Nikon D750 & D780

snerkler said:
Yeah I do, but it runs out tomorrow. Been well worth the money for me, probably been around a dozen times in the last twelves months. First time I've been since they've changed the lemur enclosure, made a bit of a mess of it imo.
Click to expand...
Yep. Looks like if you go 4 times in a year your in pocket any more than that and every other visit is free.
 
Last edited:
c22w1 said:
Yep. Looks like if you go 4 times in a year your in pocket any more than that and every other visit is free.
Click to expand...
Yep, £17 entry fee or annual pass £55 (£52 renewal) so annual pass is only just over the cost of 3 visits (y)
 
Been browsing prime lenses again, is there a reason that Nikon really went to town on the 35mm f1.4 and made a ridiculously expensive piece of glass yet the 50mm f1.4 is pretty cheap in comparison (and feels relatively cheap)? I know that 50mm's are a more simple design but it does appear to me that the 50mm f1.4 is almost a budget lens in comparison to the 35mm f1.4 (and 85mm f1.4).
 
snerkler said:
Been browsing prime lenses again, is there a reason that Nikon really went to town on the 35mm f1.4 and made a ridiculously expensive piece of glass yet the 50mm f1.4 is pretty cheap in comparison (and feels relatively cheap)? I know that 50mm's are a more simple design but it does appear to me that the 50mm f1.4 is almost a budget lens in comparison to the 35mm f1.4 (and 85mm f1.4).
Click to expand...

I think you only have to pick each of those up to see where the cost lies. The 50mm is very dated now and the 1.8 version seems as good and betters in AF etc. Will be interesting to see what Nikon do as Canon have recently upgraded their 35L and are bringing out a new 85L 1.4 with stabilisation. All those above are a little old now in terms of how long they've been about so let's see where Nikons priorities lie.

Personally the 35 & 85 are good enough, there's no improvement I would need, both are sharp where they need to be and built well. The 50 does need an upgrade. They should do away with the 58 and make a stellar 50 IMO.
 
snerkler said:
Been browsing prime lenses again, is there a reason that Nikon really went to town on the 35mm f1.4 and made a ridiculously expensive piece of glass yet the 50mm f1.4 is pretty cheap in comparison (and feels relatively cheap)? I know that 50mm's are a more simple design but it does appear to me that the 50mm f1.4 is almost a budget lens in comparison to the 35mm f1.4 (and 85mm f1.4).
Click to expand...

I've had 3 of them... all rubbish, ended up with a Sgima 1.4 which is beautiful, so I'd agree with your comment that it's a bit 'cheap' ;)
 
Livin The Dream said:
I think you only have to pick each of those up to see where the cost lies. The 50mm is very dated now and the 1.8 version seems as good and betters in AF etc. Will be interesting to see what Nikon do as Canon have recently upgraded their 35L and are bringing out a new 85L 1.4 with stabilisation. All those above are a little old now in terms of how long they've been about so let's see where Nikons priorities lie.

Personally the 35 & 85 are good enough, there's no improvement I would need, both are sharp where they need to be and built well. The 50 does need an upgrade. They should do away with the 58 and make a stellar 50 IMO.
Click to expand...
That was kind of my point though, why choose to make such a stellar 35mm and not 50mm? I used the 50mm 1.8G again the other night for boxing and I'm still a bit 'meh' with regards to sharpness. AF speed wasnt great for this either.

HopefulM said:
I've had 3 of them... all rubbish, ended up with a Sgima 1.4 which is beautiful, so I'd agree with your comment that it's a bit 'cheap' ;)
Click to expand...
Sigma would be the obvious choice, but SIgmas have never played nice with my D750. I know you can get the dock now but I read so many reports even with the dock about the sigma arts not playing nice, such as getting them right at short distances but not long even with the different adjustment settings, and/or if you get them right with one camera they're totally off on another. Plus they're heavy chuffers for primes ;)
 
snerkler said:
That was kind of my point though, why choose to make such a stellar 35mm and not 50mm? I used the 50mm 1.8G again the other night for boxing and I'm still a bit 'meh' with regards to sharpness. AF speed wasnt great for this either.

Sigma would be the obvious choice, but SIgmas have never played nice with my D750. I know you can get the dock now but I read so many reports even with the dock about the sigma arts not playing nice, such as getting them right at short distances but not long even with the different adjustment settings, and/or if you get them right with one camera they're totally off on another. Plus they're heavy chuffers for primes ;)
Click to expand...

Have been using my 50 1.8 over the weekend and same as you with it, it's still not sharp until 2.5. It's ok, but my 35 is just in a different league.

