Help with this Lens please.

[mic]

Does anybody know about this lens ?

135mm F/2D AF-DC Nikkor

Advantages / Disadvantages ?


Please click on this link :http://www.nikonusa.com/... ...mplate.php?cat=1&grp=5&productNr=1935#

I am after a lens that is fast, not too heavy and not too long.


What TC would suit this lens without effecting it too much with image quality drop off ?

As it isn't a zoom, does it offer better quality images ?

Thanks,

Mic.

[Glen]

Mic, you're on a lens buying frenzy

Birddog I believe has that lens (and most others ) so you may want to speak to him. That lens has DC (defocus control) and as such is mainly used for portraits. The DC is used to blur the background. I don't think too many would be used with teleconverters. If you want a telephoto lens you can use with teleconverters (and do the odd portrait, albeit long, if required) I would suggest the 180mm F2.8, second hand they go $350 - $750.

Good luck

[mic]

Thanks Glen,

More like I'm on a confused thinking about buying Lens frenzy, as soon as I think I've dicided on one I talk myself out of it and ask about another one.

I think I'm going mad.

But I'll persist ( going mad that is )

Cheers,

Mic.

[gstark]

Mic,

Is this the lens ? http://www.maxwell.com.au/photo/nikon/nikkor/af_telephoto/135_f2d_afdc.html (Your link doesn't seem to be correct.)

Anyhow, that's the 135mm defocus; IIRC Birddog has one, I've had a play with it, and it's a very nice lens. On the D70 you'll get an effective crop of around 190mm. Do you need the defocus capability?

FWIW, I often have a need for low light capabilities - shooting in dimly lit pubs and bars - and I'm managing quite satisfactorily with either the kit lens, my 50mm 1.4, or my newly acquired 24-120 VR. In fact, the VR has very quickly become my favourite lens, being pin sharp, lightweight, and carrying an almost ideal range of focal lengths. I've not yet bumped into my greatest concern with this lens - it's lack of WA capabilities - but I'm sure I will in due course.

But I'll be shooting some band bio shots on Sunday arvo, and I'm expecting to use the VR pretty well exclusively for that, as well as for the accompanying portraits.

HTH.

[mic]

Thanks Gary,

More possibilities for me to ponda.

Sounds good.

Regards,

Mic.

[Glen]

Mic,
What do you want to use the lens for?

[birddog114]

MIC,
I have the 105DC/ f2, It's a nikon gem on both F5/ F100/ D70/ D100/ D2h that I'm fortunately own.

It's very nice glass if you know how to control the DC +/-, it took me awhile for learning all those features and I'm like a kid with hold bunch of lolly pops in hands. They don't work on TC-14EII + TC20EII and don't need too, perhaps it's my case

Mic, the bug of lust is in your gene as I can see and so am I and am getting worse with it, 25 lenses that I have in my hands now, some on loan to friend, mostly AF-D/ AFS and AFS/VR.

Happy lens lust

[mic]

Hey Glen,

Basically this is what I am trying to acheive :

My D70

SB-800

60mm Micro


&

A good fast lens : Not too long / Not too heavy
I've been thinking of the 180mm F 2.8 as well with Kenko TC ?

Generally shooting at Parties / Occasional Wedding / Growing Daughter shots / Zoo Pics Etc Etc Etc ............

Feedback appreciated.

Mic.

[mic]

Thanks BirdDog,

Is there any hope for me ?
And my lustfull Lens thoughts ?

I think funds will put an end to too much Lustfull Lenses.

Thanks,

Mic in Lens Thearapy.

[Glen]

Mic,

I assume you have the kit lens (18-70) as well?

The 180 2.8 would be good for what you are suggesting and modestly priced.

As you already suggested the 80-200 2.8 would also be good, advantages greater focal range, disadvantage much heavier and more $, s/h $600 - $1000

at the less flash end of the spectrum

70 -210 af F4-5.6 advantages light cheap s/h $100 -$240 disadvantage high f number (ie not fast, no good low light)

70-300 F? $250 new same as above


As a long term purchase either 180 or 80-200 would get my vote as you are buying top quality, sort of like a 10 yr old mercedes

[mic]

Thanks Glen,

Yes I have the Kit Lens as well.

I agree, I was nearly there with the 80-200 ( just the size & weight of the thing )

The 180 : I'm a bit concerned about not having the ajustable zoom, I've never owned a prime before, suppose I could just get used to walking back and forths to compose ?

Would it have better image quality than the 80-200 being non zoom ?

Thanks,

Mic.

[Glen]

Mic,

I bought the 80-200, (not in my hands yet), and from what I read they both have great optical quality with the prime just taking the edge. The 80-200 was the primary photo journalists lens till about ten years ago when Canon started taking off. Until then a lot of what you saw in the papers and in mags came from that lens. The 180 is much lighter 760g versus 1300g. Going to a party I would prefer the 80-200 to allow me to frame things without moving, half way through after a few reds or beers, I would prefer the 180 as it would be lighter to carry.

Hard choice for you, if you buy well s/h you can always resell if it one doesn't suit.

[mic]

Thanks Glen,

Hmmmmmm,

I think I need a beer now.

I'll keep you posted.

Thanks for your help.

Cheers,

Mic.

[Glen]

Of course Mic my answers neglected the best and easiest choice :-
70-200 2.8 VR, great quality, works great with tc, lighter than 80-200, etc, etc. Bad news expensive, have seen some just used ones for $2100, new $2500-$3000

[mic]

Hello Glen,

Have you heard anything about a Sigma 150mm HSM ?

Thanks,

Mic.

[JordanP]

mic,

if the budget would streatch I can recommend the 70-200 VR. I have used the 180mm prime many times for protraits and weddings and it is a great lens, but since I got the VR I have up to a 300mm crop and about 3 more stops on the shutter speed.

If the budget can't stretch then the 180mm 2.8 is a top lens.

[mic]

Scratch that one Glen,

Just realised it's a new Macro coming out.

If Nikon or Sigma would Just put together a light weight / short / F2.8 / Zoom say : 15 - 250mm.

I would be content with that.

Oh well back to square one.

Mic.

[mic]

Thanks Craig,

I know I'm slowly getting steered towards that baby.

I just can't see myself at a party or other occasion with a 3 ft long lens.

I sit and ponda ?

Regards,

Mic.

[birddog114]

Scratch that one Glen,

Just realised it's a new Macro coming out.

If Nikon or Sigma would Just put together a light weight / short / F2.8 / Zoom say : 15 - 250mm.

I would be content with that.

Oh well back to square one.

Mic.

mic,
how is about the 200/ f 2.0 VR or 300/ f2.8 VR? they're nice and will fit onto your D70 easy

[Glen]

Mic,

I missed a 180 2.8 for $345 on ebay before I got the 80-200 at those prices you could kick off with it and then keep it or sell for a very little loss later. There are no wrong decisions (ok there are some) just different perspectives.

[Matt. K]

mic
I think you will find the 180 too long for normal shooting. Go for an 85mm instead.

[mic]

Hello Boys,

BirdDog, I'm not aware of the F2 / 200 ? Where can I see ?

Glen, Yes I have thought of that, sounds good ( Nothing ventured, Nothing gained )

Matt, You might be right, haven't got a clue about what I am talking about.
I'm just putting the feelers out.

But I am learning a lot.

Thanks,

Mic.

[mic]

It's O.K BirdDog,

Found those lenses, maybe when I win next weeks lotto draw.

I wish.

Thanks anyway.

Mic.