Nikon people lens recommendations - GoFuckYourself.com

stickyfingerz · 06-10-2009, 01:54 PM

Im shooting for a magazine here in Nashville, and I shot primarily stage photos where lighting highly fluctuates, I need someone with more than an 18-55 zoom also, that will work well in lower light condition, and can be used sans flash at time. Currently using a Nikon d60 for most stuff I am shooting. Would like an 18-200 I think. Want it to be VR still and have auto focus built in for quick candid stuff where I don't have time to fuck with manual focus. 500.00 or less is what I had in mind but would go 700.00 to 1000.00. Looking to get something in the next month or so. Shooting ton of stuff right now as its Cma fest week. I really enjoy doing it. So what do you recommend for those conditions?

Deej · 06-10-2009, 01:58 PM

if youre shooting magazine... you want to spend 1000... 500 wont cut it...

as for nikon, I cant help you...

stickyfingerz · 06-10-2009, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deej

if youre shooting magazine... you want to spend 1000... 500 wont cut it...

as for nikon, I cant help you...

Nah I don't buy that you have to have a super high end lens to shoot mag quality stuff. I 'might' get something that expensive soon, but the stuff Im shooting they are already happy with. Mainly I want more flexibility on lower light situations, and more zoom capability so I can get in tighter to musicians further back on stage.

Anyone have this lens?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc..._6G_ED_VR.html

Deej · 06-10-2009, 02:05 PM

Well it must be a magazine that likes low lit candid shots and dosnt care about pixelation...

When shooting digital for magazines you at least need a great lens...

I dont buy that a magazine is happy with lesser quality images for printing...

Deej · 06-10-2009, 02:06 PM

plus, a 1000 lens isnt 'super high end'

its the second step in quality...

stickyfingerz · 06-10-2009, 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deej

Well it must be a magazine that likes low lit candid shots and dosnt care about pixelation...

When shooting digital for magazines you at least need a great lens...

I dont buy that a magazine is happy with lesser quality images for printing...

I don't get much pixilation with my d60. And I've printed out 2.5' x 3.0' prints off it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deej

plus, a 1000 lens isnt 'super high end'

its the second step in quality...

I know its not super high end, but 1000.00 is still more than what a d60 costs for a body and the 18-55mm lens so its still up there in cost.

Deej · 06-10-2009, 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

I don't get much pixilation with my d60. And I've printed out 2.5' x 3.0' prints off it.

I know its not super high end, but 1000.00 is still more than what a d60 costs for a body and the 18-55mm lens so its still up there in cost.

All correct...

and im by no means capable/setup for any magazine publications, but just the simple fact that you said magazine makes me think all this...

stickyfingerz · 06-10-2009, 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deej

All correct...

and im by no means capable/setup for any magazine publications, but just the simple fact that you said magazine makes me think all this...

Remember we aren't talking full page spreads normally, most of the shots in the mag are maybe 5"x5" or so. Unless Im shooting something like for an interview where its a posed shot, wherein I have a d300 I can use, and grab some alien b's and prepared lighting, or shoot outside etc. I only take the d60 out for the club scene stuff where it could get dropped or something spilled on it etc. I just the build in flash even, and just dial the manual flash settings up or down depending on distance, and house lighting etc. I have another little trick I do too which is I cut the finger off a latex glove and put it over the built in flash to soften the light a bit more when the situation calls. More than likely going to add an external flash plus a light sphere by the end of this month, but it adds bulk to my setup, and with people bumping into you, and partying part of the night I like to keep things as compact as possible.

marketsmart · 06-10-2009, 02:24 PM

since when did you stop becoming talent for Sailor Boy Magazine and start photographing for them?

dyna mo · 06-10-2009, 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

Nah I don't buy that you have to have a super high end lens to shoot mag quality stuff. I 'might' get something that expensive soon, but the stuff Im shooting they are already happy with. Mainly I want more flexibility on lower light situations, and more zoom capability so I can get in tighter to musicians further back on stage.

Anyone have this lens?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc..._6G_ED_VR.html

i shoot with this lens and give it 2 thumbs up. it is a plastic mount so if there's a lot of lens changing going on this might not be the lens for you. it is soft in the corners at 18mm, but that shouldn't matter to a good shooter.

af is a little slow in comparison to the pro nikon lenses.

overall it is a super nice lens imo.

borked · 06-10-2009, 02:33 PM

Sigma 70-200 mm f : 2,8 II DG APO EX HSM Nikon

awesome lens never to be regretted - around $800, but the equiv Nikon is $2k+.
AF is lightening quick.
Only prob is, at f4 or less, autofocus isn't perfect, not bad at all, but not perfect. However, at those wide apertures, in manual focus mode it's awesome at f2.8 - perfect for low light conditions.

stickyfingerz · 06-10-2009, 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo

i shoot with this lens and give it 2 thumbs up. it is a plastic mount so if there's a lot of lens changing going on this might not be the lens for you. it is soft in the corners at 18mm, but that shouldn't matter to a good shooter.

af is a little slow in comparison to the pro nikon lenses.

overall it is a super nice lens imo.

