Nikon AF S NIKKOR 2 8E ED Review

Great choice. Got pros: Excellent picture quality, shooting on the D700? silent, handheld shooting in low light is amazing, little noisy. Cons below: Compared to the previous Nikkor 17-55, 2.8 lens, it focuses more slowly, but this is a problem with a similar model from Canon

bring your technique to the sc for fine tuning / I shoot weddings, is a universal must-have for those who make money from photography

Very useful when shooting events, / 1,4G, No regrets about the sale. Some pros: The only plus of the remaining years of operation is the speed and accuracy of autofocus. Has cons:

Must have from Nikon Got pros: silent, contrast does not fall. Has some cons: Weight of course, after 3 hours the camera + lens + flash, I can'

My own experience with the previously mentioned AF 50/1.4 lens did not reveal any significant variations in the way colors were captured. Please visit this link if you are interested: aspx?id=33959 I ask myself, "WHAT WOULD I DO WITHOUT HIM?" Take it,

I spent a considerable amount of time looking for something (the D7000) that would be suitable for me. 18-105 failed. Teleconverters are not compatible with the 50/1.4 lens system.

After using it for two months, Very comfortable lens, Tenacious autofocus) Constant aperture at f2.8) Has pros: Convenient to use Conveniently placed focus rings High image detail Fast and silent autofocus Cons below: there is no venetting on the crop, hours of shooting - really hands get tired)

The lens justifies its price by 100% bought Canon, Nikon left for photos) video, the picture is beyond praise, you can see: Bundle Nikon D600 + 24-70 2.8 Some pros: Stunning lens, very sharp, accurate and lightning-fast focusing, aperture, color reproduction. With its cons: Exactly one year later,

Almost complete replacement of 17-55 the zoom ring turns smoothly here, but it is located farther from the camera, wider, I think that Ide wrote his nonsense out of resentment or bad weather)))

Many wrote about the delightfulness of this lens, it is uncompromising, sharp at all apertures, a subject, at least he was able to focus on the fish in the aquarium, strangle the toad and take it, /?p=0

After the purchase, of course, is high, a woman) and then cervical osteochondrosis is not terrible for you :) An excellent reportage lens.

As an electronics enthusiast, I had high hopes for this lens. Unfortunately, as a result of my tests, I determined that the image quality did not live up to the price tag. While the overall build and focus capabilities were decent, I was disappointed by the lack of sharpness and clarity in my photos. Save your money and invest in a different lens with better optics.

This is a difficult lens to see. I had the non-VR version but sold it because I didn't find it particularly sharp from center to corners. The mids were clear but the corners were soft and I never felt like I was getting the sharp landscape photos I usually use the lens for. The new lens appears to have undergone some design changes (see Roger Cicala's excellent bench tests against the old lens and Tamron VR on the Lensrentals.com blog). For the most part, Nikon seems to have incorporated…

Money. The argument is that most photographers have (and need) 35mm primes, 50mm primes and probably 14-24mm and 70-200mm lenses. With these 4 lenses you cover all focal lengths from 14mm to 200mm - with high-quality 35mm and 50mm lenses. So what's the point of a 24-70mm lens? My answer? It just makes life easier. It is true that I have all 14-24mm, 70-200mm and high quality 35mm and 50mm prime lenses (both at f1.4). However, 90% of my photos are created with a focal length of 35-70mm. So with…