Next lens... 35mm prime or 85mm prime? - Honda Accord Forum : V6 Performance Accord Forums
Ribbon Banner

Go Back   Honda Accord Forum : V6 Performance Accord Forums > GENERAL DISCUSSION > RANDOM CHATTER > TECHNOLOGY CORNER > V6P PHOTOGRAPHY CLUB
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read Insurance
V6Performance.net is the premier Honda Accord Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old August 28th, 2009, 04:12 PM   #1
t|23v0|2 n00b t00n3|2
 
Trevendous03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 3,572
Next lens... 35mm prime or 85mm prime?

Hey all:

I do lots of portraits so am looking for another portrait lens (primes work best for portraits and DOF). My two interests are Nikkor 35mm f/2D or Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D, both of which have rave reviews by Ken Rockwell. One is more towards the wide-angle side and one towards the telephoto side. I'm leaning more towards the 85mm right now, but it is $100 more than the 35mm f/2D.

I'm wondering if anyone on here has experience with either of these lenses? That'd be great if you could make a suggestion as to which I should consider first. Thanks!!

PS Right now my only primes are 28mm Sigma and Nikkor 50mm f/1.8.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Slammed Club Member #56 (Stage I) | "I like a quiet life, you know me."
DSLR Info | Nikon D700 | Nikkor 16-35 f/4 | Nikkor 35 f/2 | Nikkor 24-70 f/2.8
Nikkor 50 f/1.4G | Nikkor 70-200 f/2.8 | Nikkor 105 VR Micro | AlienBees
Trevendous03 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old August 28th, 2009, 08:26 PM   #2
Moderator
 
00Accord4cyl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: TN
Posts: 3,436
i have never used either of those, but i have heard great things about the 85mm when used as a portrait lens. So i personally say you should go with that. But i am just one person who wants an 85mm haha
00Accord4cyl is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old August 28th, 2009, 08:53 PM   #3
The name is Scott. D:
 
Whumbachumba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 979
Send a message via AIM to Whumbachumba Send a message via MSN to Whumbachumba Send a message via Yahoo to Whumbachumba
When you say portraits, do you mean portraits in the classic sense or full body portraits? The 85mm will do better for classic portrait shots since the 35mm would have you in their face if you were doing classic portraits. However, it you're looking for full body, the 85mm would have you standing pretty far away and cause a lot more compression in the image than the 35mm would.

I would analyze what you want out of portraits and base your decision off of that.
Whumbachumba is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old August 29th, 2009, 12:22 PM   #4
"Certified Hybrid Killer"
 
SteVTEC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Commietown, MD
Posts: 5,056
This is very tricky...

85mm is a decent portrait length for DX, but the 1.8 isn't the greatest choice because it has poor bokeh. The 1.4 is a classic and far nicer just for the creamy bokeh it produces, but it's $1000+.

The 50mm f/1.8 is a nice starter lens and exceptionally sharp, but has nasty bokeh also. The f/1.4D has nicer bokeh but it's a softer lens and seems to have a lot of sample variability. If you don't mind spending $500 the newest AF-S 50mm f/1.4G is exceptional, but still a bit short for a portrait length lens.

The Tamron 90mm f/2.8 macro is a great lens, very sharp, and has great bokeh for a reasonable price so definitely worth considering. The old 105mm f/2.8D Micro-Nikkor is pretty good too, as is the newest AF-S VR version. The 105mm f/2DC and 135mm f/2DC lenses are great too, but both over $1000+. The De-Focus control mechanism on these lenses is a bit oddd and problematic too, so people tend to avoid them.

A good used 80-200mm f/2.8D is definitely something to consider. All of these are perfectly capable of producing stunning portraits and now you'll have the flexibility to change focal lengths if you want too. They're really hefty lenses though. Used prices for an 80-200mm f/2.8D two-ring (current version) is $600-800.

Bottom line is that unless you want to spend a whole ton of money you're always going to be looking at a lot of compromises, so I say go manual focus.

I just picked up an 85mm f/2 AI manual focus lens for 100 bucks! It won't meter on the d80/90 and lower bodies but it's seriously easy enough to dial in your exposure manually with the LCD and RGB histograms. It looks great wide-open and the bokeh is beautiful.

Here's the old 85/2 AI at f/2.8.
SteVTEC is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old August 30th, 2009, 10:26 AM   #5
t|23v0|2 n00b t00n3|2
 
Trevendous03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 3,572
Quote:
Originally Posted by 00Accord4cyl View Post
i have never used either of those, but i have heard great things about the 85mm when used as a portrait lens. So i personally say you should go with that. But i am just one person who wants an 85mm haha
Haha thanks, Eric... that's what I'm leaning towards.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whumbachumba View Post
When you say portraits, do you mean portraits in the classic sense or full body portraits? The 85mm will do better for classic portrait shots since the 35mm would have you in their face if you were doing classic portraits. However, it you're looking for full body, the 85mm would have you standing pretty far away and cause a lot more compression in the image than the 35mm would.

I would analyze what you want out of portraits and base your decision off of that.
You're right... I would have to stand pretty far away from the subject in order to get a full body shot, and I usually like full body shots. Now you're making me lean towards the 35mm f/2D

Quote:
Originally Posted by SteVTEC View Post
This is very tricky...

85mm is a decent portrait length for DX, but the 1.8 isn't the greatest choice because it has poor bokeh. The 1.4 is a classic and far nicer just for the creamy bokeh it produces, but it's $1000+.

The 50mm f/1.8 is a nice starter lens and exceptionally sharp, but has nasty bokeh also. The f/1.4D has nicer bokeh but it's a softer lens and seems to have a lot of sample variability. If you don't mind spending $500 the newest AF-S 50mm f/1.4G is exceptional, but still a bit short for a portrait length lens.

The Tamron 90mm f/2.8 macro is a great lens, very sharp, and has great bokeh for a reasonable price so definitely worth considering. The old 105mm f/2.8D Micro-Nikkor is pretty good too, as is the newest AF-S VR version. The 105mm f/2DC and 135mm f/2DC lenses are great too, but both over $1000+. The De-Focus control mechanism on these lenses is a bit oddd and problematic too, so people tend to avoid them.

A good used 80-200mm f/2.8D is definitely something to consider. All of these are perfectly capable of producing stunning portraits and now you'll have the flexibility to change focal lengths if you want too. They're really hefty lenses though. Used prices for an 80-200mm f/2.8D two-ring (current version) is $600-800.

Bottom line is that unless you want to spend a whole ton of money you're always going to be looking at a lot of compromises, so I say go manual focus.

I just picked up an 85mm f/2 AI manual focus lens for 100 bucks! It won't meter on the d80/90 and lower bodies but it's seriously easy enough to dial in your exposure manually with the LCD and RGB histograms. It looks great wide-open and the bokeh is beautiful.

Here's the old 85/2 AI at f/2.8.
That looks sweet... how many lenses do you have now? haha I know the manual focus lenses are very inexpensive used, but I am just going to do that later as I really want a new AF portrait lens right now. I tried out continuous shooting at 4.5fps yesterday and it was so pimp, and I was moving the camera around doing 3D AF tracking at continuous shooting and it didn't even lose focus. That's the benefit of AF, so I wanna stick with AF lenses for now. I still do MF sometimes though whenever the AF doesn't focus on what I want it to.

BTW I already have a Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 and a Sigma 28mm f/1.8, and I was reading that the 35mm f/2 has extremely nice bokeh and is much better than the new 35mm f/1.8G and it is in the range which will produce an accurate face reproduction, no barrel distortion or pincushion distortion.

