Need lens for a Fuji S2

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by AgaPSDIVER, Dec 30, 2003.

  1. AgaPSDIVER

    AgaPSDIVER Guest

    I am getting a Fuji S2 .. now I need a lens.
    I want one with a 28-70 28-80 Zoom...
    or something like that..what about f-stops
    What lens will give me the best results... Thanks..
    AgaPSDIVER, Dec 30, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. "AgaPSDIVER" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I am getting a Fuji S2 .. now I need a lens.
    > I want one with a 28-70 28-80 Zoom...
    > or something like that..what about f-stops
    > What lens will give me the best results... Thanks..


    You don't specify a price range, so I'll tell you that the Nikkor AF-S28-70D
    f/2.8ED is the best lens in that zoom category. The good news is that
    there's a $200 rebate on it. The bad news is that the rebate ends tomorrow.
    The worse news is the price. Look at http://tinyurl.com/3xmnx .

    Next best alternative in that focal length range is probably the Tamron
    28-75 f/2.8 XR Di. Reports are that it is close to the Nikkor in sharpness
    at higher f-stops (f/6-8 and above) but softer with wider apertures and
    softer at the wide-angle end. It is certainly not up the the pro-level
    Nikkor in build quality, nor its ability to give sharp images throughout its
    focal range, but it is about 1/4 the price. Look at http://tinyurl.com/3xmnx
    ..

    Tokina has a lens in that category which is fairly sharp, but I have heard
    not-so-good things about it's ability to autofocus.

    I don't believe that Sigma is in the hunt at this zoom category, but I could
    be wrong. A good alternative to the Tamron, if you don't want to drop $1300
    on the 28-70 Nikkor, is the Nikkor 24-120VR for a couple of hundred $$ more.
    A good all-around lens. Look at http://tinyurl.com/2uckg . I use it on my S2
    Pro most of the time. An excellent walking-around lens.

    HMc
    Howard McCollister, Dec 30, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Now i am glad i bought a S602 and not a dSLR!

    I'll need to sell another kidney to get into that camera and lens(es).

    chris

    On 30 Dec 2003 12:44:11 -0600, "Howard McCollister" <>
    wrote:

    >
    >"AgaPSDIVER" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> I am getting a Fuji S2 .. now I need a lens.
    >> I want one with a 28-70 28-80 Zoom...
    >> or something like that..what about f-stops
    >> What lens will give me the best results... Thanks..

    >
    >You don't specify a price range, so I'll tell you that the Nikkor AF-S28-70D
    >f/2.8ED is the best lens in that zoom category. The good news is that
    >there's a $200 rebate on it. The bad news is that the rebate ends tomorrow.
    >The worse news is the price. Look at http://tinyurl.com/3xmnx .
    >
    >Next best alternative in that focal length range is probably the Tamron
    >28-75 f/2.8 XR Di. Reports are that it is close to the Nikkor in sharpness
    >at higher f-stops (f/6-8 and above) but softer with wider apertures and
    >softer at the wide-angle end. It is certainly not up the the pro-level
    >Nikkor in build quality, nor its ability to give sharp images throughout its
    >focal range, but it is about 1/4 the price. Look at http://tinyurl.com/3xmnx
    >.
    >
    >Tokina has a lens in that category which is fairly sharp, but I have heard
    >not-so-good things about it's ability to autofocus.
    >
    >I don't believe that Sigma is in the hunt at this zoom category, but I could
    >be wrong. A good alternative to the Tamron, if you don't want to drop $1300
    >on the 28-70 Nikkor, is the Nikkor 24-120VR for a couple of hundred $$ more.
    >A good all-around lens. Look at http://tinyurl.com/2uckg . I use it on my S2
    >Pro most of the time. An excellent walking-around lens.
    >
    >HMc
    >
    >
    Chris P in PA, Dec 30, 2003
    #3
  4. AgaPSDIVER

    PeteZ Guest

    My money went into a Nikkor 28-70 AFS - an excellent piece of glasware and
    worth every penny

    I you can affford it get it. Dont learn the hard way and buy less, you'll
    have it for a few weeks then want to sell it for the likes of the Nikkor
    28-70 AFS

    Go into a good pro shop and check one out. It's big, heavy but darn sharp.


