Nikon D750 & D780

Paulie-W said:
Bored again, so reverted to off and on camera flash, and my beaten up old converse ...

Old but Lov(y)ed by Paulie-W, on Flickr
Click to expand...

I like this idea very much Paul, and it works well in B&W. Good detail & composition.(y)

If you don't mind me saying I think a smaller aperture would have worked better as the far right is OOF through lack of DOF and is a little distracting. And some sort of fill light flash/reflector etc to put some light on the inside top of the upright shoe would have helped to isolate it from the background. Still a very nice shot though.

"Only my opinion of coarse".

George.
 
G.K.Jnr. said:
I like this idea very much Paul, and it works well in B&W. Good detail & composition.(y)

If you don't mind me saying I think a smaller aperture would have worked better as the far right is OOF through lack of DOF and is a little distracting. And some sort of fill light flash/reflector etc to put some light on the inside top of the upright shoe would have helped to isolate it from the background. Still a very nice shot though.

"Only my opinion of coarse".

George.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the input George, it's always welcomed :)
 
saul01 said:
Which of the two would you? Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 or the Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G ED VR
Click to expand...
I'd pick the Nikon 24-85 for VR, better micro contrast, better centre sharpness and it can resolve detail better than the Tamron.

If you are buying a new walk around lens, consider the Tamron 24-70 2.8. A good copy of that is better than the other two lenses you mentioned.
 
anibap said:
I'd pick the Nikon 24-85 for VR, better micro contrast, better centre sharpness and it can resolve detail better than the Tamron.

If you are buying a new walk around lens, consider the Tamron 24-70 2.8. A good copy of that is better than the other two lenses you mentioned.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately the Tamron 24-70 is out of my range (but was the first on my list). A good copy? .

I will mainy be using my 35mm, but wanted a reasonably priced zoom for the odd day out etc.
 
When I had my D600 I chose the Tamron 28-75 over the 24-85. Just found the f2.8 more useful, especially as I did a friends wedding and it was on the camera all day. Cant really go wrong with either. Tamron is cheaper with f2.8, Nikon has VR. Probably get a 50/50 split of you search google!
 
I find reviews are generally left by people who have had bad experiences, not a lot of people leave positive comments. Alot of these you need to take with a pinch of salt.
 
Just looked at the Nikon 24-120 f4, that seems to be reasonably priced as well (grey market).
 
saul01 said:
Just looked at the Nikon 24-120 f4, that seems to be reasonably priced as well (grey market).
Click to expand...

Another good choice. Gets really good feedback on here.

Used one briefly when got the D750, its certainly a solid feeling bit of kit.
 
JJ! said:
Another good choice. Gets really good feedback on here.

Used one briefly when got the D750, its certainly a solid feeling bit of kit.
Click to expand...

Would you have any pics by any chance?
 
No I'm afraid not as I didn't keep it. There are some really good shots on flickr if you have a browse.

If you can't afford a 24-70 the 24-120 is a solid performer for the now lower price.
 
JJ! said:
No I'm afraid not as I didn't keep it. There are some really good shots on flickr if you have a browse.

If you can't afford a 24-70 the 24-120 is a solid performer for the now lower price.
Click to expand...

I think this is the way to go 35mm, 24-120mm, 85mm
 
What's the best way to micro adjust lenes correctly? The lens align kit is £60 which seems a lot for something I might only use like once a year!
 
JJ! said:
What's the best way to micro adjust lenes correctly? The lens align kit is £60 which seems a lot for something I might only use like once a year!
Click to expand...

Here you go, works like a dream and there's somewhere you can download a focus chart too:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zE50jCUPhM


My 85 1.4 is a little awkward on my 750 for some reason but once you have your point thereabouts it's easy to ascertain where the optimal point is. All pretty standard fare for fast primes, I haven't needed to adjust much for zooms. A night of messing around with this and you'll have more confidence in your gear.
 
saul01 said:
I think this is the way to go 35mm, 24-120mm, 85mm
Click to expand...

That`s what I have, plus a couple of others (24 prime and macro).
 
Dot tune method is pretty good. You must use the correct distance based on focal length of a particular lens
 
Paulie-W said:
That`s what I have, plus a couple of others (24 prime and macro).
Click to expand...
How are you finding the lens (24-120)? am now split between this and the 24-85.
 
As it turned out Nikon's Winter cashback is not exciting this year. No lenses at all and no FX camera.

I was hoping after a $400 discount announced in US on the D750, UK might see some good cashback. Panamoz will have my money and my first grey purchase.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JYC
Blank_Canvas said:
Well, after reading all the hype I thought I would dot.tune my Nikon trinity. I really shouldn't of wasted the time. They were all bang on !!
Click to expand...

Are these 14-24, 24.70, 70-200 or 35, 58, 85 Nick? My 14-24 is fine but the depth of field throughout, at widest aperture, is not as crucial as my 85 wide open. It's pretty obvious to me if a lens is out, or enough to make a difference, probably the fact you have not felt the need to do it before confirmed what you already knew.
 
I have a love / hate relationship with my 24-120 F4 VR. Weirdly, on my D750 (which has sadly now gone), I never really got tack sharp shots at any FL or aperture. Not soft, just not tack sharp. On the D810 however, despite it's greater pixel count, I seem to get more keepers, which may or may not be to do with the D810's dampened shutter release or lack of AA filter ?

I have been pondering back and forth for some time now whether to ditch the 24-120 for the classic 24-70 F2.8 (in either Nikon or Tamron flavours), but the thing that keeps stopping me is exactly the reason I purchased the lens in the first place. I.e. a single lens solution when travelling. With a 24-70 I just feel that whilst the image quality would be a little better and obviously low light performance better (with the extra stop), that I would miss the 71-120 FL and would therefore need to carry a second lens. Of course, no 5x zoom lens is going to win against a prime or a 3x zoom lens, but I did expect more on the D750 that I got. Maybe I've got a less than perfect copy of the lens and had a slightly misaligned D750 I(despite it going back to Nikon for the shutter shading issues, and apparently having the AF adjusted and recalibrated ?
 
Last edited:
Sootchucker said:
I have a love / hate relationship with my 24-120 F4 VR. Weirdly, on my D750 (which has sadly now gone), I never really got tack sharp shots at any FL or aperture. Not soft, just not tack sharp. On the D810 however, despite it's greater pixel count, I seem to get more keepers, which may or may not be to do with the D810's dampened shutter release or lack of AA filter ?

I have been pondering back and forth for some time now whether to ditch the 24-120 for the classic 24-70 F2.8 (in either Nikon or Tamron flavours), but the thing that keeps stopping me is exactly the reason I purchased the lens in the first place. I.e. a single lens solution when travelling. With a 24-70 I just feel that whilst the image quality would be a little better and obviously low light performance better (with the extra stop), that I would miss the 71-120 FL and would therefore need to carry a second lens. Of course, no 5x zoom lens is going to win against a prime or a 3x zoom lens, but I did expect more on the D750 that I got. Maybe I've got a less than perfect copy of the lens and had a slightly misaligned D750 I(despite it going back to Nikon for the shutter shading issues, and apparently having the AF adjusted and recalibrated ?
Click to expand...
Have you calibrated the lens on the D750? Strange that you can get sharp pics on one and not the other which suggests the camera needs micro adjusting for this specific lens.
 
The 24-120 is a great lens for the money, I've had a couple of them and IQ wise they were excellent although I have preferred the Tamron 24-70 f2.8 as I feel optically its a little better (especially if you have a good one!) that said next time I go on holiday (probably next year now) I'll probably look to pickup a used 24-120 and sell when I come back as the extra 50mm range is handy to have.
 
Here's how I see the maths at the moment, and also am thinking if I really need the bigger better lenses or has GAS kicked in again!!

Nikon 24-120 f/4 - £419 (range)
Nikon 24-85 f3.5-4.5 £289 (cost effective)
Sigma 24-105 f/4 Art - £529 (build & quality?/slightly less range)
Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 - £519 (less range)
 
Last edited:
Well, I have kept the 50mm so not all primes!
 
saul01 said:
Here's how I see the maths at the moment, and also am thinking if I really need the bigger better lenses or has GAS kicked in again!!

Nikon 24-120 f/4 - £419 (range)
Nikon 24-85 f3.5-4.5 £289 (cost effective)
Sigma 24-105 f/4 Art - £529 (build & quality?/slightly less range)
Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 - £519 (less range)
Click to expand...

Last year at the photography show in brum, I tested the sigma 24-105 against the Nikon 24-120, and I preferred the Nikon. Sharper wide open (well mine is against the one I tried out on the sigma stand anyway). Just food for thought ;)
 
So the Tamron 24-70... It's a bit beefy! Initial impressions are boy it's heavy, and the front element is huge!

Auto focus is quick and quiet, the VC is near silent. Took few images indoors and all looked great. My only minor niggle is the thought that the 24-120 might have been a better option for the reach and intended use.... But then again... Having a 2.8 is an advantage.
 
Finally, ordered the D750 from Panamoz :).

Booked a trip to Bruges during the upcoming half term break. Can't wait to get my hands on the D750.
 
The Tamron 24-70 is pretty well built. Only a very minimal play in the zoom ring, but otherwise its build is solid. It is heavy, but it really feels no heavier than the 24-120 or the 70-300.

When you swap to the 50mm f1.8g you do appreciate how light primes are! But 3 primes in a bag are about the same weight I guess.

Need to go out at the weekend and see if I have a good copy, but Initial indoor shots look clean at f2.8 and the VC seems pretty decent.

Whether I will miss having a longer ranged zoom, only time will tell. If it doesnt work out I can just trade it in for a 24-120!
 
Has anyone used both the Nikon 24-120mm f4 and Sigma 24-105mm F4 Art on the D750 (or D610/D600 I guess) and has an unbiased opinion on them?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top