The 35G mounted on a D800E exhibited no focus shifting from in depth tests I read and I haven't witnessed any either. The 35G was rated sharper than the Samyang by DxO for what it's worth. As for the bokeh photozone describes it as 'nervous' but it is uglier to me than a 35G. As for the autofocus it would mean the Samyang was much more expensive and liable to the Sigma lemon syndrome.
Nikon D800......
- Thread starter cowasaki
- Start date
The 35G mounted on a D800E exhibited no focus shifting from in depth tests I read and I haven't witnessed any either. The 35G was rated sharper than the Samyang by DxO for what it's worth. As for the bokeh photozone describes it as 'nervous' but it is uglier to me than a 35G. As for the autofocus it would mean the Samyang was much more expensive and liable to the Sigma lemon syndrome.
I got the grip, makes it much easier in portrait mode and gives the camera a nice weighty feel. Don't always put it on though which is a bonus of the D800 for me that you have the choice.
Pookeyhead
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 11,746
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
DxO's methodology is flawed. They use an averaging system to arrive at sharpness and it's heavily weighted to centre performance. Go read it if you don't believe me. Photozone list centre, border and edge performance as separately rated tests at each aperture, which is far more telling.
Anyway... no point arguing. If AF is not important I'd rather use the Samyang any day... who cares about Bokeh? Only people with beards care about bokeh.
Last edited:
gramps
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 44,805
- Name
- 'Gramps'
- Edit My Images
- No
Oi! :nono:
Cagey75
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 17,146
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
They actually state that the bokeh is about the same as the Nikon, so both nervous then:
"The quality of the bokeh is on the nervous side but that's a fate that it shares with the Nikkor lens actually. The amount of bokeh fringing is typical for a lens in this class."
The Samyang price is certainly attractive, but I would be buying a 35 1.4 for chasing the kids about, without worrying about zoom, or manually focusing. Seriously considering the new sigma, sell off my 50mm, and maybe my 105 as I just haven't used it much since buying the 70-200.
- Messages
- 3,809
- Name
- Lukas
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Where would you send it over for a check? And how much would it be?
Would have to send it nikon I suppose and not sure how much they charge,.
It may be fine after some micro adjustment, I just didn't get the proper chance when I had it out as I was on a walk with the kids and wife.
But as I said it was spot on with my d700 so may be the d800 that's off, I haven't even really check that for AF problems, gave it a quick once over when I got it but again haven't sat down to check for LH AF issues properly.
It may be fine after some micro adjustment, I just didn't get the proper chance when I had it out as I was on a walk with the kids and wife.
But as I said it was spot on with my d700 so may be the d800 that's off, I haven't even really check that for AF problems, gave it a quick once over when I got it but again haven't sat down to check for LH AF issues properly.
redhed17
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 7,316
- Edit My Images
- Yes
orangeframestudio
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 964
- Name
- Ben
- Edit My Images
- No
Gary Coyle said:
How's the Meike grip working out? Wasn't sure which cheapy version to go for.
Also has anyone any joy with the 3rd party shutter releases? Was looking at the JY-710 wireless shutter release at £25 ish, they look the part.
DxO seem well respected in the industry for IQ evaluation, I doubt that would be the case if their tests were fundamentally flawed.
The Pixel Vertax D12 is inexpensive and does the job well.
Not heard of any problems with the 3rd party releases, I usually pick stuff like that up on amazon which means a good returns policy as opposed to some eBay crooks.
Cagey75
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 17,146
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
Can Bokeh be 'nervous'?
:shrug:
You quote it as if it was my wording.
I get what they mean, it's not so hard to understand really.
redhed17
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 7,316
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Maybe harder than you think, which is why I questioned it. :shrug:
Nervous;
1.
highly excitable; unnaturally or acutely uneasy or apprehensive: to become nervous under stress.
2.
of or pertaining to the nerves: nervous tension.
3.
affecting the nerves: nervous diseases.
4.
suffering from, characterized by, or originating in disordered nerves.
5.
characterized by or attended with acute uneasiness or apprehension: a nervous moment for us all.
How that applies to an optical effect is beyond me. :shrug:
If no one questions things like this then they just pass by with a nod like it's an appropriate way to describe whatever the actual effect is.
I apologise for making it sound like you were the originator of the quote, but you sounded like you agreed with it, and knew what they were talking about.
Cagey75
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 17,146
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
I knew what they mean, nervous as in, shakey, not solid, not competent ... or at least, that's instantly what their wording conjured up for me. Reviewers tend to use strange words to help visualise at times. You just take it as a loose meaning.
- Messages
- 12,654
- Name
- Gary
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Excellent as are all Meike grips, fits quite snug unlike some pics ive seen of the pixel grip
Pookeyhead
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 11,746
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
Go read it.. don't take my word for it. It's an aggregate of edge and centre values, with a heavy bias to centre. A lens with excellent centre sharpness, but poor edge sharpness will score higher than a lens that offered very good across the entire frame... and I know what I'd rather use.
The Nikon obviously or you would still have the Samyang. If DxO is good enough for the industry then it'll do me. The Nikon was rated sharper and has fast autofocus, the best of both worlds.
Moreorless
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 989
- Edit My Images
- No
It depends what your looking at, as with the sensor marks the overally score doesnt really tell you much but again theres alot of indepth info that paints a very similar picture to the photozone tests. The Nikon slightly sharper in the center wide open, the Samyang slightly sharper at the boarders at any aperture.
Of all the 35mm 1.4 test pics I'v seen really the only one where the bokeh lookes signifcantly different to me is the Ziess.
Last edited:
Pookeyhead
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 11,746
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
DxO sensor tests are fine... i am referring specifically to their lens resolution testing. They weight the results to the centre sharpness. They outline their testing methodology quite clearly. They obviously think that's fine.. some may agree, but a test where a lens can be terrible at the edges, yet still score highly due to being very sharp in the centre is flawed in my opinion. I'm not suggesting either the Nikkor or the Samyang are terrible at the edges BTW... just using that as an example of why their methodology is flawed.
The Samyang's centre performance is not a million miles away from the Nikkor's, with the Nikkor being sharper in the centre at wider apertures, but the Samyang has better edge sharpness wider open... and isn't that the point of a 1.4 lens? Both are beyond excellent in the centre... but many lenses are. Edge performance is the real test IMO. It's noticeably sharper when you look at the real world results. Also. CA is MUCH better controlled on the Samyang. All in all, considering it's price, it really embarrasses the much more expensive Nikkor.
If only it was AF.
The Samyang's centre performance is not a million miles away from the Nikkor's, with the Nikkor being sharper in the centre at wider apertures, but the Samyang has better edge sharpness wider open... and isn't that the point of a 1.4 lens? Both are beyond excellent in the centre... but many lenses are. Edge performance is the real test IMO. It's noticeably sharper when you look at the real world results. Also. CA is MUCH better controlled on the Samyang. All in all, considering it's price, it really embarrasses the much more expensive Nikkor.
If only it was AF.
Last edited:
Moreorless
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 989
- Edit My Images
- No
The overall figures for DxO lens tests are weighted towards the center but there is also clear testing of performance across the frame within the larger review, go into the measurements sections then into sharpness and they've got results across the frame shown on a coloured field map and a graph which mirror the Photozone tests very closely.
I'd agree the Nikon looks overpriced but agenst the Samyang it of course has the benefit of autofocus, with the Sigma around it no longer has the monopoly on that either though.
Again to me alot of the talk of the Sigma's "terrible" bokeh seems to be Nikon/Canon users looking to justify that price difference, if you look hard its maybe very slightly more nervous but the own brand lenses are hardly smooth either.
Last edited:
Cagey75
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 17,146
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
It's the samyang's bokeh that was described as "nervous" - not the sigma. Photozone have yet to review that.
Other sites are more than pleased with it.
http://fstoppers.com/sigma35review
http://www.photographybay.com/2012/12/10/sigma-35mm-f1-4-lens-review/
http://www.samhurdphotography.com/2012/gear-reviews/gear-review-sigma-35mm-1-4-lens-for-nikon
Other sites are more than pleased with it.
http://fstoppers.com/sigma35review
http://www.photographybay.com/2012/12/10/sigma-35mm-f1-4-lens-review/
http://www.samhurdphotography.com/2012/gear-reviews/gear-review-sigma-35mm-1-4-lens-for-nikon
It's usually complaints about Sigma's abundance of lemons rather than their bokeh that I see. Bad autofocus, build quality and sloppy alignment crop up far more than bokeh. As a rule of thumb I'd use Sigma for focal lengths or lenses that didn't exist from the OEM.
Cagey75
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 17,146
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
I'm not their biggest fan either. I've had a few of their lemons in the past. The reason this one catches my attention is because I don't have any 1.4 lens currently, the Nikon 35 is too expensive - as it's not going to be a lens I'll use all the time. I have the 24-70 that will most likely continue to fill that role. 35mm seems perfect for my needs as a fixed walkabout lens - it'll be lighter than the 24-70, wider than my 50mm 1.8, plus better built and it's got that f/1.4 of course.
So far I can't find a bad review. Everyone is raving on about it. Declaring it is better in a lot of ways than the Canon and Nikon versions. I think the lens also looks slick.
What is stopping me is I've seen others get it for £540! But everywhere I look it's £700+
I'm selling an sb900 flash plus that 50mm which would go a long way towards buying this sigma if only I could find it for that lower price!
So far I can't find a bad review. Everyone is raving on about it. Declaring it is better in a lot of ways than the Canon and Nikon versions. I think the lens also looks slick.
