jerry_m

I like it. The people and cars in the back bring life to the image. Well framed and exposed. Just my humble opinion.

I'll be 76 years young next week and photography, in one form or another has been my hobby for about 40 years. I can not count the cameras I have had but remember most of them fondly. I still have some sleeping in storage boxes or on display in my office. Still in use are my digital slr's ( Nikon) , with probably too many lenses, and one Panasonic bridge camera. All function as well as they did when I purchased them. I am not going to get published in Sports Illustrated or Nat Geo. My kids and grand kids have enough of my pictures. I don't get large prints any more. 12 or 24 mpg is enough for me. A 70-300 lens is long enough. A 10-20 is wide enough. I don't shoot in rain or cold weather. My buffer speeds are fast enough. I'm constantly learning bout features on my D90. D7000 and d3300. I read the ads in the magazines and on line, and the reviews, and sometimes think about new bodies, but the thoughts quickly pass. I don't need any more gadgets or features.So--- Unless my gear is all stolen or lost (or I win the lottery), I kind of think that I'll look at the ads, read the reviews, but have bought my last "new" or improved camera body.

Sunrise at Vero Beach Florida 2 weeks ago

, with my old but still used Nikon D 50, 18-55 lens, 1/4000, f 6.3---

try this-----Jerry

Nikon F2 Photomic Finder DP-2 instruction manual, user manual, PDF manual, free manuals

I don't need a wide angle zoom that often but I did buy a Sigma 10-20 4.-5.6 lens recently and on the few occasions I needed to use it,I was satisfied with the results. It does not have VR, which I found I did not need at wide angle shooting outdoors. It is light weight and easy to carry. And it works fully on my Nikon D7xxxx and D3300 bodies. I'm happy with its versatility, price and performance.

I just went through comparing three DX super-wide zooms:

 

Tokina 11-16/2.8 (the first version)

Tokina 11-20/2.8

Tamron 10-24/3.5-4.5 Di-II VC HLD

 

The intent is to replace my wife's 11-16 with something a bit more versatile (which brought the Tamron into the picture because of both the widest range and the presence of vibration reduction). I have not tried the Nikon AF-P DX 10-20/4.5-5.6G VR - which is the other DX super-wide that offers vibration reduction. For what my wife mainly shoots, a wide aperture is not necessary, which automatically makes the Tamron the favorite from the above list. Since of lot of what she shoots is landscapes or cityscapes, somewhat even performance across the frame is desirable - which is why I focused mostly on corner performance in my comparisons (done on a D500 and evaluated at 100%).

 

In a direct comparison at the widest zoom setting, one surprise was that the old 11-16 clearly beats the new 11-20 when it comes to corner performance (center sharpness seems to be at par with all three - at least I can't see a significant difference). It's not a big difference but definitely noticeable in a direct comparison. The Tamron looks slightly worse wide open (f/3.5) compared to both the Tokinas. Stopping down to f/4 sharpens up the corners with both Tokinas but does nothing for the Tamron (no suprise really as it is only 1/3 stop down from wide open). At f/5.6, the small advantage of the 11-16 over the 11-20 remains and the Tamron still lags behind but manages to close the gap somewhat when stopped down to f/8.

 

At 16mm, the 11-16 looses in the corners against the 11-20 and the Tamron 10-24 at every aperture; the 11-20 clearly beats the Tamron at each aperture.

 

At 20mm, in the corners, the 11-20 is clearly ahead of the Tamron at each aperture again.

 

The 11-16 performs well at the widest focal length setting and gradually degrades towards the long end. The 11-20 does the opposite, as does the Tamron.

 

Overall, the 11-20 is better than the 11-16 except at the widest focal length setting. Replacing the 11-16 with the 11-20 comes with the additional caveat that the 11-20 requires 82mm filters, the other two make do with 77mm. The Tamron never matches the 11-20 but gets close to the 11-16 with the Tokina having the advantage over half of its focal length range (starting with the widest) and the Tamron over the rest.

 

I summary, the 11-20 is the overall sharpness and eveness king of the three lenses compared while the Tamron is the most versatile due to the widest range and the presence of VR. And I am nowhere closer in finding out whether I should recommend the 11-20 or the 10-24 to my wife (though I am leaning towards the latter). Her main lens is the Nikon 16-80, with either lens there will be some overlap - which I consider a good thing as it may eliminate some lens changes.

 

Anyone wants to chime in on the Tokina 11-20 vs Tamron 10-24 VC selection decision?

I have the older non-vr version that I got at a thrift shop a few years ago. It is light and sharp, focuses fast and well on my D90, D7000, and D3300. It is a very good walk around lens with a good focal length range.

They are still as good as they ever were---excellent ! Your sales tax issue will vary according to the state in which you live.

