Episode Summary 
DTown TV is a weekly show brought to you by Scott Kelby and Matt Kloskowski with KelbyTraining.com.
Episode Summary
In this week's episode, Scott and Matt discuss:
- If you haven't watched the other Lens shows, start at Episode 16
- What happens when you put a DX lens on an FX body, or a non-DX lens on a DX body
- Scott and Matt share their favorite travel lenses
- Moose Peterson shows how to save your camera settings to a card
- Nikon is now a sponsor of the 2nd Annual Scott Kelby's Worldwide Photo Walk, and they're giving away a D700 to the winner!
- Check out example images here
- Explore the Nikon "Lens Alphabet" here
- Matt talks about using macro lenses for both macro photography and portraits
Since you could probably do a continuous weekly DtownTV vodcast on lenses alone, how about a compromise where 3 minute lens segment is a part of every show?
The example images are great. The show keeps getting better every week.
Love your show !! I noticed on your travel len’s you only talked about DX len’s. What would you take if your traveling with a D700?? or any full frame camera.
Now that I am using a D700 I bought a used Nikkor 28-200G lens for travel. It is very sharp and lightweight. Much lighter than the 18-200 and it has a zoom lock, which is nice. It doesn’t have the reach at 200 that I did with the the D300 and 18-200 but it is a nice lens.
Another great show! I have to say that this series of shows is not helping the wallet. Every week I add a lens to my “to get” list.
So, to clarify, if I put a DX lens on my D300, do I still apply the DX crop factor to it?
Thank you!
Brian
More onsite stuff.
Well , if you really wanna know about photography , you have to know at least something about lenses and these series are great and most of all are very well explained.
I would like to know more about the :
55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED AF-S VR DX Zoom-Nikkor
Thank you guys I really like you enthusiasm,how well do you explain us (to the viewers),and how you cover every detail.
YOU ARE DOING GREAT!!!
Guys,
would you recommend using a 70-200 with TC or getting the 80-400?
Also what are your thoughts on the 80-400?
Thanks for touching on macro lenses. But could you please comment on the differences between the 105mm VR and 200mm micro? I’ve noticed with the 105mm VR lens that once you have your subject framed then fine tune focus, the 105mm VR lens recomposes what’s included in the frame while focusing! Does the 200mm micro do this too? Is the only solution to get a micro focusing rail for my tripod?
I found Matt’s description of the 12-24 mm F/4 as small and light somewhat amusing. Yes, at 1 lb 3 oz (with front and rear lens caps), its lighter than the 18-200 mm at 1 lb 6 oz, but my deinition of light looks more like the 50 mm f/1.8 D at 6.2 oz.
thanks for teaching! I learn something each time!
Any info on 80-200 2.8d The 70-200 2.8 g does not work on all my cameras and cost too much. Anyone using this lens.
Great series… I do learn and enjoy every each week.
I appreciate the thoughts on the D5000 and 18-200 as a great travel kit. I have a D700 (Its the best camera I have ever owned), but what to use a travel lense?
Scott & Matt,
Great series, so far. I hope you’ll talk about the 105 and 135 Defocus Control (DC) lenses at some point. It would be great if you can offer any tips on how to get the most from these lenses.
Thanks!
Thanks for the show. I also use the 18-200mm VR with my D90 alot. I went to epcot and hollywood studios with my daughter and got some beautiful shots. I use nx2 and color efex pro. You can talk about the color efex pro filters from nikon. I love to use these.
Good show, but why the heck is everything black?
Can’t you guys afford some new (white) t-shirts!? :p
Not so fast . . . Great info, but you forgot to mention “what happens when I put a DX lens on an FX body and turn OFF auto crop . . .”
When I first got my D3, I did tests with DX lenses and auto crop turned off. You get some interesting effects that way but it is also important to note that on some zoom lenses (17-55, for example) there is a point where they cover the full frame sensor. For the 17-55, that was a significant portion of the range. Armed with this knowledge, I prefer to leave auto crop off and take advantage of the extra sensor area and some of the cool results.