105mm is quite a bit of an increase from my 55 so might be a good middle ground for now. Have you tried much with lower light no flash type shots?

Here are a couple quick shots from 2 nights ago.

A black and white of some hot chicks. One in the white kept coming up and grabbing my ass while I was shooting my stage shots LOL

No flash here, but spot lights were nice and soft yet bright.

dyna mo · 06-10-2009, 02:38 PM

i don't have enough experience with a variety of lenses to compare how the lens does in low light. it is a f 3.5 so it certainly won't see in the dark but it's never let me down.

i find the sweet spot for this lens is 80-90mm f5.6

if you want a great flash that is very small, i recommend the sb-400. small and well-priced and a solid performer

borked · 06-10-2009, 02:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

I don't get much pixilation with my d60. And I've printed out 2.5' x 3.0' prints off it.

I know its not super high end, but 1000.00 is still more than what a d60 costs for a body and the 18-55mm lens so its still up there in cost.

sorry, I don't agree - 3 foot prints and not pixelated? I had a D60 and a decent A3 photo printer and the prints were pixelated. I moved up to a D300 and invested in some semi-pro lenses and the diff in quality is just mind blowing. OK, maybe my D60's stock 18-55 suffered from front focus or something, but semi-pro lenses are well worth the investment.

And the camera - D300 produces very beautiful A3 photo prints. I couldn't say that about the D60.

PurrrsianPussyKat · 06-10-2009, 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

I know its not super high end, but 1000.00 is still more than what a d60 costs for a body and the 18-55mm lens so its still up there in cost.

The body is the cheap part skippy.. the lenses are where the price skyrockets.

PurrrsianPussyKat · 06-10-2009, 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by borked

Sigma 70-200 mm f : 2,8 II DG APO EX HSM Nikon

I second this suggestion. Excellent lense!

stickyfingerz · 06-10-2009, 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PurrrsianPussyKat

I second this suggestion. Excellent lense!

Taking a look.

stickyfingerz · 06-10-2009, 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by borked

sorry, I don't agree - 3 foot prints and not pixelated? I had a D60 and a decent A3 photo printer and the prints were pixelated. I moved up to a D300 and invested in some semi-pro lenses and the diff in quality is just mind blowing. OK, maybe my D60's stock 18-55 suffered from front focus or something, but semi-pro lenses are well worth the investment.

And the camera - D300 produces very beautiful A3 photo prints. I couldn't say that about the D60.

Were you shooting in jpeg or raw? The 18-55 lens is a solid lens for general photography, and you can work around it to still get some impressive shots, but its a starter lens we know that. I've popped on the 18-200mm vr lens from a d300 and it makes a huge difference no doubt. Also when you printed did you bump up the dpi to 300? or leave it at 72dpi?

Is this the lens you guys are referring to for the sigma?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...2_8_II_EX.html

Ncite · 06-10-2009, 03:24 PM

you need a Nikor 80-200 F2.8 lens. The 2.8 is the important part for low light.

stickyfingerz · 06-10-2009, 03:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ncite

you need a Nikor 80-200 F2.8 lens. The 2.8 is the important part for low light.

Looking..

Only thing so far with that Sigma lens is that I saw a lot of reviews saying a mono pod was recommended for extending shooting due to the weight of the lens. The lens has an additional tripod connector to help support the lens weight.

stickyfingerz · 06-10-2009, 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ncite

you need a Nikor 80-200 F2.8 lens. The 2.8 is the important part for low light.

only downside there is AF won't work with a d60 so switching to candids might be a pain.

JP-pornshooter · 06-10-2009, 03:33 PM

ok i am not a fan of your other posts but perhaps it all comes back in good karma..

check out the 18-200 edVR lens, i hardly ever take it off my camera...

and btw, i dont know of any magazines NOT wanting ISO 160 or better, and the D60 wont quiet cut the mustard there..

Alvaro · 06-10-2009, 03:35 PM

the af lenses will work in D60 but only in manual mode

you should get the af-s witch is more expensive

if you want to shoot in low light conditions without graining you should look for a more expensive camera with this ability.. i guess any 55-200mm af-s lens will do it for you

stickyfingerz · 06-10-2009, 03:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JP-pornshooter

ok i am not a fan of your other posts but perhaps it all comes back in good karma..

check out the 18-200 edVR lens, i hardly ever take it off my camera...

and btw, i dont know of any magazines NOT wanting ISO 160 or better, and the D60 wont quiet cut the mustard there..

Hit me up sometime on icq and chat with me. Most everyone that knows me personally knows Im pretty true blue and loyal as anyone can be. Ill check out that lens. If its due to political stuff, well I could give fuck all what someones politics are when it comes to business. I have loved everything photo I've seen you post over the years. You could be Obama and Kerry's secret offspring and I wouldn't care lol.

