Yesterday was a momentous day for me and my photography hobby (or perhaps, misplaced addiction). After work, and directly to Penn Station via the LIRR, my friend and I went to B&H to purchase my first real lens (albeit, not a genuine Nikon lens; how sad!).
I came prepared with research and consideration for the Nikon 35 mm f/2, Nikon 50mm f/1.4, and Sigma 30mm f/1.4, in that order of preference. Some how, I left the store (having paid $200 more than I wanted to) with my third choice--the Sigma. Thanks a lot, Ricky.
I went in skeptical of the Sigma, and I still am. I had never liked Sigma's rough focus and zoom rings, and its top quality still didn't feel as good as Nikon or Canon's own lens. But compared to the two Nikon lenses (which do not autofocus on my D40, a fault of having a cheap camera body), the Sigma was nicer overall.
The Nikon lenses was designed for film cameras nearly 20 years ago. They had an extremely smooth focus ring and were much smaller than the Sigma. The Sigma, as I had expected, had a nasty focus ring. Then I thought, since it has the benefit of autofocus, I wouldn't really need to be touching the focus ring anyway! Or at least, for the most part. The Sigma had other problems of its own, but I did not notice them and wouldn't have noticed them if not for the reviews I read online.
I immediately dismissed the 50mm because that wasn't the focal length I really wanted. The final decision came after I made a few test shots with the Nikon 35mm and the Sigma 30mm. The Sigma was faster and had noticeably better bokeh. See below for a rough comparison. This is Alan in the blue, and I thank him.
NIKON 35mm: A little dark.
SIGMA 30mm: Brighter than previous using about the same settings.
NIKON 35mm: Decent Bokeh. Poor Focus (I'm not used to manual focusing).
SIGMA 30mm: Much Nicer Bokeh.
To me, this purchase is significant in a number of ways: 1. Dedication now to the Nikon brand, even though I didn't buy a true Nikon as my first lens. 2. Exceeding the beginner-level braket of lens quality and cost. 3. Finally getting a feel of what sharpness and aperture really mean. 4. Understanding how a crop-body camera affects lenses and lens choice. 5. Tying Adrian in lens-count and leading Ricky by one. :-)
----------
It felt as if I can shoot anything and the lens can make the shot magical. I took some test shots at home. I shot my sister first. Pictures came out nice, and the lens worked quite well in the dark. It's definitely not what I'm used to in a lens, although I notice I now need a flash (or two, or three). The lack of sharpness is likely my fault. Heh.
Note: For editing my sister's photos, I only cropped; nothing more. Alan's photos were straight from the D40.
Yesterday was a momentous day for me and my photography hobby (or perhaps, misplaced addiction). After work, and directly to Penn Station via the LIRR, my friend and I went to B&H to purchase my first real lens (albeit, not a genuine Nikon lens; how sad!).
To me, this purchase is significant in a number of ways: 1. Dedication now to the Nikon brand, even though I didn't buy a true Nikon as my first lens. 2. Exceeding the beginner-level braket of lens quality and cost. 3. Finally getting a feel of what sharpness and aperture really mean. 4. Understanding how a crop-body camera affects lenses and lens choice. 5. Tying Adrian in lens-count and leading Ricky by one. :-)
Note: For editing my sister's photos, I only cropped; nothing more. Alan's photos were straight from the D40.
I went to the mall yesterday, and while I was there, I checked out the DSLRs at Best Buy. I had originally say, in Canon vs Nikon and Camera Comparison, that the I did not like Canon's UI. I spent a little more time with it, particularly with the Rebel XSi, and I realized that they are not much different. It is a mere case of getting used to the subtle changes.