Fantastic, I own four of the lens you guys recommend. I like the suggestion of a brief segment focusing on lens each week. I want to know not about the latest and greatest but about the overlooked, older lens that’s sharp, focuses fast with current bodies and are a steal based on value and performance.
The first show you don’t mention the 70-200 just happens to be the same day I buy one. Love the lens ones but would love to also see an episode that gets in to lens attachments like filters, hoods and lenscoat and all the stuff that one can get as an accessory for lenses.
Warren’s answer further up is incorrect, any lens fitted to a DX camera gets it focal length multiplied by 1.5, eg the 18mm to 200mm VR lens becomes a 27 to 300mm on a DX camera body.
Moose talked about saving the camera settings. But he never said HOW it is done. So HOW is it done???
The more people trying to talk about the FX to DX crop factor and how a 14-24 becomes 21-36 on a DX camera is just going to cause more confusions for a lot of armature photographers who probably never touched a film camera before. To them this entire process is rather meaningless. Hardly any of them will end up buying into full frame cameras anytime soon, so why bother to think everything in terms of 35mm focal length anyhow? For those lucky few who have the money to burn end up buying 5D mark II or D700 and up, they are going to dump all their DX lenses anyway and I doubt they will be at any point having trouble understanding the focal length on their full frame glass either.
Film shooters who were converted to digital probably had an initial head spin when they see their “wide” lens don’t look so wide anymore on their DX camera. But I think they are either converted now, or dead by now.
So the only group that might have trouble is the ones who shoot APS-C/DX/EF-s cameras and full frame/ FX cameras at the same time. But then, how many of them are there anyhow?
Hey guys just an idea for a show or just a segment. I was wondering what lenses and/or bodies you would recommend for a photojournalist. I’m new to photography and now have a D50 but am getting into my schools newspaper. So I was wondering what you guys recommend. I’m probably going to get a D2H, but you probably wont bring that old thing up. But I was mainly wondering about lenses. Thanks allot! -James
Hey guys,
I am from Germany an I watch all your shows, and they’re great!!
I also joined the Worldwide Photowalk in Berin
Keep it on!
Greetings from Germany
I really like this series and hope you will include information about the use of the Nikon teleconverters, in particular the TC 1.4 and 1.7 II
Thanks
I have not tested myself yet, but I heard a media-school learn the students this.
Turn your lens backwards. It´s a “extrastrong” macro idea. But not every lens/camera works, and you need “lots” of light.
I going to test it myself. I send this to you because you can, if it´s something to “play” with, tip people (or of course send it to garbage).
By the way – GREAT show – I´m a fan!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Another thing – to take nice picture (meaning so) with no/or outside focus – with right light – can be really nice pictures – anything as a subject to your show?
The video says the 105mm macro lens is also a great portrait lens, but no mention of whether that’s on a DX or FX body. Can I use this as a portrait lens on a D5000? Thanks.
Watched every minute of all four episodes on lenses, all in one sitting. Learned a lot. Just a caution to advanced amateurs on the 18-200. David Busch who wrote “David Busch’s Nikon D300 Guide to Digital SLR Photography” calls the image quality “good, but not outstanding.” The lens sometimes zooms when tilted up or down, and he found the 5.6 at 200mm to be “limiting.” As I mentioned in a comment left just now on another episode, the 70-300mm isn’t all that sharp nar or at 300mm. You’ll need f/8 or higher. If you want to sell shots or put them on a stock site, those sorts of things are important. Otherwise, for strictly consumer and amateur needs, no problem at all.
From the Nikon Lens Alphabet
“G: These lenses have the same technology as D lenses, but they do not have an aperture ring. The G doesn’t stand for anything. It’s just a D lens without a physical aperture ring.”
I thought that the G stood for Gelded. I see it mentioned as that in many places.
Hey Guys Great series!!!!
Can you do a show about Prime Lenses!!
Would it be possible to go over lenses from other manufacturers? I know I have used some older Tokina lenses which were – well, not so good. I have heard that there are some Tamron and Sigma lenses that are excellent and would like to get your opinions.
