ok, so what's with this vignetting crap?

[BackdoorArts]

hmm, done ridiculing now? like i'm not gonna buy the 750 because my current lenses are DX format? and i didn't buy them because they were DX, i bought them because i liked the focal length or the macro capability. they just happened to be DX. and stop with the legwork stuff too. i don't read every thread on here nor do i want to. right now i'm more interested in learning my new camera than i am in worrying about the lenses. just came across a situation that i'll bet is pretty normal for people who just made a huge upgrade in equipment.

I wasn't ridiculing, but I will now if you'd like. Let's use my favorite analogy when it comes to talking photography - cars!! I didn't buy the tires because they fit my Ferrari, I bought them because I like the way they work on my Jeep. I'm more interested in driving fast than driving with tires that perform. Tires are tires right, and if the Ferrari can't use them then properly that's utter crap, because it's expensive and supposed to be a great car.

If you had bothered learning just a little about your new camera and you old lenses before you bought it then you would have known that you're going to live with undersized images and all this vignetting crap from day 1. This is far from what I would consider even remotely "normal" for anyone making "a huge upgrade in equipment". Perhaps they realize an accessory or two doesn't work or isn't compatible, but when a full 80% of your glass is only semi-compatible you'd think that would have come out in research and not as something you're puzzling out in a public forum, because that's what people do before a "huge equipment upgrade".

OK, now I'm done ridiculing. Hopefully you're lesson's been learned and you can figure out how to migrate down this road, because your "huge upgrade" has only just started.

 

[sonicbuffalo_RIP]

@Slipperman.....take off those slippers and put on your 50mm and use ALL the sensor that you paid lots of money for. It will take amazing pictures. If you have the bucks, then upgrade to a 24-70 f/2.8 to get you started on great new glass. You won't be sorry. Above all else, learn what your new camera can and can't do. Learn and master all of the controls on it. You really need to get Lightroom or some really good editing software if you haven't already. Let us know how that turns out! Good luck!

 

[Slipperman]

I wasn't ridiculing, but I will now if you'd like. Let's use my favorite analogy when it comes to talking photography - cars!! I didn't buy the tires because they fit my Ferrari, I bought them because I like the way they work on my Jeep. I'm more interested in driving fast than driving with tires that perform. Tires are tires right, and if the Ferrari can't use them then properly that's utter crap, because it's expensive and supposed to be a great car.

If you had bothered learning just a little about your new camera and you old lenses before you bought it then you would have known that you're going to live with undersized images and all this vignetting crap from day 1. This is far from what I would consider even remotely "normal" for anyone making "a huge upgrade in equipment". Perhaps they realize an accessory or two doesn't work or isn't compatible, but when a full 80% of your glass is only semi-compatible you'd think that would have come out in research and not as something you're puzzling out in a public forum, because that's what people do before a "huge equipment upgrade".

OK, now I'm done ridiculing. Hopefully you're lesson's been learned and you can figure out how to migrate down this road, because your "huge upgrade" has only just started.

just a real know it all aren't you? since in that link you posted you admitted to making the same kind of mistake, not sure how you can be so arrogant now. there are ways of saying things but you seem to have no clue how. read the other posts that followed yours and maybe learn how to make a proper reply. and to Marcel, Ron and the rest of you who liked this guys posts, you could learn a few things yourselves.

 

[Blacktop]

like i'm not gonna buy the 750 because my current lenses are DX format?

I would love to have an FX camera, but the price is not going to leave me with enough to buy FX glass. Without the FX glass an FX camera is pointless to me.

BTW, just out of curiosity. What was the reason for the camera upgrade, if I may ask?

 

[Slipperman]

I would love to have an FX camera, but the price is not going to leave me with enough to buy FX glass. Without the FX glass an FX camera is pointless to me.

