joseph_sanders

<p> </p>

I wish fuji and nikon would get into bed together. Nikon bodies with FF fuji sensors would be sweet.

The Enemy of Great: // Medium format digital back 6x6

 

The Enemy of Great is: Good.

 

What do you think would make a ?good? digital back?

 

Here is mine:

 

10MP

50mm X 50mm

Stellar dynamic range

ISO 3200 (should be easily attainable given the size of the image sites on this

sensor)

2FPS

DNG Raw compressed only.

$2000 or less

Adapters for Bronica, Rollei, Hassy ect..

 

Why hasn?t someone done this yet? Is it impossible? Why? If 10MP SLR costs

$1000 and includes: shutter, mirror, prism, metering, AF, lens, mount ect..

Shouldn?t a relatively simple back be doable for $2k?

 

 

We shoot medium format for 2 reasons, resolution and ?smoothness? Obviously my

?Good? (not great) back won?t win a resolution contest against Nikon D80. But

it would rule the smoothness contest.

 

What is smoothness? In short it is shallow depth of field. I?m convinced that

most of the mystique of MF can be attributed to its ability to isolate subject

from background. Manufacturers wonder at the low sales of MF backs while only

catering to the high dollar high resolution crowd.

Obviously this is a work of fiction.

 

marketing@tamron.com

 

 

 

I just wanted to jot a quick note and congratulate you and all of Tamron on your

up coming Bronica RF-4D Digital Range finder. What a great machine to resurrect

the Bronica name with.

 

Tamron?s vision of melding the user interface and lens mount of the Analog

Bronica RF with a great 49mm square sensor is PURE GENIUS! (Is Kodak your

partner on the electronics? I hope not as they seem to screw up everything they

touch lately.) In terms of resolution its 19mp sensor fits very neatly between

the current crop of medium format backs and high end 35mm based SLRs. It will

obviously blow the doors off the 35mm and ?cropped? (DX?) sensor systems in

terms of depth of field control, user interface, FORM FACTOR and flash sync but

of course the REAL coup de grace is the analog user interface and square format.

Built in Pocket Wizard functionality is some good gravy. I?m satisfied with

manual focus and the 2.2 fps is faster than a medium format back. I also love

the fact the swing out LCD ala: Canon PowerShot G6 helps overcome almost all the

inherent limitations associated with a traditional rangefinder design. This

will certainly broaden the appeal of the camera well beyond the ?Rangefinder

Snob? crowd. Your pricing of course makes me cringe as $6800 for the body and

normal lens is a lot of money for my working man budget but I?m sure the street

price will come down to the $6200 territory in 8-14 months and there will

certainly be no questioning of value among professionals. My guess though is

that you could sell 10 times as many @ $3500. Given this cameras complete

uniqueness, I?m sure it will like enjoy a very long production run relative to

the rest of the digital world.

 

 

So.. CONGRATULATIONS! You guys are going to hit this one out of the park

assuming lame software doesn?t screw it up. How about using me as a beta

tester? Also what order are the announced lenses going to be released? I?m

hoping the 29mm F2 (yum!) and 162mm F4 are available when the body comes down

the pipe the rest fill in shortly there after.

 

 

-Joe Sanders

I've got the epson V700. I like it with a few qualifiers. The biggest issue is that the 120/220 film hold doesn't hold the film flat. I've built some metal supports that i use in conjunction with magnets to flatten the film. I can put up some photo of them tell you how I built them if you decide to go the epson route. There is an after market film holder out there for $85 that has some snap in plastic supports. It sounded a little flaky to me so I built my own. You should check it out for yourself though I think his web site is called betterscanning. I'm testing vue scan right now which seems pretty cool so far.

 

I don't know any thing about the minolta.. but in my experience scanners can be delicate.. I don't think i'd buy one used. I want to be able to send it back if it does something wonky.<div></div>

Thank you all for posting. I�m superized at the response. I really want to write a 3 page response to each poster but I can�t or I�ll die. So I�m going try to break things down in brief orderly fashion. Like my original post comments (generally) fall along two line of thought:

 

What would be cool in a camera.

 

And

 

It will work IF (fill in the blank)

 

I�ve realized that for the project to work it will have to move large numbers. To move large numbers is will have to have broad appeal and serve a segment of the market better the current offerings (thank you Wesley) Which brings us to:

 

What would be cool in a camera? There are lots of answers to this question. I�m big fan of the 6x9 120 cameras mentioned by. Ben. And the Bronica 645 RF. But I�m not sure that these type of cameras will have mass appeal.. not because they are not great cameras but because they have limited flexibility. I�ve been eyeing those Fuji 6x9�s with changeable lenses all summer� but with interests in many different types of photography I�ve come to the conclusion that the 6x9 RF is going to have be a second or third system for me. I think to achieve critical mass we have to rethink the original question. We should be asking:

 

If you had to live with ONE camera system for the rest of your days on this planet.. and you could influence the design of it what would it look like.

 

I personally think that anything based on a small sensor (or film) size will fail because the market had done a great job of meeting those needs. Canon, Nikon, Minolta, Sony all are making great products in that arena. However the gap between Nikon/Cannon/Sony and Hasselblad is MASSIVE. I think that is the proverbial hole in the market. Not to be dismissive, but I think the any older 35mm based cameras won�t sell. People can just buy a used one.

 

I�m convinced modular is the way to go. The body, lenses and accessories could be used across several generations of higher and higher quality digital backs or mated to film backs. I�m intrigued by using an available mount Nikon/Canon? My guess is that there would be some patent trouble though. I�ll bet sigma would go for as it would mean selling more of their lenses. Perhaps a unique lens mount with adapters.

 

I�m also intrigued by the idea of convincing Tamron to kick down the guts of their Bronica cameras.

 

 

How about a sensor that would capture the entire light circle of a 35mm (or 645) format lens. (40mm in dia?) With a digital back you could choose you orientation on the fly horz/vert/square. No flash brackets!!

 

Ok.. enough from me about what I think would be cool.. on to: IS IT POSSIBLE? The biggest obstacle to possible is will people buy it. As I read Wesley Bowman�s post for the first time my knee jerk reaction was �no he is wrong� there was not a real looming commercial reason for Linux at its first iteration therefore there doesn�t necessarily need to be burning hole in the market for success. But upon further reflection I see the point: Why would people buy the Open Camera as opposed to a solution on the market already? That is the big question. If the Open Camera is only as good or flexible as the other solutions on the market the only carrot is price. Which brings us too two other thoughts: 1) How much of the price of a camera is attributable to marketing, profit and development? If the Open Camera can be %95 as good as Hassy H2 and cost %40 as much folks will buy it. 2) What will the open camera do that an H2 won�t?

Either the Open Camera has to be way cheaper or way better or some compelling mix there of. Hopefully we are addressing the �way better� first section of this post (what is the most flexible camera system)

There are those that think it just out right impossible.. though I haven�t heard the reasons. For the sake of discussion I�ll reject that out of hand. This guy is trying to design a freaking Helicopter from an entirely new direction:

http://www.unicopter.com/UniCopter.html#top

He may fail.. but I don�t think its impossible.

We would need CAD software. We would need to be able to test the camera�s mechanicals inside a computer 10,000 times before machining a single part. I know there are software�s that can do this�. But are they cheap enough to spread copies around to 1000+ volunteer developers.

 

http://www.emachineshop.com/

 

Has their freebie CAD software.

 

I�m thinking injection molded Liquid Metal ( www.lqmt.com ) for the main material (Doug G. please weigh in here!) Is injection molding cheaper then casting or machining?

 

 

 

How many components can be bought off the shelf? If we go with an atypical format� probably not many.

 

Thanks again for all your posts.

 

JOE

So we can build software via. open source. Could we build a camera system? How

much of the cost of a camera is attributable to marketing and development? I

know the initial gut reaction is "no". Cameras are complex and there is a

marginal cost to every unit whereas software has no marginal cost per unit.

Lets just set that aside for a moment. Lets answer the question: What would an

open source camera look like?

 

Here is (one of) my answer(s):

 

1) square format (not necessarily 6x6 though. possibly Nikon/canon mount.

a. User selectable orientation horizontal, vertical or square.. rotate able

back?)

2) separate body/lens/back... possibly separate finders and winder/motordrive.

3) diamond (square) pattern AF sensors. One sensor at each rule of thirds

intersection, one sensor in the center, sensors centered vertically and

horizontally just outside the box created by the rule of thirds sensors.

4) lens based focus motors

5)

6) USB port for firmware updates. (open source firmware obviously)

7) open flash protocol.

 

 

What if Tamron donated the designs to the bronica sqai or RF as starting point?

 

What if foveon was willing to donate some engineering in an effort to create a

market for their sensors?

 

In my little sci-fi world the open camera project would aggregate orders in

blocks of 1000 or 5000 or whatever made sense for demand. Non refundable

deposits would be taken to hold a spot in the production run. Full payment

before production is ordered from manufacturing sub-contractor. Abandoned

deposits would lower cost for the rest of the buyers.