I know some people consider using other lenses on Nikon sacrilegious, but I need to know if there are less expensive alternatives to the excellent Nikon glass.
A lot of stuff about different lenses which is great. Here’s a few questions:
Some lenses are all plastic, even the mount. This would seem to make them weaker. Should we avoid these lenses and only get the ones with metal mounts? Are there specific precautions we need to take?
Some of the lens combos you talked about have holes in the focal length ranges, ie 15-55 + 70-300 is missing 55-70. Is there some acceptable gap before this becomes a problem?
One thing that keeps coming up is changing lenses. Most of us probably can’t afford to have a ton of different bodies, so we have to actually change on site to get different lenses into play. When is it safe and unsafe to switch? Any tips or tricks for making the changing safer and easier? How can you recover if something happens?
I have heard varied opinions on this: do you travel with lenses on or off inside the camera bag? For that matter, how do you keep your lenses and camera safe from impacts and theft? What about insurance, is it really that helpful or is it just a drain on finances that could go for more lenses?
What about filters? What kinds are useful, and which are most important?
Are off-brand lenses (Sigma, Tamron, etc.) any good?
Great episodes on lenses…. very informative.
I seem to be hearing fewer references to the D300 these last few shows. Is that a hint that there is a new DX format camera on the way? Like the the D400 that has been the subject of many rumors the last six months or so…….
Love the recent episodes very fun and informative. Question about if I have a 70-300 VR for telephoto and a 12-24 F4 for wide angle is a 50mm f1/4 G overkill or would it be of great value as a low light lens? Thanks for the tips and input!
The website says ” Moose Peterson shows how to save your camera settings to a card ”
but in the video he did NOT show how, he just recommended that we do it.
SO IS SOMEONE GOING TO DEMO IT????
I have a practical question which you may address in your next episode.
1. how to use polarizing filters; how much to turn the filter
2. I am struggling to use the lens hood and the polarizing filter at the same time
3. my glasses get greasy from my skin when I am looking through the viewfinder, any suggestions would be appreciated.
thank you, great show and good job
stephan
I notice the guys recommended the 12-24mm DXwide angle lens (although I can’t remember which lens episode it was in) and I was just wondering if the guys (or anyone else) had any thoughts on the new 10-24mm DX lens. (BTW I’m using a D200).
Great show! Hope you’re going to talk about the PC lenses as well.
Great show and good job
love your shows. i have many of the lens you mentioned and use them much as you discussed. BUT there is one thing many people keep saying about dx cameras, ie wide angle lenses arent as wide as full frame or old 35mm. this is of course true, but a major advantage of dx cameras is that the long lens are 50% longer. this is great and by the way, it costs a LOT less to purchase a new wide angle lens than a 400 or 600 lens.
WHAT HAPPENED TO YOUR DOWNLOAD TIME FOR THE DTTV SHOW ? YOU HAD CHANGED SOMTHING A WHILE BACK AND IT WORKED GREAT AND NOW IT CONSTANTLY BUFFERS EVERY FEW SECONDS OR SO . I LOVE THE SHOW BUT DONT HAVE A LOT OF FREE TIME ,I KNOW IT IS NOT MY COMPUTER OR INTERNET , AS I DONT HAVE THIS PROBLEM WITH OTHER SITES. KEEP UP THE GREAT WORK , AND THANKS KARL.
Do you guys know what a “prime” lens is?????? Doesn’t seem so.
You just called the 70-300 VR a lightweight lens. I have that lens and it is the heaviest lens I own. Talking about traveling light, a d90 and a couple or 3 primes. Just spend a day on Santa Catalina 23 miles off Los Angeles with only what would fit in a small pack and my bicycle basket. I am SO glad I had the primes to carry. I took the d90 and a 20mm f2.8, 50mm f1.4 and 85mm f2. Only thought once all day that I wish I had the “heavy” 70-300 with me.
Another gripe, how about a “poor man’s” episode of this series on lenses. I know you guys are bought and paid for by Nikon, but most of us can’t afford many, if any, of the lenses you guys have covered so far. How about covering some of the “lesser” Nikon lenses, some which are quite good. Or, God forbid, some third party lenses.
Primes! Primes! Primes!
We need a show dedicated to prime lenses. How could we not have a show on primes, as their generally affordable cost factor, their typically high quality factor and their non-zoom *ability* (not disability) make them a great choice for new photographers who are learning on a budget. 38mm 1.8 DX, 50mm 1.8, 50mm 1.4…
I was wondering what kind of lenses you would recommend for shooting concerts? You guys always talk about landscapes, weddings, sports, portraits and travel, and I’m not complaining about any of that, but I was just hired to shoot a concert and if all goes well it could turn into a regular thing for me, so I was wondering if you had any advise for the best lenses to use. I’m guessing it would be about the same as with weddings since you’d be shooting in low light.
Really enjoy your show Guys. As an “OLD” analog shooter recently returning to the digital domain of the craft your shows have eased the conversion and given me much greater use of my camera; D700. Many Thanks!
Love to see some shows on Flash, just picked up a SB900 and would welcome your guidance and inspiration on its setup and application.
Keep up the great work!
I love the show but I would enjoy a lens show dedicated to PRIMES only and a with a chapter on the DC and PC-E lenses! BTW have a great birthday Scott!
Rasmus
I love my 18-200mm, It my carry around lens. Just like they said, wish it did better in low light.
I am a Sony A700 shooter and I LOVE watching your shows:)
Great work guys and anybody behind scenes, thanks.
These shows are great but I wanted to let you know that “Ask Brad” is very helpful as well. I’ve already picked up a couple of tips from him that I’ve applied. I especially like the focus point reset! Great Job!
I’ve enjoyed the DTown series but I think you all should issue a clarification on the FX vs DX lens stuff. You’ve been perpetuating a misconception into the cropping issue. The focal length never changes between FX and DX. Just the field of view changes. When you refer to a 300mm lens as being a 450 on DX cameras that’s actually not true. It’s still a 300mm lens with the 300mm perspective. It’s just that you get less of the image captured than with a larger sensor. You all know that but I think clarifying it will help people avoid mistakes in perception.
No episode this week?
just for the sake of argument, has anyone including Scott or Matt, had any experience with the Nikor 18~70 DX VR zoom lens? i do mostly landscape fine art so i need a better quality lens than the 18~200 seems able to give me. stupid me, i sold my 70~200 which was a dynamite lens when i wanted a better quality lens below the 70~200 i had in the process.
Hello Richard, the 18-70 DX VR does not exist at least without the VR ability.
That lens was known as one of the sharpest consummer zoom lens until the 16-85 VR but still has advantage of larger aperture
I just watched the bit about the lenses and it seem somewhat misleading. If you put FX 12-24mm on a DX body you will get about 16-33mm (as mentioned). But the same is true if you use the DX 12-24mm. If I put the 35mm 1.8DX on my DX body it will still be about 49mm it is still not 35mm.
Further more if i put the 12-24mm DX lens on my FX body..it will not crop the image. I will get 12mm but you will see the barrel on the edges. I have the 12-24mm DX lens and can only use it at 18mm-24mm without getting the barrel in frame. So at 24mm I will get a full 12.1mp image.
I can’t seem to link to that Nikon Alphabet. Every time I click the link I just get a link back to the episodes page. Is there another link to it?
Thanks
No. D300 is a DX camera. A DX lens on a DX camera doesn’t require a conversion factor. The 1.5 crop/reach/visual angle factor only applies when a non-DX lens is used on a camera with a DX sensor. In the case of a D700, your DX lens would crop the image, but it would also reduce file size by about half. Simple rule of thumb: DX on DX just read the numbers. No conversion. Non-DX on DX, conversion factor is necessary.
Okay… I read this earlier and wanted to give it some thought before I chimed in. Here’s the way I look at it. I have had this discussion with many people at many trade shows and I really believe that this whole concept it just over-thought. This about this whole DX vs. FX topic like this…
DX format is just that… a different format. Sort of like medium format cameras like a Mamiya or a Hasselblad or a large format camera such as a 4×5 or 8×10 view camera. The world is just too used to comparing each format to the more well known “35mm” format. When I hear someone say “full frame” I think… Full frame as compared to what? So, we are all stuck in thinking that the 24mm x 36mm format size is the norm and everything else has to be compared to that.
For example… what is considered a “normal” lens? Well, on a medium format camera that would be in the 80mm range. On a 35mm camera it would be around a 50mm range. On a DX format camera it would be somewhere around 35mm. That’s because the device that captures the image (a digital sensor or a frame of film) for each of these formats is a different size.
Where the confusion really comes from is that some manufacturers over the years started putting 35mm equivalent numbers on the lenses of their digital cameras that were the same focal length numbers that would have been if you were shooting with a 35mm camera and not that particular camera’s actual focal length. That sort of messed things up awhile back.
Now we have this whole DX/FX thing going on. Real simply, just realize that they are different formats. As you are aware to get the equivalent focal length in FX when using a DX format you need to multiply the focal length by 1.5 times. If you have only ever shot a DX camera then this would really mean nothing to you.
The hard part is that the lenses between these two formats are somewhat interchangeable. So, now you are mixing things up a bit. Just remember that a focal length is a focal length. If you shoot with a DX camera and use any lens on it an 18mm lens would be a wide angle, a 35mm lens would be a normal and a 70mm or more would be considered telephoto (give or take a few mm each way). It doesn’t matter if the lens is a DX lens or a non-DX lens.
A DX lens produces an image circle just big enough to fill a DX format frame. So, it just is what it is. There is really no need to dwell on any sort of crop factor because you aren’t really cropping anything. If a lens can fill an FX format sensor and you use it on a DX format sensor then you are actually cropping what the lens sees. To get the equivalent focal length between the two multiply by 1.5.
I know it’s a lot to think about but really don’t try to over think it. Watch the DTownTV episode with the DX and FX format diagrams again… hopefully that will help.
AJ… you’ll have much fast AF performance with the 70-200 and the TC. That route will also double the price though but give you more versatility in the future…
When I travel with a D700 I personally like the 24-120VR and the 70-300VR. Great lenses that aren’t too much to carry.
Their doing shows about what the majority of people are asking for.
Thanks for that Scott as I was wondering the same thing.
So would you recommend the TC1.4 or TC1.7 – i’ve read that TC1.4 is optimal as the TC1.7 gets a little bit more reach but loses too much light – the TC1.4 is ultimate compromise – is that true?
Thanks, Jase
Why is a professional photographer, (30 years) watching a show like this. Go somewhere else.
Is this correct, that a 200 mm DX lens on a DX body is effectively 200? I thought 300! The 1.5 crop factor still applies with DX lenses on DX bodies.
If I put my 18 – 200 DX on my D200 (DX), at 200 mm, and my 80 – 200 2.8 on my D3, also set to 200 mm, there is more telephoto with the former combination. The width of view I would estimate to be 20% less with the DX lens and body. I’d guess that to about 300 mm.
Similarly, the field of view I get with the 18 – 200 at 18 on the D200 is the same field of view I get with my 17 – 35 at about 27 on the D3.
Perhaps it’s because Nikon’s brand colors are black and yellow (and white). If you’ve ever seen Nikon employees at a photo expo, the shirts are usually black with a small NIKON logo in yellow & white. But they usually wear the “company/team” colors. Just a guess.
Nope. Its just because we like black.
Thanks for pointing this out. I was about to.
I use my old 18-55mm kit lens on my D700 all the time. I get some fall-off at the corners (that everyone else seems to add in Camera Raw or Lightroom or whatever) but I can zoom out to around 24mm just fine. Wider than 24mm and it goes beyond fall-off and is unpleasant. But I shoot this way frequently, and I like it!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jlharris/3604846920/in/set-72157619312792617/
Thanks for letting us know my definition and your definition differ Tom
Yeah, Scott calling the 70-300VR as light is also quite amusing. It’s much heavier than the next step lower of consumer lens, the 55-200VR. Maybe he was comparing it to the 70-200VR?
I’d like to know about that as well as I just got a 70-200 and can’t decide on getting a 1.4 or a 1.7 tc, I can’t afford the 200-400 so this will be my longest lens, still leaning towards the 1.4 but would love to hear what you have to say Scott.
They only trade off is the amount of light loss with each… 1.4 is about a stop, the 1.7 is around a stop and a half and the 2.0 is two stops. So, with a 70-200 2.8 and a TC-20EII it would be a 400mm 5.6 at it’s longest focal length. I say you need all three… just to cover all bases!
AF performance and VR function (and image quality to me…) is the same for each…
Name this movie… “They’re filled with helium… so they’re very light.”
This is wrong, a DX lens that is 18-200 is really a 24-300 on A DX body. Watch episode 16.
No, this is incorrect. 18-200 is 18-200 no matter where you put it, on DX or FX. On DX, it’s 18-200, however, the picture taken look exactly like the pictures taken using 27-300 lens from a film camera (or full frame). If you put 18-200 on a full frame camera, you will still get the 18-200 performance, however, you are going to get a dark corners around your picture because the image circle on 18-200 DX lens is smaller. But 18 is 18 no matter where you put it. It is the distance between the front element and the focal plane (sensor). In that sens, 18 is exactly the same on both DX and FX.
You are correct bigmouth, this is what i meant,if you read Warrens answer, he believes a DX lens on a DX body eg 35mm f1.8 DX is the same angle of view as a full frame 35mm f2 lens on full frame body, it is not, i did not suggest the 18-200 grow to 27-300 on a DX body, but it has the same angle of view as 27-300mm on a 35mm film or FX Digital body if there was such a lens.
Talking in 35mm equivalent helps i believe take the focal lenght of the lens to something to compare against, take an extreme eg i have a Lumix FZ-30 bridge camera,its lens focal length is 7mm to 89mm printed on the front of lens and because of the 5X crop factor they have to write on the side of the lens that 35mm Equiv 35-420, to try to avoid confusion.
I’m not dead
OK, angel of view is probably going to make more people’s eye rolling when you want to start looking into the mathematical formula that determines the horizontal AofV. That’s why people tend to just rely on the established 35mm chart to think about things.
But really, since majority of us are using DX cameras, all they need to understand is this example:
If you put a 14-24 (full frame lens) on a D300, take a shot at 14mm. Then you put a 12-24 (DX lens) to the D300, set focal lens to 12 again, with the same aperture, and shoot the same thing again. Both photos will end up looking pretty identical (except minor details like clarity and distortion).
Then, if you put the same test to a D700, a 14-24mm at 14mm will look exactly the same as 12-24 DX at 14mm (except it will probably have a lot of light fall offs).
Now if you compare the 4 photos together, you will notice that the 14mm shots on the D700 (full frame), no matter its from DX lens or not, looks much wider than the ones on the D300 DX body.
Scott, I have all three TC’s and the combination of the 70-200 VR and the 2.0 TC is not the greatest thing since sliced bread. The images are very soft. I will use that combo only as a last resort.
On the other hand, the 1.4 and 1.7 TC’s are stellar in performance!
Jay… some of my favorite images were taken with a 70-200mmVR and a TC-20E teleconverter.
Seen rumours of the 135 being discontinued.
I too would like to hear about the 105 DC. I would also like to see samples still shots to see the differences.
It’s a great lens for any camera… DX or FX.
agreed. tell us about them primes. please
I agree, that would be nice
I shoot with a D300. I’ve actually only shot with a D700 once and never with a D3. We don’t really talk about the exact camera we’re shooting with a lot but all of the lenses we mentioned over the last shows work just fine with the D300.
Those tiny point-n-shoot cameras don’t matter. Not only their focal lengths mean nothing, their aperture values mean nothing as well. Take a look all the PoS you have,almost of all of them start with F2.8 or less.
