Are Zooms OK?

Hello all,

First, I apologize for having two active posts at one time.

Second, since I didn't mention it last time, and some very kind people became concerned, please be advised I will be away until Monday evening or Tuesday.

Third, there has been some discussion about zoom lenses not being sharp enough. Without being confrontational, while it is true that a good prime is probably sharper than a good zoom, it is a rare picture that will show the difference. Or to say it a different way. it is easily possible to take good, sharp pictures with a quality zoom lens. These were taken with the Nikon 80-200 f/2.8 IF/ED.

Some detail was lost in down sizing and saving for the web.

Please click on the images to see them full fram.





Thank you.

I'll see you all next Tuesday.

hugh

Hi hugh, that was me!!!! But these do look just fine.
with respect,
Larry

hugh said:

Hello all,

First, I apologize for having two active posts at one time.
Second, since I didn't mention it last time, and some very kind
people became concerned, please be advised I will be away until
Monday evening or Tuesday.

Third, there has been some discussion about zoom lenses not being
sharp enough. Without being confrontational, while it is true that
a good prime is probably sharper than a good zoom, it is a rare
picture that will show the difference. Or to say it a different
way. it is easily possible to take good, sharp pictures with a
quality zoom lens. These were taken with the Nikon 80-200 f/2.8
IF/ED.

Some detail was lost in down sizing and saving for the web.

Please click on the images to see them full fram.





Thank you.

I'll see you all next Tuesday.

hugh

Click to expand...

Hi Hugh! What a great idea answering a question that crosses everyones mind. And providing an answer in pictures... They are wonderful clear and sharp, real beauties! Have a safe trip!
--jo

hugh said:

Hello all,

Click to expand...

Hello Hugh,
These pictures are awesome ...

By the way, I don't think anybody had doubts about the quality of the Nikon 80-200 f/2.8. Outstanding lens + outstanding photographer : The result is predictable, as you just demonstrated with these beautiful Egrets
Regards
francis

LMC54 said:

Hi hugh, that was me!!!! But these do look just fine.
with respect,
Larry

Click to expand...

Hello Larry,

You weren't the only one . Thanks for the compliment.

With appreciation,

hugh

joann said:

Hi Hugh! What a great idea answering a question that crosses
everyones mind. And providing an answer in pictures... They are
wonderful clear and sharp, real beauties! Have a safe trip!

--
jo

Click to expand...

Hello jo,

Well, maybe a picture is worth a thousand words. In that case, I saved almost two thousand .

Thanks for the compliments, and the well wishes.

hugh

Toussaint said:

hugh said:

Hello all,

Click to expand...

Hello Hugh,
These pictures are awesome ...
By the way, I don't think anybody had doubts about the quality of
the Nikon 80-200 f/2.8. Outstanding lens + outstanding photographer
: The result is predictable, as you just demonstrated with these
beautiful Egrets
Regards
francis

Click to expand...

Hello francis,

Thank you for the very kind words. Since I use zooms a lot, and find them very convienent, I just wanted to be sure people did not get turned off on them for no reason. I appreciate your vote of confidence.

hugh

hugh zooms 200%
what a two pictures, thistime you caught me by surprise
till tuesday
rgds

hugh said:

Hello all,

First, I apologize for having two active posts at one time.
Second, since I didn't mention it last time, and some very kind
people became concerned, please be advised I will be away until
Monday evening or Tuesday.

Third, there has been some discussion about zoom lenses not being
sharp enough. Without being confrontational, while it is true that
a good prime is probably sharper than a good zoom, it is a rare
picture that will show the difference. Or to say it a different
way. it is easily possible to take good, sharp pictures with a
quality zoom lens. These were taken with the Nikon 80-200 f/2.8
IF/ED.

Some detail was lost in down sizing and saving for the web.

Please click on the images to see them full fram.





Thank you.

I'll see you all next Tuesday.

hugh

Click to expand...

--John smeets http://www.pbase.com/john1minolta D7 and Olympus B300

These are beautiful images with all the details and clarity one needs for this kind of display. When I decided on zoom lenses - (still not sure the right ones) I have assumedthat for prints size of A3 (I think it is B in the States) the difference will not be that great. Your images reinforce this decision

Thanks

Ruvy

hugh said:

Hello all,

First, I apologize for having two active posts at one time.
Second, since I didn't mention it last time, and some very kind
people became concerned, please be advised I will be away until
Monday evening or Tuesday.

