stevejw

<p>I'm having a little trouble finding info on whether metering is affected in manual mode in a normal low light situation.</p>

<p>Say for example I'm shooting a low light cityscape in manual mode and I have the top LCD lit, will that affect metering and therefore produce an underexposed image if I go by what the meter is telling me?</p>

<p>My guess is that it would since the shutter speed is being told what to do via the light meter in Aperture Priority mode.<br>

Obviously you would have to either turn the LCD light off or adjust your shutter speed accordingly.</p>

<p>I don't really understand how this can be dismissed as a non issue if this is the case.</p>

<p>The "G is for gelded" line means little. It's way more convenient to change aperture via the dial, you only have to move your finger slightly, how this isn't seen as an improvement is beyond me.<br>

Unless of course there are some older Nikon bodies that don't have this dial, I could understand anyone not liking the missing aperture ring then. Most people would be shooting with the dual dial, digital bodies now though, surely.</p>

<p>Anyway, I really wish Nikon would update their 17-35. The 16-35 is f4, has heinous distortion at 16-17mm and a little soft at 35mm. It does have good centre sharpness, is light and relatively inexpensive though.<br>

The 14-24 can't take filters, although it is optically fantastic for how wide it is on FX.</p>

<p>A 16-35 f/2.8G without VR would be awesome & really what I'me waiting for Nikon to do, (if they ever do it). Perhaps the 16-35 f4 was meant to be it's replacement..?<br>

The current 17-35 f/2.8 is okay but it's old, big & heavy and the AF motor has issues.<br>

It's also stupidly over priced in Australia, $2500 AUD, that's about 2 or 3 hundred more than the 14-24!</p>

<p>Thanks Sam, I'm going to continue putting up little blurbs about the lenses I try out.<br>

It's my journey and I'm merely sharing it, if it helps others decide what they want to use or buy then that's really up to them. It's only meant to document my progress as a photographer from the beginning but as gear is expensive, choices become more crucial and so I suppose sadly, that's part of it as well.</p>

<p>The only negative that I can think of for myself personally is manual focus on moving subjects but if you're good at that then I can't see why you wouldn't like this lens.<br>

Just thought I'd mention also that the samples, many online photos for that matter, look better in IE9 as it supports the AdobeRGB colour space. In my Google Chrome browser they look less saturated and less contrasty. I still use Chrome though, I just like it so much more than IE9.<br>

I'm going to do a short Blog post on the 24G next, I really liked that lens as well. I'll post a link when I do. :D</p>

<p>Rather than go on too much here, I decided to write a quick Blog post about the 2/35 with samples. That plus the fact that I couldn't manage to post my photos here from my Google+ album...</p>

<p>Here's a <a href="http://stevejwphotography.blogspot.com/">link to my Blog</a> and here's a link to the <a href="http://stevejwphotography.blogspot.com/2012/01/carl-zeiss-and-nikon-lens-samples.html">Zeiss Blog post</a>.</p>

<p>Anyway... The CA was only noticeable in one shot where I managed to catch the ceiling lights in such a way as to bring it out, probably more than it normally would show. I don't mind the vignetting but I really don't like distortion, fortunately the distortion is mild and both are fixed with one click in Lightroom.</p>

<p>I'll try and get some samples up today and post links to them.</p>

<p>I went and tried out a 2/35 at a camera shop. It was really nice, the build quality makes a lot of other stuff look & feel pretty cheap. The IQ is excellent, there was a decent amount of vignetting and CA wide open with a small amount of distortion. The distortion and vignetting are fixed in LR with one click but the CA didn't go away, although the CA was only really apparent in one shot where I caught the ceiling lights just so. The colour and '3D depth' is great in some of the shots I took, as is the contrast. I like it.</p>

<p>I tried out the Nikon 24G, 16-35VR and 20 2.8 as well and to be honest I would have them as well. Alas, I can only chose one at this point...</p>

<p>Before buying anything, I'd still like to try out the 2.8/21 and the 35 1.4G. Maybe the CZ 25 & 28 as well.</p>

<p>Manual focusing on the Zeiss was not a big thing, it's made for it and made well. The focus ring has a long throw and is ultra smooth with the perfect amount of resistance. I probably couldn't say the same for focusing on a moving subject but that's my MF skill level at the moment as well.</p>

