12-15-2010, 10:57 AM
[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1292342943' post='4984']
"So... in advice threads, try not to let your personal bias or love or use weigh in so much, and try to analyze the needs of the person you want to advice... not yourself."
A theoretical analysis based general wisdom was not my intention, sorry for that <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />
My comment pointed mostly to my experiences with Nikon's N 24-70 (and 70-200 VR mk II by chance).. which I use quite often.. I stated clearly I had no direct contact with Sigma's 24-70 .. I believe I also suggested borrowing mentioned lenses to get a first hand experience - and an idea as to whether it makes sense to pay the premium for the Nikkor or not.. What's biased in that ?
The opinion that it's worth saving for the premium lenses (from any company) in order to get the best possible performance is still valid in the way that it saves both the trouble and money, when you end up wanting for more after a budget purchase; each of us has to consider the budget for a given lens and whether it's worth it .. a personal and not objective decision indeed <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' /> BTW I have not seen a single friend of mine going back to Sigma Tokina or Tamron after trying out pro glass from Canon or Nikon (I mean 2.8 zooms in the popular 24-70 / 70-200 categories).
About bias, have you actually used any of the Nikon glass you write about?
I do use the 70-200 mk II in landscape and portraiture (also at a relatively close range) and focus breathing is not a problem for me. I was aware of this when trying it out, but in practical shooting it wasn't a problem. Then, it's just me and my take on it.. subjective indeed <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />
"So... in advice threads, try not to let your personal bias or love or use weigh in so much, and try to analyze the needs of the person you want to advice... not yourself."
A theoretical analysis based general wisdom was not my intention, sorry for that <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' /> My comment pointed mostly to my experiences with Nikon's N 24-70 (and 70-200 VR mk II by chance).. which I use quite often.. I stated clearly I had no direct contact with Sigma's 24-70 .. I believe I also suggested borrowing mentioned lenses to get a first hand experience - and an idea as to whether it makes sense to pay the premium for the Nikkor or not.. What's biased in that ?
The opinion that it's worth saving for the premium lenses (from any company) in order to get the best possible performance is still valid in the way that it saves both the trouble and money, when you end up wanting for more after a budget purchase; each of us has to consider the budget for a given lens and whether it's worth it .. a personal and not objective decision indeed <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' /> BTW I have not seen a single friend of mine going back to Sigma Tokina or Tamron after trying out pro glass from Canon or Nikon (I mean 2.8 zooms in the popular 24-70 / 70-200 categories). About bias, have you actually used any of the Nikon glass you write about?
I do use the 70-200 mk II in landscape and portraiture (also at a relatively close range) and focus breathing is not a problem for me. I was aware of this when trying it out, but in practical shooting it wasn't a problem. Then, it's just me and my take on it.. subjective indeed <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />