I am now in the purchasing stage of getting an S2. I would like a high quality general purpose lense that has USM and IS. What I want is the sharpest jpegs i can get out of this camera. I want razor SHARP. A little advice please.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Which is sharpest lense with USM and IS
- Thread starter Nukester
- Start date
Donald Hutton
Leading Member
Any lens with USM and IS will not fit your S2 - those are Canon designations. Nikon's equivalents are AF-S and VR. There are only a few VR lenses available and the general purpose model which incorporates both VR and AF-S is a 24-120 which has received mixed reviews. Not the most contrasty lens and mixed reports on sharpness and distortion. Personally, the sample I tried seemed very nice, but I did not test it in a structured way.
One lens will not do everything perectly, hence the reason Nikon has so many. You really need to decided what features are the most important to you. My own opinion is that the VR functionality is of more value on longer lenses where image stabilisation is a big help. On shorter lenses, you may be better off concentrating on finding a sharp zoom. I have a 28-105 which I like as a general purpose zoom; it is also dirt cheap and quite compact. For five times the money, you could buy a 28-70 which has less range, is much heavier, but is faster (2.8), a tad sharper and has AFS - but not VR....
One lens will not do everything perectly, hence the reason Nikon has so many. You really need to decided what features are the most important to you. My own opinion is that the VR functionality is of more value on longer lenses where image stabilisation is a big help. On shorter lenses, you may be better off concentrating on finding a sharp zoom. I have a 28-105 which I like as a general purpose zoom; it is also dirt cheap and quite compact. For five times the money, you could buy a 28-70 which has less range, is much heavier, but is faster (2.8), a tad sharper and has AFS - but not VR....
Daughter playing or doing crafts, both indoor and outdoor.
Waterfalls.
Walking around during family events and taking everyones pictures.
very little true landscape work.
Very little high end zoom work.
VERY general purpose photography.
I am dead tired of my F717 with its soft image and lack of "snap"
Waterfalls.
Walking around during family events and taking everyones pictures.
very little true landscape work.
Very little high end zoom work.
VERY general purpose photography.
I am dead tired of my F717 with its soft image and lack of "snap"
As a way of saving up front $ and also developing your compositions skills, you might start with a 50/1.8. Fast, cheap (get one used for almost nothing), good for shooting people (at the multiplied focal length from the smaller sensor; in 35mm work I found the 85mm lenses to be ideal for people.) Able to use indoors without flash at f/2 or f/2.8. Use with an ND filter outdoors to slow down the water in the waterfall.
Nice thing about interchangeable lens cameras is that you can buy/trade to build what you need as your skills/demands change.
-dan
Nice thing about interchangeable lens cameras is that you can buy/trade to build what you need as your skills/demands change.
-dan
Carl Maiorino
Senior Member
...Given the list of what you want to shoot. A previous poster mentioned the Nikkor 28-105mm lens. I own that lens and it is a fine optic with my S1. AFS is a moot point for me because the S1 isn't AFS-compatible. I produce wonderfully sharp JPEGs with the 28-105mm.
Greg Zillgitt
Senior Member
I love my 28-70 f2.8 as a walking-around lens. It's heavy, sure, but I love the results. No VR, though I don't feel it's really necessary in that focal length range. Expensive, but you didn't mention cost as an issue.
Here's some recent shots with the S2 and the 28-70:
http://www.pbase.com/gzillgi/fuji_s2_pro
--
http://www.pbase.com/gzillgi
Here's some recent shots with the S2 and the 28-70:
http://www.pbase.com/gzillgi/fuji_s2_pro
--
http://www.pbase.com/gzillgi
J
jacques
Guest
Hi do yo have broad band connection ?
Open
http://www.pbase.com/image/22751285
and look at the hair at the girls upper lip.
S2 with 70-200 AFS VR lens, hand held,
jacques.
Open
http://www.pbase.com/image/22751285
and look at the hair at the girls upper lip.
S2 with 70-200 AFS VR lens, hand held,
jacques.
Darrell Wilks
Leading Member
Nikkor AFS 28-70 f2.8 is sharp and fast, sorry no VR
Nikkor AFS 17-35 f2.8 is sharp, fast and fun, sorry no VR
Sigma AF HSM 120-300 f2.8 is sharp, fast, fun, and long, sorry no VR
Still trying to satisfy myself with Nikkor AFS 70-200 VR.
Darrell
Nikkor AFS 17-35 f2.8 is sharp, fast and fun, sorry no VR
Sigma AF HSM 120-300 f2.8 is sharp, fast, fun, and long, sorry no VR
Still trying to satisfy myself with Nikkor AFS 70-200 VR.
