OT: Any photogs shoot with a circular polarizer..If so, got one to recommend.

[zzz]

bubble- which nikon do you shoot with? and where did you shoot those beautiful butterflies?

anyone have an opinion on the tokina wide angle lenses?

[bubble_contagion]

I have a D80 and a D90. Butterflies were shot at the Wild Animal Park. During two weeks in April there is a special butterfly exhibit. I used a 70-300 with an extension tube and external flash. The Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 has very good reviews and it is a good alternative to the new and expensive 10-24 Nikon DX. You will need a D80 or higher for the Tokina if you want the camera to auto-focus.

[bubble_contagion]

I have a D80 and a D90. Butterflies were shot at the Wild Animal Park. During two weeks in April there is a special butterfly exhibit. I used a 70-300 with an extension tube and external flash. The Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 has very good reviews and it is a good alternative to the new and expensive 10-24 Nikon DX. You will need a D80 or higher for the Tokina if you want the camera to auto-focus.

[bubble_contagion]

I have a D80 and a D90. Butterflies were shot at the Wild Animal Park. During two weeks in April there is a special butterfly exhibit. I used a 70-300 with an extension tube and external flash. The Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 has very good reviews and it is a good alternative to the new and expensive 10-24 Nikon DX. You will need a D80 or higher for the Tokina if you want the camera to auto-focus.

[bubble_contagion]

I have a D80 and a D90. Butterflies were shot at the Wild Animal Park. During two weeks in April there is a special butterfly exhibit. I used a 70-300 with an extension tube and external flash. The Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 has very good reviews and it is a good alternative to the new and expensive 10-24 Nikon DX. You will need a D80 or higher for the Tokina if you want the camera to auto-focus.

[bubble_contagion]

I have a D80 and a D90. Butterflies were shot at the Wild Animal Park. During two weeks in April there is a special butterfly exhibit. I used a 70-300 with an extension tube and external flash. The Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 has very good reviews and it is a good alternative to the new and expensive 10-24 Nikon DX. You will need a D80 or higher for the Tokina if you want the camera to auto-focus.

[sd_matt]

Does anyone here know about fisheyes for Nikon?

I noticed this one made by the company that makes my, ahem….inexpensive screw-on attachment.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Bower-8mm-Circular-Fisheye-Lens-for-Nikon-SLR-Cameras_W0QQitemZ270418519380QQcmdZViewItemQQptZCamera_Lenses?hash=item3ef6332554&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=65%3A12|66%3A2|39%3A1|72%3A1205|293%3A1|294%3A50

Have you seen any reviews on it?

Also have you had any experience with the Pelang or Belomo fisheyes?

[sd_matt]

Does anyone here know about fisheyes for Nikon?

I noticed this one made by the company that makes my, ahem….inexpensive screw-on attachment.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Bower-8mm-Circular-Fisheye-Lens-for-Nikon-SLR-Cameras_W0QQitemZ270418519380QQcmdZViewItemQQptZCamera_Lenses?hash=item3ef6332554&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=65%3A12|66%3A2|39%3A1|72%3A1205|293%3A1|294%3A50

Have you seen any reviews on it?

Also have you had any experience with the Pelang or Belomo fisheyes?

[sd_matt]

Does anyone here know about fisheyes for Nikon?

I noticed this one made by the company that makes my, ahem….inexpensive screw-on attachment.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Bower-8mm-Circular-Fisheye-Lens-for-Nikon-SLR-Cameras_W0QQitemZ270418519380QQcmdZViewItemQQptZCamera_Lenses?hash=item3ef6332554&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=65%3A12|66%3A2|39%3A1|72%3A1205|293%3A1|294%3A50

Have you seen any reviews on it?

Also have you had any experience with the Pelang or Belomo fisheyes?

[sd_matt]

Does anyone here know about fisheyes for Nikon?

I noticed this one made by the company that makes my, ahem….inexpensive screw-on attachment.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Bower-8mm-Circular-Fisheye-Lens-for-Nikon-SLR-Cameras_W0QQitemZ270418519380QQcmdZViewItemQQptZCamera_Lenses?hash=item3ef6332554&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=65%3A12|66%3A2|39%3A1|72%3A1205|293%3A1|294%3A50

Have you seen any reviews on it?

Also have you had any experience with the Pelang or Belomo fisheyes?

[sd_matt]

Does anyone here know about fisheyes for Nikon?

I noticed this one made by the company that makes my, ahem….inexpensive screw-on attachment.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Bower-8mm-Circular-Fisheye-Lens-for-Nikon-SLR-Cameras_W0QQitemZ270418519380QQcmdZViewItemQQptZCamera_Lenses?hash=item3ef6332554&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=65%3A12|66%3A2|39%3A1|72%3A1205|293%3A1|294%3A50

Have you seen any reviews on it?

Also have you had any experience with the Pelang or Belomo fisheyes?

[Coronita]

[quote]Two other lens manufacturers to look at are Sigma and Tokina (As far as I know, their lenses are still largely metal). I tend to rate the aftermarket mfrs in this order of quality: Sigma, Tokina, Tamron. I generally won’t bother with the others. Sigma also makes SLR cameras using the Foveon sensors. The Sigma EX tends to have pretty good build quality. My Sigma 50-500EX,APO is all metal (not a light lens) and has held up for several years (more than 8). It is getting to the point that I may need to get it cleaned though. I got my S.O. a Tokina 80-400ATX which is virtually all metal. My sister is using a Nikon body with older Nikon lenses and Tamron lenses. I have noticed that Nikon is going plastic.. and I am not too happy about their lens quality these days. They have decided to try to fix lens problems in the camera w/ software vs a proper lens build. Canon tends to have good lenses.. but very pricey.
[/quote]

Thanks. I did do a comparison between the Sigma 18-50/2.8, the Tamron 17-55/2.8, and the Canon 17-55/2.8

Canon seemed to be good. Tamron seemed the sharper at versus Sigma, especially at 2.8. I ended up picking up the Tamron because it was cheaper that all 3.