Third, there has been some discussion about zoom lenses not being
sharp enough. Without being confrontational, while it is true that
a good prime is probably sharper than a good zoom, it is a rare
picture that will show the difference. Or to say it a different
way. it is easily possible to take good, sharp pictures with a
quality zoom lens. These were taken with the Nikon 80-200 f/2.8
IF/ED.

Some detail was lost in down sizing and saving for the web.

Please click on the images to see them full fram.





Thank you.

I'll see you all next Tuesday.

hugh

Click to expand...

--Ruvy

hugh Beautiful Hugh just beautiful. DL--Dog Leader D30 300mm 4L IS50mm 1.4 and a 1.4 Teleconvertor

i wish i could take great pictures like these hugh..very nice and excellently captured perfect in every aspects ..will miss you..enjoy!
regards
urpardnerfloren

hugh said:

Hello all,

First, I apologize for having two active posts at one time.
Second, since I didn't mention it last time, and some very kind
people became concerned, please be advised I will be away until
Monday evening or Tuesday.

Third, there has been some discussion about zoom lenses not being
sharp enough. Without being confrontational, while it is true that
a good prime is probably sharper than a good zoom, it is a rare
picture that will show the difference. Or to say it a different
way. it is easily possible to take good, sharp pictures with a
quality zoom lens. These were taken with the Nikon 80-200 f/2.8
IF/ED.

Some detail was lost in down sizing and saving for the web.

Please click on the images to see them full fram.





Thank you.

I'll see you all next Tuesday.

hugh

Click to expand...

John said:

hugh zooms 200%
what a two pictures, thistime you caught me by surprise
till tuesday
rgds

--
John smeets
http://www.pbase.com/john1
minolta D7 and Olympus B300

Click to expand...

Hello John,

Thanks for the comment. See you on my return.

With appreciation,

hugh

Ruvy said:

These are beautiful images with all the details and clarity one
needs for this kind of display. When I decided on zoom lenses -
(still not sure the right ones) I have assumedthat for prints size
of A3 (I think it is B in the States) the difference will not be
that great. Your images reinforce this decision

Thanks

Ruvy

Click to expand...

Hello Ruvy,

Thanks for the positive comments. I typically print A3 and B sized with no problems. I'm glad I could provide useful information.

With appreciation,

hugh

Dogleader said:

hugh Beautiful Hugh just beautiful. DL
--
Dog Leader D30 300mm 4L IS
50mm 1.4 and a 1.4 Teleconvertor

Click to expand...

Hello DL,

I forgot to mention that I was also using a 2X teleconvertor on these. Thanks for the complimentary words.

With appreciation,

hugh

ulol said:

i wish i could take great pictures like these hugh..very nice and
excellently captured perfect in every aspects ..will miss
you..enjoy!
regards
urpardnerfloren

Click to expand...

Hey pardner,

Not to worry. Your pictures are easily as good as these in their way. Most of the difference is just the more expensive hardware. I'm really pleased you like these. I'll see you on my return.

With appreciation,

hugh

Hi hugh,

These are definitely very crisp and clear images, and it's terrific of you to share them with those of us suffering the winter blahs. I do believe there are quite a few zooms that produce very good results, and provide incredible compositional flexibility, even though I'm a prime man myself.

With that said, the 80-200 is hardly your typical zoom....I'd say it's one of the few Nikon zooms (the 17-35 is the other) with quality to rival primes. The issue I have with the 80-200 is not the quality, but the weight...I'd almost rather carry an 85mm, a 105mm and a 180, than have to lug around the larded beast that is the 80-200, as good as the latter is. The weight clearly goes to good use, but that doesn't make it any easier to lug the thing around and suffer hand cramps and slumped shoulders after handholding it for an extended indoor or outdoor photo session.

Anyway, these were a pleasure to view...thanks for sharing.

Robert

hugh said:

Hello all,

First, I apologize for having two active posts at one time.
Second, since I didn't mention it last time, and some very kind
people became concerned, please be advised I will be away until
Monday evening or Tuesday.

Third, there has been some discussion about zoom lenses not being
sharp enough. Without being confrontational, while it is true that
a good prime is probably sharper than a good zoom, it is a rare
picture that will show the difference. Or to say it a different
way. it is easily possible to take good, sharp pictures with a
quality zoom lens. These were taken with the Nikon 80-200 f/2.8
IF/ED.

Some detail was lost in down sizing and saving for the web.

Please click on the images to see them full fram.





Thank you.

I'll see you all next Tuesday.

hugh

Click to expand...

