Buzz Bryson
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Travis,
One site you might want to refer to when considering lens’ choices is Bjorn Rorslett’s (http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2_PC.html).
He’s a Nikon guy, and does a pretty good job of thrashing out most of the Nikon lenses.
Buzz
Joel, Joel, Joel,
Why on earth would Lauren want to “learn” to row, when the only other option is to stay in the front of the boat and fish????
She uses all those brains for a lot more than analyzing moldy English literature!
Buzz
To David’s point, if the only variable in a studio set-up is the lens (same lights, camera on manual or at least the settings not changing when changing lens), and the exposure is differeing, what I’ll bet you’re seeing is the, uh, enthusiasm, of some manufacturers in their product labeling.
Just because a lens says it’s f/something-or-other, it might not be.
Fundamentally, let’s say that if the light falling on a subject is fixed and the ISO is fixed, then the only variables for exposure are the shutter speed and f/stop. Cut the shutter speed in half, say from 1/60 sec to 1/125 sec, we have to double the amount of light reaching the film if we get the same exposure. Say from f/11 to f/8. Doesn’t matter whether the lens has a focal length of 50mm or 500mm, or a maximum aperture of f/2 or f/8. For that scene, the correct exposure is 1/125 at f/8 (or 1/60 at f/11, etc).
That’s how the aperture/shutter speed system is designed. Right?
Better lenses actually gather more light for a given aperture setting by virtue of having larger front elements and less glass in between the film/chip and the subject.
Zach,
Are you saying that a better lens (say one with a max aperture of f/2.8) set at f/8 will give a “brighter” image than a less expensive lens of the same focal length (but with a max aperture of say f/5.6) when that lens is also set at f/8? That you can either use a faster shutter or get more light on the film/sensor at the same shutter?
And that better lenses have less glass (fewer elements) in them?
I compared this lens when it came out, because the focal length was a bit better for my uses than the tried-and-true 17-35.
Agree with Zach on idea that it’s hard to see how a (very soft) PVC line could cause wear to (very hard) guides.
You basically get what you pay for. While the optical quality of the glass might be close, or even equal, often the mount isn’t. So go with quality, typically the mfgr, Hoya, B&W, etc. And do get the slim mount.
Well, check the Tokina lens hood. If, like on the Nikon 12-24, the hood mounts on the lens body and not on the front lens/filter threads, you’re good to go. If hood mounts on threads, well, typically there are none on the slim mounts.
Same on UV filters, particularly if you intend to mount one more/less permanently for protection. You want the best, since every layer of glass potentially degrades the image. But then, so does a big scratch on the front element. I generally use a protective filter (and saved a lens that way once!).
Buzz
I carry on camera and computer stuff, maybe a clean shirt and extra glasses, but . . .
I check pretty much everything else.
I think there’s a tendency among many anglers, and probably landowners and resource agencies, to lump various laws.