I prefer primes for portrait work and do not wish to spend more than $500 on a new lens right now. So now that you know this, what is your advice?
Trevendous03 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old August 30th, 2009, 11:26 AM   #6
"Certified Hybrid Killer"
 
SteVTEC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Commietown, MD
Posts: 5,056
I owned the AF 35mm f/2D and definitely prefer the new AF-S 35mm f/1.8G. It's noticeably sharper wide-open. The f/2D doesn't get super sharp until at least f/2.8. Bokeh on both is neutral - not bad but not super creamy smooth either. 35mm will give a far more personal portrait. You'll need to get close enough that you'll start exaggerating facial features like noses and such. There's no right or wrong portrait length, but if you're talking about accurate face reproduction I think you'd want something longer like in the 105-135mm range. Nikon makes nothing affordable in this range new today, which is why I'd suggest the 105/2.5 or 135/2.8 manual focus lenses for $120 used. The AF 85mm f/1.8D is nice, but you just need to be careful with your background since the bokeh can get nasty. $500 will also get you a Nikon 105mm f/2.8 Micro lens which is supposedly very good for portraits also, or that Tamron 90mm f/2.8 which is definitely very nice, just a stop slower than the 85mm f/1.8. Since you already have a 28mm, I'd skip a 35 and go for something longer.

I've got about a dozen lenses right now, and have probably previously owned and sold about a dozen more. I'm a lens whore.
SteVTEC is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old August 31st, 2009, 01:09 AM   #7
t|23v0|2 n00b t00n3|2
 
Trevendous03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 3,572
I thought the 105 was around $900? That's why I wasn't even considering it. I also heard accurate/non-distorted face reproduction is from 35mm to 85mm (35mm = 53mm on DX and 85mm = 128mm on DX). I'm still stuck in my decision-making, because I also would like to get a lens I can use in a studio aka my basement, and I hear the 85mm f/1.8 or f/1.4 is THE portrait lens right now, but I can't spend $1000 on the 1.4. There's no way I'm getting a manual focus lens right now... maybe later on when I know I have enough AF lenses.
Trevendous03 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old August 31st, 2009, 05:25 AM   #8
"Certified Hybrid Killer"
 
SteVTEC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Commietown, MD
Posts: 5,056
The new/current 105 AF-S VR is $900. But you can get the previous AF-D non-VR that some think is better anyways for $500 used (KEH.com). The 85/1.8 will still do some nice portraits, just gotta be careful with backgrounds...
SteVTEC is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old August 31st, 2009, 09:45 AM   #9
t|23v0|2 n00b t00n3|2
 
Trevendous03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 3,572
Mmmmk so I definitely did not get what I thought I would this paycheck, but I really want a new lens like this week, because I have like three shoots planned and don't wanna wait another two weeks... now my budget is sub $300 for a lens. I may look into a used manual focus 105mm f/2.5 now just for something new to have this week at least.
Trevendous03 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old August 31st, 2009, 10:04 AM   #10
"Certified Hybrid Killer"
 
SteVTEC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Commietown, MD
Posts: 5,056


105/2.5 BGN from KEH for $179-189

For help with metering if you want any get one of these: http://www.adorama.com/GSDS.html?sea...isix&item_no=1

And you're set.
SteVTEC is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old August 31st, 2009, 12:13 PM   #11
t|23v0|2 n00b t00n3|2
 
Trevendous03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 3,572
The 105mm f/2.5 AI-S is supposedly one of the best lenses Nikon has ever made optically, especially for portraits, so I might as well just throw this one in my bag right now since it's so affordable. If I ever wanna sell it, I could sell it for the same amount I bought it for too. I'm not too sure about the BGN price... this means the lenses are all torn up when for like $60 more I could get one in excellent condition. I found one in excellent condition for $235, and this may be my best bet for one of the best portrait lenses ever.

No metering and manual focus on my D90, but I always meter myself nowadays anyway, just guessing and checking at the metering. I never leave manual mode... I even did some natural light portraits the other day in manual mode without a problem. Only thing I'm worried about is will I still receive that green "focus dot"? I don't want to manually focus and have it not give me that dot.
Trevendous03 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old August 31st, 2009, 12:29 PM   #12
"Certified Hybrid Killer"
 
SteVTEC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Commietown, MD
Posts: 5,056
All the lenses I've bought from KEH have been "BGN" and they've all been great. KEH has a very very good reputation. Believe me when I say it that their lens rating system is very conservative. My Nikkor 135/2.8 AIS just had a ding or two and a scrape in the retracting lens hood. That's it. Otherwise it's flawless. And my 80-200 f/4 AIS just had a tiny bit of internal dust. Otherwise it was flawless too. My Nikkor 28mm f/2.8 AIS shows some brassing on the exterior, and one tiny section of the rubber grip seems to have peeled off, but it's in great shape otherwise too. You save a whole ton of money with the BGN lenses and still get great optics that still have decades of use left in them. Below that they have "UG" (Ugly) lenses. Those are the real beaters.

