new lens (Nikon 17-55 mm f2.8)/MA foliage

Discussions on Equipment, Locations and Tips for getting the photograps you want of Vermont scenes.Note: You must be registered in order to post. If you have trouble registering, use the contact us form on Scenes of Vermont's home page.

Moderators: bm, Andy, admin

abby
Moderator
Posts: 1802
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 12:01 am
Location: southeast massachusetts
Contact:

new lens (Nikon 17-55 mm f2.8)/MA foliage

Postby abby » Sat Oct 29, 2011 7:59 pm

Hi all,
Hope things are well in your worlds. I'm sitting here cuddled up with the two dogs watching the rain/snow fall. Crazy stuff!!!!
After consutling with my mentor (thanks Mr. Richards) :wink: I decided to purchase the Nikon 17-55 mm lens. It was time for an upgrade for me......I have not bought any new lenses since I got my first DSLR (the D90 with the 18-200 mm lens)
Here are a few shots taken in Norwell MA this week with the new lens:
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Carol


Andy
Site Admin
Posts: 1493
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2005 12:01 am
Location: Saginaw, Michigan
Contact:

Re: new lens (Nikon 17-55 mm f2.8)/MA foliage

Postby Andy » Sun Oct 30, 2011 7:26 am

Carol: Congratulations on the new lens. As I have said to you privately, you won't regret the purchase. The 17-55 2.8 is one of the Nikon "gold band" "pro" lenses. They are as good as Nikon gets and perhaps rival some of the old classic Zeiss (I am sure Nikon disagrees with my use of the word, "rival" :lol: ) lenses that Leica was so famous for back "in the day." Contrasty, great bokeh, and sharp at all apertures. Thats what 3 - 4 times the price will get you!

I had the great opportunity to meet and spend about 1/2 day with <A HREF="http://www.transient-light.com">James Moore</A>, Pittsburgh area teaching pro and inspiration to me (if you haven't seen Jim's work, you should -- it is really, REALLY good!). Two of his comments that day are still resonating with me. One was that the best, INEXPENSIVE equipment improvement any photographer can make is to buy a bubble level (see, Al, I told you that you will like Jim), and more to the point, the BEST equipment improvement a photographer seeking "the next level" (as I have <A HREF="http://lightcentric.wordpress.com/page/2/?s=next+level">recently blogged</A> about) can make is to move to "pro" quality glass.

I am convinced, and Carol, you have motivated me toward a plan to do just that. Because of the "35mm equivalent" FX sensor in my camera, I am planning to acquire, sometime in the next year, the pro Nikon 24-70 f2.8 and 70-200 2.8 VRII. Not sure if I will keep the 28-300 or not. For the longer reach, I have some options, including borrowing my old 300 2.8 from my buddy, who (just to make it more convenient for me, I am sure), moved just a mile away from me recently :mrgreen:

EDIT: Sorry folks. No idea why the html links aren't working here. Have checked and double checked and I THINK I have it coded right.
Andy

If it sounds too good to be true, its probably . . . .

abby
Moderator
Posts: 1802
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 12:01 am
Location: southeast massachusetts
Contact:

Re: new lens (Nikon 17-55 mm f2.8)/MA foliage

Postby abby » Sun Oct 30, 2011 7:57 pm

Hi Andy,
So far so good with the new lens. It will be fun for you when you get your new lenses. I went out shooting this morning after last night's snowfall. I had to change lenses when I shot some waterfall shots, as the new lens is 77 mm and my ND filter is 72 mm to fit the 18-200. Wasn't a big deal, but I have been spoiled this whole time with just using the 18-200 for all of my needs.
That was very nice of Rich to move within a mile away from you so that you can use that lens. What a guy! :wink:
Carol

Utah Baker
Posts: 566
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2010 9:45 pm

Re: new lens (Nikon 17-55 mm f2.8)/MA foliage

Postby Utah Baker » Mon Oct 31, 2011 6:39 pm

WOW! The sharpeness and clarity of those photos, certainly says it is worth it! The photo bug can sure bite hard, I have to remind myself I don't have the time or money.......at least not right now! :lol:

abby
Moderator
Posts: 1802
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 12:01 am
Location: southeast massachusetts
Contact:

Re: new lens (Nikon 17-55 mm f2.8)/MA foliage

Postby abby » Tue Nov 01, 2011 9:15 am

Hi Janice,
Thanks.....glad you liked these. I am really happy with this lens and I can't wait to use it more and more. I actually hit it lucky....literally! :wink: I won 2500 dollars a few months ago on a slot machine. I brought 150 dollars to gamble and came home with 2500. Not bad, huh? 8) Sooooooo, I tucked the money away and after my daughters wedding, I decided to treat myself to an expensive piece of glass. I never would normally buy myself something that expensive.
I want to start saving up to get something with longer reach, as I do love to shoot the birds and wildlife. The 18-200 will still remain with me for those purposes for now, although I really would like more reach than 200 mm. That's the thing........there's always more to want! I really am quite happy with what I have for now though. :wink:
Carol

Andy
Site Admin
Posts: 1493
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2005 12:01 am
Location: Saginaw, Michigan
Contact:

Re: new lens (Nikon 17-55 mm f2.8)/MA foliage

Postby Andy » Tue Nov 01, 2011 10:53 am

Carol: A couple points on the "longer glass." First, remember that with the DX sensor in your Nikon, the 200 is really closer to 300 (from what I have read, the 18-200 and the 28-300 are really not the full 200/300 on the long end. When I bought the 28-200, I had a 70-300 copy and confirmed this, though it is nominal).

Second, alot depends on the use for the lens. For example, the 70-300 4.5-5.6 (but was VR). It was very sharp (approaching pro-quality, imo). It was also light and inexpensive (around $4-500). However, you are going to be using higher ISO a lot of the time. Might be a good wildlife or birding lens. But not going to have that nice bokeh that the 2.8 gives you. Contrast that with the fixed length lenses. My Tokina Pro 300 mm 2.8 lens was a $2500 lens (expect Nikon to be about twice that), and was big and heavy (no handholding, and for good birding results, you really wanted a gimbal type lens). I know there are fixed focus copies out there in the 400 mm range that are affordable, but again, they are only going to be as fast as f4 or smaller apertures.
Andy

If it sounds too good to be true, its probably . . . .

abby
Moderator
Posts: 1802
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 12:01 am
Location: southeast massachusetts
Contact:

Re: new lens (Nikon 17-55 mm f2.8)/MA foliage

Postby abby » Thu Nov 03, 2011 8:19 am

Thanks for the reply Andy. There's a lot of choices out there. The Nikon 80-200 f2.8 is another consideration. 200 may not be long enough for some of my needs, but the lens is so much faster and sharper than the 18-200 that I would probably get a lot better cropped images than I get now with the 18-200. I'll be saving my pennies for quite a while I think. :D
Carol



Return to “Vermont Photography Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests