What would be your dream lens

[spree86]

Hmm..... you brought some interesting points here:

I have no experience with videography so what I pen it here may not make sense. Just thinking out loud - would VR help in videography as it is a different animal all together. And I have one friend who does that alot and seems like he is always using tripod with joystick kind of head to control his shots. But again, I have no experience in this so would assume, if Nikon, Canon or any lens Co. wants to go into the field of serious videography, perhaps a study group with some experts would be necessary.

For Macro/Micro, I am sharing strictly from personal experience only. With 105mm VR, it works great on still subjects and most of the time, if DOF is not key, F/4 does the trick. But F2.8 comes in handy when shooting fast flying insects like bees and houseflies. Bees not so bad cos they are in bright day light. Insects that works in the dark, the subject are unforgiving. I usually lower the resolution, set to 2.8 and use continuous shuttle. VR is off too. Make sense. Share with me your experience. I can use some tips too.

Hey I didnt realize Canon has a 70-200 F/4!!! but we have 24-230 f/4 and they don't!!!

You shoot macro at f2.8? Wow, no one I know shoots insects at f2.8 and flying ones some more, can show a pic?

 

[shutter-matrix]

Your dream may come true. Rumor has it that 50mm f/1.2G and 105mm f/2G are both in the "not so far away" future. The no fungus for life might be a manual effort though. Unless of course you migrate to cold cold dry dry country like Alaska.

hahaha, ill just put it inside my drybox no need to migrate to Alaska. How bout the "cheap" thingy? I think a new lens with this specs should cost $1.5k above. OMG!

 

[Nostalgraphy]

You shoot macro at f2.8? Wow, no one I know shoots insects at f2.8 and flying ones some more, can show a pic?

Yes I did ;p and none is decent enuf to show here.
The reason why I did this is because I had problem getting sharp images earlier at f5.6 and so, I tried to increase my aperture hoping to snap the shots as fast as possible - which is why I have also decided to use continuous shuttle.
A lot turn out "no head no tail" and sharpness still an issue. Anyway, I will be going oversea this Aug. Will try at the recommended F4, do a bit more research how to manage Macro and then will show the "indecent" versus the recommended ones. Anything esle I should take note and try, please feel free to comment. Also if you have any recommended reading, pls share with me cos I am really keen in Macro.

 

[Nostalgraphy]

hahaha, ill just put it inside my drybox no need to migrate to Alaska. How bout the "cheap" thingy? I think a new lens with this specs should cost $1.5k above. OMG!

Canon has a 50mm f/1.2 that cost app 2+K I think. budget at 2.5K I suspect.

 

[spree86]

Yes I did ;p and none is decent enuf to show here.
The reason why I did this is because I had problem getting sharp images earlier at f5.6 and so, I tried to increase my aperture hoping to snap the shots as fast as possible - which is why I have also decided to use continuous shuttle.
A lot turn out "no head no tail" and sharpness still an issue. Anyway, I will be going oversea this Aug. Will try at the recommended F4, do a bit more research how to manage Macro and then will show the "indecent" versus the recommended ones. Anything esle I should take note and try, please feel free to comment. Also if you have any recommended reading, pls share with me cos I am really keen in Macro.

Are you using a flash? Sharpness shouldn't be a problem if you use f5.6 and above. I would suggest you go to an outing and learn from the more experienced shooters. Flying subjects need not be shot at f2.8, that would just cause you to miss more shots.

I shot this at f16

 

[Nostalgraphy]

Are you using a flash? Sharpness shouldn't be a problem if you use f5.6 and above. I would suggest you go to an outing and learn from the more experienced shooters. Flying subjects need not be shot at f2.8, that would just cause you to miss more shots.

I shot this at f16

WOW!!! THANKS BRO!!! and no I dun use flash..... When I was at the flora exhibition in Taiwan.... this is the kind of shots I SOOOOO want to do it and zero made it though I toyed with Shuttle and Aperture priority.
So if you don't mind me asking, flash even during the day correct? I am assuming this because your background seems to be taken in bright daylight. I will give it a shot anyway. Again, thanks for the tips.

 

[spree86]

WOW!!! THANKS BRO!!! and no I dun use flash..... When I was at the flora exhibition in Taiwan.... this is the kind of shots I SOOOOO want to do it and zero made it though I toyed with Shuttle and Aperture priority.
So if you don't mind me asking, flash even during the day correct? I am assuming this because your background seems to be taken in bright daylight. I will give it a shot anyway. Again, thanks for the tips.

At high f-number you have to light up your subject using flash even during the day. Yup I shot this during the day in bright light, generally flash is necessary for shooting macro at high shutter speeds. Use natural light only if you have your camera tripod mounted.

 

[SnagIt]

Nice shot Spree

 

[spree86]

Nice shot Spree

Thanks

 

[shutter-matrix]

Canon has a 50mm f/1.2 that cost app 2+K I think. budget at 2.5K I suspect.

if its 2K+. then confirmed its already a dream for me.

 

[Jeff Heng]

if its 2K+. then confirmed its already a dream for me.

i hope nikon have primes 35/50/85/105 f1.2 AFS nano coat

 

[kimazuru]

I'm not greedy.
AFS 12-24 F2
AFS 24-70 F2 VR Macro 1:1
AFS 70-300 F2 VR Macro 1:1
The above lens are all built with carbon fiber material yet weather seal.
C=

 

[UncleFai]

Obviously u are not greedy enough, I would want a 14-300mm f1.4 lens lol...

Nah... Not enough, I say! Must be 14-500mm FX, f1.2, AF-S, VR II, 52mm filter, less than 500g in weight, and less than 15cm in total length, and priced less than S$1000. A challenge to the lens makers.

 

[lsisaxon]

My Canon friends will be happily pointing out "I TOLD YOU SO" if he hear this "we actually late" hahaha...... and thanks for sharing, I will try different setting based on what you have shared and see how it works differently. All my experience have been based on reading and trial and error anyways.

In fact before the days of VR and digital, Nikon had the 24-120 first. And no, Nikon doesn't need an L designation on the lenses to show that they are good. You will have the last laugh when they starts mounting Nikon lenses on their Canon bodies.

 

[kriegsketten]

Nah... Not enough, I say! Must be 14-500mm FX, f1.2, AF-S, VR II, 52mm filter, less than 500g in weight, and less than 15cm in total length, and priced less than S$1000. A challenge to the lens makers.

Not a challenge, just make everything in plastic without a hint of metal or glass, except for the motors and electronic boards... (Nobody says anything quality glass here, and I am ASSUMING you don't care just as long as the specs above is met :bsmilie

 

[UncleFai]

Not a challenge, just make everything in plastic without a hint of metal or glass, except for the motors and electronic boards... (Nobody says anything quality glass here, and I am ASSUMING you don't care just as long as the specs above is met :bsmilie

OK, OK... let's add good IQ, no vignetting, zero distortions, and all-weather and shock proof.

Plastic or not, don't really care.

 

[michi0301]

16-35mm f2.8 is nice, so are 35mm f1.2 and 85mm f1.2 or maybe a 135mm f2 macro ??? lol

 

[nikonriana]

An AF-S 12-300mm F2G FX VR II built with carbon fiber and weather sealing... Price.. well.. i guess most prolly around 10k or something.. hahaha

 

[Jeremy1]

I hope Nikon will come out a cheaper Telezoom lens ( 150-500mm ) for hobby photographer to shoot bird...

 

[Sgdevilzz]

An AF-S 12-300mm F2G FX VR II built with carbon fiber and weather sealing... Price.. well.. i guess most prolly around 10k or something.. hahaha

Price no problem, weight is the problem :bsmilie: