22mm (which looks a lot like 16mm at the wide end on a full frame camera).  The DX lenses definitely have their place.  Some of my favourite shots are with that lens.  I had to sell it now that I am trying to simplify my equipment line up.  Couple of samples at the wide end...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/deh39/3296849251/sizes/l/in/set-72157614083665191/ (Ultra wide angles do funny things to the foreground background relationship)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/deh39/3297679204/sizes/l/in/set-72157614083665191/ (You can start to see the linear distortion set in)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/deh39/2694043946/sizes/l/in/set-72157606873176662/ (And my self indulgent plug for my landscape work.)

 

[dangerboy]

Nice pictures, and not a yellow flag to be seen which is always a nice site ;D.

 

[deh]

Nice pictures, and not a yellow flag to be seen which is always a nice site ;D.

We were mostly blessed, the yellow flag did show its ugly face once or twice though...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/deh39/3297678206/sizes/l/in/set-72157614083665191/

 

[ex-Sup]

http://www.flickr.com/photos/deh39/2694043946/sizes/l/in/set-72157606873176662/ (And my self indulgent plug for my landscape work.)

Nice! But I have to admit that I have a soft spot for these. Here's a couple of mine from days past. When I get some new ones with the new camera & lens I'll post them.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/36623087@N07/3375565891/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/36623087@N07/3376380076/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/36623087@N07/3375557107/

 

[FormerHorseGuard]

my  fav lense for my  35mm F801 is the 28  to 70 sigma zoom. I will admit I am not as well educated in the digital age as i was in the film age. I miss the simpler age, and black and white film.

I want to get a lense close to my  28  to 70 zoom for my  D60...any  advice? i have the 18  to 55mm nikon lense that  came with the camera.
I am also looking at the nikon  55 to 200mm zoom. 
Like i sid i shoot mostly  trains there days, who knows what  i will find over there when I go for my  new job.
any  recoomendations here guys who might know more than me.

as for the person who was saying he would liek to see pictures from the former EMD plant. they  do not allow cameras there, any  pcitures shot there are done by  in house people. I was suppose to tour the plant back in 1993 but my  boss at ipperwash would not let me have time off when the Salesman arranged the tour. He was  a Res COL i worked for at LFCA HQ time to time but summertime boss sadi no dice to time off.
thanks in advance for the information on the glass

 

[ex-Sup]

my  fav lense for my  35mm F801 is the 28  to 70 sigma zoom. I will admit I am not as well educated in the digital age as i was in the film age. I miss the simpler age, and black and white film.

The D60 should do B&W. I know we bought some D40's for the school and they have that function. My old D70 didn't have it, but the D90 does. Just set it to B&W and bump it up to 1600, 2000, etc. It looks good from my stand point.

I want to get a lense close to my  28  to 70 zoom for my  D60...any  advice? i have the 18  to 55mm nikon lense that  came with the camera.
I am also looking at the nikon  55 to 200mm zoom. 

Your 18-55 is it; multiply but 1.5 and that will give you the film equivalent ie. 18-55 is 27-82.5.
IMHO, I didn't like the 18-55 that came with the D40's. I have the 18-70...it just feels better. It also is a whole stop faster (4.5 compared to 5.6) at the top end. They do make a VR version, which I would imagine is a better. Same with the 55-200; it's a $100 more, but get the VR. It will probably give you an extra stop or two over the non-VR.
http://www.nikon.ca/en/Lens.aspx#
I've been happy with the 18-70, but I wanted something a bit wider so I bought the Tokina 12-14 from Adorama. Half the price, but pretty close in quality.
http://www.adorama.com/TN1224NKAF.html
BTW, have you used your 28-70 on your D60? Just changes to 42-105, but should work fine.

 

[deh]

It really all depends on what you are shooting... what is it you are looking to capture and what kind of cash do you have to spend?  VR and IS lenses tend to be heavier and have a more complex optical formula as they need extra elements in them to shift to compensate for vibration.  They are also usually a lot more expensive.  More glass means more diffraction which can affect sharpness...  That is the tech nerd talking, in real life i doubt you would see the difference but it is there.  The nice part about digital is you can just shoot more and steady yourself and just keep the one frame out of four that is always in focus.  If you are going to be doing a lot of low light shooting you should look at getting a decent fast prime.  No amount of VR can stop motion or boost shutter speeds.

Just for the record 4.5 to 5.6 is 2/3rds of a stop, the full stop down from 1:5.6 is 1:4.  And while the lens *frames* like a 42mm it has all the optical charateristics of a 28.  DoF, MFD, distortion and max resolution and what have you are identical to a true full frame lens at 28mm.

The short answer is, spend a lot of time thinking how you are going to use the equipment and purchase something to fit the need.  Don't pull the Canadian army special of buying whatever is cheap and fitting the usage to it.  Zing.

 

[Snaketnk]

I hope to see you snapping pics during the upcoming Ex and ranges, your photography is exceptional.

 

[ex-Sup]

Just for the record 4.5 to 5.6 is 2/3rds of a stop, the full stop down from 1:5.6 is 1:4.  And while the lens *frames* like a 42mm it has all the optical charateristics of a 28.  DoF, MFD, distortion and max resolution and what have you are identical to a true full frame lens at 28mm.

Okay Deh, 2/3...I was rounding up 
While it displays all characteristics of a 28, you're still going to get 42 on a DX. I know the issue all too well; I still don't have a 67mm polarizer and until I got my 12-24, I had to use my 28-70 for polarized effects (28-70 & 12-24 have same 77mm ring). New polarizer on the list!

If you are going to be doing a lot of low light shooting you should look at getting a decent fast prime.  No amount of VR can stop motion or boost shutter speeds.

You just love those primes  >
People like you and me are willing to have a pile of lens on hand, but most average users (not assuming FHG is one) mostly stick to a few zooms. I suggested the 18-55 & 55-200 VR's simply because they are probably better constructed and (in some ways) better optically than the standard versions. One thing I didn't like about the 18-55 was the plastic collar; my brother has a D80 w/18-135 and his broke. I prefer metal, especially when you're changing lens constantly.
Anyway, Deh is right. Decide what you need and what you're shooting and go from there.

**Hey mods, maybe can we split this into a separate thread so photo geeks like myself are not hijacking the original topic!

 

[George Wallace]

The original topic is 25mm TOC 0901 pictures.  I think the discussion as to how the pictures are taken IS part of the topic, and one that several (or more) may be interested in.  Especially the complications of getting a good night shoot of Tracers on the Range.  I have spent many a roll of film trying to get that one perfect or close to perfect shot.  Anticipating Tank Fire is difficult to do, as is overcoming the concussion of the blast.  There are many tricks/tips that one can pass on still in this topic.......as well as photos.

 

[ex-Sup]

I think the discussion as to how the pictures are taken ARE part of the topic, and one that several (or more) may be interested in.

Works for me!

 

[George Wallace]

My poor grammar, however, isn't.  ;D

 

[ex-Sup]

My poor grammar, however, isn't.  ;D

Gee, my teacher radar didn't pick that up...WTF is the matter with me?