Canon 17-55 has slightly better construction (though still plasticy) but also has the ultrasonic focusing and image stabilizer, the other two don’t. Tamron’s drawbacks are (1) focusing is loud (2) the zoom works in the reverse direction of all other canon lenses. Also, none of the lenses are weatherproof…The tamron is the worst…Fortunately, the tamron includes a 6 year warranty, and if dust gets caught in the inside of the lenses, they clean it out for you under warranty

[Coronita]

[quote]Two other lens manufacturers to look at are Sigma and Tokina (As far as I know, their lenses are still largely metal). I tend to rate the aftermarket mfrs in this order of quality: Sigma, Tokina, Tamron. I generally won’t bother with the others. Sigma also makes SLR cameras using the Foveon sensors. The Sigma EX tends to have pretty good build quality. My Sigma 50-500EX,APO is all metal (not a light lens) and has held up for several years (more than 8). It is getting to the point that I may need to get it cleaned though. I got my S.O. a Tokina 80-400ATX which is virtually all metal. My sister is using a Nikon body with older Nikon lenses and Tamron lenses. I have noticed that Nikon is going plastic.. and I am not too happy about their lens quality these days. They have decided to try to fix lens problems in the camera w/ software vs a proper lens build. Canon tends to have good lenses.. but very pricey.
[/quote]

Thanks. I did do a comparison between the Sigma 18-50/2.8, the Tamron 17-55/2.8, and the Canon 17-55/2.8

Canon seemed to be good. Tamron seemed the sharper at versus Sigma, especially at 2.8. I ended up picking up the Tamron because it was cheaper that all 3.

Canon 17-55 has slightly better construction (though still plasticy) but also has the ultrasonic focusing and image stabilizer, the other two don’t. Tamron’s drawbacks are (1) focusing is loud (2) the zoom works in the reverse direction of all other canon lenses. Also, none of the lenses are weatherproof…The tamron is the worst…Fortunately, the tamron includes a 6 year warranty, and if dust gets caught in the inside of the lenses, they clean it out for you under warranty

[Coronita]

[quote]Two other lens manufacturers to look at are Sigma and Tokina (As far as I know, their lenses are still largely metal). I tend to rate the aftermarket mfrs in this order of quality: Sigma, Tokina, Tamron. I generally won’t bother with the others. Sigma also makes SLR cameras using the Foveon sensors. The Sigma EX tends to have pretty good build quality. My Sigma 50-500EX,APO is all metal (not a light lens) and has held up for several years (more than 8). It is getting to the point that I may need to get it cleaned though. I got my S.O. a Tokina 80-400ATX which is virtually all metal. My sister is using a Nikon body with older Nikon lenses and Tamron lenses. I have noticed that Nikon is going plastic.. and I am not too happy about their lens quality these days. They have decided to try to fix lens problems in the camera w/ software vs a proper lens build. Canon tends to have good lenses.. but very pricey.
[/quote]

Thanks. I did do a comparison between the Sigma 18-50/2.8, the Tamron 17-55/2.8, and the Canon 17-55/2.8

Canon seemed to be good. Tamron seemed the sharper at versus Sigma, especially at 2.8. I ended up picking up the Tamron because it was cheaper that all 3.

Canon 17-55 has slightly better construction (though still plasticy) but also has the ultrasonic focusing and image stabilizer, the other two don’t. Tamron’s drawbacks are (1) focusing is loud (2) the zoom works in the reverse direction of all other canon lenses. Also, none of the lenses are weatherproof…The tamron is the worst…Fortunately, the tamron includes a 6 year warranty, and if dust gets caught in the inside of the lenses, they clean it out for you under warranty

[Coronita]

[quote]Two other lens manufacturers to look at are Sigma and Tokina (As far as I know, their lenses are still largely metal). I tend to rate the aftermarket mfrs in this order of quality: Sigma, Tokina, Tamron. I generally won’t bother with the others. Sigma also makes SLR cameras using the Foveon sensors. The Sigma EX tends to have pretty good build quality. My Sigma 50-500EX,APO is all metal (not a light lens) and has held up for several years (more than 8). It is getting to the point that I may need to get it cleaned though. I got my S.O. a Tokina 80-400ATX which is virtually all metal. My sister is using a Nikon body with older Nikon lenses and Tamron lenses. I have noticed that Nikon is going plastic.. and I am not too happy about their lens quality these days. They have decided to try to fix lens problems in the camera w/ software vs a proper lens build. Canon tends to have good lenses.. but very pricey.
[/quote]

Thanks. I did do a comparison between the Sigma 18-50/2.8, the Tamron 17-55/2.8, and the Canon 17-55/2.8

Canon seemed to be good. Tamron seemed the sharper at versus Sigma, especially at 2.8. I ended up picking up the Tamron because it was cheaper that all 3.

Canon 17-55 has slightly better construction (though still plasticy) but also has the ultrasonic focusing and image stabilizer, the other two don’t. Tamron’s drawbacks are (1) focusing is loud (2) the zoom works in the reverse direction of all other canon lenses. Also, none of the lenses are weatherproof…The tamron is the worst…Fortunately, the tamron includes a 6 year warranty, and if dust gets caught in the inside of the lenses, they clean it out for you under warranty

[Author]

Posts