DX trinity...

[sleist]

for the price the 70-300 is great, and on a dx body that is 450mm.

No its not.

Ya, it's pretty soft beyond 250mm.
Also 300mm is 300mm.

I'd have to pick the 10-24mm, 17-55mm 2.8 [snip]

Seems like a lot of money to spend for so much overlap of coverage, but it's your wallet ...

 

[RobertDarasz]

for the price the 70-300 is great, and on a dx body that is 450mm.

No its not.

Not great cheap deal or 450mm on DX?

From what I know producers ALWAYS give us the equivalent in 35mm.

Ya, it's pretty soft beyond 250mm.
Also 300mm is 300mm.

Do you plan to use it for LARGE 300dpi prints? No? Then it doesn't matter if it's a little bit blurry at the far end, you won't see the difference. It's a cheap, compact, comfortable, daily use lens which serves it's purpose for **** sake, what are you expecting from it?

 

[matthewo]

what part of that the being great or the 450mm?

well i think the 70-300 is great, but it is fact that 300mm x 1.5 = 450mm...

yeah im not really sure what you want then 70-200 2.8 is 5x the price. and is 3.5 lbs and twice as big. drop it down to 250mm and get sharper images if its that bad, but what else in the price range can beat it. maybe a sigma, but still its a very good lens.

and i got the 24-70mm and my 70-300 is sticking with me. cause the difference in sharpness isnt much at all in good lighting conditions. now the big kicker is the 2.8 vs the 4.5-5.6. but thats why you pay big money for 2.8

and i paid $325 for my 70-300, so there is no way thats not a good deal for what you get.... and the guy is asking for the DX trinity so he probably is trying to get an idea of a 3 way setup that isnt PRO grade, thus not needing to spend $5000+

 

[mjhoward]

for the price the 70-300 is great, and on a dx body that is 450mm.

No its not.

Not great cheap deal or 450mm on DX?

what part of that the being great or the 450mm?

well i think the 70-300 is great, but it is fact that 300mm x 1.5 = 450mm...

A 300mm lens is not 450mm on a crop body or any other body for that matter. The lens is still 300mm. It provides a similar FIELD OF VIEW to that of a 450mm lens on a full frame body, but the focal length remains the SAME.

 

[RobertDarasz]

No its not.

Not great cheap deal or 450mm on DX?

what part of that the being great or the 450mm?

well i think the 70-300 is great, but it is fact that 300mm x 1.5 = 450mm...

A 300mm lens is not 450mm on a crop body or any other body for th
at matter. The lens is still 300mm. It provides a similar FIELD OF VIEW to that of a 450mm lens on a full frame body, but the focal length remains the SAME.

That's why I wrote 450mm *caution*on DX*caution*. Physically the focal length doesn't change but virtually yes, that's why we use the term "equivalent for 35mm film".

 

[mjhoward]

The term is actually 'crop factor' and refers to Field of View... not focal length.

 

[RobertDarasz]

That's why I said that the lens doesn't change the focal length physically.

Oh, you've got me for using a mental shortcut.
By virtually I meant to say that using a 300 mm lens will have the same effect when using a 450 mm on a 35mm/FX camera. I know that the focal length stays the same but the FOV changes because the sensor is smaller thus the angles are different, giving the joy of virtually having a longer focal length lens.

Eh, I'm tired. We both know what we are talking about, let's leave it that way.

 

[jake337]

That's why I said that the lens doesn't change the focal length physically.

Oh, you've got me for using a mental shortcut.
By virtually I meant to say that using a 300 mm lens will have the same effect when using a 450 mm on a 35mm/FX camera. I know that the focal length stays the same but the FOV changes because the sensor is smaller thus the angles are different, giving the joy of virtually having a longer focal length lens.

Eh, I'm tired. We both know what we are talking about, let's leave it that way.

It may have a similar FOV as a 450mm lens but not the same pespective. The perspective will remain that of a 300mm lens.

 

[RobertDarasz]

Did I ever mention perspective?

There's no such thing as 300 mm or 450 mm perspective, just as there's no such thing as 14 mm perspective. Change of perspective is caused by movement. If you won't change your position to re-compensate the smaller/bigger FOV (yay! Oh, I meant to say zoom. :trollface: ) the perspective would stay the same, yes. But I guess you too are using a mental shortcut, I know what you mean.

Now, I'll go to bed and finally get some sleep. Goodnight

 

[9ballprodigy]

you know, looking at the tokina line up, their 11-16mm 2.8 and 16-50mm 2.8 look real good despite it not being nikon glass. all is needed is a 50-135mm 2.8 and we're all set.

 

[mjhoward]

you know, looking at the tokina line up, their 11-16mm 2.8 and 16-50mm 2.8 look real good despite it not being nikon glass. all is needed is a 50-135mm 2.8 and we're all set.

They have one, check my sig....

 

[9ballprodigy]

Well. There you go... Now if I can only find it on amazon...

 

[mjhoward]

Well. There you go... Now if I can only find it on amazon...

That lens, along with the Tokina 16-50 have recently been discontinued in the US.

This is probably the cheapest you'll find it: TOKIN 50-135mm f2.8 AT-X PRO DX for NIKON, MOST COVETED LENS,SUPER SHARP IQ! | eBay

Otherwise you can buy new out of Taiwan for just over $900 shipped: New Tokina AT-X 535 50-135mm F2.8 4 Nikon D7000 D300s | eBay

 

[KmH]

The Dx trinity...

1) 70-200 2.8
2) 24-70 2.8
3) 14-24 2.8

Those are all professional grade FX lenses, not DX lenses. But, FX lenses can be used on DX bodies.

 

[djacobox372]

The tamron 17-50mm woud be my chice for the best mid zoom on dx.