 

I know this seems crazy... but I think it could be the next step in economic

evolution. It not really socialist.. it exists in a market but it is very

decentralized and design is "owned" by no single person or entity. Look at what

Lego had done with their kit design contests. Look at the system they developed

to enable the sharing of designs among their customers.

 

 

-Joe

 

If you think this isn't even worth discusing, put your money where your mouth is

and don't post.

 

If you think it impossible, you are probabally right, tell me why.

 

Lots of things are impossible, but still worth discussing.

Perhaps I missed it in the thread somewhere.. but- What body are you putting this lens on? I suspect it will matter less if it is going on a digital camera with a crop factor as only thte center of the lens will be used. From what I've read the Tamron is the better of these two lenses but I've not used either.

 

I did spring for a Sigma 24-60 this is what I wrote in my blog about it:

<snip>

In yet another spasm of financial insanity, sparked by a windfall at

my monday night 'Holdem game, I recently acquired a new (used) lens.

After all, if I'm going to be shooting weddings this summer (2 booked

so far!) I MUST have a good wide angle.. right? Or... expressed in

the language of a certain ex of mine, "Those boots were such a bargain

at $315 I just HAD to buy them."

 

All you photo nerds out that still shoot film cameras with

interchangeable lenses, all 3 of you that is, may appreciate this

piece of glass. Its really quite unique, 24mm-60mm zoom @ a constant F

2.8. It is the closest thing on the market to my dream nikkor: 24-50

F2 D. http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=005zxO

Inside my head I entertain the fantasy that because its

relatively short zoom range, that somehow the sharpness will good

despite its lack of prime-ness and sigma label on the barrel. Even if

it doesn't go toe to toe with my trusty 50mm nikkor the range is just

incredible! It is the perfect walking around lens. The ends of the

lens at 24 and 60 create dramatically different perspectives, almost

super-wide and almost tele-photo. An 80-200 at each end, looks pretty

much like a telephoto... because it is.

 

It sets me up for 2 lens bag: 24-60 F2.8 and 80-200 F2.8. Simple

Beautiful Wonderful. For weddings I'll mount each to its own body and

keep the 50mm in my pocket for groups (sharpness) All I need now to

round out my kit is a nice graflex.

 

<snip>

 

 

Since I wrote this i've put 30 rolls behind this lens and I'm really happy with it. It does flare, but i've never met a wide angle lens that doesn't.

 

 

Here are some pic taken with this lens.. probabally not great examples as half of them were taken in a piston powered helicopter traveling @ 100mph.

 

http://www.pbase.com/adphoto/life

 

 

-Joe

Here are my 2 bits. I've not owned either Rollie or Contax.. I've used a rented Hassy 503.

 

If you remove money from the equasion:

 

Go with the Rollei. For the following reasons- 1) square format, you never have rotate, you never have worrry about flash postion. 2) Flash sinc @ 1/1000. If I recall correctly the Rollei is the only one of this bunch that will sinc at this speed. 3) In camera flash metering VERY COOL.

 

If cost is a bit of an issue go with a manual focus 6008. As mentioned above, you will probabally be focusing manually anyway. AF lens selection for the the Rollei is pretty slim. A Hassy 503 wouldn't be a bad way to go either.

 

If cost is even MORE of an issue. Buy a used bronica SQAI... or 2.

 

-JOE

In the past I just used a norman/bare bulb and a flash meter with a rented Hassy. For the little camera I just bounced light from an SB-28 off the ceiling in TTL mode with shutter set to grab some ambient light. Balanced fill -1 outdoors.

 

Now I live in an area that doesn't have any rental equipment available.

 

Thanks for your advise on the defuser, I'll test that route in the next day or so and go that way if I like the results. Also +1 in backlit situatations I've never tried with the flash before... always with the body.

 

I'm thinking the SB-26 as a slave with its simultainous/delay modes may just get me in trouble. I should probabally just ditch it unless I can beg, borrow or steal a flash meter and go manual... even then I'll worry about the optical slave functioning consistently.

 

-JOE

Nikon N90s body. Shooting a wedding in about 10 days. I am planning

to do a few tests between now and then but some advice would

definitely be helpful. I need some help with a flash situation. I

have an SB-26 and an SB-28 I have a diffuser on the 28.

 

Here is what I think:

 

For fill light out doors:S

B-28 w/diffuser on camera

Balanced fill setting

-1 to -.5 stops

 

Camera on Aperture priority

 

If I need more fill (20 person wedding party shot?):

Add SB-26 in Delay mode AUTO

Auto -1 stop (by setting larger aperture on the flash then

what I?m actually shooting)

 

For Primary light:

Evening reception will be in white tent, which will make a nice reflector.

 

Camera on Manual mode Shutter 1/30 ? 1/50

Aperture F 8 or larger depending on what I?m shooting

 

SB-28 no diffuser bounce off ceiling

TTL MODE -/+ 0

 

SB-26 Bounced off ceiling

Simultaneous, manual mode

 

Watch the back of the SB-28 for over/under exposure warnings.

Basically, use the sb-28 as a flash meter.

 

-Joe

Anyone tried it?

If you are doing wedding work don't mess with the n80. Flash sinc @ 1/125 sucks. I've owned an n80, 8008, n90, n90s and f100. The n80 was the most recent until this week. I just dumped it to a local pawn shop and picked up a near mint n90s with grip for $203. For 35mm wedding work it is perfect. Great finder, durable, FASTER AF then the N80, Flash sinc @ 1/250 or up 1/4000 using FP mode. Save your money for glass, go with the N90s over the f100.

 

-JOE

Amen. Amen. AMEN!

 

My orignal, 6 month old, N90s ($650 as a demo!) was stolen in 1996 along with my 80-200 2.8 AF ED, 20mm AF D 28-70 F2.8 EX Sigma, SB-26 and SB-28 by some A-hole who kicked my front door off its hinges. I finally replaced it with an F100 a few years later but then had to dump it during fit of unemployment.

 

I'd landed myself on an n80 about 16 months ago which was ok but when I started doing a few weddings again its limited flash sync reared its ugly head. They were going for about $200 on ebay so took $175 from the local pawnshop and never looked back.

 

Two days ago I received my used N90s w/MB-10 that I stole off ebay last week for $203.50. Gotta love that final lowball bid w/ 7 seconds left in the auction. It was descibed as being in good condition. I shocked to find a near mint camera with boxes and manuals on my doorstep.

 

I love this camera. Aside from the useless AE-lock lever, the interface is sweet. Apature control is where GOD intended it: on the lens. AF is better than the N80. View finder kicks ass. I used to shoot my old 8008 so much I almost never had to look at the camera to see what was going on. The camera helps you think "manually" which gives you more direct control over the image. It doesn't say "just point it and push the button buddy" although you can do that if you want.

 

BTW has anyone ACTUALLY USED the new 24-60 2.8 ex Sigma on a FILM body? its getting good reviews on digi bodies and I like the coverages. I want a 24-60 and 80-200. Already have a 50mm D.

 

Also my used sb-26 isn't showing the sunshine icon when I select TTL in consort with center weighted metering on the body. Has anyone else run into this? Got any ideas?

 

JOE

I can never resist.

 

 

Philosophically:

 

I like the "Machine-ness" of Nikons. The mechanical roots, long ago killed by electronics in the Canon line, are still alive (barely) A Nikon doesn't try to be invisible between eye and photo. A Nikon acknowledges it own mechanical nature and strives for simplicity within that framework. Modern Canons are designed to be organic, to become part of you, an electronic extension of your ability to experience and record a moment, a black box.. you aren't supposed to understand what is it doing just hold it up your eye and push the button. It tries to hide it machine-ness behind smooth plastic. If you are starting from scratch I think it probably works better in many ways.

 

In terms of experience:

It would be interesting to know the ages of all the posters to this thread, I suspect I?m one of the youngest at 32. I'm like most people who have testified of their love here. I learned on a Nikon. It has become a tool for executing and recording my vision because I have grown around the machine and now any other feels foreign.

 

Practically:

 

The vast majority of the backward compatibility within the Nikon system is pointless for most users, myself included. I've never mounted a manual focus on my auto focus bodies, and never will. I've never changed a screen. I prefer medium format if I?m going to mess around with waist level finders and manual focus. If my hands suddenly lost their memory and a burglar cleaned out my gear box I'd probably start over again with Canon stuff, only because I believe they are closer to have a full frame DSLR for less than $2000 which is my jumping off point for 35mm film. But my hands won't forget, so I must have aperture control on the LENS and shutter under my thumb. Nikons affordable recent offerings greatly disturb my affections, after owning an N80 for a year I've recently dumped it with plans to acquire an n90s again. Poor view finder, poor flash sync, aperture control forced to the body, and unfortunately the D70 is the same way. G series lenses??!! O please kill me.

 

There is a lot to love in the older (8008s n90s) and high end (D1/2, F100, F5, F6 (oh my god I MUST have one!!)): A truly brilliant flash system, great ergonomics, great view finders, durability, a hands off approach to image control in the digital offerings. I think Nikon is better in all these areas.

Thanks for the interesting discussion.. I actually figured about 30mm square in my original napkin doodle, that dimension just got lost between napkin and keyboard. Either way, I'm still not too worried about my geometry skills. I doubt that Nikon will render anything in metal and plastic based on my little fit here.

 

The mirror is the real problem.. I didn't think that part out. You might be able to get around it by having the mirror flip down and slide forward a bit so the top edge will clear the CCD.. sort of like an old bronica S. I don't know if that would buy enough clearance. Certainly a bigger mirror an prism will be necessary.

 

The original inspiration for this little fiction was my hate of flash brackets and love of square format.

 

As for sensors.. Nikons current best would be great, anything better would just be gravy.

 

Capturing the entire CCD would be interesting. I wonder if round pictures would come in to fashion.

 

Although the mirror would be a challenge, I do think general concept is physically possible. Economically possible is another matter. If they could pull it off I figure they could charge about $8,000-$10,000 for the first few years. It would slide between the cost of a FF 35mm SLR and medium format digital back. Not quite the image quality of digital/MF but will all the advantages of 35mm.

 

-JOE

That would be me. You can tell from my name -Joseph Sanders, at the bottom. You are correct I've not studied any geometery in over 17 years.. I think I got a C-. Thank you for your post.

New Nikon F6d

 

Rumor is that Nikon, in an effort to stave off a takeover by Fuji,

(possibly a good thing in my book, Fuji need a lens mount, AF and

Flash system, Nikon needs more R&D money and marketing muscle) is

working with Foveon on a ROUND 3x sensor for their up coming F6d.

39mm in dia. Which will allow in camera orientation selection on the

fly, -full frame vertical, full frame horizontal or approx 24mm x

24mm SQUARE. Vert/horz will run about 16x3 Mpix, square will run

about 21x3 Mpix. 4fps vert/horz and 2.5fps for the square. Latest

AF ( rule of 3rds AF points will shift depending on orientation

selection) and flash system. Nikon F mount compatible obviously.

 

Would it be cool if this little piece of science fiction had a scrap

of truth in it?

 

Blast away!

If you must save a buck, get the nikon 70-210 used. It is very sharp and very cheap. http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/70210f4.htm That and 50mm or 35mm will get you a long way. Don't worry about not having all the focal lengths covered. You are better off covering a few focal lengths with sharpness than covering all of them with shit.

 

Just my .07$.

Subject: Response to Elan 7 / N80 / Rebel Ti - Which one for a Beginner

 

I'd go AF.

I'd get a used Nikon N90s before I got an n80. View finder is way better. 1/3 stop metering contol. AF is as good or better. WAY more durable. Real vert. grip option. Higher flash sinc. (which doesn't matter now but may someday.)

 

I've used some of the canons.. I generally prefer the controls and view finders of the N90s, but they are dandy cameras, it is a matter of preference.

 

I'd avoid most of the zooms you mention. If you must have zoom convenience I'd go with either:

 

used nikon 35-70 AF D or

 

Sigam 24-60 f2.8 (I have not owned or used this lens, it just sounds good in theroy) or

 

used Nikon 80-200 F2.8 AF D ( 2 ring) or

 

Sigma 70-200 APO EX HSM F2.8 I think you can find new ones for about $550 on ebay.

 

or

 

the nikon 70-210 F4 is extremely sharp and VERY cheap used $120-$150. Not to quick on in the AF department, but it probabally won't depriciate much.

 

Unfortunately zooms with large ranges (24-135) usually suck I would avoid them like the plauge.

 

my 2 bits.

 

JOE

 

Have owned:

 

Bronica S

 

Nikon 8008 Nikon N90 Nikon N90s Nikon F100 Nikon n80 Olympus Stylus Canon A2E

 

Have used: Mamiya 6 Hassey 503 CW Canon EOS 3 Mamiya RB 67

Search the forums section on dpreview.com. Keep in mind, these folks arent using this lens on film body.