    - Simon


    "AgaPSDIVER" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I am getting a Fuji S2 .. now I need a lens.
    > I want one with a 28-70 28-80 Zoom...
    > or something like that..what about f-stops
    > What lens will give me the best results... Thanks..
    PeteZ, Dec 31, 2003
    #4
  5. Probably not what you're looking for, but I'd almost jump ship (from a
    well appointed film and digital Canon arsenal) for an excuse to buy
    the Nikon 28/1.4.

    Michael

    (AgaPSDIVER) wrote in message news:<>...
    > I am getting a Fuji S2 .. now I need a lens.
    > I want one with a 28-70 28-80 Zoom...
    > or something like that..what about f-stops
    > What lens will give me the best results... Thanks..
    street shooter, Dec 31, 2003
    #5
  6. AgaPSDIVER

    Paul Rubin Guest

    (street shooter) writes:
    > Probably not what you're looking for, but I'd almost jump ship (from a
    > well appointed film and digital Canon arsenal) for an excuse to buy
    > the Nikon 28/1.4.


    Don't like Canon's 24/1.4L ?
    Paul Rubin, Dec 31, 2003
    #6
  7. "AgaPSDIVER" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I am getting a Fuji S2 .. now I need a lens.
    > I want one with a 28-70 28-80 Zoom...
    > or something like that..what about f-stops
    > What lens will give me the best results... Thanks..


    What sort of budget? The Nikon 18-35mm 3.5-4.5 is really nice for about $900
    Canadian.

    If you do any sort of indoor group shots, you need a really wide lens, in
    the 18 mm range.

    Zinchuk
    Brian Zinchuk, Jan 1, 2004
    #7
  8. AgaPSDIVER

    Paolo Pizzi Guest

    AgaPSDIVER wrote:

    > I am getting a Fuji S2 .. now I need a lens.
    > I want one with a 28-70 28-80 Zoom...
    > or something like that..what about f-stops
    > What lens will give me the best results... Thanks..


    I strongly suggest the Nikkor 24-120VR, an
    excellent "walk-around" lens that will give you
    a very useful 35mm-equivalent range of 36-180
    on your S2. Thanks to the VR system, you will
    be able to successfully shoot at shutter speeds
    as low as 1/15 or even 1/8 with no blur. The
    optics are excellent, the distortion is minimal.
    Price around $550.
    Paolo Pizzi, Jan 5, 2004
    #8
  9. "Paolo Pizzi" <> wrote in message
    news:JT1Kb.6078$...
    > AgaPSDIVER wrote:
    >
    > > I am getting a Fuji S2 .. now I need a lens.
    > > I want one with a 28-70 28-80 Zoom...
    > > or something like that..what about f-stops
    > > What lens will give me the best results... Thanks..

    >
    > I strongly suggest the Nikkor 24-120VR, an
    > excellent "walk-around" lens that will give you
    > a very useful 35mm-equivalent range of 36-180
    > on your S2. Thanks to the VR system, you will
    > be able to successfully shoot at shutter speeds
    > as low as 1/15 or even 1/8 with no blur. The
    > optics are excellent, the distortion is minimal.
    > Price around $550.
    >
    >


    I have that lens. It's not the star of Nikon's lineup from a sharpness
    standpoint especially below about f/8. And the barrel distortion at 24mm
    is...uh...noticeable. BUT...for $550, it is a really good lens considering
    it's focal length range, it's focusing (AF-S), the VR, its construction,
    and its internal focusing (end of lens doesn't rotate with focusing). It is
    not the sharpest lens I have, but it's the one I use the most.

    HMc
    Howard McCollister, Jan 5, 2004
    #9
  10. AgaPSDIVER

    Paolo Pizzi Guest

    Howard McCollister wrote:

    > I have that lens. It's not the star of Nikon's lineup from a sharpness
    > standpoint especially below about f/8.


    Given the excursion, it is pretty obvious you can't get the performance
    of a fine Nikkor prime (I still have to find ONE lens sharper than my
    Micro Nikkor 60mm...) But as a general-purpose "walk-around" lens
    it beats all "super-" and "hyper-zooms" on the market, including Nikon's
    own 28-200. Besides, you don't always need the sharpest resolution,
    especially when you're shooting people in the street (the 24-120VR is
    considered one of the best photojournalism lens in the world.)

    > It is not the sharpest lens I have, but it's the one I use the most.


    Same here.
    Paolo Pizzi, Jan 5, 2004
    #10
  11. "Howard McCollister" <> writes:

    > "Paolo Pizzi" <> wrote in message
    > news:JT1Kb.6078$...
    >> AgaPSDIVER wrote:
    >>
    >> > I am getting a Fuji S2 .. now I need a lens.
    >> > I want one with a 28-70 28-80 Zoom...
    >> > or something like that..what about f-stops
    >> > What lens will give me the best results... Thanks..

    >>
    >> I strongly suggest the Nikkor 24-120VR, an
    >> excellent "walk-around" lens that will give you
    >> a very useful 35mm-equivalent range of 36-180
    >> on your S2. Thanks to the VR system, you will
    >> be able to successfully shoot at shutter speeds
    >> as low as 1/15 or even 1/8 with no blur. The
    >> optics are excellent, the distortion is minimal.
    >> Price around $550.


    > I have that lens. It's not the star of Nikon's lineup from a sharpness
    > standpoint especially below about f/8. And the barrel distortion at 24mm
    > is...uh...noticeable. BUT...for $550, it is a really good lens considering
    > it's focal length range, it's focusing (AF-S), the VR, its construction,
    > and its internal focusing (end of lens doesn't rotate with focusing). It is
    > not the sharpest lens I have, but it's the one I use the most.


    It's awfully slow, though -- f3.5 to 5.6. Which means the VR
    basically blows itself out in compensating for that, and is no actual
    benefit to me. It's very annoying.
    --
    David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/>
    RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/>
    Photos: <dd-b.lighthunters.net> Snapshots: <www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/>
    Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>
    David Dyer-Bennet, Jan 5, 2004
    #11
  12. AgaPSDIVER

    Paolo Pizzi Guest

    David Dyer-Bennet wrote:

    > It's awfully slow, though -- f3.5 to 5.6.


    Not really, considering that it's still f/3.5 (i.e. HALF f-stop
    slower than f/2.8) right until 60mm (half way) and it goes
    down to f/5.6 only near the tele end.
    Paolo Pizzi, Jan 5, 2004
    #12
  13. "David Dyer-Bennet" <> wrote in message
    news:-b.net...
    >
    > It's awfully slow, though -- f3.5 to 5.6. Which means the VR
    > basically blows itself out in compensating for that, and is no actual
    > benefit to me. It's very annoying.
    > --


    I'm not exactly sure what you mean about blowing itself out, but I do agree
    that it would be nice if it were a little faster.

    OTOH, if it were, say, f/2.8 or so, wouldn't it be a little bigger, or at
    least more expensive? Both of those things would detract from it's
    usefulness, not to mention market appeal.

    HMc
    Howard McCollister, Jan 5, 2004
    #13
  14. "Paolo Pizzi" <> wrote in message
    news:N64Kb.6162$...

    >
    > Given the excursion, it is pretty obvious you can't get the performance
    > of a fine Nikkor prime (I still have to find ONE lens sharper than my
    > Micro Nikkor 60mm...)


    I have the 60mm Micro Nikkor too. I agree that that is truly a remarkable
    lens, and I think it's sharper than my 50mm f/1.8 under a lot of
    circumstances.

    HMc
    Howard McCollister, Jan 5, 2004
    #14
  15. "Howard McCollister" <> writes:

    > "David Dyer-Bennet" <> wrote in message
    > news:-b.net...
    >>
    >> It's awfully slow, though -- f3.5 to 5.6. Which means the VR
    >> basically blows itself out in compensating for that, and is no actual
    >> benefit to me. It's very annoying.


    > I'm not exactly sure what you mean about blowing itself out, but I do agree
    > that it would be nice if it were a little faster.
    >
    > OTOH, if it were, say, f/2.8 or so, wouldn't it be a little bigger, or at
    > least more expensive? Both of those things would detract from it's
    > usefulness, not to mention market appeal.


    I imagine it would be bigger and heavier than say my 28-105 f2.8,
    yes. With flash the 3.5 is tolerable, but the 5.6 is still kinda
    doggy. But I shoot without flash a *lot*. I often take off the 28-70
    f2.8 to use the fast primes, because 2.8 isn't fast enough.

    And the point of VR is to increase hand-holding in low light, right?
    So putting it on a slow lens makes no sense.
    --
    David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/>
    RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/>
    Photos: <dd-b.lighthunters.net> Snapshots: <www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/>
    Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>
    David Dyer-Bennet, Jan 5, 2004
    #15
  16. AgaPSDIVER

    Crownfield Guest

    Paolo Pizzi wrote:
    >
    > David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
    >
    > > It's awfully slow, though -- f3.5 to 5.6.

    >
    > Not really, considering that it's still f/3.5 (i.e. HALF f-stop
    > slower than f/2.8) right until 60mm (half way) and it goes
    > down to f/5.6 only near the tele end.


    and just when does the shake become exaggerated?
    wide or telephoto?

    that kind of lens is weakest when you need it.
    Crownfield, Jan 5, 2004
    #16
  17. "David Dyer-Bennet" <> wrote in message
    news:-b.net...
    >
    > And the point of VR is to increase hand-holding in low light, right?
    > So putting it on a slow lens makes no sense.


    Ah...I see your point, but I'm not sure I agree. The VR supposedly lets you
    shoot at shutter speeds 3 stops slower than you would otherwise be able to
    take a picure at the same f-stop. So you'd still be able to get that low
    light shot at f/3.5. I see the VR as a way to enhance the low light
    performance of that lens without adding the bulk and expense of making it an
    f/2.8 lens. Works for me. Although I do wonder what a 24-120 (or
    thereabouts) at f/2.8 or faster and with AF-S would look like and cost.

    HMc
    Howard McCollister, Jan 6, 2004
    #17
  18. AgaPSDIVER

    Paolo Pizzi Guest

    Crownfield wrote:

    >> Not really, considering that it's still f/3.5 (i.e. HALF f-stop
    >> slower than f/2.8) right until 60mm (half way) and it goes
    >> down to f/5.6 only near the tele end.

    >
    > and just when does the shake become exaggerated?
    > wide or telephoto?
    >
    > that kind of lens is weakest when you need it.


    It's a compromise, like ALL zooms. Considering the
    price, the light weight, the robust construction and
    the effectiveness of the VR, it's a damn good one.
    Paolo Pizzi, Jan 6, 2004
    #18
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Chris Gunn
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,483
    David Oddie
    Jul 14, 2003
  2. The Ruzicka Family
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    1,159
    Chris Gunn
    Jul 12, 2003
  3. The Ruzicka Family
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    961
    The Ruzicka Family
    Jul 11, 2003
  4. Giuen
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    751
    Giuen
    Sep 12, 2008
  5. Replies:
    5
    Views:
    964
    Paul Furman
    Feb 16, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page