The funny thing is that a lens that shows a little bit of use can actually be a good thing. If a lens delivers good results optically it'll get used more than a dud copy that might not get used at all, and hence show more wear. The lousy copy sits around and maintains better mechanical and apparent optical condition, but it'll still suck. So some wear is good IMHO. KEH rates only on apparent mechanical condition and how the glass "looks", not based on actual optical performance.

Especially if you're on a tight budget, don't be afraid at all of buying a BGN rated KEH lens. In fact that's the only class of lens I'll buy from them. I'm not a collector looking for the most pristine copy of something. I just want something that will deliver great results while spending as little money as possible, so their bargain lenses are right down my alley. These old Nikkors are built for decades of continuous use too, so no worries if one shows a little wear. I've seen some awesome photos from some super beat up lenses!

Yeah you still get green dot focusing.
SteVTEC is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old August 31st, 2009, 12:35 PM   #13
"Certified Hybrid Killer"
 
SteVTEC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Commietown, MD
Posts: 5,056
D40 + 135mm f/2.8 AIS, manually focused, full manual exposure




Didn't need green dot. You do need good vision. I just got new glasses a few months ago. Helped out a ton at the shooting range too.
SteVTEC is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old August 31st, 2009, 01:16 PM   #14
t|23v0|2 n00b t00n3|2
 
Trevendous03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 3,572
Thanks for sharing that. I actually think I have changed my mind to something different. I saw that Nikon made a 85mm f/2 AI-S that Ken Rockwell highly recommends, so I think that may suit my needs better as I have that 1.5x crop factor and a 105mm lens would yield 158mm and pretty much create flat portraits. At least it seems that way to me. The 85mm wouldn't be as telephoto and would be a couple stops faster, even though wide open it's pretty weak, but one stop up from there, I hear it's golden.

How fast does Keh ship? Could they have it here by the end of the week you think?
Trevendous03 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old August 31st, 2009, 02:04 PM   #15
"Certified Hybrid Killer"
 
SteVTEC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Commietown, MD
Posts: 5,056
The slightly older 85mm f/2 AI that I have is optically identical to the AI-S version, so if you see the older AI version and it's cheaper don't think you need to buy the newer one.

Here's two shots both at f/2.

&mpt=[CACHEBUSTER]">


&mpt=[CACHEBUSTER]">


100 bucks!

Very slightly softer at f/2 but could just as likely be due to focusing error, and definitely very nice by f/2.8. That photo in post #4 is from that lens too, but in nasty harsh contrasty light you definitely need to stop it down some. The lens coatings they used back then aren't quite as good as what they use today. But yeah, I specifically asked Ken about the 85mm f/2 AI-s bokeh and he said it was better than the 1.8D version and "no funny business". Mines been very nice so far. To fill a frame with a face at 85mm on DX you still have to get pretty close. It won't be flat at all and you'll have some dimension to it. I like the longer lengths like 135 so that I can get a more candid portrait. My kids don't pose for me yet, and if I get right in their face with an 85mm they'll usually run away.

KEH is in Georgia. If you ordered today it'd probably get to you by Friday. If you need it sooner you might want to expedite shipping.
SteVTEC is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old August 31st, 2009, 03:29 PM   #16
t|23v0|2 n00b t00n3|2
 
Trevendous03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 3,572
Hahaha thanks for all the useful info there. I'm thinking since I'm on a budget, I'm going to get the 100mm f/2.8 AI-S series E which Ken says is optically better than even the $1,800 80-200 f/2.8 AF-S. These were some of the highest ratings I've seen him give, so I might as well get it for $100 from Keh.