Hey Matt,
Great job by you and Scott. I love your presentations/shows. It seems many viewers don’t know which cameras by model number are the DX bodies or the FX full frame bodies. Could you occasionally let viewers know that the FX full frame bodies are the D700 D3 and D3X. It may be confusing to some, especially now with the D5000 which is still a DX frame camera. Again thanks for all the good info, I have learned a lot and have a long way to go. (in the blogs it seems there is a lot of uncertainity about which cameras are DX or full frame cameras)
Thanks again
Walt
Only if you give it a 35mm equivalent,does it become something to relate too.
I’m in a similar situation like you and I just bought the f1.8 D a week ago. I love the combination of the 12 – 24, my 80 – 400 and now the 50 in between. The f1.8 is roughly half the price of the f1.4 and its working perfect. I used it for a shoot in my company with very changing light conditions and I got excellent results. I would recommend you to get a 50 mm, the f1.4 or the f1.8 is basically a question of budget.
If you are looking for a Tele – Consider the Tamron 70-200 F2.8.
Not as good as the Nikon but still a pretty sharp lens.
It’s around 450-600 Bucks.
Don;
Since this is a Nikon sponsered gig, I don’t think there will be any real discussion of other brands of glass.
Scott, now I’m more confused than ever about the DX vs FX format. I thought that DX lenses could not cover the sensor of a FF camera. Why would you use the 70-300 on a D700? Wouldn’t it fail to cover the sensor??
I’m struggling with the same problems from time to time. Additionally, I have a question on how a polarizer and a flash work together. Will the polarizer also filter out some of the light generated by the flash?
10-24 is so new that I’m not even sure Scott and Matt are even aware of its existence yet. The difference between 10mm and 12mm is not that much (maybe about 10 degree of additional angel of view). I think the optical performance between 10mm and 12mm is very similar. Price wise, I think 12-24mm are sold on used market for something like $600 while 10-24 can only be gotten for brand new $900.
They do know of the 10-24 because it’s been mentioned on Scott Kelby’s blog. I think they recommend the 12-24 for two reasons: gold ring professional lens and constant aperture. The 10-24 needs to be out a little longer before it enjoys a reputation.
The 70-300VR is not a DX lens. It will cover both an FX sensor and a DX sensor.
Thanks Scott. I had assumed that it was………and we know what assuming does :0)
If I had looked at mine instead of assuming, I would have seen at a glance that it is not a DX lens because it doesn’t have the big black on yellow DX moniker on it. It’s the only non-DX lens I have.
Thanks again for your response.
I second this!!
Southswede also asked about this, so, now I know I didn’t just miss something.
I have a D90, can I do it?
Joe and Blue, I’m with you on that question. Moose must have been in a big hurry that day! Last week I sent an “Ask Brad” on that topic but haven’t heard anything yet.
Philip… For concerts I personally like “fast” lenses such as the 24-70mm 2.8 and the 70-200mm 2.8 as well as the 50mm 1.8 and 1.4 lenses. You just need the extra light gathering ability for a concert. Now, it depends on if you are doing a club concert or a full arena type of show. The full arena shows will get you an exposure usually around ISO 1600 at 1/500 at 2.8. So, you can do the math from there for a different lens. If it’s a club show to get that sort of exposure you may need a couple of extra stop of ISO such as 3200 to 6400. It’s tough stuff…
I posted a “Concert Photography – How to…” awhile back that Scott mentioned… here’s the link. Maybe it will help. http://www.scottdiussa.com/Scott_Diussa/Scott_Diussas_Blog/Entries/2009/2/23_“How_to…”_Concert_Photography.html
Good luck…
Much thanks Scott!
You are technically correct, but I DO think it helps people understand the “practical” ramifications of shooting with a 300mm on a crop camera to say you effectively get 450mm.
Your statement about the 300 still having 300mm “perspective” is why I LOVE shooting with my 60mm Micro on my d90. I get the effective field of view of a 90mm lens but without so much telephoto compression. The macro images have a very nice 3D feel to them that would be flattened somewhat if I were actually shooting with a 90mm.