abbilder

Hi Eric!

Get both flashes!

The iTTL is a very fine thing. It is no hard to learn how it works, especially because there are no film-costs - and you see the results. It realy makes fun, not only for portraits.

If you know that you will never use wireless iTTL, you can get the SB600. It is a fine flash - with one exception. Although the SB600 has a display, it does not show the range of the flash. This is of course no big deal, but well, that is a minus.

If you compare the price of the two flashes, you should consider that the SB800 is a little bit stronger AND that some nice stuff is delivered which would cost extra money if you want it for the SB600. I realy enjoy the diffusor.

To be honest, only you know what flash you need - or can afford.

Axel

Hello!

Do you know if its possible to combine wireless iTTL-flashlights and

using other flashs with the SU4?

I have the D70 and two iTTL-flash + SB24 and SB 28 with two SU4-

units. Will it be possible to use the two iTTL flashs in the wireless

iTTL-mode and also use the two older flashs by the SU4s? I would

switch the SU4s and the older flashs to manual, of course.

Thanx,

Axel

Hello Asaf!

The 18-70 is definately not like a Canon L-lens - except they are optically fine, but mechanically plastic consumer lenses. But you are looking for an alternative.

My tip is also the 24-85 2.8-4. This lens is not a G lens, so you can use it with older Nikon Cameras as well as with the D70. I use this combo and I am satiesfied. And I am satisfied with the 24-85 on film-cameras. To be honest, I enjoy the AFS-Autofocus of the 18-70 and its wider wide-angle more on the D70 than the 24-85, but that seems not to be the point for you. Its macro-function is also worth to be mentioned.

Best wishes,

Axel

Hello Jenny!

I don't know eitehr of this two lenses. But what about AF-speed?

Your D100 has the same AF-System as my D70. For me, this AF is very slow with Non-AFS lenses. The Nikon would have AFS, the Sigma, as I see not but instead it has the mechanical AF. You should think of this and test both lenses, if AF-speed is important for you.

Best regards,

Axel

Hello Tom!

Is the 24-120 realy build as a pro-level lens?

The 18-70 definately is not, but I will compare the 24-120 to my 20-35 or the 80-200.

I am a little bit disappointed by the AF-speed of the D70 with Non-AFS-lenses.

By, Axel

Hello!

has anybody experience how the 24-120 VR performs compared to the 18-

70. I am satiesfied with the 18-70 by its quality, but I want a more

tele lens. The 24-120 would give me the AFS my 80-200 does not have

and it has the range of about 200 mm. So this might be a perfect

lens for me - but does how does it perform.

I know that both lenses cover a similar wide angle area. Neverless,

one day I will get the digital version of my beloved 20mms and then,

a third lens will cover the wide angle.

Thanks,

Axel

Hello!

This is a good combo.

Bit, compared to my F90x, the AF of the D70 is slow with no AF-S lenses. I only got the D70 kit - D70 and 18-70 and I enjoy this combo even more than the D70 with 24-85. But - the only reason is AF-speed. AF-S makes fun.

So you have to decide which lens yopu choose. My last siggestion. Don't take the 28-105 - or shall 42mm be your wide angel?

Digital photografie makes it possible that you see your photo-products at once. Maybe you can test both lenses at your dealer?

Best wishes,

Axel

Hello!

I thin you mean the 28-70 2.8 and the 28-80 2.8.

I do not know about the optical performace, but there are at least two differences in the handling:

- the minimum focus distance of the 28-70 is 0.7cm, the minimum focis distance of the 28-80 is 50cm

- if you change between AF and MF, you only have to switch the distance-ring using the 28-80 but swith the distance-ring in the lens and switch the camera using the 28-70.

Hope that helps,

Axel

Hello!

Of course, any 50mm prime will be better than a 3,5Xzoom. I own a 24-85 2,8-4 and till now, I am satiesfied. It seem that there is or that there had been a lot of sample variation. May be, the sample variation is especially true for older lenses. My one is very

When I got the 24-85, I needed an midrange zoom for a non G-capable Camera and my alternative was Tokinas 28-80 2.8. Because there had been even more mixed reviews, the greater zoom range and the lighter weigt, I decided for the 24-85.

I found a comparison of the Tokina 28-80 and the Sigma 24-70 anywhere in the internet saying (with test-photos) that the Sigma is unsharp compared to the Tokina (while some people say the Nikon is sharper than the Tokina...)

If you use filters, the Sigma might be an unlucky choice (82mm) and I don't like Simas AF/MF-switch, because you have to change on both the camera and the lense if you change the focusing-mode. The Sigma is turned in the wrong direction.

Your only way: You compare booth lenses.

Good Luck,

Axel

Hello Adam!

I own the 24-85 2.8-4 and up to now, I am not disappointed by the lens. I got my lens last year and the main contra, the distortion is nearly nill at my lens - at least not more or less than with the 20-35.

You must ask you what you want:

A very flexible zoom lens with good, but not the very best quality

or a very good zoom lens with a very limited zoom range.

If you decide for 2nd, you should consider getting one or two primes instead.

Best wishes,

Axel

And again: The Nikon AIS 20 3,5 is the one lens you are looking for - if you can make use of AIS lenses.

Best wishes,

Axel

Is there realy a Tokina 28-80 f2.8 ATX Pro SV (77mm).

I had a similar decission - a fast midrangezoom. Instead of any 2.8 zooms by Tokina or Sigma I decided for the Nikon 24-85 2.8-4. Till now, I do not regret.

Axel

Hi Mike!

I used the Sigma 18 3.5 for 8 years and changed it last year against the Nikon 20 3.5. At F8 or below the lens makes realy good pictures, sharp and brilliant.

Two reasons I changed the lens: The lens flares a lot. A real problem if the sun is not just behind you (not always easy with an 100 degree wide-angle.

The other reason: I found the Sigma 18-35 to be as good or even better and much better at flare. Of course, the 18 3.5 feels better build than the zoom, but that is another story.

If you can life with flare when the sun shines, you get a good lens.

Best wishes,

Axel

PS: What about Nikon 20 2.8?

Why I would not this lens on an analog camera: I do not have to spend thousands of Dollars or Euros, I would get the 70-200 and teleconverters.

! Much cheaper, I think.

Best wishes,

Axel

The lens clearly is not designed as a 220-400 4G AFS VR on film-cameras. It is designed for digital cameras - and than it is a 300-600 4G AFS VR. That is the point, and the digital-users will buy it.

But I can't imagine that this lens will find its way to a film camera.

Best wishes,

Axel

The lens clearly is not designed as a 220-400 4G AFS VR on film-cameras. It is designed for digital cameras - and than it is a 300-600 4G AFS VR. That is the point, and the digital-users will buy it.

But I can't imagine that this lens will find its way to a film camera.

Best wishes,

Axel

There should be some questions to help to answer your questions?

- How much money will you spend for 20mm?

- How often will you use such a lens?

- What kind of photos do you do?

- Do you often shoot into the sun? The 20 3.5 is one of the best flare-resistant lenses I know

- Will you shoot the lens wide open? The lens is not the best wide open, but very good at f8; you can't see a difference to the other lenses mentioned.

- What about Macro with wide-angel? The 20-35 has a minumum range of 50cm, the 20 2.8 of 25cm, the 20 3.5 of 30cm. Of course, the 28 2.8 MF has a minumum range of 20cm!

- Do you need AF, MATRIX, etc?

- The 20 3.5 will not work on F65, F75, F80, D100?

All in all, you want get any of the alternatives for 220 Dollars!

One alternative has not been mentioned yet: The 18-35. It is said to be very god at the 35mm end and you can surely life with the quality at 18mm. There are many reviews of this lens online.

A suggestion: Make some test-shoots at your dealer and decide than, or get it and - if you can not live with it, sell it again.

Best wishes,

Axel

Which compability of the CANON-System d you mean? The Compability, that I can use 20 year old Manual-Focus lenses on the newest Cameras?

Besides that, I think Sigma already delivers you the lens you are looking for! What about the 15-30 3,5-4,5?

What about the 24-85 2,8-85 (NON-G)? That might be a interesting alternative if you miss 24mm and if you want to get a zoom lens. For what you say you need it a zoom involving 24mm should be much more interesting than the 28-105 3.5-4.5.

I personaly do not know the 24-85. If you search the web for this lens you get very mxed results. Some love it, others hate it, so you should test the lens yourself.

Best wishes,

Axel

What I forgot: The viewer of the F801s is much better than the viewer of the f80. Most forget about this.

What about an F90x or F90 at the used market. I don't know theprice in US, but this Camera would give you a much better AF than the F801s has and the possibility to use AF-S lenses (but no G and no VR) and 1/8000 and 1/250 flash-synchro (even 1/8000 with SB 25/26/28...)

Axel

Hi!

Which lenses do you use and which do you want do get? Will you you one or two zooms, get the f80. Do you want to get more and more lenses and want to you get AI/AIS lenses, get the F801s/N8008s. Beside the AF (which is 12 years old but fine except sport, heavy teles) the F801s gives superior possibilities: 1/8000 Shutter and very Important 1/250 Flash-Synchro.

And there are really some interesting manuell lenses out there which you could not use at the f80. If you do not only want zooms, the manual-lenses are a must - and they are cheap.

Because of the age of F801s,you should really look how she looks and try to find out who used the camera before. And you have to know that the F801s does not work AFS, VR and G lenses in all modes.

So the decission depends on what you want. Nobody can answer this for you.

Wish you a decission you wan't regret,

Axel

Hello!

What is said about the 20 3.5 with 52mm filter size is true. Nearly no flare, even if the sun is in the picture.

The finders show flare even if the picture latter does not, and you should not use a filter when you have problems with flare.

Best wises,

Axel