Reading mode: Light Dark

Three primes?

Go to last post
Probably the Fisheye Nikkor 10.5mm DX, the Nikkor 18mm f/2.8 and the Sigma 30mm f/1.4.

With a film body, probably the Fisheye Nikkor 16mm , the Nikkor 24mm f/2.8 and the Nikkor 50mm f/1.4.
 
Even though it isn't a true wide angle in the digital world, I'd go with a 28/1.4 then add a 58/1.2 NOCT and 85/1.4. And if no one was looking, I'd throw in a 20/2.8 and 180/2.8 in the bag for good measure.
--
dgjean
 
Junior, I use the 50/1.4 and 105/2.8 but I prefer using them to complement my present 18-200VR . which is very close in IQ once stopped to f8 up .

Your interesting thread trigered my quick comparison test for your benefit in a new thread--
avis
http://www.pbase.com/avistar/avi_s_photographic_world
Nikon D70, 50/1.4, 105/2.8, 18-200VR SB600, SB800
Gitzo 1228, and 1226 ,
 
I want to play this game !
I belong in the once you ve used primes you prefer them group .....

A big "bottle" stuck on the front just draws "fire". I also { and I know this will be contentious } still think the pics look " better " not just sharp but there s a certain "quality" shooting wider gives you..
I use
24
35
85

All are small & light for travel & cover most "reportage " situations. in a perfect world I d have the 180 lurking somewhere.
Even after praising primes I m still thinking of getting {if I could find one }
a 18 - 200mm always good to have all bases covered .......just in case.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/nickevans9/
 
18mm 2.8
50mm 1.4
85mm 1.4

If I could add a third it would be 200 f2 VR
--
Respond to rudeness with civility, it really annoys them.

Regards,

JR
 
Cultured Vulture said:
18mm 2.8
50mm 1.4
85mm 1.4

If I could add a third it would be 200 f2 VR
--
Respond to rudeness with civility, it really annoys them.

Regards,

JR
Click to expand...
Make that a fourth...Duh
--
Respond to rudeness with civility, it really annoys them.

Regards,

JR
 
for walking around
24 f2 (yes manual focus)
60 f2.8
105 f2.8
or extend the range
35 f2
105 f2.8 (90 f2.8 Tamron a substitute)
200 f2
for portraits
35 f2
85 f1.8 (maybe the 1.4)
200 f4 micro

If you noticed here I just don't like being without a micro (macro) lens

Tom
 
junior said:
IF you had only three primes to have for general photos, what would
they be?
Click to expand...
I can only fit 3 lenses in my Adorama Slinger bag, and my trio of primes for general photography is the 35/2 + 85/1.4 + 180/2.8. It's rare that I find myself needing anything wider, longer, or faster, and their IQ is top notch.

--
Warm regards, Uncle Frank
FCAS Founder, Hummingbird Hunter, Egret Stalker
Dilettante Appassionato
Galleries at http://www.pbase.com/unclefrank
 
The choice if I am rich:
Nikkor 28 f1.4 , 50 f1.4 and 84 f1.4

But I am not rich , ie for myself have chosen:

Sigma 30 f1.4 , 50 f1.5 and (either Nikkor 85 f1.8 or Sigma 105 f2.8) The last one, depend on if you like shooting macro as well.

Whant do you think ?
--
Kin

http://www.pbase.com/nikond70
 
each prime has such an interesting personality to be discovered :). I have a 50mm 1.8, 60mm micro and a new 35/f2. What amazing worlds they let me enter...

To me the zooms don't open such interesting doors...with my feet zooming I get more exercise, to boot!
Crystal
--
http://treehuggergirl.zenfolio.com/
 
Largely, I like to do close range sports photography and flashless portraits.

By usage, I actually use these primes the most :
28mm f/1.4, 85mm f/1.4, 400mm f/2.8
 
I still have the 35f2 and I sold the 50f1.8. Neither lense has anything on the 17-55 which I own. I have closely examined images from all three and the images produced using the 17-55 are as good as the other two. I also have an SB800 to make up the difference between a couple stops if it came down to it which it rarely does especially outside. Inside under poor lighting you need a flash anywaw and sometimes you need one outside to be used as fill. Often I prefer to use a flash anyway. VR on a 70-200 makes up the difference between a couple stops also. The 35f2 and the 50f1.8 don't have AF-S either. Having used these lenses I will take a good zoom over the 35 or 50mm primes any day. The 85f1.4 is another story but it is not every day that I need a specialized lense like that at that focal length. I don't often need a macro either because I don't shoot bugs and flowers. If I did that would be a different story.

When it comes down to it, it is about preference and my preference is a good zoom any day having used both. Images from the 50f1.8 are not that sharp at 1.8 either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top