Most of my real life friends politics are polar opposites to mine, but really basing friendship or business relationships on someones politics is a terrible thing to do.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alvaro

the af lenses will work in D60 but only in manual mode

you should get the af-s witch is more expensive

if you want to shoot in low light conditions without graining you should look for a more expensive camera with this ability.. i guess any 55-200mm af-s lens will do it for you

Ya honestly for candid shots I don't want to fuck with manual mode especially in a darker club. A quick AF I think is a must unless I want to be flipping lenses all night and risking getting dirt on my sensor.

Grapesoda · 06-10-2009, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

Im shooting for a magazine here in Nashville, and I shot primarily stage photos where lighting highly fluctuates, I need someone with more than an 18-55 zoom also, that will work well in lower light condition, and can be used sans flash at time. Currently using a Nikon d60 for most stuff I am shooting. Would like an 18-200 I think. Want it to be VR still and have auto focus built in for quick candid stuff where I don't have time to fuck with manual focus. 500.00 or less is what I had in mind but would go 700.00 to 1000.00. Looking to get something in the next month or so. Shooting ton of stuff right now as its Cma fest week. I really enjoy doing it. So what do you recommend for those conditions?

the d60 doesn't really shoot clean enough at high ISO to use 5.6 or slower glass. if you wanna shoot low light you'll need 2.8 or faster glass. $.02 -bmb

Grapesoda · 06-10-2009, 06:05 PM

[QUOTE=borked;15945462]Sigma 70-200 mm f : 2,8 II DG APO EX HSM Nikon

equiv Nikon is $2k+.

Only prob is, at f4 or less, autofocus isn't perfect, not bad at all, but not perfect./QUOTE]

stickyfingerz · 06-10-2009, 06:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bm bradley

the d60 doesn't really shoot clean enough at high ISO to use 5.6 or slower glass. if you wanna shoot low light you'll need 2.8 or faster glass. $.02 -bmb

Ya that is seeming to be the consensus so far. I still get a lot of great shots just with the kit lens but I also lose alot due to movement in low light. A lot depends on the clubs lighting setup. I've had varied results just using the built in flash and dropping the flash power down, and even with the little latex glove finger I throw over to help soften the flashes light a bit. Not idea, but you have to work with what you have. Thanks for the recommendations Bm.

HomerSimpson · 06-10-2009, 06:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by borked

Sigma 70-200 mm f : 2,8 II DG APO EX HSM Nikon

awesome lens never to be regretted - around $800, but the equiv Nikon is $2k+.
AF is lightening quick.
Only prob is, at f4 or less, autofocus isn't perfect, not bad at all, but not perfect. However, at those wide apertures, in manual focus mode it's awesome at f2.8 - perfect for low light conditions.

first all Sigma lenses are just waste of money - trust me!
buy only Nikon lenses. period.

you can try with 18-105 or 18-135 if you don't need much of a range
(and it's bit sharper than 18-200)
or just buy 18-200VR and get it over with

Silver Sinema Parker · 06-10-2009, 06:31 PM

you're better off going this way...

Adorama has the D90 for around $1150 with the kit lens.

get the D90 with the 18-105mm vr cost is $1150 then sell your D60 for around $650-$700. Then you have a better camera, better lens for around $600 for an upgrade.

stickyfingerz · 06-10-2009, 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silver Sinema Parker

you're better off going this way...

Adorama has the D90 for around $1150 with the kit lens.

get the D90 with the 18-105mm vr cost is $1150 then sell your D60 for around $650-$700. Then you have a better camera, better lens for around $600 for an upgrade.

I've thought of that, and planned on upgrading to the d90 anyways, so that is an option, or just buy that d90 package and keep the d60 as a backup. d90 has a few things I want such as built in bracketing to play with hdr photos more.

stickyfingerz · 06-10-2009, 06:49 PM

Here is another pic from Monday.

Grapesoda · 06-10-2009, 07:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

Ya that is seeming to be the consensus so far. I still get a lot of great shots just with the kit lens but I also lose alot due to movement in low light. A lot depends on the clubs lighting setup. I've had varied results just using the built in flash and dropping the flash power down, and even with the little latex glove finger I throw over to help soften the flashes light a bit. Not idea, but you have to work with what you have. Thanks for the recommendations Bm.

use 'rear curtain' flash. gonna pull the BG a bit and 'freeze' the action, hopefully

Grapesoda · 06-10-2009, 07:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silver Sinema Parker

you're better off going this way...

Adorama has the D90 for around $1150 with the kit lens.

get the D90 with the 18-105mm vr cost is $1150 then sell your D60 for around $650-$700. Then you have a better camera, better lens for around $600 for an upgrade.

very good plan

Grapesoda · 06-10-2009, 07:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

Looking..

Only thing so far with that Sigma lens is that I saw a lot of reviews saying a mono pod was recommended for extending shooting due to the weight of the lens. The lens has an additional tripod connector to help support the lens weight.

the thing is the sigma does NOT have vr/is. this is why the tripod/mono pod gimbel is mentioned in association with the 70-200 2.8 sigma. the weight is no big deal... you're young man, if you can't shoot with a 70-200 you have 'pussy ass'

JustDaveXxx · 06-10-2009, 07:53 PM

D60??? save your money for a full frame camera.

I got a D3 and just about every piece of glass out there. And moving from a D200 to a D3 full frame made the biggest difference in my low light quality. N series lenses really rock!!!

Good luck

stickyfingerz · 06-10-2009, 08:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JustDaveXxx

D60??? save your money for a full frame camera.

I got a D3 and just about every piece of glass out there. And moving from a D200 to a D3 full frame made the biggest difference in my low light quality. N series lenses really rock!!!

Good luck

Ill more than likely do that at some point, but photography is more of a hobby to me for now, though I do have a paid mainstream gig doing it now. Its not a lot, but I enjoy it, and also writing articles for them, so published in a soon to be national magazine will be cool. Nothing of mine in this issue coming up, but I will in the next one. Ill upgrade as I go.

JP513 · 06-10-2009, 08:05 PM

All right, here's the deal.

Your B&W shots are pretty good, but if you want to execute ultra sharp shots with good, beautiful bokeh, you need to go larger than all of these these variable aperture (3.5-5.6) zoom lenses which go only as large as 3.5, and when you zoom them, they get smaller like f/5.6.

The main problem is your D60, which as you know, does not autofocus on AF-D lenses and requires AF-S lenses. If you have a D300, why are you not shooting with it? I would recommend you to use that and get a 50mm f/1.8 for $125 and/or an 80-200 f/2.8 @ $950. If that's too much, the 50mm is dirty cheap, and shot on a D300, you can gain from the 50/1.8's low light capability. Plus you have 12.3mp, plenty of room to crop since your 50mm lenses don't zoom obviously.

I had the 18-200 and it was good as a consumer lens, but the distortion is very bad and for advanced work in low light conditions, it just doesn't cut it.

An excellent alternative is the 35-70 f/2.8, which is discontinued but can be had for about $300-400 used. Great quality and the reach to 70mm should be all you need for what you're doing. But honestly, the 50mm f/1.8 on the D300 is the way to go.

stickyfingerz · 06-10-2009, 08:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bm bradley

the thing is the sigma does NOT have vr/is. this is why the tripod/mono pod gimbel is mentioned in association with the 70-200 2.8 sigma. the weight is no big deal... you're young man, if you can't shoot with a 70-200 you have 'pussy ass'

Its only 3lbs so not a big deal really. Prob older than you think though hehe. Trying to read up more on the sigma lenses as far as reviews. So far majority are very good.

SilentKnight · 06-10-2009, 10:16 PM

Late into the thread - but I shoot with an 18-200 nikkor VR lens on my d80.

Great all-purpose lens...love it.

borked · 06-11-2009, 12:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

Its only 3lbs so not a big deal really. Prob older than you think though hehe. Trying to read up more on the sigma lenses as far as reviews. So far majority are very good.

Take your camera into a shop and play around with the Sigma lens - get a full head shot of someone at 200mm at f5.6 iso 200 then zoom right in on the preview window on the eyes. Absolutely fantastic iris detail.

I absolutely love mine - like I said, the only gripe I have is if you repeat the above at f2.8 the detail in the iris is lost, but you only notice this when zooming right in - the overall picture isn't noticeable. However, YMMV and you may test one that doesn't front focus that tiny centimetre. It's so negligible on mine, that it isn't even worth sending back to Sigma for correction.

Weight wise, it is a bit of a monster, and the lens will cast a shadow using the built-in camera flash. However, if you're shooting at 1:250 or faster, you can hold it steady enough with the correct pose (elbows dug into the ribs) to not get camera shake.

here's a zoom on an eye of a monkey thingy taken at a zoo @70mm f10 at ISO 1250(!) taken through glass (you can see the window reflection)

exifdata:

Code:

ExifTool Version Number         : 7.76
File Name                       : _DSC1593_2.jpg
Directory                       : .
File Size                       : 153 kB
File Modification Date/Time     : 2009:06:11 09:33:08+02:00
File Type                       : JPEG
MIME Type                       : image/jpeg
Exif Byte Order                 : Big-endian (Motorola, MM)
Make                            : NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model Name               : NIKON D300
Orientation                     : Horizontal (normal)
X Resolution                    : 72
Y Resolution                    : 72
Resolution Unit                 : inches
Software                        : QuickTime 7.6.2
Modify Date                     : 2009:06:11 09:30:49
Artist                          : 
Host Computer                   : Mac OS X 10.5.7
Y Cb Cr Positioning             : Co-sited
Copyright                       : BorkedCoder
Exposure Time                   : 1/125
F Number                        : 10.0
Exposure Program                : Aperture-priority AE
ISO                             : 1250
Exif Version                    : 0220
Date/Time Original              : 2009:02:27 13:53:28
Create Date                     : 2009:02:27 13:53:28
Components Configuration        : Y, Cb, Cr, -
Compressed Bits Per Pixel       : 4
Exposure Compensation           : 0
Max Aperture Value              : 2.8
Metering Mode                   : Multi-segment
Light Source                    : Cloudy
Flash                           : No Flash
Focal Length                    : 70.0 mm
Maker Note Version              : 2.10
Quality                         : Fine
White Balance                   : Cloudy
Focus Mode                      : AF-C
Flash Setting                   : Normal
Flash Type                      : 
White Balance Fine Tune         : 0 0
Color Balance 1                 : 1.6640625 1.1875 1 1
Program Shift                   : 0
Exposure Difference             : 0
Compression                     : JPEG (old-style)
Preview Image Start             : 13742
Preview Image Length            : 21716
Flash Exposure Compensation     : 0
ISO Setting                     : 1250
Image Boundary                  : 0 0 4288 2848
Flash Exposure Bracket Value    : 0.0
Exposure Bracket Value          : 0
Crop Hi Speed                   : Off (4352x2868 cropped to 4352x2868 at pixel 0,0)
Serial Number                   : 4118884
VR Info Version                 : 0100
Vibration Reduction             : Off
Image Authentication            : Off
Active D-Lighting               : Off
Picture Control Version         : 0100
Picture Control Name            : Standard
Picture Control Base            : Standard
Picture Control Adjust          : Default Settings
Picture Control Quick Adjust    : Normal
Brightness                      : Normal
Hue Adjustment                  : None
Filter Effect                   : n/a
Toning Effect                   : n/a
Toning Saturation               : n/a
Timezone                        : +01:00
Daylight Savings                : No
Date Display Format             : Y/M/D
ISO Expansion                   : Off
ISO2                            : 1270
ISO Expansion 2                 : Off
Lens Type                       : G
Lens                            : 70-200mm f/2.8
Flash Mode                      : Did Not Fire
Shooting Mode                   : Single-Frame
Auto Bracket Release            : Auto Release
Shot Info Version               : 0210
Noise Reduction                 : Off
WB GRBG Levels                  : 256 426 304 256
Lens Data Version               : 0203
Exit Pupil Position             : 97.5 mm
AF Aperture                     : 2.8
Focus Position                  : 0x11
Focus Distance                  : 1.06 m
Lens ID Number                  : 238
Lens F Stops                    : 6.00
Min Focal Length                : 71.3 mm
Max Focal Length                : 201.6 mm
Max Aperture At Min Focal       : 2.8
Max Aperture At Max Focal       : 2.8
MCU Version                     : 75
Effective Max Aperture          : 2.8
Retouch History                 : None
Image Data Size                 : 6326585
Shutter Count                   : 1395
Flash Info Version              : 0103
External Flash Firmware         : n/a
External Flash Flags            : (none)
Flash Commander Mode            : Off
Flash Control Mode              : Off
Multi Exposure Version          : 0100
Multi Exposure Mode             : Off
Multi Exposure Shots            : 0
Multi Exposure Auto Gain        : Off
High ISO Noise Reduction        : Normal
AF Info 2 Version               : 0100
AF Area Mode                    : Single Area
Auto Focus                      : On
Primary AF Point                : B6
AF Points Used                  : B6
File Info Version               : 0100
Directory Number                : 100
File Number                     : 1272
User Comment                    : BorkedCoder
Sub Sec Time                    : 22
Sub Sec Time Original           : 22
Sub Sec Time Digitized          : 22
Flashpix Version                : 0100
Color Space                     : sRGB
Exif Image Width                : 4288
Exif Image Height               : 2848
Sensing Method                  : One-chip color area
File Source                     : Digital Camera
Scene Type                      : Directly photographed
Custom Rendered                 : Normal
Exposure Mode                   : Auto
Digital Zoom Ratio              : 1
Focal Length In 35mm Format     : 105 mm
Scene Capture Type              : Standard
Contrast                        : Normal
Saturation                      : Normal
Sharpness                       : Normal
Subject Distance Range          : Unknown
GPS Version ID                  : 2.2.0.0
Image Width                     : 665
Image Height                    : 441
Encoding Process                : Baseline DCT, Huffman coding
Bits Per Sample                 : 8
Color Components                : 3
Y Cb Cr Sub Sampling            : YCbCr4:2:2 (2 1)
Profile CMM Type                : appl
Profile Version                 : 2.2.0
Profile Class                   : Input Device Profile
Color Space Data                : RGB
Profile Connection Space        : XYZ
Profile Date Time               : 2003:07:01 00:00:00
Profile File Signature          : acsp
Primary Platform                : Apple Computer Inc.
CMM Flags                       : Not Embedded, Independent
Device Manufacturer             : appl
Device Model                    : 
Device Attributes               : Reflective, Glossy, Positive, Color
Rendering Intent                : Perceptual
Connection Space Illuminant     : 0.9642 1 0.82491
Profile Creator                 : appl
Profile ID                      : 0
Red Matrix Column               : 0.45427 0.24263 0.01482
Green Matrix Column             : 0.35332 0.67441 0.09042
Blue Matrix Column              : 0.15662 0.08336 0.71953
Media White Point               : 0.95047 1 1.0891
Chromatic Adaptation            : 1.04788 0.02292 -0.0502 0.02957 0.99049 -0.01706 -0.00923 0.01508 0.75165
Profile Description             : Camera RGB Profile
Profile Copyright               : Copyright 2003 Apple Computer Inc., all rights reserved.
Profile Description ML          : Camera RGB Profile
Aperture                        : 10.0
Blue Balance                    : 1.1875
Image Size                      : 665x441
Lens ID                         : Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX APO DG Macro HSM II
Lens                            : 70-200mm f/2.8 G
Preview Image                   : (Binary data 21716 bytes, use -b option to extract)
Red Balance                     : 1.664063
Scale Factor To 35 mm Equivalent: 1.5
Shutter Speed                   : 1/125
Create Date                     : 2009:02:27 13:53:28.22
Date/Time Original              : 2009:02:27 13:53:28.22
Modify Date                     : 2009:06:11 09:30:49.22
Thumbnail Image                 : (Binary data 4584 bytes, use -b option to extract)
Circle Of Confusion             : 0.020 mm
Depth Of Field                  : 0.09 m (1.02 - 1.10)
Field Of View                   : 18.2 deg (0.34 m)
Focal Length                    : 70.0 mm (35 mm equivalent: 105.0 mm)
Hyperfocal Distance             : 24.46 m
Light Value                     : 10.0

