dannyv

<p>I'm very pleased with this lense on my D700. It has a nice colour rendering and the corners start to be sufficiently sharp on FX from F6.3 / F7.1 onwards. I can live with that.<br>

The lens is well built and this permits you to focus very precisely. Its small size is handy. With the built in chip you just change diafragm on your camera and the only thing you have to do manually is to focus. Simple and easy. I didn't notice any problems with the light measurement as was encountered with the first batches of this lens.<br>

In our photoclub two other members bought the Voight as well and they're both very satisfied.<br>

I don't use the original hood (too expensive) but I use a Nikon HN-2 hood instead and that does the job.<br>

Of course it's not as good as my 14 - 24 which sharpness and colours are unrivalled but it certainly is a nice lens. My experiences are not very scientific but I hope they can help you. :)</p>

<p>I just ordered a Voigtlander 20mm. Many thanks to all of you! :)</p>

<p>The Voightlander seems to be a clear winner.Not only for sharpness but also for distortion. Thanks Tommy.Ver helpful information.</p>

<p>Many thanks for your reply,Andy!</p>

<p>Is there anyone who can tell me about his/her experiences with the 18-35 on FX? I know there is distortion but can it be controlled easily afterwards on the PC? Which type of distortion is it?Is the lens sharp enough at F5.6 or are the corners still very soft on fullframe?</p>

<p>I'm asking this because I want to buy a lightweight wideangle to take with me on a trip to Istanbul next month.Of course there will be architecture shots (interiors of churches and mosques).I will take my old 28-105 AFD along and the 50/1.4 but would like to have some extra wideangle reach.</p>

<p>I own the 14-24 but I will not take it along because of the weight. I 've had some troubles with both knees this year and still have to be careful with weight at the moment.</p>

<p>I already had a look at the Nikkors 20mm but on FX the corners are said to be very soft.Then I had a look at the Voightlander 20/3.5 but I was told it has a lot of moustache distortion which can't be corrected easily.There's the Tamron 17-35 where some people are satisfied and others are not (I saw some pictures taken with it and did not really like the colours it renders).</p>

<p>Yesterday I bumped into the old Sigma 15-30 which seems to be nice on fullframe ( sharp but distortion and flare problem) and there's the Sigma 12-24 which has no distortion but sharpness is not great.These two Sigma's are not really lightweight but 600gr is not 1kg like the 14-24.</p>

<p>So I'm leaning towards the 18-35 if it's reasonably sharp at f5.6 (with steady hand and high ISO capabilities of my D700 I hope I can take interior shots at F5.6 most of the time) and if the distortion can be corrected easily afterwards.</p>

<p>Any experiences or is there another lightweight prime / zoom I have looked over. Many thanks!</p>

Do you have the Hi noise reduction switched on (C.fn II/2)? This limits the buffer.

I will use it as my standard walking lense together with the AFs 12-24/4 and the 75-150/3.5E.Not too heavy and reasonable quality.

 

I took some shots yesterday evening of a glowing lamp here at my desk and the 28-50mm also performed better than the 25-50.The 25-50mm images consistently showed a blurred light whereas the 28-50 showed a realistic view of the light source.Perhaps the interior of the lens surface of the 25-50 needs to be cleaned but as I can see it's really clean inside.The 25-50 is in absolute mint condition so I don't understand it.

 

Anyway,I put the 25-50 for sale on a wellknown auction site yesterday evening with a "buy it now"-option and when I switched on my PC this morning I saw that it was already sold during the night.It's packed and when the payment comes in it will go to a new owner acros the North Sea in Great Britain. :)

I just added a comparative picture of the upper left corner to my portfolio.Again 25-50 on the left and 28-50 on the right and picture taken at F11.

 

Here is the smaller version.<div></div>

Yes,all the shots to the left are the ones of the 25-50mm.The circled word is in the middleof the page.The crop is at 80 percent.I should have placed the page straight up instead of lying downwards.As a result of this sharp area below the circled word is smaller than the one above it.Sorry for this.First test ever made and so I'm moving on thin ice here :)

 

The shown picture underneath is the entire picture with the cropped area indicated.It's the picture with the 28-50mm at F11<div></div>

I received my 28-50/3.5 AIS this morning and started to compare it with my 25-

50/4 AI.I like the 28-50 a lot more because of it's compactness,fast push&pull

system and it's 52mm filter size which is the same as my primes and 75-150/3.5

The 28-50mm really works fine but the one I bought is really almost like a new

one.Very smooth but enough friction to be very precise.Much faster and easier

than the two separate rings on the 25-50mm.

 

I wanted to take some comparative shots outside but the weather is very bad

here in Belgium at the moment so took some pics inside.I mounted the lenses on

my D1X and used a tripod and cable release.This is certainly not a scientific

test,just some comparative shots.The pictures were upsized to 80 percent of

the original ones and then I took a screenshot of the two next to one another.

 

I will post the F11 comparison below and the other ones (comparisons at F4-

F3.5,F5.6,F8,F11 and F16) are to be seen in my portfolio here on the site.the

pics on the left are 25-50mm and to the right the 28-50mm ones.

 

I was a little bit amazed to see that the 28-50mm seems to be somewhat better

at F5.6 and also at F8.I really thought the 25-50mm was going to be a lot

sharper.I pointed the 28-50 into the direction of a light source and it seems

to flare more easily than the 25-50m.Looking forward to hear your conclusions.<div></div>

I will have it tomorrow morning.It arrived on the 25th in Belgium but the courier service came only today with the 28-50mm to our place.We were all out working and the children off to school so I'll get it myself tomorrow morning.

