Time for a new lens

keaja · Sep 17, 2003

Hey everyone!
Well, I get my paycheck Friday and am tempted to get a new lens. I have a 28-90mm lense that came with my Nikon 65, Which I bought in july.
I talked to the lady at my local Ritz Camera, and she recommended I go for a 70-300 MM Lens, as I wont lose speed, and I will gain zoom.

To me, speed is one of the most important things. Almost all of my pictures are of planes, or from a plane. I took alot of pictures in San diego if airliners landing, but alot of them came out blurry, I don't know whether it was my lens, or whether the fact that I was only using 400 Speed Film.
I know if I get too much zoom, I will probably need a tripod. Pretty hard to fit a tripod into the cockpit of the plane types I fly lol.

I was wondering what you guys would recommend for a good combination of speed, and zoom.

I saw this, http://www.ritzcamera.com/webapp/wc...0001&langId=-1&productId=7398976&cmCat=SEARCH But I might break the bank

Any suggestions on good amount of zoom, and speed? So far it seems like that lense might be the best choice for me.

Another idea I had, was to have different lens for different applications. Like a 70-300MM for in the air and moving targets, and a bigger lens for on the ground. The problem I encountered with a lense for the ground, is I need a fast lens, but good zoom. I checked out the Sigma 600mm-1000mm but it seems like it would be too slow.

Today, I was flying out of Sacramento with my instructor, and we kept going on a course of west. 40 minutes later, we leave the valley, and I see the San Francisco Bay. It was a simply breahtaking view, saw the golden gate and everything. Unfortunetly I didn't have my camera. I wanna bring it tomorrow though

On our way back, we flew by Travis Air Force Base, and I saw a C-5 Galaxy takeoff. It was amazing, it looked like it was just hovering in mid air.

Thanks guys!

voodoocat · Sep 17, 2003

Well you're not going to get a fast lens if you buy a zoom lens. At the longest focal length you're going to get f5.6 or higher. Unless you spending mucho $$$

Oh, that lens you posted is F6.3 at 500mm. Also that is a HUGE amount of zoom. It may not be as sharp as you would like.

keaja · Sep 17, 2003

So that 500MM would offer to slow a speed correct?

What about this one:
http://www.ritzcamera.com/webapp/wc...=29922&topCategory=1004&cat1=1022&cat2=915144

voodoocat · Sep 17, 2003

If you look at the f # listed on the lens you can see what the f-stop range is. This lens is 135-400MM F4.5-5.6 which means at 135mm your lowest aperature is 4.5 at 400mm it is 5.6.

keaja · Sep 17, 2003

So the lower the F# the faster it is correct? Sorry im a newb

voodoocat · Sep 17, 2003

You got it!

Speaking in terms of fast....

I don't think anything slower than 3.5 could be considered fast. I don't think you're going to find a long focal length lens that will be that fast, unless you spent some major money. Just looking at keh.com's used selection.

Longest zoom from nikkor appears to be an 80-400 F4.5-5.6 for about $1500

500mm F4 lens ~$6,000

400mm F2.8 lens ~$5,000

300mm F4 lens ~$400

As far as non-nikkor lenses go, the longer focal length lenses seem to be fairly slow

keaja · Sep 17, 2003

Sweet thanks alot. I am going to take my camera with me tomorrow, and pick up some 800 film to see how the pictures come out.
If they come out clear and clean, then I will probably pick up that 70-300mm lense, I think its only like $170.

Thanks alot!

ksmattfish · Sep 17, 2003

I think the most important second lens a 35mm photographer can have is a fast 50mm lens. A 50mm f/2 will be dirt cheap, and faster won't be much more. It's small so it takes up very little room in your bag, and it's very versatile.

I won't leave home without mine.

voodoocat · Sep 17, 2003

ksmattfish said:
I think the most important second lens a 35mm photographer can have is a fast 50mm lens. A 50mm f/2 will be dirt cheap, and faster won't be much more. It's small so it takes up very little room in your bag, and it's very versatile.

I won't leave home without mine.

I totally agree. I have a 1.7 50mm lens and 90% of my photos are taken with it. It's so damn sharp.

ksmattfish · Sep 17, 2003

I use my Pentax(K mount) 50mm f/1.7 all the time. I mean, I love my zoom lens during the day, but f/5.6 just doesn't cut it at night. It cost me $25.

I have an adapter that lets me use Pentax screwmount lenses on my K mount cameras. I picked up a screwmount 50mm f/1.4 for $18. It has a radioactive inner element that has turned yellow. But it's okay by me because I just shoot BW with it. Besides, the bands I shoot dig it when I'm screwing this ancient hunk of glass and metal onto a modern camera body, and I'm telling them how I'm breaking out the special radioactive lens just for them.

keaja · Sep 17, 2003

Hey guys,
This 50MM seems very cool. I looked in Ritzcamera.com and they want $200 for this piece :shock: Does anyone know of a reputable dealer online I can order a 50MM 1.7F, for a Nikon 65?
Thanks!

voodoocat · Sep 18, 2003

Since Ritz took 10 days to get me my slides, I decided to forget them. They are high priced.

keh.com has quite a few Ex+ for less than $100. and a new one for $110.

keaja · Sep 18, 2003

I still havent made a deciscion on a zoom lens

I saw some pictures on airliners.net, and I found out they were from 100mm-400mm lens, the author hasnt gotten back to me on the F stop on it. The other thing, the images were huge, extremley clear.
I seriously doubt that he has one of those 7,000 dollar lens, so that leads me to believe that he has a normal F stop on his camera. I am looking forward to his reply to see what the F stop on it is.

Anyways, I was thinking, Would a zoom lens, with a F4.6-5.6, achieve the speed I am looking for with high speed film, like 800? But the dilema is, I still need quality.
I know, I know, I am asking for everything for a decent price lol, aren't we all?

So do you guys think I could achieve success with this:

Nikon 65 Camera
With NIKON LENS 70-300 F4-5.6 D ED (62)
Using 800 or 1600 Speed Film
Through a dedicated negative scanner.

BTW, here are his pics:

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/423364/L/

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/423365/L/

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/423366/L/

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/423368/L/

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/423367/L/

Oh, I forgot to mention, In San Diego, all most every single picture I was taking, was on manual. Because it would try and auto-focus while the plane was moving, which meant it never focused.
So, if I got a manual only lens, can you get a lower F stop?

keaja · Sep 19, 2003

After a cool talk with voodoo, looks like I am going to be getting everything I want. We didnt talk about the tripod, but this one seems very cool.

I wont be ordering it from ritz, as they are very expensive. I am gonna see what we have at work (Best buy) and use my discount on the stuff we have. I saw the lens on yahoo for $130!

Quantaray- tech-10 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6 High Speed Auto Focus Zoom for Nikon

Sunpak-9001UT Tripod

Minolta - Dimage Scan Dual III Film Scanner

Could someone tell me the difference between that lens and This one and if its worth the extra $160+

Thanks!! Jason

ksmattfish · Sep 19, 2003

keaja said:
Oh, I forgot to mention, In San Diego, all most every single picture I was taking, was on manual. Because it would try and auto-focus while the plane was moving, which meant it never focused.
So, if I got a manual only lens, can you get a lower F stop?

An "older" manual focus lens would probably be cheaper. I know that many older Nikon MF lenses will fit onto their new AF bodies, but there are probably some compatability issues you should research.

The faster your lens the faster your AF. Most AF systems that I am aware of don't work very well (or at all) at f/8+. It's pretty rare to find an f/8 lens, but for instance, an f/4 or f/5.6 lens with a teleconverter.