perfectodollars-gabrio · 06-11-2009, 05:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

Im shooting for a magazine here in Nashville, and I shot primarily stage photos where lighting highly fluctuates, I need someone with more than an 18-55 zoom also, that will work well in lower light condition, and can be used sans flash at time. Currently using a Nikon d60 for most stuff I am shooting. Would like an 18-200 I think. Want it to be VR still and have auto focus built in for quick candid stuff where I don't have time to fuck with manual focus. 500.00 or less is what I had in mind but would go 700.00 to 1000.00. Looking to get something in the next month or so. Shooting ton of stuff right now as its Cma fest week. I really enjoy doing it. So what do you recommend for those conditions?

shot me a message on icq when you're around, ill recommend some stuff.. Nikon rulez!

suesheboy · 06-11-2009, 06:12 AM

The 18-200 VR is the main lens I use. Not perfect but with decent light I love it for the size and the price.

stickyfingerz · 06-11-2009, 10:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by suesheboy

The 18-200 VR is the main lens I use. Not perfect but with decent light I love it for the size and the price.

I've used it on my camera a few times, its a good lens for sure. Going to get out to do some shooting today and tonight if I can break free.

Silver Sinema Parker · 06-11-2009, 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JustDaveXxx

D60??? save your money for a full frame camera.

I got a D3 and just about every piece of glass out there. And moving from a D200 to a D3 full frame made the biggest difference in my low light quality. N series lenses really rock!!!

Good luck

JustDave!!!! What up pimp? How's everything?

Was just a cost effective solution within his needs financially and technically.

CIVMatt · 06-11-2009, 10:35 AM

How about a Tamron 28-70 f2.8 ? Great low light lens, like 3 years in a row lens of the year for that price range, $399 I think

stickyfingerz · 06-11-2009, 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CIVMatt

How about a Tamron 28-70 f2.8 ? Great low light lens, like 3 years in a row lens of the year for that price range, $399 I think

Boxer has some Tamron lenses I think, and with good results. Ill do a search on that one. The 70mm is a little short sited though. Looking for 100mm or better. Lot of times I can't get up on the stage to shoot, sometimes I can. Depends on where I am and who I know a lot of times. lol

JP-pornshooter · 06-11-2009, 11:15 AM

the problem with using anything other than nikon/nikkor is much slower AF action and it sounds like you need to be pretty quick to get the right shot.
i have the Tamron2.8f 28-70 (and it is super nice glass but slower to focus especially in low light..), also i have the nikon 2.8 70-200VR, the nikon 18-200VR and a few other..
also buying nikon means you get top notch service if you ever need to get the lens cleaned or serviced..
by upgrading from your d60 you also get better and faster AF..

stickyfingerz · 06-11-2009, 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JP-pornshooter

the problem with using anything other than nikon/nikkor is much slower AF action and it sounds like you need to be pretty quick to get the right shot.
i have the Tamron2.8f 28-70 (and it is super nice glass but slower to focus especially in low light..), also i have the nikon 2.8 70-200VR, the nikon 18-200VR and a few other..
also buying nikon means you get top notch service if you ever need to get the lens cleaned or serviced..
by upgrading from your d60 you also get better and faster AF..