I was thinking of a new D7200 for a birthday present, but will just have to wait----a price increase just can't be justified to me at this time. My D7000 still works just fine.

An un wanted and unnecessary change without warning. Takes too much time and effort to find what I want. I will be gone for a while until this is fixed

<p>Call your local Bar association. I am sure the have a referral list of lawyers who specialize in contract or small business matters. You will probably find a young lawyer just starting out who is competent in these matters and will charge a reasonable rate. The on line "do it yourself" forms you see advertised are too generic and probably will not specifically cover your situation.</p>

<p>A little bit of good news----I can now log on again on my pc, but Safari will not me log on with my i-phone---it says "too many redirects", but I will keep trying. Hopefully this will soon be fixed--Jerry</p>

<p>Hi Brooks----after reading your post again, I went to my box of old film stuff, and lo and behold, in a corner was a rubber Vivitar wide angle lens hood that has 67 mm thread size. I put it on and -----fits and works great. ! Problem solved and few bucks saved. Thanks guys. </p>

Thanks. I will check this out. Jerry

<p>Thanks Eric but my lens is not the VR version (different thread size) and $34.95 ismore than KEH wants. </p>

<p>Thanks Chip. I appreciate your help. I don't have that lens. i will keep looking around and will find one somewhere--Jerry</p>

<p>Good morning folks---thanks for all your answers. That is what I like about this forum. Chip---please let me know if you still just happen to have an hb 28 in your junk drawer and if so how much you want for it. I checked KEH, but they want $19.00 plus shipping-----Jerry</p>

<p>Hi---I just got a real good buy on a Nikon 24-85 ed af-s at a thrift shop---bought it for $50.00 and it seems to perform just fine. But of course there was no lens hood. The original one would be the hb -28 which is unavailable. Does any one who has this lens know if the hb- 32 which is for the 18-105 lens and also takes the same 67 mm filters will work ? They seem to be available in either original or copy models at a reasonable price. Thanks--Jerry</p>

<p>John H---It is a "VELLO". Don't know the exact model number. Got it some months ago (ebay or Amazon) don't remember which. Works just fine. Jerry</p>

<p>Well, I might just be going in the opposite direction. Here is my reasoning. I have a Nikon d7000 which is my go to camera and has the Tamron 18-270 lens on it. My back up is a D90 with the 18-105 Nikon on it. I also have a 70-300 nikon VR zoom and a few primes. I am satisfied with both set ups. Now those kits are fine band I am satisfied with the images. I am familiar with the controls. But as I age they tend to get a bit heavy. I bought the Panasonic fz200 and have used it a lot. The images are satisfactory and it is lightweight. I bought an external flash and a wired remote too. But----even after all this time, the controls are confusing and the settings not easy figure out without an instruction book close at hand. I have taken it on vacation and accidentally changed a few settings, like the iso, , diopter adjustment, etc. The book that comes with the camera is awful. I got it printed out and it is ok at home but too big to carry around. Basically I find the menus just too confusing and not user friendly. . Ok--maybe I am just too used to Nikon. so I will try something different. I just got a Nikon d 3300 for a walk around daily use camera. It is really lightweight. I will use the kit 18-55 lens or a longer zoom. The menus are a breeze to use and follow and of course the images are excellent. It is a bit heavier has a lesser focal length, a slower lens, etc, but I do not get as frustrated with it, and unless I will be shooting sports or wildlife, this should be what I need. For serious shooting I'll probably use the d7000, an sb flash, etc. I will be experimenting and will let you know. Keeping my fingers crossed-----Jerry</p>

<p>50 states, 50 different sets of laws, rules, statutes and regulations, plus a myriad of local rules, regulations and ordinances. In addition there are federal rules to consider. Suggest you consult a local lawyer. Your legal fee may be a tax deductible business expense. </p>

<p>Back "in the day" I had and used all three. Your series e lenses are all ais. They will work on the fe or fe-2. I preferred the FE and FE 2 over the FG. My favorite was and is the FE2. I liked the higher shutter speed and ttl flash. That having been said, the only film camera I still have besides an F2, is my FE2 with a 28 mm series e lens, a 50 mm series e and a 75-15 series e. All three of those lenses work on my d7000 by the way. But you will enjoy an FE or FE2 no matter which one you get. </p>

<p>Lex---thank you for your comments. I've ordered 1 screw in filter and will see how it works. I may get a Cokin later just to compare the two. A bit of experimenting should be fun. Jerry</p>

<p>Thanks Craig. My use of the word "landscape" was perhaps. a bit too broad. I want to experiment with some long exposures and also try to blur the background on sunny outdoor images of flowers and plants. I will be using the graduated nd for more of the broader landscape shots. I appreciate your advice. </p>