Nikon D750 & D780

@JJ! , selling the 85 1.4?? :eek::eek:
 
Yes it's for sale and it it sells it sells if it doesn't it doesn't.

The extra money if it does sell is going to my wife who is going through a wife time. Not that I should need to justify it on here! But in my eye, family comes before anything else.
 
Livin The Dream said:
But I did go for the Tammy 70-200 that's on there which is your fault ha. Good price, just hope it's a decent copy. Really wanted the Nikon but at that price..
Click to expand...

Great, I am sure you will love it. At that price, it is tremendous value for money.
 
Forgot to mention these were taken with the Nikon 200-500mm (because everyone has been praising the Sigma(s) ) :p

[edited for glaring, grammatical error]
 
Last edited:
Woot!

New lens (to me at least, it's 2nd H) arrived a few moments ago...

zP40JvEh.jpg


It's quite a beast. I originally wanted the Nikon AF-S 300mm f/4 and found what looked to be a decent one for a crazy cheap price from MPB. Turned out to have a dead AF. So that's going back on Thursday and this 120-300mm f/2.8 is its replacement.

I can just about handhold it for a few minutes at a time, but I'm planning on getting a gimbal for it. And a Sigma 1.4 TC because... well, why not?

The lens was a good bargain as the exterior is not in perfect nick, as you can see. And it's the old old model, but it seems to work well from a few test shots including high contrast scenes.

Very excited!
 
Looks like the lens I sent back for the decentering issue has gone straight back on sale, I would've hope they'd addressed the issue before reselling.

https://www.lcegroup.co.uk/Used/Sigma-85mm-f1.4-DG-HSM_151539.html


I sold my 50mm f1.8 at the weekend so I've decided to buy a new Sigma 85mm instead of looking for another used one. Not had much luck with used of late so thought I'd sell the 50mm and buy new. Had bit still left in amazon vouchers anyway ;) Arriving tomorrow :)

If I had a few extra pounds I would've been seriously tempted by JJ's f1.4g. That being said I do like the exaggerated subject isolation/slightly superimposed look that some lenses give and I think the Sigma does this better than the other 85mm's (to my eyes), it's does it almost as well as the Canon 135mm f2 imo.
 
snerkler said:
Looks like the lens I sent back for the decentering issue has gone straight back on sale, I would've hope they'd addressed the issue before reselling.

https://www.lcegroup.co.uk/Used/Sigma-85mm-f1.4-DG-HSM_151539.html


I sold my 50mm f1.8 at the weekend so I've decided to buy a new Sigma 85mm instead of looking for another used one. Not had much luck with used of late so thought I'd sell the 50mm and buy new. Had bit still left in amazon vouchers anyway ;) Arriving tomorrow :)

If I had a few extra pounds I would've been seriously tempted by JJ's f1.4g. That being said I do like the exaggerated subject isolation/slightly superimposed look that some lenses give and I think the Sigma does this better than the other 85mm's (to my eyes), it's does it almost as well as the Canon 135mm f2 imo.
Click to expand...

You could have given the Tamron 1.8 VC a try unless 1.4 is a must. The reviews are excellent and the lens has excellent control of CA and has better centre and corner sharpness (although not necessary for portraits) than most other 85 mm lenses.

I think you should be happy with the Sigma 1.4. Heard it is a great lens and renders nicely.
 
Tamron is around £500 grey now which seems pretty good. Nice match for the 35mm VC too.
 
twist said:
That seems a lot of extra for VC and for the type of stuff 85 is used for your shutter should be fast enough to counteract subject movement anyway. Maybe its just me though.
Click to expand...

Yeah it does seem pretty expensive for a 1.8, especially when the 1.8g is so cheap!
 
anibap said:
You could have given the Tamron 1.8 VC a try unless 1.4 is a must. The reviews are excellent and the lens has excellent control of CA and has better centre and corner sharpness (although not necessary for portraits) than most other 85 mm lenses.

I think you should be happy with the Sigma 1.4. Heard it is a great lens and renders nicely.
Click to expand...
f1.4 isn't a must no, but as I mentioned I do like that slightly superimposed look and the Tamron seems to lack that in comparison from the image pool I've seen. Also, for UK it's more expensive than the Sigma f1.4 (on amazon at least) and I don't think I'll need VC. As above, at more than double the cost of the Nikon f1.8g I can't help think that Tamron have overpriced this lens. TBH I don't understand why Canikon have not developed IBIS and then we wouldn't need VR/VC.
 
snerkler said:
f1.4 isn't a must no, but as I mentioned I do like that slightly superimposed look and the Tamron seems to lack that in comparison from the image pool I've seen. Also, for UK it's more expensive than the Sigma f1.4 (on amazon at least) and I don't think I'll need VC. As above, at more than double the cost of the Nikon f1.8g I can't help think that Tamron have overpriced this lens. TBH I don't understand why Canikon have not developed IBIS and then we wouldn't need VR/VC.
Click to expand...

Just get another G
 
Ok, quick and completely unexciting photo taken with the new lens to see how it performs. Handheld at 300mm f/2.8, 1/400 ISO 180 but a hefty exposure lift in LR (that's highlight metering for you). Very cloudy, verging on rain but that meant nice flat light at least for the purposes of this test:

wt8PXLah.jpg


Link to the full res image here.

I was focusing on the front seam of the ball nearest to us, so it looks to be more or less on for that. The blur might be softening wide open, possibly slight shake from me (quite probable) or perhaps just missed focus.

Bokeh quality looks interesting - not bad and fairly consistent both front and back.

Thoughts from you guys... does the lens look to be performing ok given the limitations of the test?
 
pjm1 said:
Thoughts from you guys... does the lens look to be performing ok given the limitations of the test?
Click to expand...

Not the best image to comment. If you can place the ball or a high contrast object on top of something with good distance from the background, it would be easier to comment.

From the pic in high re, sharpness seems ok, but not super sharp. Good to see CA is limited, but the image lacks strong light or backlight to see if CA is any worse.
 
anibap said:
Not the best image to comment. If you can place the ball or a high contrast object on top of something with good distance from the background, it would be easier to comment.

From the pic in high re, sharpness seems ok, but not super sharp. Good to see CA is limited, but the image lacks strong light or backlight to see if CA is any worse.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the suggestion... I'm just uploading a trio of shots at f/2.8, f/4 and f/5.6 with a bright (cloudy) sky behind. Looking at it quickly (with no lens correction etc.) there does appear to be a fair bit of CA, but that should be easy to correct out with a standard profile.

I'll post them once my slow internet connection has finished uploading!
 
Ok, here is a much higher contrast scene with backlighting from the cloudy sky behind.

tGsyzIhl.jpg


Full size images here:

Link to f/2.8

Link to f/4.0

Link to f/5.6

Pretty strong CA throughout, but especially horrible on the f/2.8 shot to my eyes.

I guess it's handy to have f/2.8 for focusing (especially when using TCs) but I'll need to be careful about how I use it, if at all...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top