BTW, just out of curiosity. What was the reason for the camera upgrade, if I may ask?

boy, the good ol boys club cliquishness in this place is really coming to a head.

not that an explanation will do any good but i bought it because i could. i knew the old lenses would work at least somewhat - i just wasn't that worried about it. as far as not taking full advantage of the FX format, don't know why certain people are getting all bent out of shape about it. isn't that my decision/business? what do you care? i can do just fine for now in DX-crop mode. and it's not like i can't afford a new lens within the next month or so. i already have my eye on Sigma and Tamron FX lenses from this web site..

neocamera

and btw, the title of this thread was meant as totally tongue in cheek. it's called humor.

 

[sonicbuffalo_RIP]

relax @Slipperman....in defense of @BackdoorHippie...not that he needs my defense....he knows more about photography and the how too's and why not's than all of us combined. You will learn a lot if you humble yourself a tad bit and listen to him. I have been somewhat blasted by him on occasion, but he knows his stuff. I take it in stride. He is here not to promote himself or demean others. If nothing else, he is here to show his work, and to teach us how to achieve some pretty fantastic images. I'm sure you two just got off to a rocky start. I think you should just see what you can learn and hang around a while. Don't be afraid to read what he and others here post. Unless YOU'RE NOT here to learn and grow as a photographer. I bought over my head a few times, and some may say I have done it again. I had the D610, and a D7100.....I then went out and spent a fortune on used Holy Trinity of zooms. I had the best lenses for a professional so they say. I had the 14-24 f/2.8, the 24-70 f/2.8, and the 70-200 f.2.8 vr II. They are considered the best zoom lenses. The downside, if there is one, is they cost nearly $1500.00 a piece or more brand new. Like I said, I bought used, and so I didn't take that big of a hit when I sold mine. I decided I wanted a smaller footprint system like the full frame Sony. Sony makes a lot of the sensors for Nikon, so I am on the right trail. I like to travel, and if you've ever held in your hands the Holy Trinity, you will know they are massively heavy and bulky, especially the lens I love the most, the 14-24. There are some here, and myself included, who more than respect what BackdoorHippie has to say. His brother is a professional photographer, who used to, or presently works for a newspaper. He has the background, and the knowledge if you'll listen to him. Here's to you getting along with all of us. I know you can do it. If not, well, I tried.

 

[Horoscope Fish]

i already have my eye on Sigma and Tamron FX lenses from this web site...

If you're considering primes at all, allow me to suggest the Sigma Art 35mm f/1.4 and 50mm f/1.4 lenses. They're both astonishingly good.
....

 

[Slipperman]

as far as new lenses, the Tamron i got around TG'ing (before i knew if any of my Dad's life insurance money was available to buy the camera), i may be able to exchange it for the FX version through either Amazon or Cameta. if so, i can replace the 70-300 for little or no money. i already have the 50mm prime (which is a great lens) so all i'll probably have to buy any time soon would be a 24 (28?) - 100 or something close (thx for the info on that Hark). should hold me over for a while.

 

[BackdoorArts]

just a real know it all aren't you? since in that link you posted you admitted to making the same kind of mistake, not sure how you can be so arrogant now. there are ways of saying things but you seem to have no clue how. read the other posts that followed yours and maybe learn how to make a proper reply. and to Marcel, Ron and the rest of you who liked this guys posts, you could learn a few things yourselves.

Boy, you can read anything into anything can't you?! The only thing I admitted to was not knowing the difference between DX and FX when I first purchased my D7000, and yeah, there's a boatload of stuff I didn't know when I bought that. Dig back into the archives (you won't) and you'll see an awful lot of open questions and public research happening before just about every purchase since.

Look, you can call this a club, you can call me arrogant, but I'm not the guy who spent over two grand and waltzed in and accused the camera of being what's at fault - because there's awhole lot of difference between asking about why you're getting what you're seeing and saying, "OK, so what's with this vignetting crap?", when the only crap was your inability to research properly before buying. When I happen to be a both an owner and a big fan of the camera you're pointing fingers at them I'm going to take it personally, because there are people who are doing research that are going to come here, go to this subforum and see the title of your post, and I want to make sure that when they read through it (hoping that they do) that they realize that the "crap" has more to do with the OP than the camera. You were slinging sh*t out of ignorance, and that's the wrong way to walk into a room. Maybe it's you who needs to learn a little about how to ask a question.

