B&W Fine Art Photography
B&W Fine Art Photography
A very cheap, all plastic, toy lens, that neverthless performs marvellously. The only problem, but this will change from sample to sample, is a big lack of consistency when focusing at full aperture, that one cannot even correct in camera because it varies randomly from front focus to backfocus and in intensity. It will blows …
Very good for low-light photograpy. As compact as his Ai sibling, just a little less sharp at all the apertures. For landscape is not the best lens out there, because the borders are very soft even stopped down (and if you compare it to a 40/2 Leica Summicron C as I did you will be …
Picture from Nikon.com Dirty cheap (used), but a not-so-bad performer. Someone rate this in a more favourable manner, but at least with my sample the performance was nothing to write home about. It’s a pity, because this is a very useful focal on the reduced sensor size of the DX format cameras. Rating:
Picture from Nikon.com Built like a little tank, but with a stiff focusing ring (compared to the manual version tested above), it’s not one of my favourite lenses. It is very sharp, whit an higher contrast respect the old Non-Ai version, but the images have a less pleasing and distinctive look. Not bad, indeed a …
Aside for the average vignetting (stronger on film or FX, obviously) you may see at the long end @ f/2,8 this lens is a very capable performer. It is sharp, it doesn’t flare so easily like its inheritor, the 70-200 VR, and it is shorter and somewhat smaller too. The firs D version (without tripod …
If you don’t need the extra speed of the 17-35/2,8 this is a good purchase. It is quite sharp and don’t flare easily, even shooting into the sun. Obviously you have to keep the front lens religiously clean to avoid the ghosts. In short a very good lens, without the stellar sharpness of his “rich …