Ya agreed, I was very close to just getting the d90, but I knew I could easily get 75% of what I paid for the camera back if I sold it, and Ill probably upgrade to the d90 in not too long. Im a video guy, and photography is a new hobby for me. So most of what I am making shooting and writing for the magazine is going right back into new equipment, but doing it slow and as I need it.

stickyfingerz · 06-12-2009, 03:57 PM

Little update same lens and all, but wanted to share this pic lol. Camera is the ultimate ice breaker, and gotta love when they walk up to you and say "can you take our pic please?" Well... yes surely of course hehe. Bit of the Nashville trim to share.

JP-pornshooter · 06-12-2009, 04:09 PM

you need to get one of them really high output on camera flash (try quantum)
will expose underwear or none etc.. yes i know, damn perverted.

06-10-2009, 01:54 PM	#1
stickyfingerz Doin fine Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 24,983	Nikon people lens recommendations Im shooting for a magazine here in Nashville, and I shot primarily stage photos where lighting highly fluctuates, I need someone with more than an 18-55 zoom also, that will work well in lower light condition, and can be used sans flash at time. Currently using a Nikon d60 for most stuff I am shooting. Would like an 18-200 I think. Want it to be VR still and have auto focus built in for quick candid stuff where I don't have time to fuck with manual focus. 500.00 or less is what I had in mind but would go 700.00 to 1000.00. Looking to get something in the next month or so. Shooting ton of stuff right now as its Cma fest week. I really enjoy doing it. So what do you recommend for those conditions?

06-10-2009, 01:58 PM	#2
Deej I make pixels work Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: I live here... Posts: 24,386	if youre shooting magazine... you want to spend 1000... 500 wont cut it... as for nikon, I cant help you... __________________ Deej's Designs n' What Not Hit me up for Design, CSS & Photo Retouching Icq#30096880

06-10-2009, 02:05 PM	#4
Deej I make pixels work Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: I live here... Posts: 24,386	Well it must be a magazine that likes low lit candid shots and dosnt care about pixelation... When shooting digital for magazines you at least need a great lens... I dont buy that a magazine is happy with lesser quality images for printing... __________________ Deej's Designs n' What Not Hit me up for Design, CSS & Photo Retouching Icq#30096880

06-10-2009, 02:06 PM	#5
Deej I make pixels work Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: I live here... Posts: 24,386	plus, a 1000 lens isnt 'super high end' its the second step in quality... __________________ Deej's Designs n' What Not Hit me up for Design, CSS & Photo Retouching Icq#30096880

06-10-2009, 02:33 PM	#11
borked Totally Borked Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 6,284	Sigma 70-200 mm f : 2,8 II DG APO EX HSM Nikon awesome lens never to be regretted - around $800, but the equiv Nikon is $2k+. AF is lightening quick. Only prob is, at f4 or less, autofocus isn't perfect, not bad at all, but not perfect. However, at those wide apertures, in manual focus mode it's awesome at f2.8 - perfect for low light conditions. __________________ For coding work - hit me up on andy // borkedcoder // com (consider figuring out the email as test #1) All models are wrong, but some are useful. George E.P. Box. p202 Last edited by borked; 06-10-2009 at 02:34 PM..

06-10-2009, 02:24 PM	#9
marketsmart HOMICIDAL TROLL KILLER Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Sunnybrook Institution for the Criminally Insane Posts: 20,419	since when did you stop becoming talent for Sailor Boy Magazine and start photographing for them?

06-10-2009, 02:38 PM	#13
dyna mo The People's Post Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: invisible 7-11 Posts: 64,588	i don't have enough experience with a variety of lenses to compare how the lens does in low light. it is a f 3.5 so it certainly won't see in the dark but it's never let me down. i find the sweet spot for this lens is 80-90mm f5.6 if you want a great flash that is very small, i recommend the sb-400. small and well-priced and a solid performer

06-10-2009, 03:24 PM	#19
Ncite Registered User Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: west SFV, L.A. Posts: 4	you need a Nikor 80-200 F2.8 lens. The 2.8 is the important part for low light.

