What do you think about this photo?Do you have questions or curiosities about this image? Do you want to ask something to the author, give him suggestions for improvement, or congratulate for a photo that you really like?
You can do it by joining JuzaPhoto, it is easy and free!
There is more: by registering you can create your personal page, publish photos, receive comments and you can use all the features of JuzaPhoto. With more than 252000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.
| sent on November 08, 2015 (1:07)
You saw sunshine!! I didn't. And this baa-lmy weather too, these sheep won't need all that wool. Nice image, Ann |
| sent on November 08, 2015 (1:33)
Thanks, Tim! The sun put in a surprise appearance right at the end of the day! Good job I had my camera with me. Although it has to be admitted that it is a very rare thing for me not to have my camera with me..... |
| sent on November 08, 2015 (1:50)
You not having a camera with you - UNTHINKABLE (shudders....) |
| sent on November 08, 2015 (4:55)
Done some probing, from detailed lens tests between Nikon VR and Sigma OS 105mm f2.8's. The Nikon is 25g heavier, both are heavy, you'll notice it as much carrying it around with you as when using it. The VR/OS adds a lot of extra weight, between 1/3 rd -1/4 of the lens' weight is just this feature. The Sigma has a slightly more advanced lens design (2LD elements vs 1 ED in Nikon - the two, "LD/ED" are much the same in what they do).
Sharpness, both beat the renowned Canon "L" 100mm IS version, the Sigma has the sharpest centre of all, but the Nikon has the best combination of centre and edge. This is actually a characteristic of most of the new 'G' fixed focal Nikons - purists like this and if you are professional archivist copying something like a historical document that is totally flat, then the Nikon 'might' be better. But the Sigma edges are still very good, on a par with the Canon L - and you never hear a Canon user ever criticise the performance of their Canon's L's, do you? I doubt if you and I would notice the difference anyway, the limits of our sensors would probably kick in before then. Both use silent wave technology and so focus is silent and fast. The VR/OS should be of similar performances as each other. The Sigma is in their EX (Excellence) range and is built and handles beautifully. You say that you tried out 'one very similar' - that is no good, you have to do a direct comparison! The camera shop might have been biased into to getting you to choose the more expensive Nikon (bigger price, % bigger profit)
On Amazon, you'll find 82 customer reviews for the Sigma - 72 were 5*s and the rest were 4*s. No 1, 2 or 3 stars and that is quite something. Yes - if I had the money I'd still get the Nikon, but I don't and didn't have and obviously, as you can tell, am perfectly happy with my Sig. The Sigma actually used to be a lot of serious dosh, it has come down in price, it used to be up near the Nikon mark when launched. You could do/buy quite a lot of extra kit with the change between them now though. |
| sent on November 08, 2015 (5:35)
Nikon also produce an 85mm f3.5 VR macro for DX cameras. Most, including the two 105's above are full frame lenses that can also be used on DX's. FX lenses have to be bigger and heavier, simply to cover the larger area that the FX sensor is (36x24mm), whereas the DX is 1/3rd smaller. Both your 18-300mm and 35mm f1.8 are DX lenses and unless you one day have your heart set upon the big bad (and expensive) days of full frame in the future, in some ways you are wasting the full potential. OK, the 85mm is a little slower (1/2 a stop) and a little shorter, but it will still give your the equivalent of 127mm on DX. It is also half the weight of the Nikkor 105mm f2.8 VR, but is built for the enthusiast in mind, not the professional but would be on a par with the 35mm f1.8 in terms of build - i.e. perfectly satisfactory, as is the sharpness. The new price of this Nikon is a little less than the Sigma 105mm f2.8 OS, above at 350. I would say that this might suit you much better than either of the 105mm's, so bear it in mind!
Even cheaper is the Nikon 40mm f2.8 DX but 40mm is far too short a focal length for most macro work, the lens would be within a few inches of the subject at life size ratio, your shadow, the lens' shadow as well as frightening off anything that was alive and had wings or legs! I wouldn't recommend this one, but it is very cheap at 185 - and (not surprisingly) no VR (with price in mind). Don't forget there are also user reviews and ratings on most lenses here on Juza (Reviews - Lenses, at top of page) |
| sent on November 08, 2015 (10:42) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Very nice! Congratulations Ann!
Hello! Sergio ;-) :-P Molto bella! Complimenti Ann!
Ciao! Sergio  |
| sent on November 08, 2015 (11:43) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Excellent image Ann!
Compliments
Hello, sonia Ottima immagine Ann!
Complimenti
Ciao, sonia |
| sent on November 08, 2015 (21:06)
Thank you very much, Sergio! :) |
| sent on November 08, 2015 (21:07)
Many thanks for that lovely comment, Sonia! |
| sent on November 08, 2015 (21:30)
Thank you, Tim! That is so good of you to go to so much trouble! You have certainly given me plenty of food for thought! I don't spend money lightly but could buy the Nikkor 105 mm, if I really thought it was the best buy for me. Weight is is something I do try to keep down, although I wouldn't expect to carry all lenses at all times. I don't (yet) have any dreams of a full frame so the 85 mm also sounds interesting - it would be worth taking a closer look at that one, if at all possible.
Whilst in CC, it was I who brought up the subject of the expensive Nikon macro lens and they who suggested the less expensive Sigma equivalent! This is why I am assuming it is the same as the one you have - I can't imagine why I didn't take special note! I suppose it was because my head was already filled with bags, tripods, etc.......
|
| sent on November 09, 2015 (9:49)
Very nice shot:) |
| sent on November 09, 2015 (9:54)
I'm pleased you like it, Bormi - thank you for your comment! |
| sent on November 11, 2015 (1:38) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Light may be too rough, but that gently caresses the landscape and the sheep :-) ;-)
Compliments
A greeting Luce forse troppo dura, ma che accarezza dolcemente il paesaggio e le pecore
Complimenti
Un saluto |
| sent on November 11, 2015 (10:25)
Thank you very much for your comment, Francesco - very much appreciated!
Greetings
Ann |
user62557 | sent on December 12, 2015 (17:13) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Beautiful image. warm atmosphere ..
Hello Mau ... Bella immagine. calda atmosfera..
Ciao Mau... |
| sent on December 12, 2015 (18:38)
Thank you very much, Mau - glad you like it!
Ann :) |
| sent on February 21, 2016 (3:47) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Beautiful photos! Talented Ann! I love how you are able to still see the colors of the sheep in the shadows!
Great shot, congratulations .. a greeting. :-P :-P Foto stupenda! Bravissima Ann! Mi piace come si riescano ancora a vedere i colori delle pecore nell'ombra!
Gran colpo, complimenti.. un saluto. |
| sent on February 21, 2016 (9:50)
Thank you so much, Micio, for your very lovely comment!
Ann :)) |
|
Publish your advertisement on JuzaPhoto (info) |
![[retina]](shared_files/layout/retina_badge.jpg){kind=icon}
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.
14.2 MEGAPIXEL
Resize to fit window
