murrays 0 #1 December 10, 2003 A month or so ago the local Nikon dealer told me rumours of a 12-24mm Nikon lens for digital use....with a 1.6 conversion factor, that's a 20 to 40mm lens equivalent. Very nice range for freefall photography! The following article about using digital cameras for a complete National Geographic article mentions that this lens was used by the photographer, Joe McNally. (Page 2) I think that Nikon will soon be answering the gauntlet thrown down by Canon's 10D and 300D.-- Murray "No tyranny is so irksome as petty tyranny: the officious demands of policemen, government clerks, and electromechanical gadgets." - Edward Abbey Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Deuce 1 #2 December 10, 2003 Sigma has a new 12-28(I think it's 28) and I thought it had solved all my problems. But, after using some of the links to reviews that Quade has posted, it's a POS. Zooms at that range are super hard to do right. I think if anybody can do it, it's probably Nikkor, but damn, that thing is gonna be like 2 grand if the quality is there. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fasterfaller 0 #3 December 10, 2003 You guys are better off going primes . Zooms produce lower quality images and I have had zooms change focal lengths in freefall due to the wind blast on the front element . If you decide to upgrade bodies at some point in time (10d-1ds ) you will find your zooms aint what they are cracked up to be . Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Deuce 1 #4 December 10, 2003 No, that's where I'm at. I agree that primes are the way to go, if you can afford them. I have the Canon 20 for tandems and RW and have the Sigma 14 coming as a Christmas gift for FF and stuff like balloon jumps. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
psw097 0 #5 December 10, 2003 I have the new Sigma 12-24. The first test shots I saw from the pre-production sucked - then they started getting better, so I bought one. I have not got to jump it yet, there is snow on the ground here in Virginia. It matches my KUW-042M at 13mm and my SGW-05PRO at 17mm - I like that flexibility and there is no other lens on the market that can do that. Its not a bad lens, just not a great lens. Its extremely hard to make a full frame 12mm lens that's flat. I did not expect a miracle at 650 bucks and with the 1.6 crop it does well. Wide open at 12mm the corners start getting pretty bad distortion - but nothing compared to a fish-eye. Above F11 its pretty nice. For skydiving the aperture won't be wide open and most shots have nothing but blue/green at the edges, and they'll be center cropped anyway. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
garywainwright 0 #6 December 11, 2003 Nikon are apparently throwing down the gauntlet with a D70. I'm still thinking of switching to canon though!http://www.garywainwright.co.uk Instagram gary_wainwright_uk Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
murrays 0 #7 December 13, 2003 Thanks for the model name, I was able to find some more information searching on the model number.. According to this Nikon Australia website, Nikon is releasing 3 digital lenses: 10.5, 12-24 and 17-55. It will be interesting to see the pricing and how the quality stacks up. I was thinking of selling off my Nikon film equipment but think I'll wait and see the pricing on this new body.-- Murray "No tyranny is so irksome as petty tyranny: the officious demands of policemen, government clerks, and electromechanical gadgets." - Edward Abbey Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
newshooter12 0 #8 December 13, 2003 The 10.5mm or 10.5 is on the market here. I've heard good, bad and ugly about it so i guess the verdict is still with the jury on that one. 12-24mm or 12-24 17-55mm matt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