 

I hope it will be a fine lense.Anyway,or I will sell a mint 25-50/4 or a mint 28-50/3.5 because I won't keep the two of them.I'll take some comparative pictures with them but it's difficult to compare lenses in a quick way (or the 28-50mm must be really unsharp,the 25-50mm is a sharp lense but I don't like the separate two rings for focussing and the viewangle)

Thanks again,Roland.Till now I haven't received the 28-50/3.5 yet.Must be across the Atlantic by now.

 

I have thought about the 28/2.But first I'll have a look waht I'm going to do with the twoo zooms in this range. :)

Thank you Roland.Much appreciated.It seems it's going to be difficult to decide between the 25-50 and the 28-50 because I really like to shoot into the light.If the 28-50 flares easily that's a negative point.

 

I have used the 28-70mm you mention but sold it because mine wasn't sharp at all.Perhaps I had a bad sample.I regretted selling it because of the reasons you mention but the optical quality was really bad.But nice range,handy size and weight and also 52mm filters.

Thanks for your replies.Yes,the 25-50/4 is sharp and has no distortion.I'm really curious for the 28-50/3.5.Its compactness as you say is an important factor.I hope it will be optically allright too even if its not as good as the 25-50mm.

 

Well,I already received a mail that the 28-50mm is on its way from the USA to Belgium and I hope to receive it by the end of this week.Parcels from the USA get here very fast but then the Belgian Post takes over and it takes more time for the parcel to get from Brussels to my place (about 80km) than to cross the big water :)

That's true,David but I'm pretty sure there are people here who have been using these lenses for a long time.I would appreciate to know their experiences with the two lenses.I've read for example that the 28-50/3.5 flares more easily (the 25-50/4 not or less)but is it such a big problem?

I have been searching for a mint 28-50/3.5 AIS for months now and finally

found one and bought it for 199 dollars an a wellknown auction site.Haven't

received it yet but since I've bought several times from this reliable seller

I'm pretty sure it will be without a scratch and in good working condition.

 

I already have a 25-50/4 AI (also in mint condition)and will probably sell

this lense and keep the 28-50/3.5 because of its smaller size,weight and

because its 52mm filter size.From what I've read (not a lot of information is

to be found) the 25-50/4 seems to be the sharper lense but is the difference

in optical quality that great?What are the experiences from those who have

used these two fine lenses?How do they compare?

Thanks for all your answers.This forum is an amazing place!!Thank you.So I'm not going to bother with the CPC 28-50mm on the internet.

 

I already own a 25-50/4 but am still looking for the lighter 28-50/3.5.Not only because of the weight but also because it's a push and pull.Really handy because you can do everything in one movement whereas with the 25-50/4 you have to adjust two separate rings.

I noticed a Nikon mount CPC for sale on the internet (a 28-50 F3.5-4.5) and I

wonder what the CPC stands for.Can't find any information.My attention was

drawn to this lense because I'm looking everywhere for a 28-50/3.5 AIS (can't

find one).Can anyone enlighten me.Thanks!

I've noticed the same thing already with Nikon Capture.With Capture in NEF it's easier to adjust your pictures and it gives much nicer colours than CS2.

 

I have NX running on my PC too but still prefer to use Capture because NX still needs some tuning and some updates before it will work as smooth as Capture.Have fun with NX!

With a D1X you have to expose for the highlights and put your metering system on -0,3 or even -0,7 exposures.Also put the camera on "less contrast" in your menu.There's probably nothing wrong with the sensor.With a D80 or a D200 you will have the same "problem" whe, contrasts are high and you will also get blown out highlights..The dynamic range of a digital sensor is smaller than the dynamic range of an analog film.You simply underexpose the shot and then you lighten it up in nikon Capture or photoshop.It's just another way of workflow.The D1X is still a very fine camera and capable of taking lovely pictures but with each camera there's a learning curve.

 

Here's an example of a picture taken with a D1X against the sun.<div></div>

When I do a city trip I take my 12-24/4,35/2,50/1.4 and the 100/2.8E which is a very sharp lens and as the other two primes a light weight (if you buy one buy the version with the chrome ring).If I want a lightweight zoom with me I take the 75-150/3.5E

I bought the Adorama 4-way two years ago and I'm very satisfied.I use my D1X with 200/4 macro on it and it works very smooth and precise.

I had the same "problem" and finally bought the AFS 24-85 F3.5-4.5 to pair with my 12-24/4.It has some distortion at 24mm but not at that level that it bothers me.It's very sharp and renders the colours very nicely.For me this is an ideal travelling lense;sharp and lightweight.

I used to have a D100,after that a D70s and now have a D1X.I really like the old D1X although it does have some negative points (older Dttl flashsystem instead of Ittl,battery life (but it's not that bad as many say when you use the 2400 mAh batteries) and white balance which is not always correct when taking pictures inside (no problem for me as I always shoot in RAW and I use the "cloudy" setting most of the time for all my pictures).

 

But when I take the positive points into consideration (pro build,big viewfinder,CAM1300 AF is much faster than D70s and yes...also faster than the D200 with CAM1000,1/500 shutter speed with flash instead of 1/250,the sturdiness and weight allow me to take sharp pictures at lower shutter speeds than possible with m former D100/70s...) for me it it's much more camera than a D70.When using one of my heavier lenses like the Nikkor 200/4 macro or the 300/4 AFs on the D1X the balance and feel are really great.

 

Of course a D200 has newer technology and more pixels.A friend of mine used his D1X for nearly 3 years,sold it a few months ago to buy a D200 and his conclusion last week after comparing lots of pictures of the two cameras is that the difference can't be seen in most of his pictures(you can for pictures taken with flash where the D200 has an advantage!)and the D1X pictures are still great.

Thanks for your replies.I purchased 2nd one (the later version with chrome ring,the one I have now is entirely plastic)and I hope it will be better.