DSLRUsers.com

Last week I was hard at work in the South Pacific (Someone has to do it ) running a usual workshop in Leadership with about 20 students. I take a lot of photos in the workshops, both to keep me interested and to help me remember the long names of the participants. (footnote on lens) I also often give the students copies of the photos so that they can also use them at their leisure.

On Friday, I noticed one of the photos I had given a student had been printed and backed with cardboard. Upon further enquiry, I found out that one of the 'enterprising' students had printed a copy of my photo of a young female and...wait for it...sold it to her at a tidy profit. At first I was a bit...intellectual property...about it and then laughed at the pure enterprise of the event. There is no way I could/would have made any money out of it and I did give someone a copy with no instructions about ownership.

There's probably a lesson or two in this. One is about making sure that you specify (c) if you dont want anyone to copy. The other is that my photo obviously brought the enterprising student extra and needed wealth and the subject was very happy with the outcome.

Only in the South Pacific where nobody takes themselves too seriously.

Peter Mc

(lens footnote) I use the 24-120 Nik as my travelling lens these days. In a conference room it has brilliant reach for close ups of students and wide enough for most group shots...highly recommended for such situations)

Im looking at getting that lens as an all rounder lens.

hows the sharpness comapred to the kit lens on the d70s and what is your over all opinion of it?

also I'd be kind of annoyed if someone sold me work as thier own, I don't think I could stomach it to well but im sure I'd get over it somehow.

Michael it's a great allrounder: See the following recent threads of mine for some samples of what the lens can deliver:

Just TWO more - first pic is 24-120VR

Bibs & Bobs First 2 with 24-120 VR

The Golden Hour All are 24-120 VR

Planes on a windy day 3 of 4 are with 24-120 VR

I think you can see this lens performs well in a wide range of situations

Thanks for those stubbsy.

I'm still debatign whether or not it's really worth it whether the VR makes that much of a difference.

Id probly like to use it when I photograph music gigs and stuff in low light but I don't know how well that lens would perform at a gig.

Michael if you want a lens for music gigs look at the 50/1.4 or 85/1.4 both not cheap, but much better in low light. If $ tight look at the 50/1.8 The 24-120 is f4, but on the plus side it has VR which DOES make a difference (about 1 stop by most estimates)

The 1.8 50mm is already on its way providing I win the auction.

I can't keep that lens on during gigs and stuff as its a bit limited in its range. hence why I was thinking the 24 - 120 vr I was also thinking about picking it up off ebay for around $700 inc postage.

Michael wrote:The 1.8 50mm is already on its way providing I win the auction.

I can't keep that lens on during gigs and stuff as its a bit limited in its range. hence why I was thinking the 24 - 120 vr I was also thinking about picking it up off ebay for around $700 inc postage.

Yes, the 50mm restircts you range wise.

Yes $700 is a good price - I'm assuming grey market at that price

Yeh grey market from good ole hong kong.

I only buy non critical gear from there. If i want to buy a camera body i just bite the bullet and buy with cash at a retail store. also sorry for hijacking your thread petermmc

stubbsy wrote:Michael if you want a lens for music gigs look at the 50/1.4 or 85/1.4 both not cheap, but much better in low light.

I use the 50/1.4 myself and I find that it's usually a bit too wide to take photos at the gigs I go to. The 85mm might be better. I figure a 70-200/2.8 is probably the best choice, it should be ok for all but the darkest venues. VR is great for static scenes, but when there is movement (like at a gig) you still need a high shutter speed. If you want to stop the action then nothing beats fast glass . Even so, I'm still happy to have the 50/1.4 in my bag, it's a great lens.

Funny how the topic changed a bit to focus more on the lens. As it happened I bought a 'grey' 1.4 50mm in Sydney (during lunch time) today from Discount Digital Photographics. I went there to return a 2x converter that I ordered which came with a canon and not Nikon mount. Seeing he didnt have the Sig 2x in stock I used the credit to buy the Nik 50 1.4 instead. I think that's a combination of lens lust and impulse buying. There is an awful lot of glass in this baby compared to the 1.8 version. Also. I think the 85mm 1.8 is also a supurb lens which needs due consideration in this discussion

Back to the thread and a question about the 24-120. Its a lens you really need to get used to. In any one round of shots especially in low light you can get a mixed bag. It really slows down on auto without you knowing and you can get a bit of cam shake. Now I have the 50 1.4 it may become my constant travelling companion as I have a preference for light gear. I can see myself walking up to Robert Louis Stevenson's grave which is up a huge hill in Samoa with the 50 and not the 24-120

Sorry for late reply but its been a 13 hr day from Gong to Nth Syd to Gong to bed.

Peter Mc

I really am wondering if the lens is really worth the extra few dollars, the 1.4 that is.

It'd be good to have more money once again sorry for the hijack peter.

Michael wrote:Im looking at getting that lens as an all rounder lens.

hows the sharpness comapred to the kit lens on the d70s and what is your over all opinion of it?

also I'd be kind of annoyed if someone sold me work as thier own, I don't think I could stomach it to well but im sure I'd get over it somehow.

Michael

I think the 18-70 appears to be slightly sharper all round than the 24-120 but that is only my humble opinion. Millions may differ. They are both pretty good lenses.

Peter Mc