That's even half the price of the 85mm I was looking at. Then I can still eventually get myself a 35 and a 85mm later on (probably the AF versions). This way I can have an extremely fast (and small) telephoto lens even though it's manual focus. This is clearly the option for me right now.

PURCHASED!

Last edited by Trevendous03; August 31st, 2009 at 03:48 PM..
Trevendous03 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old August 31st, 2009, 04:36 PM   #17
"Certified Hybrid Killer"
 
SteVTEC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Commietown, MD
Posts: 5,056
Great choice! I have one of those too.
SteVTEC is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old August 31st, 2009, 07:23 PM   #18
t|23v0|2 n00b t00n3|2
 
Trevendous03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 3,572
Thanks for all your help and guidance.

I saw this sample photo on flickr just now...



That's not my photo but it is someone's photo taken with a D3 and the 100mm f/2.8 Series E lens, made by Nikon but not called a Nikkor, and you literally cannot beat the price and size of it. I can't wait till it arrives? Do you have any pictures of it??
Trevendous03 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old August 31st, 2009, 08:06 PM   #19
"Certified Hybrid Killer"
 
SteVTEC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Commietown, MD
Posts: 5,056
why yes actually!






photo sample @ f/4


and f/2.8



SteVTEC is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old September 1st, 2009, 10:02 AM   #20
t|23v0|2 n00b t00n3|2
 
Trevendous03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 3,572
OMG!!! I am so glad I bought this lens. No wonder KR says it's one of the sharpest lenses he has ever used.

And it's so dag-gone cheap. I feel like everyone should own this. I love how small it is... is it rather easy to focus and does it hold focus pretty well when you do focus it? I know my 50mm f/1.8D loses focus easier than my Sigma 28mm f/1.8 does when I'm in MF.
Trevendous03 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old September 2nd, 2009, 07:40 AM   #21
"Certified Hybrid Killer"
 
SteVTEC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Commietown, MD
Posts: 5,056
There's absolutely no comparison between the manual focus modes of AF lenses and these old manual focus only Nikkors. The feel really is exquisite as KR describes. They're perfectly damped so that you don't constantly under/overshoot focus as you can with loose AF rings in MF mode, and there's just the right amount of "stiction" too so you can't just break it free from set focus by accident. These things are amazing mechanically. The plastic Series E was derided back in the day for (horrors) being plastic, but even its build quality today is still better than a whole lot of lenses out there. The only issue with mine is it has a little plastic squeak when you're turning the focus ring with the camera in vertical orientation once in awhile, but that's it. Not bad for a lens that's probably around 25 years old. I'd be surprised if any of the even flimsier built lenses today are in as good of shape after 25 years.
SteVTEC is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old September 2nd, 2009, 10:43 AM   #22
t|23v0|2 n00b t00n3|2
 
Trevendous03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 3,572
Thanks Steve... u've been truly helpful. I'm glad to hear that even the Series E (mostly metal with bits of plastic) is very sturdy. I read KR's review and he also said like you that the old MF lenses, even the Series E lenses, were built much stronger and built to last and he even states that this lens (only $100) outperforms the $1800 80-200mm AF-S optically and mechanically. 5% of the cost and optically better. craziness!

Do you think I'm gonna start to fall in love with used and cheap MF lenses? haha

BTW it comes in tomorrow, because I'm impatient when I buy stuff and always upgrade the shipping. hahaha The one I bought was actually $170 because of the EX condition on KEH and the fast shipping and lens caps included.
Trevendous03 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old September 3rd, 2009, 04:36 AM   #23
"Certified Hybrid Killer"
 
SteVTEC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Commietown, MD
Posts: 5,056
Always happy to help other people spend their money. Can't wait to see what you'll be able to do with it.

I think Ken goes a little overboard with the 80-200 comparisons. I'm sure it probably could outperform the zoom at 100mm, but the little Series E doesn't zoom and it also doesn't have blindingly fast AF. He's anal about distortion and ghosting, and I'm sure the Series E has a whole lot less of that too. If you're doing serious photojournalist work or sports a zoom is definitely a better choice.

I use a lens like this as landscape telephoto, or for taking candid portraits. The old guy is my wife's grandfather. It's perfect for that sort of thing because it's a tiny little lens that nobody is going to think twice about, and it's long and fast without extending a mile out like my 18-135 did and thus giving it away that you're zooming on them.

You'll cry if I tell you how much I got mine for, but seeing what I could do with it and how easy they are to use I'd have easily paid $150+ for one now.
SteVTEC is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old September 3rd, 2009, 10:22 AM   #24
t|23v0|2 n00b t00n3|2
 
Trevendous03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 3,572
Ha did you get yours in BGN condition? You can tell me the price. Idc.

It's good to know that this thing will be a capable little lens. I was going to use it for portraits mainly though or candids as you said. I've seen it used for posed portraits rather nicely like I showed above.
Trevendous03 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old September 3rd, 2009, 11:58 AM   #25
t|23v0|2 n00b t00n3|2
 
Trevendous03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 3,572
It just came in, and it is shockingly so tiny. haha I knew it'd be tiny, but I was like what the?

I don't have my camera with me to test it yet, but I shall soon. Mine is a little different than yours in the fact it has a silver grab ring. You were right about the ratings on KEH.com being conservative to say the least. Only flaws I notice on my lens is normal wear on the focus ring and the lens cap "NIKON" is starting to rub off. The glass itself has no apparent flaws. I'd like to see excellent plus condition. haha
Trevendous03 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old September 3rd, 2009, 07:06 PM   #26
"Certified Hybrid Killer"
 
SteVTEC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Commietown, MD
Posts: 5,056
I paid a whole $40 for mine.

I run a photography club at work with about 15-20 members. A guy in the club had some old MF stuff and asked if I had any interest in it. He had an old broken Nikon FG with a 50/1.8E, 35-100mm, and the 100/2.8E. I said I was interested in the 100 and before I could get back to him on a price he said he'd be happy with $40. I was going to offer him more like $80, so I quickly whipped out my wallet and two 20's and ran!

Mines the older one without the silver ring, and it was optically pretty grimy. Gunk build up on the outer elements that would probably come off but I've been too lazy to even clean it, and then a very mild amount of dust on internal elements. Cleaned up it probably would have been a BGN lens at KEH.

Yeah I thought my 18-55 kit lens and the 35/1.8G were both small. Nope!
SteVTEC is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old September 4th, 2009, 02:23 PM   #27
t|23v0|2 n00b t00n3|2
 
Trevendous03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 3,572
Haha nice story. Mine doesn't have anything wrong with it optically... I tested last night on some furniture... pics which I will not post haha.

My only lens smaller than this is the 50mm f/1.8D. I like getting smaller lenses, because then I can fit more in my Slingshot. My Tokina and my Sigma are huge!!!
Trevendous03 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old September 9th, 2009, 09:45 PM   #28
t|23v0|2 n00b t00n3|2
 
Trevendous03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 3,572


camera phone pic of my camera with the new series E lens. I couldn't borrow my friend's camera to take a pic of my camera, so this will have to do for now.
Trevendous03 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old September 10th, 2009, 10:08 AM   #29
Moderator
 
00Accord4cyl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: TN
Posts: 3,436
wow..that is a small lens
00Accord4cyl is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old September 12th, 2009, 10:41 PM   #30
t|23v0|2 n00b t00n3|2
 
Trevendous03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 3,572
Extremely... it's almost as small as the 50mm f/1.8, just slightly bigger. I'm glad though cause I can fit four lenses and a SB-600 in my camera backpack main compartment.

Pics I took the other day with this lens, natural light with a reflector...






Last edited by Trevendous03; September 13th, 2009 at 04:12 PM..
Trevendous03 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply


Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Honda Accord Forum : V6 Performance Accord Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:
Chapter
Choose your AV6 Chapter Location
Ride
What do you drive?
Insurance
Please select your insurance company (Optional)

Log-in


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On