Robert M said:

Hi hugh,

These are definitely very crisp and clear images, and it's terrific
of you to share them with those of us suffering the winter blahs.
I do believe there are quite a few zooms that produce very good
results, and provide incredible compositional flexibility, even
though I'm a prime man myself.

With that said, the 80-200 is hardly your typical zoom....I'd say
it's one of the few Nikon zooms (the 17-35 is the other) with
quality to rival primes. The issue I have with the 80-200 is not
the quality, but the weight...I'd almost rather carry an 85mm, a
105mm and a 180, than have to lug around the larded beast that is
the 80-200, as good as the latter is. The weight clearly goes to
good use, but that doesn't make it any easier to lug the thing
around and suffer hand cramps and slumped shoulders after
handholding it for an extended indoor or outdoor photo session.

Anyway, these were a pleasure to view...thanks for sharing.

Robert

Click to expand...

Hello Robert,

You certainly have gone to the heart of the matter. I don't carry the 80-200 in my bag unless going someplace to use if specifically. It, and the two macro lenses live in a second case that is available at need. I agree with you about the 17-35. The 24-70 does very well also. I almost always use a tripod, so the handholding is not typically a problem.

And, thank you for compliments. I am pleased to share a bit of our mild weather.

With appreciation,

hugh

Zoom zoom zoom, Hugh! Works great and you proved it!! What beautiful photos. And without the zoom, how would you get THAT close?!!

PS: Now you guys know why a wife always says "Drive Carefully" when you leave. It's another way of saying "I care". So you have found that you were missed and we were worried as to why you were absent. What a great group of people. Anyway, TRAVEL SAFELY!!

Marilu

--Marilu (Nikon 990) http://www.pbase.com/canyonlu/galleries

Hugh, first these are fabulous photos. As far as zoom v fixed lenses I have a few comments:

Many people find that they use their telephoto zooms at only there longest setting. This would indicate that a longer lens is need and that a fixed telephoto would have just as much reach.

There is more glass in a zoom lens, which makes it heavier. This reduces the ability to handhold the lens steady. For mid range lenses this affects sharpness. I am a big fan of mobility and rarely use my tripod.

More glass increases the chance of flare.

While zoom lenses used to cost more than fixed lenses this is no longer the case as so many more zoom lenses are manufactured driving the cost down.

Zoom lenses used to have faster optics. This is not the case in the low to mid price range.

Mid range zooms (both telephoto and wide angle) can be very useful. The disadvantage of them is that they tend to be much slower than a normal lens. They are frequently just as fast at the maximum and minimum zoom positions as fixed lenses.

As far as sharpness zoom lenses have come close to or equaled fixed lenses.

For me I do outdoor photography and have cause those family photos. Outdoors I either want all the reach I can get from a telephoto lens or a very wide lens. There are no zooms with this kind of range (that are any good) so fixed lenses are lighter and easier for me to carry around. For shooting the family a mid range zoom is great but I still like a good fast 50mm for low light.

Morris

hugh said:

Hello all,

First, I apologize for having two active posts at one time.
Second, since I didn't mention it last time, and some very kind
people became concerned, please be advised I will be away until
Monday evening or Tuesday.

Third, there has been some discussion about zoom lenses not being
sharp enough. Without being confrontational, while it is true that
a good prime is probably sharper than a good zoom, it is a rare
picture that will show the difference. Or to say it a different
way. it is easily possible to take good, sharp pictures with a
quality zoom lens. These were taken with the Nikon 80-200 f/2.8
IF/ED.

Some detail was lost in down sizing and saving for the web.

Please click on the images to see them full fram.





Thank you.

I'll see you all next Tuesday.

hugh

Click to expand...

Gary wrote:

hugh...great crisp pictures....zoom looks just fine to me....no weight on my end with the pro90 and the Olympus teleconverter....gives me 640 optical I think...and no weight to speak of...and IS too.

hugh said:

Hello all,

First, I apologize for having two active posts at one time.
Second, since I didn't mention it last time, and some very kind
people became concerned, please be advised I will be away until
Monday evening or Tuesday.

Third, there has been some discussion about zoom lenses not being
sharp enough. Without being confrontational, while it is true that
a good prime is probably sharper than a good zoom, it is a rare
picture that will show the difference. Or to say it a different
way. it is easily possible to take good, sharp pictures with a
quality zoom lens. These were taken with the Nikon 80-200 f/2.8
IF/ED.

Some detail was lost in down sizing and saving for the web.

Please click on the images to see them full fram.





Thank you.

I'll see you all next Tuesday.

hugh

Click to expand...

--My photo site http://www.pbase.com/woody/galleries