colinjames's reviews
-
Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical IF SP AF
9 out of 10 points and recommendedvery sharp in center at all apertures, great close focus, pricevignetting @ 17mm, dust gets in (front element easy to remove though)An excellent choice for for an wide/normal 2.8 zoom at this price point. Forget the Nikkor equivalent (too pricey for DX imho). I've printed 16x20's from 100% crops taken with d300 and have been delighted. Great beginner lens - I probably used this 80% of the time my 1st two years shooting. Not great for IR. Looking at reviews on various sights I feel this outperforms the new stabilized version...
reviewed November 10th, 2010 (purchased for $400) -
Tokina 17mm f/3.5 AT-X 17 AF PRO Aspherical
8 out of 10 points and recommendedBuild, 77mm, close focus, ok distortion consideringuse correctly or images are FLAT on FF, goofy flare artifacts, SOFT until f5I purchased this lens after careful review to replace (yes replace) my Nikon 14-24mm on D700. It was nice seeing that many of the reviews online were published in the film era. It was my first Tokina - and build quality is superb. IQ is quite soft at 3.5 - I almost always stop to f5 or further. People gripe about the af/mf clutch mechanism on Tokinas - it is pretty lame. Leave it in AF - it's very fast and accurate - even in low light (on D700). This lens loses its appeal on aps-c cameras - but I believe it is the best bang for buck full format ultrawide. It's compact, accepts filters (no huge bulbous front element), and a rare blessing in the $100-$200 range. I recently replaced this with the Nikon 20-35mm 2.8 ($300) and am much happier...
reviewed November 10th, 2010 (purchased for $150) -
Nikon 50mm f/1.4G AF-S Nikkor
7 out of 10 points and not recommendedSharp from f2 & beyond across the frameContra lighting a huge obstacle, huntsThis was the 4th 50mm I've owned from Nikon - I'm giving up on this focal length unless a future 50mm 1.2 is done right or a Sigma 50mm 1.4 is given to me. The most annoying part about owning this lens is its propensity to hunt. It's af-s is a joke. Worse than a funky 3rd party macro. IQ is superb when it takes pictures. Shot on D700 - I had this lens since it came out and sold a couple months ago and I'll never miss it. I played with 3 samples at the camera store so I feel I got the best (minor variation on this particular lens I believe). This one showed apparent aperture blades in oof at 2.8 only - all other apertures were nice and round. C'mon! LOca's weren't too bad in its defense...
reviewed November 10th, 2010 (purchased for $400) -
Nikon 85mm f/1.8D AF Nikkor
8 out of 10 points and recommendedSharp, great focus ability, tinyLOCA, wish it focused closerGreat lens for the most part. Sharp. Annoying green and magenta aberrations until f5.6+
reviewed November 10th, 2010 (purchased for $350) -
Nikon 85mm f/1.4D AF Nikkor
8 out of 10 points and not recommendedTank Murdock, bokeh, Sharp from 2.8+too soft, blooming, loca'sWith all the excitement of new fast 85mm lenses coming out I decided to review some old shots I took with this lens on my D700 and D300. They make me glad I sold it. Looking forward to the Sigma or 85G when I get back in the country...
reviewed November 10th, 2010 (purchased for $900) -
Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8G IF-ED AF-S Nikkor
8 out of 10 points and recommendedIncredible on FF, sharpness across the framenot too practical (FF), babysitting gangster glass, pricey but worth it ?An amazing lens I don't regret selling - replaced with Tokina 17mm 3.5 lol - have since let that go and now have 20-35mm for practicality. My wide angle fixation has kinda worn out though. Many will adore this lens - there are no equals in terms of IQ. Watch the flare...
reviewed November 10th, 2010 (purchased for $1,400) -
Nikon 105mm f/2D AF DC Nikkor
10 out of 10 points and recommendedsharp, bokeh, price, hood, rear element, recessed front element, buildNONESuperb IQ - FAST, Nice size, contrasty, built in hood a huge plus. I have owned several of Nikon's fastest lenses (85 1.4, all the 50mm's, 80-200, etc) This lens is special. You could do a photoshoot in a landfill and not take a bad picture. 105mm on full frame gives you more freedom than 135mm by far, and has better repro ratio and sharper wide open than 85mm as well. 1.4 is a hot mess for headshots - you always have an eye out of focus - heaven forbid you get the tip of the nose in focus oh jebus. Blows away 105mm VR.
reviewed August 7th, 2011 (purchased for $775) -
Tokina 16-28mm f/2.8 AT-X PRO FX SD
10 out of 10 points and recommendedSharp, fast 2.8 , build, focus is fast and accurate2.8 at 28mm, flare with long exposuresTokina did a great job with this lens. Debated a long time over Nikon 17-35mm - but landed here. I previously owned the Nikkor 14-24mm, so carrying this around is no problem. save your money over Nikon. Newest version has nice cap and ass gasket. Wish 28mm @ 2.8 performed like 16mm - but prefer the wide end to be sharp. Really useful focal length for DX. Close focus is great, but of course be wary of bulbous McGee. Zoom is stiff - may ease up but remains to be seen.
reviewed October 21st, 2011 (purchased for $800)
What else for the same money? A used 16-35mm f4 or an old 200,xxx serial 17-35mm 2.8? Perhaps primes for half the price? I think this lens is money well spent.
Looking at samples from new full frame Tokina 17-35mm f4 indicates some intense CA - the 16-28mm handles it well happily and is easily corrected in LR. Will keep an eye on the newcomer from tokina. Build and size/weight resemble one of my previous favorites - the Nikkor 20-35mm - but let that go due to poor close focus distance...