arturo_monterroso

<p>Thanks for your replies guys, seems like the Tokina is a good investment, if not the best overall. I think I'm gonna take the plunge and go with it.</p> <p>Thanks again!</p>

<p>Thanks for the responses guys. I'm asking about such a lens (~100mm macro) because it's the focal length that I use now for my work, and I know it works perfectly. The distance compression at that focal length is exactly what I need, so anything wider, like an 85mm, wouldn't work as well. Shallow depth of field is not really a requirement, it's nice but not a priority, and at ~100mm, f/2.8 is quite shallow. Even more so on a full frame sensor. </p> <p>I have used the 105mm AF-D from nikon on a D800 and the focus was pretty accurate. I'm guessing the precision of focus depends more on the AF system from the camera's body. Am I right on that one?</p> <p>AF speed > weight and number of elements that move.<br> AF accuracy > AF system in the camera body.</p> <p>Does that make sense?</p>

<p>Oh, that makes sense. So a lighter lens with less elements and groups would focus faster than one with more, right?</p>

<p>Hello all, I'm about to buy a Nikon D750 and I need a macro lens around 100mm for studio portrait work. I want a macro lens because they're very sharp, and the ~100mm focal distance is just perfect for my type of work.</p> <p>I've used a Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 AF-D lens before on a D800, and the AF speed was sufficient and the lens was very accurate too. Does this Tokina lens compares to this AF-D Nikkor regarding the AF speed and accuracy?</p> <p>Also, if these AF-D lenses don't have a built-in focus motor and use the AF motor on the body they're being used on, wouldn't the speed and precision of the AF depend on the body's AF motor and not each lens? (I hope that question made sense).</p> <p>I know there's the sigma 105mm with HSM, and the tamron 90 with USD, but the Tokina is cheaper and optically competent. If the AF performance is like that of the Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 AF-D then it will be sufficient for my type of work. I've looked for this info everywhere, but haven't found a definite answer.</p> <p>Thanks a bunch for your help!</p>

<p>Thanks for all the comments guys. You convinced me to not switch systems, for the time being. I think I'm gonna invest in a better portrait lens, and then move up to a better crop body from Nikon. I like the video capabilities of the D5300, and the overall quality of the D7100, but Photokina is around the corner, so I'm gonna wait up and see what Nikon has in hand. In the meantime I'm gonna start saving up to purchase some good glass.</p> <p>Thanks all!</p>

<p>Thanks all for your responses. I'm considering the D7100 option, it seems it has the same AF system as the D4, which can't be bad I imagine haha. </p> <p>As for the studio lights, I use the studio space that's available at my job (I work at a photography school). The Aliens have 150w modelling lights, and the Bowens have a mix of 150w and 250w. I've done shoots with my friend's D800 and it has no trouble focusing with those lights, so that's why I think the AF system of my D3100 has a rough time. I usually shoot at f/5.6, as that's the f-stop where I get the sharpest results. The D3100's sync speed is 1/160, so at that f-stop and speed it's not always possible to leave the overhead lights on without them showing in the photos. </p>

<p>I have the kit lens (18-55), a 55-200 and a 50 1.8, which is the lens I use the most, though for studio portraits from the waist up I really need something around 105mm. I'm going to use my 55-200 for an upcoming session, I hope it works out. <br> See I know the lens is good, but the AF system in the D3100 it just isn't that good in low light. In dimly lit rooms, it's not as accurate, in my experience. <br> I don't have enough glass to make a switch a really painful experience, I maybe would miss my 50 1.8, but that'd be it. <br> A D7100 would be an option, but I'm not sure. I also like the color of Canon sensors, but that's nothing that a little post can't fix.<br /><br />A D5200 or D5300 is not really an upgrade, as far as I can tell.</p>

<p>Hello all! I currently own a Nikon D3100 and I'm in need of an upgrade. Now I'm posting here in the Canon forum 'cause I'm considering upgrading to a Canon 70D. First, let me tell you why:</p> <ul> <li>Very good APS-C sensor (not the best I know, but still very good)</li> <li>More megapixels (not a nut about this, but having more than 14MP is nice :))</li> <li>Slightly better dynamic range (not hugely so, but it's an improvement nonetheless)</li> <li>Excellent AF system (19 cross-type AF points, quick and accurate)</li> <li>Better looking noise (yes, you read that right XD)</li> <li>Lighter than FF bodies (D800s and 5Dxs have produced back and shoulder pain, I don't need that)</li> </ul> <p>Now, what do you guys think about this? The big factor for me is the AF system. I don't mind the ~2 stops less of Dynamic Range vs say a D7100, or the loss of ~4 megapixels or that the 70D has a AA filter. I'm not a pro, but I know that no sensor can fix an out of focus, badly lit photo, period. I need reliable AF during studio sessions, lit by the modeling lights of studio flashes (Bowens, Alien Bees and the like).<br /> I'm not a full time photog, but I do shoot for some local magazines from time to time. A few times I've borrowed a friend's D800, and I've also shot with a 5DII, 6D, L glass and all. They are nice rigs of course, but I cannot afford them. It's kinda hard for me to put that amount of money all at once. The 70D body is within my reach if I save up for a few months and do extra jobs on the side. The 6D is really nice, but I'm not sold on the 1 cross-type AF center point. If any of you can convince me otherwise please do.<br /> When I'm on a shoot I need to rely on my tools, mostly AF, because nothing sucks more than nailing a shot, but when you look at it on the computer screen it is slightly out of focus. <strong>I need a reliable and accurate AF system</strong>, which is why the 70D caught my eye. <br /> So far, the DR of my D3100 has been more than enough, so I think I wouldn't need much more. I think glass and sensor resolution matter more in the long run. I plan on acquiring Sigma Art primes and probably a Tamron 90 macro for portraits eventually (Canon L glass is overpriced IMO). I don't need full frame, it'd be nice, but it's more of a luxury than a necessity. <br /> What do you guys think? Does my plan make sense? Please help me out!<br /><br /><br />P.D. I've also considered other systems, like the Olympus OMD-EM1, Sony A7 and Fuji XT-1, but I'm not sure about their AF system's reliability and the EVF's those cameras have. Unfortunately these cameras are not available in my country and I cannot test drive them in the flesh to either confirm or deny my assumptions. On the other hand, I have used Canon 60Ds, T4is, T5is, 7Ds, etc., so I do have first hand experience with them.</p>