<p>Very keen to try out the 21 now.</p>

<p>Cheers. :)</p>

<p>What is it with that 'photozone.de' site? Not one 35mm lens is recommended for FX. Only very wide and ultra wide get the thumbs up i.e. the 14-24 and the 2.8/21 ZF.2.</p>

<p>In any case, thanks for all the replies. Alas, I'm still no closer to deciding. I'm going to have to hit a few more camera shops and test more lenses then come home and order the one I decide on from overseas. :D<br>

Cheers</p>

<p>Just to clarify, I don't want a manual focus lens. I would much rather have the convenience of auto focus. I did mention Nikon lenses so don't get hung up on the idea that your suggestions have to be manual focus. It's just that the Zeiss, with it's magical image quality, happen to be manual focus.<br>

I've only tried manually focusing with my 50 1.8G, I admit that on moving subjects it was a lost cause, for static subjects it was fine, although it took me a few goes for one or two shots. The arrows and dots in camera can be very touchy sometimes. That is of course, if it's not all in my head as well.<br>

With everything being as expensive as it is, I'm surprised no one has mentioned the Sigma 30mm, unless I have convinced myself that it's better than it really is as well?</p>

<p>As per title. I have only tried out the Nikon 24-70 and 14-24 which have excellent image quality. The size and weight, especially of the 24-70 did put me off a little. On the other hand I'm blown away by the images from Zeiss lenses that I've seen online. As I'm sure you all know Zeiss are manual focus lenses, this coupled with the fact that Nikkor make some pretty decent glass is making me second guess my decision to buy a 2/35 ZF.2 lens for my D700.<br>

So far I've only used a Nikon 50 1.8G and it's a great lens, it's just that lately I've wanted something a bit wider. With that said, is there anyone else here that has gone ahead and bought a Zeiss 2/35 ZF.2 instead of any Nikon lens that covers 35mm and regretted it? Also, would it be more advisable to buy the 1.4/35 ZF.2 instead? I find the 2.8/21 ZF.2 very appealing as well.... I know.</p>

<p>Also, how important is it to get a focus screen installed in your D700 to use manual focus?</p>

<p>Thanks for any help with this. It's time to buy my next lens and I'm a little unsure as I'm looking at a third party lens. The only thing I know for sure is that I want something wider than 50mm. Because of this, I've considered a virtual myriad of glass. The Nikon 35/1.4, 24/1.4, 14-24/2.8, 24-70/2.8 and the 16-35/f4VR. Zeiss wise, I've considered the lenses above 2/35, 1.4/35, 2.8/21 and more recently all other ZF.2 primes wider than 50mm such as the two 25mm and the 28mm.</p>

<p>What I shoot is really a mixed bag. I do low light cityscapes, day & low light, hand held Street-esque stuff. So the large aperture does come into it to a degree. Above all what I'm after is image quality, hence considering the ZF.2 series. That's not to say that Nikon doesn't have IQ, it's just that Zeiss seems to have something else, a certain character & a different kind of contrast & depth.</p>

<p>I know I'm asking a lot and throwing a lot of options out there but this is kind of where I'm at decision wise.<br>

Thanks</p>

<p>I'm trying to decide between Nikon's three wide zooms at the moment. I favour a different lens everyday. I suppose that's because they all have their pros and cons.<br>

Realistically though, I'll probably end up buying the 16-35 VR as I want to use it mostly for landscape and handheld low light shots. The fact that it's f/4 does worry me a little but I haven't used a lens with VR before, although have read that it does match the low light ability of an f/2.8 lens. The other niggling thing about this lens is the amount of distortion at 16-17mm that people keep reporting.<br>

There's a few hundred to be saved buying the 16-35 over the other two and a specialised filter holder isn't necessary as is with the 14-24.</p>

<p>Thanks for the input everyone, much appreciated.</p>

<p>I ended up going with the Really Right Stuff D700 L-Plate, TVC-33 and bag which have already been delivered. I must say, it's all very nice!</p>

<p>I also ordered an Arca-Swiss Z1 with QR (screw type) and a Nikon MC-36 remote which should be here tomorrow.</p>

<p>Can't wait to get out and do some low light long exposures with the new set up!</p>

<p>Ha, I have to admit that I've become a bit obsessed with getting this upcoming purchase 'just so'. The A-S Z1 is looking like the winner for a head at the moment, the tripod is a toss up between two Gitzo Systematic models and the TVC-33.<br>

With the Arca-Swiss in the lead I suppose I'll probably end up buying their L-Plate for the D700.<br>

All up I'd say it's going to be around $1550 - $1850.<br>

That said, I'd rather buy well, buy once. :)</p>

<p>In my search for a good ball head & tripod I stumbled across <a href="http://www.ronmartblog.com/2011/05/tripod-recommendations2011-part.html">this Blog</a> which has some decent reviews of both heads and tripod legs.</p>

<p>The Benro B3 is meant to be pretty good value for money considering it costs nearly half of what Arca-Swiss Z1's does.</p>

<p>Cheers</p>

<p>Thanks for the input fellas.<br>

I have actually considered the Arca-Swiss QR and L-Plate, I probably would prefer the lever type but it's my understanding that the screw type is more user friendly. If anyone has tried both I'd like to hear about your thoughts on the two.<br>

Sticking to AC for everything, i.e. QR & L-Plate would make ordering a heck of a lot easier as well.</p>

<p>So Ellis, it isn't that the screw type is easier to use, it's just a compatibility thing for you?<br>

Rod, is Arca-Swiss planning on ever creating a web site? It would make life a lot easier for those interested in making a decision on their gear. So far I've been going by <a href="http://www.robertwhite.co.uk/">Robert White UK</a> shop site, it's pretty useful for Arca-Swiss stuff & they even have YouTube videos showing & explaining the differences in the Arca-Swiss heads.</p>

<p>A Z1 mounted on either TVC-33 or GT5531S legs I think would be an excellent set up.<br>

I Still haven't decided on the legs but leaning more toward RRS at the moment, the TVC-33 legs look rock solid and are pretty light for their size. The Gitzo legs look great as well, it's just they would cost me a lot more to ship over to Australia.</p>

<p>Cheers</p>

<p>Thanks Mat, considering a few options at the moment & yes, RRS gear does seem to be top notch considering all the positive comments they receive.<br>

Are you using their heads as well, i.e. the BH-40 or BH-55?<br>

I'm also keen on their TVC-33 tripod legs, they seem to be excellent quality & worth the money.</p>

<p>Cheers</p>

<p>As per title, I'd like to buy an Arca-Swiss ball head & was thinking of getting a different brand quick release system & L-Plate, any recommends appreciated.<br>

I was going to use the head on either Gitzo GT5531S or Really Right Stuff TVC-33 tripod legs.<br>

Any suggestions for either are welcome.<br>

Thanks :)</p>

<p>Sorry to revive an aging thread but I'm finding myself in a similar boat, was thinking about using the RRS TVC-33 legs with an AC Z1 ball head, still not entirely sure on what QR system and L-Plate to get. The concesus seems to be for a Kirk QR & L-plate (D700 non-grip) with this particular ball head.</p>

<p>Cheers.</p>

<p>Sorry to revive an aging thread but I'm finding myself in a similar boat, was thinking about using the RRS TVC-33 legs with an AC Z1 ball head, still not entirely sure on what QR system and L-Plate to get. The concesus seems to be for a Kirk QR & L-plate with this particular ball head.</p>

<p>Cheers.</p>

<p>LoL, it very well may!</p>

<p>If someone were to only shoot manual, pro or not, surely they would miss opportunities that only present themselves briefly.</p>

<p>It sounds more like someone saying that they are a superior technician rather than something that a pro would actually practice in real world situations.</p>

<p>Hey JDM, at this point I wouldn't know what professional practice is.</p>

<p>There's a few local photography courses that range from beginner to wildlife to photojournalism to glamour. They're fairly cheap, short courses & so I thought I'd do the beginner one then shoot for a while on my own and then go back and do another one that met my interests later.</p>

<p>I've used ISO, focus points, exposure compensation & zoom with my current little camera so I'm fairly keen to get experience using shutter speed and aperture.</p>

<p>Thanks for your input mate. :)</p>

<p>I think I'm just going to get the 35mm DX.<br /> Otherwise I'm going to be spending as much as the FX kit I wanted.</p>

<p>Cheers :)</p>

<p>Janin, did you get the 18-105 kit lens or the 16-85?<br>

I'd prefer the 16-85 as it's meant to be a better lens, if I get that and a 35DX I will have spent just about as much a D700 and a 50 1.8G. Although I will have two cool lenses instead of one.</p>