Seriously, Nikon; six TIMES the price for AF and a tad better body??!

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by RichA, May 22, 2011.

  1. RichA

    RichA Guest

    RichA, May 22, 2011
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. In rec.photo.digital RichA <> wrote:
    > 85mm f1.4 Samyang (Opteka variant). I saw an $1899.00 price sticker
    > today for a Nikon 85mm f1.4. I think cheap aspherics have radically
    > levelled the playing field for relatively inexpensive and traditional
    > expensive lenses.


    > The full sized "original" images are there. I figured I wouldn't
    > direct anyone to them since some don't like getting hit with 4-5 meg
    > files.


    > http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/image/134898207/large


    > http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/image/134898210/large


    Some reviewers have claimed it to be sharper than the Nikon from f1.4
    to f4, after which the Nikon sharpens up more. That suggests the Nikon
    may have better lens surface finish but poorer control of the
    spherical aberration which softens wider apertures.

    --
    Chris Malcolm
     
    Chris Malcolm, May 24, 2011
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Re: Seriously, Nikon; six TIMES the price for AF and a tad better body??!

    On May 21, 8:50 pm, RichA <> wrote:
    > 85mm f1.4 Samyang (Opteka variant).  I saw an $1899.00 price sticker
    > today for a Nikon 85mm f1.4.  I think cheap aspherics have radically
    > levelled the playing field for relatively inexpensive and traditional
    > expensive lenses.
    >
    > The full sized "original" images are there.  I figured I wouldn't
    > direct anyone to them since some don't like getting hit with 4-5 meg
    > files.
    >
    > http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/image/134898207/large
    >
    > http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/image/134898210/large


    Af is pretty important for me. I converted to Nikon AF in 1994 based
    on tests showing me I got a lot more good photos that way. And
    since then, I've gotten old enough to need reading glasses; I don't
    think my manual focus skills are better today, so I really need AF.

    (Using a Nikkor 85/1.8 AF, not even the AF-D; quite a usable
    compromise for me.)
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, May 24, 2011
    #3
    1. Advertisements

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Similar Threads
  1. Xtx99

    Nikon SB-800 AF vs. SB-600 TTL AF (for D70 use)

    Xtx99, Sep 28, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    456
    Ed Ruf
    Sep 30, 2004
  2. Xtx99
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    939
    Dave L
    Jan 13, 2005
  3. Fred Banning

    Nikon 300mm f/4 AF vs. Nikon 300 f/4 AF-S

    Fred Banning, Nov 15, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    2,201
    Bill Crocker
    Nov 15, 2006
  4. Ed Ruf  (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!)

    Nikon 200-400mm f/4G ED-IF AF-S VR + TC-20E-II AF

    Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!), Feb 16, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    50
    Views:
    1,805
    ASAAR
    Feb 21, 2007
  5. Dave

    How much better is Nikon AF-S II to AF-S ?

    Dave, Sep 1, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    569
    Dave Martindale
    Sep 2, 2008
  6. Tzorzakakis Dimitrios

    six six six the number of the beast:-)

    Tzorzakakis Dimitrios, Jun 20, 2009, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    659
    Tzorzakakis Dimitrios
    Jun 20, 2009
  7. RichA
    Replies:
    16
    Views:
    566
    Bruce
    Oct 23, 2011
Loading...