06-10-2009, 03:33 PM	#22
JP-pornshooter Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: westcoast usa Posts: 4,007	ok i am not a fan of your other posts but perhaps it all comes back in good karma.. check out the 18-200 edVR lens, i hardly ever take it off my camera... and btw, i dont know of any magazines NOT wanting ISO 160 or better, and the D60 wont quiet cut the mustard there.. __________________ "Obscenity is whatever gives the Judge an erection." -- Author Unknown

06-10-2009, 03:35 PM	#23
Alvaro Confirmed User Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Brazil Posts: 695	the af lenses will work in D60 but only in manual mode you should get the af-s witch is more expensive if you want to shoot in low light conditions without graining you should look for a more expensive camera with this ability.. i guess any 55-200mm af-s lens will do it for you

06-10-2009, 06:05 PM	#26
Grapesoda So Fucking Banned Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Montana Posts: 46,238	[QUOTE=borked;15945462]Sigma 70-200 mm f : 2,8 II DG APO EX HSM Nikon equiv Nikon is $2k+. Only prob is, at f4 or less, autofocus isn't perfect, not bad at all, but not perfect./QUOTE]

06-10-2009, 06:31 PM	#29
Silver Sinema Parker Registered User Industry Role: Join Date: May 2008 Location: Corona Posts: 7	you're better off going this way... Adorama has the D90 for around $1150 with the kit lens. get the D90 with the 18-105mm vr cost is $1150 then sell your D60 for around $650-$700. Then you have a better camera, better lens for around $600 for an upgrade.

06-10-2009, 06:49 PM	#31
stickyfingerz Doin fine Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 24,983	Here is another pic from Monday.

06-10-2009, 07:53 PM	#35
JustDaveXxx I AM JUSTDAVE ! Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: LA Posts: 4,111	D60??? save your money for a full frame camera. I got a D3 and just about every piece of glass out there. And moving from a D200 to a D3 full frame made the biggest difference in my low light quality. N series lenses really rock!!! Good luck __________________ Smut Peddler Productions.com ICQ #378-696-435 / / Skype: JustDaveXxx "We shoot custom, exclusive content your way"

06-10-2009, 08:05 PM	#37
JP513 Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: The Republic of Barebackistan Posts: 1,914	All right, here's the deal. Your B&W shots are pretty good, but if you want to execute ultra sharp shots with good, beautiful bokeh, you need to go larger than all of these these variable aperture (3.5-5.6) zoom lenses which go only as large as 3.5, and when you zoom them, they get smaller like f/5.6. The main problem is your D60, which as you know, does not autofocus on AF-D lenses and requires AF-S lenses. If you have a D300, why are you not shooting with it? I would recommend you to use that and get a 50mm f/1.8 for $125 and/or an 80-200 f/2.8 @ $950. If that's too much, the 50mm is dirty cheap, and shot on a D300, you can gain from the 50/1.8's low light capability. Plus you have 12.3mp, plenty of room to crop since your 50mm lenses don't zoom obviously. I had the 18-200 and it was good as a consumer lens, but the distortion is very bad and for advanced work in low light conditions, it just doesn't cut it. An excellent alternative is the 35-70 f/2.8, which is discontinued but can be had for about $300-400 used. Great quality and the reach to 70mm should be all you need for what you're doing. But honestly, the 50mm f/1.8 on the D300 is the way to go.

06-10-2009, 10:16 PM	#39
SilentKnight Megan Fox's fluffer Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: shooting pool in Elysium Posts: 24,818	Late into the thread - but I shoot with an 18-200 nikkor VR lens on my d80. Great all-purpose lens...love it.

06-11-2009, 06:12 AM	#42
suesheboy Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: FL - TN/NC Posts: 5,211	The 18-200 VR is the main lens I use. Not perfect but with decent light I love it for the size and the price. __________________ Adult Web Site Domain Names For Sale Adult Sex Toy Domain Names For Sale Tantric Delights, Sex Toys Blog, Tantric Sex Toys

06-11-2009, 10:35 AM	#45
CIVMatt Amateur Pimpin Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Orlando, FL Posts: 13,075	How about a Tamron 28-70 f2.8 ? Great low light lens, like 3 years in a row lens of the year for that price range, $399 I think __________________ Make easy money with Webcams

06-11-2009, 11:15 AM	#47
JP-pornshooter Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: westcoast usa Posts: 4,007	the problem with using anything other than nikon/nikkor is much slower AF action and it sounds like you need to be pretty quick to get the right shot. i have the Tamron2.8f 28-70 (and it is super nice glass but slower to focus especially in low light..), also i have the nikon 2.8 70-200VR, the nikon 18-200VR and a few other.. also buying nikon means you get top notch service if you ever need to get the lens cleaned or serviced.. by upgrading from your d60 you also get better and faster AF.. __________________ "Obscenity is whatever gives the Judge an erection." -- Author Unknown

06-12-2009, 03:57 PM	#49
stickyfingerz Doin fine Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 24,983	Little update same lens and all, but wanted to share this pic lol. Camera is the ultimate ice breaker, and gotta love when they walk up to you and say "can you take our pic please?" Well... yes surely of course hehe. Bit of the Nashville trim to share.

06-12-2009, 04:09 PM	#50
JP-pornshooter Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: westcoast usa Posts: 4,007	you need to get one of them really high output on camera flash (try quantum) will expose underwear or none etc.. yes i know, damn perverted. __________________ "Obscenity is whatever gives the Judge an erection." -- Author Unknown