Getting a bit more digital, company to my 45mm/D300?

[vha]

Then I got the idea of getting a bit more digital, not just that out of nowhere, but it seems like the way to continue since I do not longer work in a lab anymore. Just a student and a bit much into photography, luckily there is no such as too much is there ? ;D

Anyway, got a nice deal for a hardly used D300, and happens to have a 45mm nikkor p in one of the bags, think it is in the green one.
Nice lens with a great signature, but would like something more close to normal perspective as well, but what would be a match to the 45mm P ?
New glass is an option, but lots of what I´v seen looks boring, or should i say too digital. Old glass have more character but there i have no clue what would look as a fine companion, Ideas please ?

Thanks again.

Vidar.

 

[vha]

Bump ?

Bump ?

Looks like everyone is at the D700 tread 😉
Have read it a few times, sure I would like a D700 when I can afford it.
Have been looking around, and the 28mm 2.0 ais and the 24mm 2,8 ais looks interesting, the 35mm 1,5 is nice but slightly too big, and the 28mm 1,4 seems to go close to 3800 usd on the e**y, just lovely 🙂

Anyone ?

vha

 

[user237428934]

Problably the Sigma 1.4/30mm. It's a calculated 45mm on your Nikon. Experience with this lens is mixed because the quality of that lens is not predictable. People who get a good one, really like this lens very much! But I know many people who had quality problems. Had it myself on my canon and gave it back because of AF-Problems. But I will try it again soon.
In the center this lens is very sharp, even wide open. Let's not talk about the sharpness in the corners wide open.

 

[zgeeRF]

vha, get the 24 2.8. A great lens for film and beautiful on rendering on the digital "format". I used it on the D200 and love the results.

btw this " 4x5 after a e**y accident " is intriguing (and maybe funny?)

 

[jja]

Good suggestion, zgeeRF. The 24/2.8 ais is a great lens. If you want close to normal, then the 28/2 ais has a very fine reputation, as does the 28/2.8. If you are used to shooting with 40mm on a film RF, then 28mm seems the way to go with your D300.

Here are Bjorn Roslett's ratings of Nikon wide angle lenses:
http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2.html

Btw, I have just acquired a 45P, and plan to use it on a digital body eventually. Do you have photos taken with this lens? Also, how does it look/handle on a D300?

 

[peter_n]

The 28/2.8 is an excellent lens. Make sure that you get the version with closest focus of 0.2M. 🙂

 

[willie_901]

The 20/2.8, 24/2.8, 28/2.8 and 35/2 AIS lenses are very nice and reasonably priced. Since you have a 45, I'd get the 20/2.8 first. Then I'd fill in the middle based on how you use the 20/2.8 and 45.

You have probably realized by now that a 2.8 lens is more than practical in low light because the D300 does a great job at ISO 800.

Enjoy!

 

[cmedin]

Problably the Sigma 1.4/30mm. It's a calculated 45mm on your Nikon. Experience with this lens is mixed because the quality of that lens is not predictable. People who get a good one, really like this lens very much! But I know many people who had quality problems. Had it myself on my canon and gave it back because of AF-Problems. But I will try it again soon.
In the center this lens is very sharp, even wide open. Let's not talk about the sharpness in the corners wide open.

I LOVE the Sigma 30/1.4. Have it for my K20D (Pentax mount obviously) and it's fantastic. I do hear that there are some QC issues, however they seem to indicate more of a problem with the US Sigma distributors than the company; rumor has it lenses that were returned for AF issues or minor other problems just get shipped out to other customers.

I posted regarding corner/edge performance on my blog:
http://storpotaten.blogspot.com/2008/11/edge-sharpness-of-3014-example.html

Since many (including myself initially) argue that even stopped down corners/edges are very soft. It's not THAT bad honestly. 🙂

 

[mfogiel]

The lens to buy would be the Distagon 25/2.8 ZF, but if you want to go on the cheap. avoid the 24mm Nikkor, as on digital it is laughable. The 20/2.8 is a bit better, and a better companion to your 45P, which by many standards is probably one of the best lenses Nikon ever made, although being a Tessar in disguise, it is not great wide open.

 

[rolleistef]

The problem with manual focus lenses is that they're a real hassle to focus correctly on digital, due to the physical absence of a circle of confusion on a sensor. Well, it is possible with a little help from your friend the green dot in the VF but takes a long time to get the rule of thumb.
The 28/2.8 is said to be very good indeed.

 

[jpressman]

I use the 45mm Nikon P on my D80 and its great! The size is relatively small, the images are sharp and saturated. I find that I can focus pretty well without the green dot.

 

[kshapero]

Isn't it hard to manually focus these lens without a split prism focusing screen?

 

[cmedin]

Isn't it hard to manually focus these lens without a split prism focusing screen?

I have no problems focusing on a matte screen, but the issue is more complex than that:
http://www.jayandwanda.com/photography/dslr_man_focus/man_focus.html

 

[willie_901]

It is easier to focus these lenses on a D300 compared to a D200.

Contrary to mfogiel's experience, my sample of the 24/2.8 AIS is more than competent on my 2 D200s and D300. I used it briefly on a D700 – while the results looked fine, I really did not have time to do a careful analysis. However the 24/2.8 AIS is prone to flare (film or digital).

I use a split screen on the D200. The split screen is an improvement, but it does not provide a dramatic advantage. With decent light and contrast the spit screen and green dot always agree.

The green dot method works very well on the D300. I see no reason to use a split screen sensor on that camera unless there is very low ambient light and low contrast subjects.

My guess is many people who write about frustrating results with the green dot method do not have much experience with manual focus and they may not use optimal AF settings on their cameras.

 

[Nh3]

The lens that you want is the Tamron 17-50/2.8.

Don't waste your money on primes if you shoot digital. All digital images need sharpening in post-processing no matter how sharp your lens.

 

[cmedin]

The lens that you want is the Tamron 17-50/2.8.

Don't waste your money on primes if you shoot digital. All digital images need sharpening in post-processing no matter how sharp your lens.

Uhhhh... not even going to touch that statement, but do you honestly believe that sharpening will somehow invent detail that isn't there? I shoot a lot of primes on my K20D; should I just toss them and get a cheap 18-250 zoom and "fix" it all by sharpening?

 

[Frank Petronio]

The current plastic body AF Nikon primes are not as pleasing to heft as the best AI lenses but... they are better performers. The secret with all these lenses is to shoot as close to wide open as possible -- the aperture is closer to being circular and their bokeh is best wide open.

The new Nikon 50/1.4 AFS looks promising as a great portrait lens for the D300 or as a walk around lens for the D700. Hopefully they upgrade the rest of their primes in the same way.

I've had the 20-24-28-35-and both 50s in AF-D and they have all been excellent. I had the 28/1.4 but at f/2 the 35/2 was better, so I sold the 28/1.4 for a hefty profit. People are ridiculous about these "cult" lenses, it is worse than the stock market!

For a zoom the AFS 18-70DX is quite good, and the price is under $200.

 

[vha]

btw this " 4x5 after a e**y accident " is intriguing (and maybe funny?)

A 4x5 is always useful, two of them is maybe more than needed 🙂
I´s fun to use, not exactly portable, quick or suitable for "snapshots", but just see the prints . .
Have to repair the Szabad a bit but the Crown Graphic is waiting in the bag.

vha

 

[vha]

Btw, I have just acquired a 45P, and plan to use it on a digital body eventually. Do you have photos taken with this lens? Also, how does it look/handle on a D300?

Good question, have my self just tried the 45mm p with my FM and some BW400CN, but my colleague
(who is also selling my the D300) borrowed the lens for some weeks, and he liked what he saw, claiming i had to sell i to him 🙂
Been looking around on Flickr and it looks promising.
Think I have the camera Tuesday or so so i look myself.

 

[ben_m]

I too have the 45mm P, and it is nice to have a Nikon mount normal lens without the harsh bokeh you get with the others. But, it is no match for the 55mm micro-nikkor in sharpness.

As to a wider lens, I have both the 24mm f2.8 AIS and the new Zeiss 25mm ZF. I have done a lot of tests on a D200 in real-world shooting conditions, and I don't think there is a considerable difference. The Nikkor is actually sharper at close focus (but doesn't go quite as close as the ZF). The ZF is also completely free of flare. I wanted a really sharp 24/25mm, but the ZF is not really there at the edges (even on a DX sensor). I wish someone would use ED glass and aspheric elements in a modern wide prime (that isn't huge and fast and expensive e.g 28 f1.4)- they should be able to make cheap f2.8, or even f3.5, wide prime lenses that are much sharper using these techniques if they can make such good consumer zooms for next to no money (e.g. 18-55mm which is very, very sharp at the wide end).