I've been asking a similar question here:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=009D5A

 

I'm thinking the relatively short zoom range makes it easier to design a sharp lens. This lens on paper is the closest thing to my dream lens:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=005zxO

 

I've read conflicting reports on dpreview.com on which is better 24-60 vs 24-70 vs Tamron. The Tamron does seem well loved though. These threads are written by folks using these lenses on Digital bodies which generally only use the center of the image circle which is of course the sharpest portion.

 

I've been looking for a first hand report from someone using a film body. In theory the 24-60 should be easier to design due to its shorter zoom range.

 

I've owned a Sigma EX 28-70 and was very happy with the performance.

 

 

Good luck.

Of course you are about to get what I think. It could be totally wrong. I'd recomend a canon G3 or G5 digital (same camera slightly higher rez in the G5) and a canon flash. I wouldn't bother with inkjet prints at home, they don't look very good, the ink rubs off easily and they fade quickly. A lab with a good fuji processor should be able to make prints on photo paper that will look good. Only print the good ones. Film WILL look better but it costs a lot more to shoot/process and for 96.8% of what you plan to do the G3/5 will work just fine. You can get decent looking 8x10 out of it. This camera also has full manual controls if you develope a greater interested in photography. If you must go the film route (my personal choice for now.) I'd go with a used nikon 8008s (pay about $150-$200) or you get alot faster camera with a used N90s (pay about $240-$320) In either case you will need a flash, you can get sigma or sunpack used for $100 or less (get one designed to work with nikons matrix flash system) for $125-$200 you can get a used Nikon SB-26 or SB-28. An off brand (sigma, tamron, tokina) zoom will work but don't buy their low end stuff. I'd own sigmas top end (EX series) lenses but I wouldn't touch anthing else of theirs. Look for lenses with short zoom ranges and constant (or near constant )apatures ie: Sigma 28-70 EX F2.8 or Tokina 28-80 F2.8. It is tempting to go for a "super zoom" (28-200 F4-6.8 or 28-135) DON'T these lenses are not sharp, they don't allow much light in (which results in longer exposures, which results in blurry photos)and they are not durable. I personally recomend and have owned the following: Sigma 28-70 F2.8 EX good balance between speed sharpness and price. Avoid the 24-70 F2.8 Sigma its a dog.(its really hard to build a good wide and long lens.) Tokina 28-80 ATX Pro F2.8 more solid and abit sharper, also more expensive. Nikon 35-70 F2.8 used is very sharp. Nikon 28-85 F3.5-4.5? is decent. Canon also makes great cameras. I have worked with a few but have always owned Nikons. In general I prefer the controls, view finders and apature rings on the Nikon system. You can find a large amount of used gear in either brand. The photo.net classified are about the best source of used equipment, ebay can also be good. Don't be in hurry in either case, ask some questions, come to your own understanding of what you want to buy.

Thanks for your post.

 

I am getting paid a bit and will increase my rates as I get more experience, but for the moment the 28-70 AF-s is out of my price range and lacks the 24mm coverage I'd like.

 

I'm trying to strike a balance between sharpness and speed. Weight is not an issue. The idea is to change lenses as little as possible. I may ditch B & W as I could avoid switching lenses almost entirely with color in both bodies. My local processor gets a pretty nice B & W print off of color neg film so why bother shooting it?

 

I've heard the 24-85 F2.8-4 Nikkor is a bit of a dog. I imagine that building a sharp 3.5x zoom is very tough paticularly with 24mm at the wide end. If the sigma is as bad then I will definitely avoid it. I was hoping with less zoom range that it would be decent. Ideally I'd like a 24-50 F2 that was sharp, ( http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=005zxO ) of course there is no such lens.

 

Still would love to hear from someone who has tried the new Sigma on film body.

 

-JOE

Has anyone out there tried the new Sigma 24-60 F2.8 EX on a film

body? According to what i've seen out there on the net this lens

works well on digital bodies in term of sharpness.

 

I'm shooting weddings and love the idea of using 2 lenses for 90% of

my shots. This is the kit i'm putting together, 2 lenses on two

bodies with a speedlight on each, everything else in a bag near by:

 

24-60 Sigma (documentary/candid/wide)

80-200 F2.8 Nikkor (tight portoraits/documentary/candid/long)

50mm 1.4 Nikkor (standard portoraits/group shots/low light)

Nikon N90s Primary body(color)

Nikon N90s Backup body (b&w)

2-SB-26-28-80 (whatever)

 

I don't want to buy this lens if its a dog on a film body. If it

stinks I'll have to go with the tried and true Nikkor 35-70 F2.8 +

24mm wide. This would put me up to 5 lenses to lug around which is

not my idea of a great time.

 

-JOE