chulster

The one lens I keep forgetting even exists is the Tamron 35-150/2.8-4.

 

 

Well, I stopped resisting the urge when I realized that my F-mount Sigma 24-105/4 hasn't been used in some time - in addition to its heft and 82mm-filter size, I had soured on the lens a bit because of its tendency to eat camera batteries (the IS system needs power to hold the IS lens system in place - and it doesn't turn off when the camera goes in stand-by mode but takes an additional 1 minute (see thread here: An FYI about OS in some current Sigma lenses).

 

So I decided to part with the Sigma 24-105 and get the Tamron 35-150/2.8-4 VC instead - a EX copy arrived from keh yesterday. First impressions: physically longer than the Sigma 24-105, but about 100g lighter, 77mm filter. AF isn't fast but appears adequate; not entirely silent either. The OSD AF drive comes with one drawback - the focus ring turns during focus operation - which certainly caught me by surprise. Together with that comes the inability to directly override the AF to manually focus - you need to turn AF off on the lens before doing that. Quite outdated behavior for a lens released in 2019. Luckily, I hardly ever feel the need to manually focus this kind of lens anyway - but the turning focus ring will take some getting used to. Couldn't detect any back- or front-focusing issues (some tendency was reported on the interwebs). Like the Sigma 24-105 (or the Nikon 24-120), the lens extends quite a bit when zooming out from 35mm (where it's shortest).

 

35mm is not very wide at the short end - so I most likely will carry either the Tamron 15-30/2.8 VC, the Nikon 16-35/4 VR or the Nikon 20/1.8 alongside the 35-150. 35mm to 150mm is quite an unusual focal length range for a "midrange" zoom - it will remain to be seen if it's a good choice for a walk-around lens. When walking with only one lens, the Sigma 24-105 might have been the more versatile choice - but that no longer applied when used in combination with the first and second lens mentioned above (in particular the 2nd, which I considered to be useful only in the 16-28mm range). I never felt I had a good longer-focal length lens to accompany the Sigma 24-105. A 70-200 (either f/2.8 or f/4) has quite a substantial overlap - and with the 35-150, I expect to leave the 70-200 home most of the time.

 

What intrigued me was the quite even performance over the entire focal length range (see for example the lenstip.com review on the lens). A 4.3x zoom certainly will entail some optical compromises - there's some vignetting and some sharpness fall-off in the corners at wide apertures, but generally the lens seems to perform at a fairly high level.

Yes, the lack of instant AF override, and the related fact that the focus ring is coupled to the gear train in AF mode, seem to be cost-cutting measures taken to meet the economical $799 price point.

I know to keep my fingers away from the focus ring when not focusing manually, which is something I never feel the need to do with this accurate-focusing lens. I love the wide-open sharpness at all focal lengths, which is something I can't say about the Nikkor 24-120mm f/4.

Yup, I guess you don't do much paid work where a corrupted card doesn't just get you no images, it gets you sued. Re-shoot a wedding? Sure, that's what insurance is for, but you're not getting a job locally ever again.

I don't have a dog in this spat, but here's an innocent question. If your livelihood depends on images being captured successfully, doesn't it make sense to have not just a backup card slot, but a whole backup body? Because a card slot isn't the only thing that can malfunction.

I mean, if you're not checking (at least at the beginning of an event) that images are being successfully written to the card, then I can see how it would feel indispensable to have two slots and to use the second slot for redundancy rather than overflow. But if you do check the slot before any important captures, and it works at that time, how common is it that the slot will go bad during the event? Just wondering, not arguing.

I think that's the case with any of Nikon's DSLRs. As soon as you take a chipped AI lens off minimum aperture, you get the 'FEE' error on the top LCD. So you can only use body control of the aperture.

 

I'm pretty sure there's a menu option to change to aperture-ring control, but I never use it because it would add needless complication to using a chipped lens - including any Non-G AF Nikkor.

The option to use the aperture ring (of an AF lens) is not present on such cameras as the D7500 precisely because they have no Ai follower. Nor does the FTZ. Thus, these cameras don't know what aperture you've set the lens to, if you're using the aperture ring. A Dandelion-equipped manual-focus lens will behave the same as an AF lens with an aperture ring in this regard.

Not having a Nikon Z and ZF adapter, I can't check, but doesn't fitting a 'Dandelion' CPU to an AI(d) lens allow the camera to know the working aperture? Just curious if this is the case. Because a dandelion chip certainly works to give EXIF data with a digital F mount camera.

Joe, I believe a Z camera with FTZ will behave with a Dandelion-equipped lens the same way a D7500, D5600, or other non-Ai-supporting DSLR does: If you let the camera control the aperture, it will "know" and record the taking aperture by virtue of the fact that it, rather than the lens, is controlling the aperture. But if you set the aperture using the aperture ring, since the FTZ has no Ai "follower", the Z camera cannot know what the taking aperture is. And adding a Dandelion chip will not help in this case.

A head scratcher - mine makes the clunk with my D7200, but not my Z6. (yes, VR is on.)

Is it possible the Z6 keeps the VR motor running all the time the camera is awake? Instead of turning it on only when you half-press the shutter release or press AF-ON? I remember my Nikon 1 V2 kept VR constantly on, at least for adapted lenses.

I have the lens in Ai-converted form. One nice thing about using a Z camera is you can take advantage of the lower—sometimes much lower—prices of non-Ai lenses!

The flip side of that is one of the reasons I still don't have a Z camera: it can't tell what aperture a fully mechanical lens is set to—even if it is Ai. I hate not having the taking aperture in EXIF.

I really wish a third party would make an adapter with an Ai sensor and report the taking aperture to the camera. But it's possible that Z cameras do not support communication of the taking aperture in this direction.

Dieter, thank you for bringing up this lens. I was reading the thread for when I hope to resume travel after staying put for too long, and that focal length range has always intrigued me. I believe the late Nadine Ohara, a much-missed member of PN for years, used a much earlier Tamron 35-135mm in some of her wedding photography.

 

My own advice to Kevin is to try to anticipate how much flexibility each of your trips will allow. Ages ago, while in the UK, a friend suggested that we might be able to attend the Wimbledon tennis tournament and photograph, which I hadn't planned to do. Having a moderately long zoom (to 200mm) was very helpful. Traveling in Japan, a colleague noticed how intently I searched for the sight of Mt. Fuji as we rode the bullet train beween Osaka and Tokyo, and arranged for us to make a day trip to the famous mountain. Some trips are tightly scheduled, and you know what to take; with others, you just don't know.

The Tamron 35-150mm is dope. A much-undervalued lens. Sharp at all focal lengths and apertures. Light, despite the fast apertures and extended range. A really nice travel lens when paired with something like the tiny and sharp Nikkor 20mm f/3.5.

However, on further thinking about it, the strain on your lens could be reduced simply by pointing the rig vertically downwards. This might need a re-arrangement of your illumination source, but should automatically centre the lens better.

That's a good idea. Shouldn't be too inconvenient either.

I just started using an ES-1 with my 55mm f/2.8. I must say, I'm disappointed in the amount of play in the lens's front inner barrel that this usage has revealed. When the lens is fully extended (at MFD), the front barrel, with the ES-1 attached, seems to sag on the order of half a millimeter due to the added weight of the attachment. This throws the alignment of the ES-1 off enough that I am forced to push it up with my left hand in order to center the slide on the sensor before taking an exposure.

Does anyone else have this problem with their 55mm f/2.8 when using an ES-1 or ES-2? Perhaps my copy has loosened over time.

Just found the manual for the FTZ adapter...incompatible with my 55 micro nikkor.

I wonder why it says the 55mm micro is incompatible? What could make it so?

Does the FTZ slow down the attached lens, ie, does a f/2.8 lens become a f/4?

No. The FTZ does not change the aperture range or the focal length of a lens.

I haven't bought a Df, mostly because of the price, not because I don't think I wouldn't like to have one.

You know, I'm going to reconsider buying a Df once the price is under $1K—if there are any clean copies left by then!

According to Wikipedia - "The 'F' in Nikon F was selected from the term 're-f-lex', since the pronunciation of the first letter 'R' is not available in many Asian languages."

Ironically, Asians also have a hard time with the letter F. I've never heard a non-American Japanese person say "Nikon F3"... I wonder how they say it? I feel certain they don't say "three."

Oh, and what does f stand for or mean?

Isn't it obvious? ;) It's supposed to recall the "F" of the film SLRs.

I appreciate all the responses. The majority opinion seems to be that it's a foolish trade. In this thread, the Df finds more support as a fun second body, not a replacement for the D810.

I would be interested to hear more about what everybody thinks are specific deficits of the Df compared to the D810. Resolution is the most obvious. A few here have derided its ergonomics. Anything else? Is the Df's viewfinder smaller or darker than the D810's? That's a difference I'd care about.

Convince me not to do this foolish thing. I'm sorely tempted because (1) I've always wanted one; (2) I've read that the Df's sensor is sublime; (3) my computer is slow to process the D810's 36 MP files; and (4) I simply don't need 36 MP.

If the Df had 24 MP, the decision would be easy; but at 16 MP it almost crosses the line into not-enough-pixels. I may miss the 15 MP DX crop mode of the D810. (The Df's DX crop is a rather pitiful 7 MP!)

The trade will not be cheap. At over 100K actuations, my very clean D810 is worth perhaps $800. A Df in excellent condition is about $1200. In order to feel better about the expense, I may need to sacrifice my D300 as well.

What do you think of this putative exchange? Is it idiotic, or merely ill-advised?

No, it wouldn't.

A teleconverter is basically one big negative lens, which increases the focal length of whatever it's attached to. Turning it round doesn't stop it being a negative lens.

 

A speed-booster is basically one big positive lens.

Obvious in hindsight.

WOW, keh has one in EX condition for $320 - almost the same price range as the AF-S 28/1.8 ($360)! I guess quite a few people know about this lens being a gem?

I guess that explains why the 28mm f/2 AI-S that i bought for $180 was a dog. Seller must have known it too.

Neither the E2 nor B2 screen will make manual focus any more precise unless you also fit an eyepiece magnifier.

These screens have a coarser ground surface than a laser-etched DSLR screen. Doesn't that make focus "pop" more and thus easier?

If you have old gear you don't use and that doesn't even have sentimental value for you, why not sell it at a low price—or give it away? Someone else, usually someone of far lesser means than you, can get good use out of your old gear. So let them! To hang on to old gear solely because it is an affront to sell it so cheap is just selfish.

Please note, i am speaking of retired gear. If you have an old camera that you like to pull out of the closet once a year and shoot a roll of film through for sentimental or any other reasons, if it brings you joy, then by all means keep it!