Still see too many issues with Sigma AF inconsistencies for me to give one a try again. One of the lads on the workshop last week had a 35 art that suddenly just parted halfway down without any impact.

The 1.4 is built slightly better than the 1.8 which is the only discernible difference. Depends how particular you are with pixel peeping, hard not to when other lenses are noticeably better.
 
Last edited:
Sorry being lazy, is the highlights option in the playback menu setup to turn on the blinkies?

Thanks
 
I'm in the minority and love my 50 1.8g. It was certainly as good as the 35mm 1.8g (well about the 3 or 4 I have had and sold lol) and if anything was better in low light. I found the 35 to hunt a lot more and focus speed on par.

I would take the 50 any day over the 35, but as I said I'm in the minority.

As for the 35mm f1.4g, had 2 and never been blown away. IMO the Sigma beats it on all counts.
 
As for the 58mm...

It doesn't feel cheap, well no worse that the 35mm 1.4g.

We moan when primes are too heavy so Nikon use plastic and make it lighter and we still moan. They can never win!!

However, it does need to be handled with care when replacing the lens cap. One ever so slightly not so perfect attachment and you can put creases/dents in the filter ring.

It's common on this lens - cameralabs first reported it in their review and there are a few threads on DP review too.

One of them here:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3579525

I'm super careful with my kit and I managed to do it a couple of times (part since been replaced).

Of course a filter would fix this or just a filter with the glass taken out. But not something you would expect to happen!
 
JJ! said:
I'm in the minority and love my 50 1.8g. It was certainly as good as the 35mm 1.8g (well about the 3 or 4 I have had and sold lol) and if anything was better in low light. I found the 35 to hunt a lot more and focus speed on par.

I would take the 50 any day over the 35, but as I said I'm in the minority.

As for the 35mm f1.4g, had 2 and never been blown away. IMO the Sigma beats it on all counts.
Click to expand...
Maybe I'll be disappointed in the 35mm too then. Quick look on DXO shows it's as sharp as the 85mm though on the D750 scoring 21Mpix compare to 17Mpix on the 50mm. This site totally conflicts with this though, although I am starting to find this less and less reliable. I've seen a few examples where really good lenses have had poor sample shots so I don't think the shots are as controlled as they should be.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...meraComp=614&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=1
 
snerkler said:
Maybe I'll be disappointed in the 35mm too then. Quick look on DXO shows it's as sharp as the 85mm though on the D750 scoring 21Mpix compare to 17Mpix on the 50mm. This site totally conflicts with this though, although I am starting to find this less and less reliable. I've seen a few examples where really good lenses have had poor sample shots so I don't think the shots are as controlled as they should be.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...meraComp=614&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=1
Click to expand...

No idea how DXO works when it comes to lens testing. Do they just try one copy or a few? We all know that there are copy variations out there!

Interesting that the 35mm f1.4g has about the same sharpness as the 50mm 1.8g on DXO.
 
JJ! said:
We moan when primes are too heavy so Nikon use plastic and make it lighter and we still moan. They can never win!!
Click to expand...

I don't moan when they make lenses out of plastics/composites. In fact I prefer them. (y)
 
JJ! said:
No idea how DXO works when it comes to lens testing. Do they just try one copy or a few? We all know that there are copy variations out there!

Interesting that the 35mm f1.4g has about the same sharpness as the 50mm 1.8g on DXO.
Click to expand...
Yep, who knows. Always best to just try for yourself I reckon.
 
Selling my 50 1.8g was one of my biggest regrets. I would love to substitute it with a 58 though.

Was contemplating selling my 70-200vr2 to fund yours in the sales or to put towards a sigma 135, just not sure I would have any balls left selling the vr2 for such a loss even though I could count the amount of times I've used it on one hand in the 4/5 years I've actually owned it.
 
Last edited:
Graham said:
Geezus, just look at them paws, like this 2nd shot lots. [emoji106]
Click to expand...
Thanks. His paws are huge, he's a big fella altogether.
 
Not put anything up for a while, I guess it must be time ;)

Processing not to everyones taste, pretty much a grab shot at SS Great Britain this weekend. I just liked the surroundings and and the lovely expression on this young lady's face.

Small file, so image might not show up so well, and yes, she had very dark eyes.



llView attachment 101118
 
Not taken any pics for ages. Need to get back out there! Life has taken over so been too busy to get out and about.
 
pmac said:
Selling my 50 1.8g was one of my biggest regrets. I would love to substitute it with a 58 though.

Was contemplating selling my 70-200vr2 to fund yours in the sales or to put towards a sigma 135, just not sure I would have any balls left selling the vr2 for such a loss even though I could count the amount of times I've used it on one hand in the 4/5 years I've actually owned it.
Click to expand...

I guess it's not all about sharpness with the 50. It's a lens that makes me want to pick up my camera. It's small, it's light, I find it great in all conditions.

Maybe it's not sharp wide open, never really looked in to it really. I enjoy the images it produces, I enjoy the focal length and I guess that's why I love it more than any other lens I own or have owned.

They say you are a 35 or 50 lover, and I'm in the 50 camp. I tried leaving but always came back!
 
JJ! said:
I guess it's not all about sharpness with the 50. It's a lens that makes me want to pick up my camera. It's small, it's light, I find it great in all conditions.

Maybe it's not sharp wide open, never really looked in to it really. I enjoy the images it produces, I enjoy the focal length and I guess that's why I love it more than any other lens I own or have owned.

They say you are a 35 or 50 lover, and I'm in the 50 camp. I tried leaving but always came back!
Click to expand...
I prefer the 50mm focal length too tbh.
 
snerkler said:
I prefer the 50mm focal length too tbh.
Click to expand...

The Sigma looks king of 50's but then it takes away half the things I love about my 50!

Talking of old fashioned, have you tried the 1.4D? So many conflicting comparisons of it online!
 
JJ! said:
The Sigma looks king of 50's but then it takes away half the things I love about my 50!

Talking of old fashioned, have you tried the 1.4D? So many conflicting comparisons of it online!
Click to expand...
Yeah tried it when I tried the f1.4g. Was soft compared to the G even just comparing on the LCD screen.

As mentioned previously I still have my concerns with Sigmas.
 
JJ! said:
I guess it's not all about sharpness with the 50. It's a lens that makes me want to pick up my camera. It's small, it's light, I find it great in all conditions.

Maybe it's not sharp wide open, never really looked in to it really. I enjoy the images it produces, I enjoy the focal length and I guess that's why I love it more than any other lens I own or have owned.

They say you are a 35 or 50 lover, and I'm in the 50 camp. I tried leaving but always came back!
Click to expand...

I sold my 50 after buying the sigma 35 as i was using that a lot and thought the 35 and 85 would make a better match. So hadnt used the 50 in a few months when a mate asked if i knew where was best to get one from so just sold it to him. Seems after a while 35 isnt for me.

My 50 1.8 was sharp enough for me and produced some of my favourite images, now that i look back on them anyway. The size and weight was also something i miss as my 35/85 are both a lot bigger and heavier.

I might just pick another up at some point as they are relatively cheap. Just dont have the disposable income jusr now.

Did you not like the 58? It seems to produce some lovely images.
 
JJ! said:
The Sigma looks king of 50's but then it takes away half the things I love about my 50!

Talking of old fashioned, have you tried the 1.4D? So many conflicting comparisons of it online!
Click to expand...
Has anyone tried the Tamron 45mm f/1.8 as an alternative to Nikon and Sigma 50mm?
 
pmac said:
I sold my 50 after buying the sigma 35 as i was using that a lot and thought the 35 and 85 would make a better match. So hadnt used the 50 in a few months when a mate asked if i knew where was best to get one from so just sold it to him. Seems after a while 35 isnt for me.

My 50 1.8 was sharp enough for me and produced some of my favourite images, now that i look back on them anyway. The size and weight was also something i miss as my 35/85 are both a lot bigger and heavier.

I might just pick another up at some point as they are relatively cheap. Just dont have the disposable income jusr now.

Did you not like the 58? It seems to produce some lovely images.
Click to expand...
Much difference in the 50 1.8D and 1.8G in terms of quality? Know there are issues with the lens on older cameras, just wondered if the G was worth the extra £
 
Last edited:
pmac said:
I sold my 50 after buying the sigma 35 as i was using that a lot and thought the 35 and 85 would make a better match. So hadnt used the 50 in a few months when a mate asked if i knew where was best to get one from so just sold it to him. Seems after a while 35 isnt for me.

My 50 1.8 was sharp enough for me and produced some of my favourite images, now that i look back on them anyway. The size and weight was also something i miss as my 35/85 are both a lot bigger and heavier.

I might just pick another up at some point as they are relatively cheap. Just dont have the disposable income jusr now.

Did you not like the 58? It seems to produce some lovely images.
Click to expand...

58 is lovely, even more so now it's all running perfectly. It's not my lens, selling for a friend and I can't afford it!
 
Heres one from 2 weeks ago in Norfolk, its a place just past Blakeney point, I`m not to sure about this one though, is it missing something ?
Boat and reeds by Graham, on Flickr
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top