Reading mode: Light Dark

The Holy Trinity...

Go to last post
Shaun Skelly said:
Pictures OF lenses? How about pictures through lenses?
Click to expand...
Hhmm... these are pictures through lens, what else do we use to take pictures, any pictures, even this one? :-) Do you have some magical devise that can take picture w/o using a lens? A pin-hole camera perhaps?
:-))

--
JR
 
James Riley said:
little_beginner said:
James Riley said:
Click to expand...
I am not so good in guessing. Is it a 70-200VR, 17-35 2.8, 85 1,4
and the 80-400VR ?
Greetings
Sven
Click to expand...
Nop, that is a 28-70AFS instead of 85/1.4.

Below is the 85/1.4, and 85/2.8PC Micro, modified with the 90deg
rotation by yours truly.

Click to expand...
I am melting by this ... when I am earning more money .... help, dreams come true ...
Greetings and enjoy your tools and
... ehm, my only to play with it would be enough dreams ..
Sven
 
I have all three of these lenses but I must confess that if I am not out shooting for a purpose, and I decide to take my camera along for those "just in case" opportunities, my 24-85G AFS is on my camera...... The size appeals to me for this type of shooting. I will have one of my cameras with me at most times. One is sitting on a table behind my desk as I type this and it has the 24-85G mounted on it. I do have a smaller bag that holds the three of the trinty, a flash, and extra battery nicely near by though........if the "just in case" opportunity becomes more serious.

I do have a larger bag that could hold the trinity, an 85/1.4, 20/2.8, 28/1.4 and a 300/4 (if I swap some of the other lenses out), a second body, etc. when I am out shooting REAL seriously......(grin)
Group Idiot said:
...of zoom lenses ;-)

The 17-35/2.8 AF-S, 28-70/2.8 AF-S, and 70-200/2.8 AF-S VR:
Click to expand...
Group Idiot said:
Now if Nikon could just get me a 70-200/VR that would work with a
TC I'd be tickled pink. I have to admit it, Nikon makes the sexiest
lenses available -- hands down. Canon just can't compete there, if
that matters to anyone ;-)

Apologies to those who think me a blasphemer.

Brendan
--
If a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, I'm the world's most
dangerous man!
Bunch of new photos at: http://www.pbase.com/bgetchel/root
Click to expand...
 
mmm drool What I wouldn't give to be able to reach into my bag and have those options to choose from!!!!

Couple questions, am I seeing that right, your 70-200/2.8 AF-S VR is a G lens? And you are having trouble getting it to work with teleconverters... just a 2.0 or 1.4 as well?

With the newer G lenses, other than the lack of an aperture ring, are there any downsides to a G lenses over the D lenses?

Thanks for sharing!

Joe
 
let's all post pics of our TRINITY
or... in this case... the 3 things we can't live without

1. as it pertains to our photography
2. as it pertains to everything else besides photography

greg
 


And my old Tokina 800/8 with Nikon T-mount, cost me $200 at a camera show long time ago..

500/4AFS with TC-14E (effective 700mm)

800/5.6AIS loaned from a friend, looking at buying..

--
JR
 
You guys are sooo funny. I finally stopped to look at what "The Holy Trinity" message was about, and what a laugh... :-)

Actually, I was really mad at you all yesterday. It was raining out and there was this cool branch with raindrops in all different spots. Took out my spanking new 28-70 and couldn't get the shot I wanted. I knew I needed a 300. So, I took out my 70-300 and sure, it gave me the perspective I wanted, but I was so disappointed with the sharpness. I need that 300 f/4 now.

So, then I looked out the back window and the grass is all green and there's a bird feeder statue of St Francis back there under this huge oak tree. The oak trees' branches were spread way out around St Francis and it had orange buds all over...looked like they were dancing in the air. Again I shot with my 28-70, but I knew I really needed the 17-35 or perhaps the 12-24. I looked at one of the branches and the leaves looked like a floral display. I went and got my 70-300 and shot at 300, again disappointing.

The sun came out a bit and for a photo class, I'm taking shots with window lights. So, I took out the 28-70 and was thrilled I had f/2.8 and could capture some that I never could with my 24-85 (f/4 on the telephoto side). And, wow, that AF-S is fantastic! Still, to get just those little birdie heads, I had to get quite close at 70 mm and sometimes, they'd stop what they were doing. I could take out my 105, but then again, it doesn't have that fantastic AF-S. Oh, how I lusted for that 70-200 VR!!!! All day long I was a bit crabby and blamed it on not having the lenses I wanted to take the photos I wanted :-) And it's all your fault! :-)

I think I should invest in the other 2 parts of the trinity and St Francis can be by 300 f/4 :-) 'cause he'll help me take those wildlife photos :-)

MF
 
Pictured here are some Nikkor collection except one. Guess who are they?

 
...an RPG!

Brendan
--
If a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, I'm the world's most dangerous man!
Equipment list in profile -- where it BELONGS!
 
I can absolutly understand you ... my equipment is now also far from perfect.... But if you dream of the 70-200VR and the 300f/4, I would think about your St Francis as a TC 1,4 ... with the 70-200VR nearly the same as the 300f/4, lighter, cheaper and you can use it on the next holy tele 300 or 400 f/2,8 ;-)

From Ron's page: " I took a number of shots on both days with the TC-14e, on the first day in direct comparison with the bare lens at 200mm and at 150mm+TC (210mm), and on the second day at 200mm+TC (280mm) vs. the 300mm prime. In both cases, the quality of the zoom+TC was nearly equal or equal to either itself (without TC) or the 300mm f/4 AFS prime."
Greetings
Sven
Many Feathers said:
You guys are sooo funny. I finally stopped to look at what "The
Holy Trinity" message was about, and what a laugh... :-)

Actually, I was really mad at you all yesterday. It was raining out
and there was this cool branch with raindrops in all different
spots. Took out my spanking new 28-70 and couldn't get the shot I
wanted. I knew I needed a 300. So, I took out my 70-300 and sure,
it gave me the perspective I wanted, but I was so disappointed with
the sharpness. I need that 300 f/4 now.

So, then I looked out the back window and the grass is all green
and there's a bird feeder statue of St Francis back there under
this huge oak tree. The oak trees' branches were spread way out
around St Francis and it had orange buds all over...looked like
they were dancing in the air. Again I shot with my 28-70, but I
knew I really needed the 17-35 or perhaps the 12-24. I looked at
one of the branches and the leaves looked like a floral display. I
went and got my 70-300 and shot at 300, again disappointing.

The sun came out a bit and for a photo class, I'm taking shots with
window lights. So, I took out the 28-70 and was thrilled I had
f/2.8 and could capture some that I never could with my 24-85 (f/4
on the telephoto side). And, wow, that AF-S is fantastic! Still, to
get just those little birdie heads, I had to get quite close at 70
mm and sometimes, they'd stop what they were doing. I could take
out my 105, but then again, it doesn't have that fantastic AF-S.
Oh, how I lusted for that 70-200 VR!!!! All day long I was a bit
crabby and blamed it on not having the lenses I wanted to take the
photos I wanted :-) And it's all your fault! :-)

I think I should invest in the other 2 parts of the trinity and St
Francis can be by 300 f/4 :-) 'cause he'll help me take those
wildlife photos :-)

MF
Click to expand...
 
I'd say the one on the camera is the 17-35. As for the rest of them, I can only guess.
Jeff-C said:
Pictured here are some Nikkor collection except one. Guess who are
they?

Click to expand...
--
If a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, I'm the world's most dangerous man!
Equipment list in profile -- where it BELONGS!
 
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