Entropius

The little cheap 35/1.8 is surprisingly good. It really depends on what you want. The 85/1.8G is a nice lens for portraits and such. The Sigma 18-35/1.8 is a large lens, but very sharp, and really ...

The main difference between the 85/3.5 and 105/2.8 is that the 85 is DX-only and only f/3.5. This means that the 105 is a serviceable portrait lens if you need one. But you don't care: you have a ...

That's an incredible shot of a beautiful bird! (Unless you're a squirrel.)

They're having to special-order some extra small cuffs.

Now could y'all build more 500/5.6's and get around to making something wide and fast for DX?

But I can buy a D750 for around 700 bucks used.

Everyone's talking about Nikon Z. Meanwhile they have this lens, which they can sell as fast as they make them. PF lenses are one of the greatest advances in the last few years in photography, at ...

I've never understood why stills photographers complain about focus breathing. I have an 80-400 (well, until I broke it falling off a hill with it around my neck), and the focus breathing never ...

Nikon, you make the best fullframe DSLR's and the best APS-C DSLR's in the world, and everyone knows it. Don't throw away all that success to chase this mirrorless thing. That means you should:

*...

I'm hoping this mirrorless revolution happens soon and drives down the prices for those antiquated F-mount lenses and bodies on the used market. My D500 does pretty well, thanks.

100MP sensors on smartphones are going to be incredibly diffraction-limited. We already have f/2 lenses on the things.

We are at the point where noise levels in nearly all circumstances are...

More choice is never bad.

Remember we've had very good ultra-fast zooms for a while (Sigma f/1.8 zooms).

Huh. Funny, my D500 and 300/4 are still chugging along.

There are two advantages of mirrorless: 1) Bodies can be made smaller and lighter 2) Wide-to-normal lenses are easier to make, for any given specs and performance. Canon has decided to take ...

That's over double the weight of my wildlife lens.

Sigma's f/1.8 zooms are fantastic, though.

Can't say enough good stuff about the Sigma 18-35/1.8. Will flare really be that much of a problem? I've not had any super severe issues with mine.

Multiply the focal length and the f/number by the teleconverter factor. Using a 1.4x converter the 300 f/4 becomes a 420 f/5.6 and will work fine. Using a 1.4x converter on the 200-500 or a 2x ...

I don't see how you can talk about kit-zoom replacements for Nikon DX without mentioning the Sigma 18-35.

I wish the people who made sensors, the people who made paper, and the people who made frames would talk to each other. That's all.