Darrell
I am getting this lens, I am sold on it big time, Just a matter of a few dollars (Ha-Ha). Within a month it will be mine. As far as sharpness, it is a great lens, wheter it could compete with the 180 2.8 we will see. I am going to keep the 180 even when I get the 70-200 as it can handle sunsets well (no ghosting or flare) but my 70-200 will be my MAIN lens. Things it can do are unbelievable! The 50 1:8 is the bargain of the centrury as far as lenses go.......
Reguards,
Rob Perry
Reguards,
Rob Perry
Andy-James
Well-known member
(look at msg subject)
Those are probably Nikon's best. You don't really need the VR for 28-70 - I just don't see the purpose for many applications. Though I do think Nikon should come out with a version of the 28-70 with VR, maybe a "second generation" version like they did when they upgraded the 500mm to AF-S.
Oh, and the 12-24 DX AF-S for your wide shots of course.
So there ya go. By the way, those lenses together cost around $13,000 US so you might want to reconsider the fact that you need AF-S and VR. For the purposes you mentioned, you definitely don't need VR and AF-S.
Andy
========
When the sun burns out, they will try to blame the Fuji S2
Those are probably Nikon's best. You don't really need the VR for 28-70 - I just don't see the purpose for many applications. Though I do think Nikon should come out with a version of the 28-70 with VR, maybe a "second generation" version like they did when they upgraded the 500mm to AF-S.
Oh, and the 12-24 DX AF-S for your wide shots of course.
So there ya go. By the way, those lenses together cost around $13,000 US so you might want to reconsider the fact that you need AF-S and VR. For the purposes you mentioned, you definitely don't need VR and AF-S.
--
Andy
========
When the sun burns out, they will try to blame the Fuji S2
Andy-James
Well-known member
Derrel87035
Senior Member
Nukester,
There are not many choices in Nikkors if you need VR. The 24-120 would be a good choice if you want VR for stability at small apertures hand-held. Considering its focal length range and price, it's designed to be the travel lens with VR, the one-lens solution for those who understand that the sharpest lens shot hand-held at 1/10th to 1/45th often produces a blurred shot due to photographer motion (aka camera shake). In other words, an average zoom with VR takes more-stable images than the 28-70 does when you've got the shakes, when you're indoors in a no-flash situation and need some DOF,or you're breathing a bit hard,or you're shooting from an unsteady body position.
VR makes a creative difference in panning shots,low-light,and deep depth of field shots. No matter how bad a lens is reputed to be, it can still make interesting photos.Even a slowish zoom lens. Let's face it, at f/11 too slow a shutter speed leading to camera shake issues is what ruins more photos than almost anything. VR's shake-stopping ability on indoor,low-light images with decent depth of field has been demonstrated by a Washington DC area Fujista using the 24-120. For him, the VR alone makes this a viable lens.It'd be a good choice for the kinds of shots you described wanting to do.Providing you have a good example of it, the 24-120 VR might really,really suit your style.
But the answer to your original question-which is the sharpest lens with the Canon-equivalents of USM and IS, it's the 70-200 VR. But it's a lengthy,weighty,very substantial lens,and would probably cramp your style.But it is very sharp and contrasty,and VR makes it fly.
--
Happy Shooting!
Derrel
There are not many choices in Nikkors if you need VR. The 24-120 would be a good choice if you want VR for stability at small apertures hand-held. Considering its focal length range and price, it's designed to be the travel lens with VR, the one-lens solution for those who understand that the sharpest lens shot hand-held at 1/10th to 1/45th often produces a blurred shot due to photographer motion (aka camera shake). In other words, an average zoom with VR takes more-stable images than the 28-70 does when you've got the shakes, when you're indoors in a no-flash situation and need some DOF,or you're breathing a bit hard,or you're shooting from an unsteady body position.
VR makes a creative difference in panning shots,low-light,and deep depth of field shots. No matter how bad a lens is reputed to be, it can still make interesting photos.Even a slowish zoom lens. Let's face it, at f/11 too slow a shutter speed leading to camera shake issues is what ruins more photos than almost anything. VR's shake-stopping ability on indoor,low-light images with decent depth of field has been demonstrated by a Washington DC area Fujista using the 24-120. For him, the VR alone makes this a viable lens.It'd be a good choice for the kinds of shots you described wanting to do.Providing you have a good example of it, the 24-120 VR might really,really suit your style.
But the answer to your original question-which is the sharpest lens with the Canon-equivalents of USM and IS, it's the 70-200 VR. But it's a lengthy,weighty,very substantial lens,and would probably cramp your style.But it is very sharp and contrasty,and VR makes it fly.
--
Happy Shooting!
Derrel
I've always been told that as long as the user knows what they are doing with the camera, the #1 thing to save up and buy the best of is your glass. I am going to consider this lense What good is a 1600.00 camera if it can't produce results that are better than a prosumer. If you have to spend 1600.00 on glass with the 1600.00 camera, well that is life. I would love to get out cheaper, but I don't want cheap glass!!!
bm bradley
Senior Member
I'm useing the tamron 28-105, 2.8 with good result $900 more or less. not sure but the nikon high end lens might have a little better color reproduction. I shoot std/org/std on the camera settings and bring the sharpness up in PS as needed. I find crisper images with umbrellas as opposed to softboxes. most of the problems I've seen with the s2 have been cheap glass. the newer s2's shoot slower than the first models
bm bradley
--
bm bradley
Donald Hutton
Leading Member
The photographer makes 99.9% of the difference. A 28-105mm for $300 will be capable of producing spectacular images in the right hands.
Moonwalker
Senior Member
Nukester,
the 70-200mm f/2.8VR lens is a great choice for the great S2 camera. It's my favourite Nikon lens. If I could keep just one lens it would be that lens. It's great for candids. But it is a big, heavy and expensive lens. Buy it, you won't regret it. But keep in mind, there are also occasions where you might not feel comfortable with such a huge lens.
So I have to agree with Donald Hutton, buy the Nikon 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 lens too, for travelling or when you don't want to look like the pro photographer. It's a slow lens with a slow autofocus and it looks rather cheap. But it gives very nice pictures. And don't underestimate the focal range: You can shoot a lot of different situations with one and the same lens. With the pro lenses you have to change all the time: With a 70-200mm f/2.8 VR you don't have enough wide angle, with a 28-70mm f/2.8 you sometimes don't have enough tele. The 28-105mm lens on an S2 is sort of your Sony camera. But it's still more fun because you have a real slr camera with a lot of control over it.
At a course in portrait photography we had to take candids at a train station for about three hours. I had four good Nikon lenses with me but the best shots didn't come from me and my great lenses but from a lady with a 28-300mm type of lens (it was a cheap looking plastic lens from Canon, don't remember the focal range in detail, but it was a huge focal range). She didn't bother about lenses, just used that one lens with a big focal range and got the greatest shots, ok, a few of them were blurry but with a great atmosphere. With one lens you can focus on what's really important: Taking a picture at the right moment with a reasonably good framing.
Moonwalker
http://homepage.swissonline.ch/Utopia/
the 70-200mm f/2.8VR lens is a great choice for the great S2 camera. It's my favourite Nikon lens. If I could keep just one lens it would be that lens. It's great for candids. But it is a big, heavy and expensive lens. Buy it, you won't regret it. But keep in mind, there are also occasions where you might not feel comfortable with such a huge lens.
So I have to agree with Donald Hutton, buy the Nikon 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 lens too, for travelling or when you don't want to look like the pro photographer. It's a slow lens with a slow autofocus and it looks rather cheap. But it gives very nice pictures. And don't underestimate the focal range: You can shoot a lot of different situations with one and the same lens. With the pro lenses you have to change all the time: With a 70-200mm f/2.8 VR you don't have enough wide angle, with a 28-70mm f/2.8 you sometimes don't have enough tele. The 28-105mm lens on an S2 is sort of your Sony camera. But it's still more fun because you have a real slr camera with a lot of control over it.
At a course in portrait photography we had to take candids at a train station for about three hours. I had four good Nikon lenses with me but the best shots didn't come from me and my great lenses but from a lady with a 28-300mm type of lens (it was a cheap looking plastic lens from Canon, don't remember the focal range in detail, but it was a huge focal range). She didn't bother about lenses, just used that one lens with a big focal range and got the greatest shots, ok, a few of them were blurry but with a great atmosphere. With one lens you can focus on what's really important: Taking a picture at the right moment with a reasonably good framing.
Moonwalker
http://homepage.swissonline.ch/Utopia/
WOW... Now i'm more confused about lenses than ever 
I am leaning towards the Nikon 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 lens because I want a great walk around lens. But I really am getting confused about which lens would fit me the best.
I am leaning towards the Nikon 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 lens because I want a great walk around lens. But I really am getting confused about which lens would fit me the best.
Derrel87035
Senior Member
Okay, you've apparently got two choices...24-120 AF-S VR G or the old standby 28-105 with its actually decent macro range focusing. You wanted a VR lens with sophisticated silent-wave focusing. The 28-105 does not have sophisticated silent-wave focusing, but it is a good lens.WOW... Now i'm more confused about lenses than ever
I am leaning towards the Nikon 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 lens because I
want a great walk around lens. But I really am getting confused
about which lens would fit me the best.
The 24-120 has better range, especially at the wide end where it really counts,but also at the longer end. Compared to the 28-105 Nikkor, the 24-120's 4 extra mm at the bottom range is worth more,pictorially, than the extra 15mm it offers at the top of its range. The VR lens also has AF-S.And VR. Main concern? Making sure a 24-120 has good sharpness on the right hand side of the frame. Sure, the corners might be a tad soft at some settings. Same with a LOT of zooms...
The thing about VR is that it is new to Nikon...it has not been available for very long in F-mount lenses...anybody who has used a VR lens knows what it does. It brings the 1/10th to 1/45th second exposure zone at f/8 right into your grasp...it "gives you" those slow speeds without much fear of camera shake. It allows you to set appropriate shutter speeds to pick up ambient light with flash. VR is an amazing technological advancement that brings you something no non-VR lens can give you,and that is hand-held shooting at small stops or slow speeds without fear of excessive vibration ruining the shot. Those who have not owned a VR lens will argue VR's merits with you saying, "Tripod! Tripod!" all day long. I sense a major Luddite undercurrent whenever VR and IS come up,with those without it always discounting its merits and its real-world utility. Not pointing fingers at anybody here,just stating an opinion formed over the last few years.
You say you like deep depth of field,right? Well, if you want to shoot more deep DOF shots,you're gonna' be shooting at f/11 to f/16 a lot. VR makes sense for this. If you were a Canon shooter you'd buy their 28-135 IS lens,right? Both the Nikkor zooms are "slow lenses". If you have a slow lens, VR is a godsend. VR is not just a crutch for the sloppy or beginning shooter.It is a technological advancement and it has benefits.
Frankly,considering your stated uses for the lens you're considering, I am surprised you're not considering the 28-200 G-series Nikkor zoom which is allegedly much,much better than its predecessor,and incredibly compact--smaller than the 24-85 AF-S G, since it has a 62mm front thrtead,not an oddball 67mm thread like the 24-85 AF-S G has. Check out Nikon SLR Lens Talk for the 28-200 G thread that's posted there if you're interested in further muddying the waters.
Coming from a prosumer digicam background, I can understand your confusion or indecision,since the Nikon lens lineup is broad and constantly in a state of revision, with new designs,entirely new ranges, new features,etc.
A trip to a truly well-stocked photo dealer's shop would be a good thing. You can mount the prospective choices,handle them,maybe shoot a bit with each,and get a feel the lenses in your own hands. Nothing beats a hands-on demo and trial fitting to either eliminate or to up-rate a prospective lens choice.
---
Happy Shooting!
Derrel
Moonwalker
Senior Member
Sorry Nukester,
didn't want to create confusion. You were talking about super sharp lenses with VR. That's why I was talking about that 70-200VR f/2.8 lens. But this doesn't mean the 28-105mm lens or the one Derrel speaks of is not sharp. They are very sharp and well up to the task. I use the 28-105mm lens for a lot of occasions and get beautiful pictures. You will be amazed at how much difference there is between the Sony and the S2 with a 28-105mm lens, if the Fuji S2 camera is used properly.
P.S.: Two years ago I couldn't have imagined that I would ever buy such an expensive lens like the 70-200VR. Start with a cheap but good lens like the ones Donald Hutton or Derrel proposes.
Now I shut up.
Moonwalker
didn't want to create confusion. You were talking about super sharp lenses with VR. That's why I was talking about that 70-200VR f/2.8 lens. But this doesn't mean the 28-105mm lens or the one Derrel speaks of is not sharp. They are very sharp and well up to the task. I use the 28-105mm lens for a lot of occasions and get beautiful pictures. You will be amazed at how much difference there is between the Sony and the S2 with a 28-105mm lens, if the Fuji S2 camera is used properly.
P.S.: Two years ago I couldn't have imagined that I would ever buy such an expensive lens like the 70-200VR. Start with a cheap but good lens like the ones Donald Hutton or Derrel proposes.
Now I shut up.
Moonwalker
Moonwalker,
No apology needed! I am going to try both lenses and see which one gives the best overall sharpness for the type of shots I take. Your input has been VERY valuable to me.
Thanks!
No apology needed! I am going to try both lenses and see which one gives the best overall sharpness for the type of shots I take. Your input has been VERY valuable to me.
Thanks!
Sorry Nukester,
didn't want to create confusion. You were talking about super sharp
lenses with VR. That's why I was talking about that 70-200VR f/2.8
lens. But this doesn't mean the 28-105mm lens or the one Derrel
speaks of is not sharp. They are very sharp and well up to the
task. I use the 28-105mm lens for a lot of occasions and get
beautiful pictures. You will be amazed at how much difference there
is between the Sony and the S2 with a 28-105mm lens, if the Fuji S2
camera is used properly.
P.S.: Two years ago I couldn't have imagined that I would ever buy
such an expensive lens like the 70-200VR. Start with a cheap but
good lens like the ones Donald Hutton or Derrel proposes.
Now I shut up.
Moonwalker
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum