ericjhall

Just started a similar thread with the same problem. I'll delete mine and follow yours.

Hello everyone, Maybe this question is best left to moderators. I had started a post: Which wide/medium zoom is sharpest at infinity? and after a few replies to my post, I was going to respond to a reply, but when I hit the send button I got an error message saying: "The following error occurred: Your content can not be submitted. This is likely because your content is spam-like or contains inappropriate elements. Please change your content or try again later. If you still have problems, please contact an administrator." What's going on, and how can this be fixed? Thanks. -Eric

Hi Kent, I've heard the Art lenses are excellent, but I think they lack aperture rings unfortunately.

Yes, and I love the Zeiss lenses. I have the Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 Planar. Getting the 21mm (or the 18mm?) Is an option for sure, but it is a chunk of change, and if I'm going with a set of primes, I'll have to spend quite a lot more. I could get a Nikon equivalent for a few hundred dollars.

Hi Peter, For sure, time lapse is unkind to shutters. Even video-centric cameras like the Panasonic GH5 is designed to open/close it's shutter for every shot when in time lapse mode. And most time lapse sequences I shoot probably average about 400 actuations (resulting in 16 seconds of video at 25fps). Until they change the technology, it is what it is unfortunately.

Hi Roland, Thanks so much for your reply, I'll defenately look into those lenses you mention. I may end up going with a set of primes if they'd be sure to deliver much better results, but if I can find a zoom that is sharp enough that would cover the focal lengths of 2-3 of these lenses that would be ideal because it might free up space for things like water and food, but we'll see. As to your question about the issue of flicker while shooting time-lapse sequences, the way I understand it works is that even though you might have a Canon EF lens (or any other brand) whose aperture is controlled electronically set to a particular aperture, lets say f/8 in this case, between each shot, the aperture opens back up, and then stops back down to f/8 for the following exposure, and it does this again and again hundreds of times for each sequence. Unfortunately, because of real-world physics and unavoidable variability, no two electronically determined f/8s are exactly the same. Some will be very slightly larger, and some smaller, but even a slight inconsistency in exposure results in a visible flicker when rendered into video which can be time consuming to minimize in post (using software like LRTimelapse). I suppose inconsistencies in shutter speed and maybe even ISO might also cause thier own problems, but those caused by aperture can be solved by using a non-G Nikon lens on a Canon body as once you set the aperture to f/8, there is no link, electronic or mechanical, between the Canon body and the Nikon lens' aperture mechanism. So while the camera is doing its thing, the aperture stays motionless throughout and between every shot. I have a Canon 24-105mm f/4 L and a Canon 70-200mm f/4 L. These would very nearly be all I would need if I could be sure as zooms they were sharp enough at infinity (and I'm not even sure how useful I'd find the 70-200mm focal range to be honest) if it weren't for the electronically controlled shutters. So yeah, the quest remains to find a sharp Nikon zoom if possible. If no non-G Nikon zoom is really sharp enough to do what I need, then I'll resort to a set of Nikon primes.

Hello, I'm both a photographer and cinematographer. I'm planning on doing a series of time lapse sequences in the Colorado Rockies this spring. I'll be shooting with a Canon 5D mk iii and an intervalometer. Because Canon EF lenses control the aperture electronically, I'm wanting to use a non-G Nikon lens with an adapter to ensure aperture consistency and avoid flicker. I'll be rendering 1080 x 1920 video from from the Canon's 22 megapixel RAW stills. The small size of the final videos will give me a lot of latitude in being able to re-frame in post from the much larger RAW stills, *provided* the lens(es) I shoot with are sharp when focused at infinity. I'm attaching an image to illustrate to what extent I can crop when using these RAW stills in an 1080 x 1920 timeline so you can see if I decide to take it that far, why the lens would have to deliver very sharp images (the image is not mine by the way, I'm just using it for demonstration purposes). I'm going to be out in the mountains, sometimes hiking long distances. I need to keep my equipment weight and volume to a minimum. However, I need the lens(es) I take to be sharp optically, especially at infinity. So my queston is, do I take three or four manual nikon primes with me (probably something like 20mm, 28mm, 50mm, and 105mm lenses) to ensure sharpness but also provide enough range of focal lens to be able to adapt to any situation to get the look I want (especially when considering the effects compression has on the relative size of distant mountains)? OR do I choose one or two zooms to carry? If I were to go with a zoom or two, they would need a manual aperture ring and would ideally be a twist zoom, not a push-pull zoom. The lenses would NOT have to be fast. I don't need f/2.8 or anything like that. Are there any Nikon zooms that can compete with primes to keep my weight down while out in the mountains?