What is stopping me is I've seen others get it for £540! But everywhere I look it's £700+
I'm selling an sb900 flash plus that 50mm which would go a long way towards buying this sigma if only I could find it for that lower price!
Currently got a D5100, kit lens and 50mm prime. I'm tempted to save for either a 17-35mm F4 or a D800, realistically which one is going to give me better photo?
I understand that the lens is likely to give me raw quality and quite a bit of flexibility but the body will give me a ton of confidence in regards to the weather sealing and I should be able to comfortably take better photos consistently with the more controls.
Either way I plan to end up with both of these things, just wondering which is the smarter move in the short term. I'm going to hazard a guess at the lens because by the time I can afford the body things "may" have moved on to bigger and better things.
I understand that the lens is likely to give me raw quality and quite a bit of flexibility but the body will give me a ton of confidence in regards to the weather sealing and I should be able to comfortably take better photos consistently with the more controls.
Either way I plan to end up with both of these things, just wondering which is the smarter move in the short term. I'm going to hazard a guess at the lens because by the time I can afford the body things "may" have moved on to bigger and better things.
Last edited:
skysh4rk
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 3,134
- Name
- RJ
- Edit My Images
- No
Errrr... unless I'm missing something, I don't see how getting either a 17-35mm f/4 or a D800 will help you take any better photos at the moment.
On a D5100 a 17-35 f/4 lens would actually seem to offer less flexibility than the kit lens as you only gain 1mm on the wide end, lose 20mm from the long, lose VR, and the lens really isn't even any faster. It would effectively be a kit lens with 20mm and VR lopped off.
If you were to only buy a D800, you would then only have a 50mm lens to use with it as the DX kit lens of the D5100 will heavily vignette on the FX body. You might find a single lens on the D800 rather restrictive to your photography (but maybe not depending on what you want to shoot).
With regard to ruggedness, I think the D800 is a lot of money to spend simply for piece of mind in poor weather. You could just freely use your D5100 in all weather conditions and replace it with a new one if something should ever happen for a lot less than buying a D800. In fact, you could replace the D5100 several times before it added up to the cost of a D800.
What sort of photos are you looking to take? The D800 is a nice camera, but the D5100 is also very capable of producing good images. What is it not allowing you to do?
I'm still dying to get one of these but will have to wait for a while I think,mainly because I don't have the cash and the fact I keep buying items on release not thinking with my head and then cry when the price drops...my d800 being one of those buys.
Check out the FM forums, there some super sharp sample straight from camera(d4).
Cagey75
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 17,146
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
Good point on the price drop front. But someone here managed to get one for £540 - and I remember someone linking a site on here [began with 'm'] that had the same price. Cannot for the life of me think of it.
I've been reading the reviews about the net, all of them say it is better than the Canon and Nikon in many ways.
I've been reading the reviews about the net, all of them say it is better than the Canon and Nikon in many ways.
I should probably add I use my 50mm significantly more than my kit lens, I only ever use my kit lens for the wide end.
I take a lot of landscapes and I want to try out some wide angle stuff. I plan on going full frame in the future any so the question is more when, I decided a 17-35 F4 VR was the best lens I had my eye on because it covers the areas I want to cover right now and I felt the VR was more useful than the F2.8 model.
I find it irritating to change all the settings in a menu on the D5100, I can "do" most of what I'd like but it takes time. The pro styled body is mostly what I want, realistically its between a D800 and a D7000, a D600 is an option but I feel like I'd rather wait longer and get the higher end body.
The low light performance of full frame definitely a big plus to me as is the extra focus points basically just the quality of life things, I'm not sure if its just a placebo effect but I also feel like the D800 renders colour in a lot nicer way compared to my D5100. Another big plus would be the ability to use AFD lenses rather than just AFS as it seems theres quite a few old lenses which are still simply fantastic but I wouldn't like to lose the ability to focus because without a viewfinder like they had on the film cameras which blurs out most of the image and allows you to focus a lot more accurately and lastly I would love a 100% prism viewfinder as this old film camera I have next to me put my D5100 to shame in that area. The idea is to sell my D5100 with the kit lens and then purchase a D800 body and just live with the 50mm and zoom with my legs until I can afford another lens.
There's probably a few other things too. Also apologies for how fragmented this is written; I went back to add things a few too many times.
The 14-24 is the wide angle zoom you should look at instead of the 16-35 if you are a landscape buff. Almost any other camera I'd say upgrade the glass first, but the D800 is an exception, it's excellent. Coming from a DX you'll wonder why you waited so long. You don't need to spend £1,000+ on every lens either. A 28mm 1.8G go for £350 to £400 and the manual focus Samyangs mentioned earlier will provide much bang for your buck.
Last edited:
I love the look of the 14-24 but the lack of filters is a bit of a turn off. (I guess I'm just looking for an excuse not to spend an arm and a leg?) I thought getting a 17-35 and a 14mm prime would be a smarter option because then I can use filters at least on the 17-24mm range rather than not at all! That being said I'm not certain of anything until the money leaves my pocket.
Cagey75
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 17,146
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
Don't ever feel you have to explain why you want to upgrade your gear.
The reasons you mentioned are the ones I upgraded for too though. Better build, better ISO performance, getting the best out of better FX lenses, and better all-round controls at your finger tips. I hate having to use the menu outside of quick check on images. I have the histogram set to come up on preview which can be handy, but other than that ... only when I want to make changes to more permanent settings.
It is hard to advise on your choices though. Personally I'd go with the better body in this case, use the 50mm while getting to grips with the camera and save on the side for another FX lens. The 28mm 1.8 mentioned will be great for Landscape, and has that wide aperture for indoor/general use too. It's not that expensive either.
The D800 feels funny with a 50mm on though
Like it's all one sided. Maybe because I'm so used to having the bigger lenses like the 24-70 on now?
Last edited:
Mahone
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 346
- Name
- John
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I finally got my D800 yesterday after Amazon lost my original order!
So I have gone from an X100 (which I am keeping!) to an D800 with Nikon 24-70 f2.8, 50mm f1.4G and nikon 85mm f1.4D...
Quite a difference in kit
Charged the battery and had a play indoors in low light and I am very impressed already. Hand holding seems fine to me, I was worried after hearing all that stuff about needing a tripod to get sharp images etc. I am sure that might be the case to get the very best from the camera but I already feel I can use it like I would any other DSLR.
I had already upgraded my PC to a maxed out 27" iMac and have no problem whatsoever transferring and editing RAW files. I can hardly tell any difference from the X100 files speed wise, which is a great relief!
I am going to take some photos for a friends dance school so that will be the first proper test.
I love the controls too. After an hour I am comfortable with all the buttons and making adjustments etc, seems to me that everything is where i need it making it feel like I am more involved in the composition and photo taking and not thinking about the controls, if that makes sense.
I will post up a couple of pics when I have a chance to get out and take something decent....
Cheers
So I have gone from an X100 (which I am keeping!) to an D800 with Nikon 24-70 f2.8, 50mm f1.4G and nikon 85mm f1.4D...
Quite a difference in kit
Charged the battery and had a play indoors in low light and I am very impressed already. Hand holding seems fine to me, I was worried after hearing all that stuff about needing a tripod to get sharp images etc. I am sure that might be the case to get the very best from the camera but I already feel I can use it like I would any other DSLR.
I had already upgraded my PC to a maxed out 27" iMac and have no problem whatsoever transferring and editing RAW files. I can hardly tell any difference from the X100 files speed wise, which is a great relief!
I am going to take some photos for a friends dance school so that will be the first proper test.
I love the controls too. After an hour I am comfortable with all the buttons and making adjustments etc, seems to me that everything is where i need it making it feel like I am more involved in the composition and photo taking and not thinking about the controls, if that makes sense.
I will post up a couple of pics when I have a chance to get out and take something decent....
Cheers
AshleyC
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 2,956
- Name
- ...
- Edit My Images
- No
I think you can get an adaptor for it now so you can stick filters on. I've got the 16-35 and its fantastic, still very very sharp just not very very sharp + 1 like the 14-24
Cagey75
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 17,146
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
Welcome to the club
Two myths right there you've busted from the off, good stuff. I don't know where some get the idea you have to use a tripod to get sharp shots. You have to be a little more spot on, but otherwise, same as any dslr as you say. Also, I've never had trouble with the larger RAW file sizes either. Ok, I use an i7 laptop, but I think anyone with a camera like this should be able to manage that.
Cagey75
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 17,146
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
With your technique [Hand holding, focusing, not shaking like a leaf while shooting ...] As I said, a little more is all. You are firing with a chunk more megapixels and any faults show up that much more. I don't think it's the type of camera to just hand to anyone and expect a decent, sharp shot. With my D90 I had no problems doing that.
Last edited:
Mahone
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 346
- Name
- John
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Absolutely love this camera! Went out for a walk with the dog this morning and took a few snaps. Now, I am fairly new to photography having started just over a year ago so my photos won't be that great but check this out for hand held:
ISO 900, 1/160 F4.0
At first I thought "damn, wish I brought the tripod" but still got some nice photos hand held in tricky light.
I am only posting this so others who are considering this camera are not put off by the technique etc thing.
Just wets my appetite for tripod days on the mountains!
ISO 900, 1/160 F4.0
At first I thought "damn, wish I brought the tripod" but still got some nice photos hand held in tricky light.
I am only posting this so others who are considering this camera are not put off by the technique etc thing.
Just wets my appetite for tripod days on the mountains!