 

[Blacktop]

boy, the good ol boys club cliquishness in this place is really coming to a head.

not that an explanation will do any good but i bought it because i could. i knew the old lenses would work at least somewhat - i just wasn't that worried about it. as far as not taking full advantage of the FX format, don't know why certain people are getting all bent out of shape about it. isn't that my decision/business? what do you care? i can do just fine for now in DX-crop mode. and it's not like i can't afford a new lens within the next month or so. i already have my eye on Sigma and Tamron FX lenses from this web site..

neocamera

and btw, the title of this thread was meant as totally tongue in cheek. it's called humor.

I really don't give two shits about why you bought the thing, but when you come in here with that kind of an attitude, my curiosity gets peaked.
Enjoy your 2,500 dollar 11MP DX camera.
As for the "good ol boys club" comment. ROTFLMFAO

 

[hark]

as far as new lenses, the Tamron i got around TG'ing (before i knew if any of my Dad's life insurance money was available to buy the camera), i may be able to exchange it for the FX version through either Amazon or Cameta. if so, i can replace the 70-300 for little or no money. i already have the 50mm prime (which is a great lens) so all i'll probably have to buy any time soon would be a 24 (28?) - 100 or something close (thx for the info on that Hark). should hold me over for a while.

If your Tamron lens is this one, I believe it is an FX lens. You can confirm if it is FX by putting it on the D750 but don't select the DX option for lenses--if you don't get the vignetting, you should be fine.

As far as 24-xxmm zooms, Tamron makes a really nice 24-70mm f/2.8 that includes VR, but it will depend on your budget. Sigma also makes a 24-70mm f/2.8 which is what I use--it's not quite as expensive as the Tamron.

Nikon makes a couple you might want to consider, too. There is the Nikon 24-85mm f/2.8-4D and a different Nikon 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G that has been used as a kit lens for some bodies. If you want a little longer zoom, Nikon makes the 24-120 f/4 which is nice. You will pay more for a longer length zoom, but the constant f/4 and the extended reach are terrific benefits; however, right now the Tamron is on sale making it the better choice for the same price with its constant f/2.8.

Of course, if you buy pre-owned, you will save a little. There may be other lens options out there--just a few to kick around some ideas in your head.

What I say next won't be the popular vote...but here goes: I am dismayed to read some of the replies. Slipperman, your question was naive and asked in a humble manner. For sure you were in the minority of not knowing the consequences of upgrading from DX to FX, but I highly doubt that every person who upgrades knows. Granted, most people probably will, but I doubt 100% will. And especially since you asked in a humble and affable way, I do not think some of these responses are appropriate. Although I am a female and am not knowledgeable about cars, I will say the comparison of a D750 to a Ferrari is exaggerated. In my opinion, a D4 or D4s might be a much more equal comparison to a Ferrari and isn't even applicable here. Zoom, zoom.

 

[RocketCowboy]

as far as new lenses, the Tamron i got around TG'ing (before i knew if any of my Dad's life insurance money was available to buy the camera), i may be able to exchange it for the FX version through either Amazon or Cameta. if so, i can replace the 70-300 for little or no money. i already have the 50mm prime (which is a great lens) so all i'll probably have to buy any time soon would be a 24 (28?) - 100 or something close (thx for the info on that Hark). should hold me over for a while.

The Nikkor 24-120mm/f4 is a great lens and is an FX lens. I bought it for my D7100 in anticipation of moving to full frame eventually (either the D750 or D810). It's a little more pricey than the 70-300mm variable aperture, but I've been very happy with the results.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Slipperman]

Boy, you can read anything into anything can't you?! The only thing I admitted to was not knowing the difference between DX and FX when I first purchased my D7000, and yeah, there's a boatload of stuff I didn't know when I bought that. Dig back into the archives (you won't) and you'll see an awful lot of open questions and public research happening before just about every purchase since.

Look, you can call this a club, you can call me arrogant, but I'm not the guy who spent over two grand and waltzed in and accused the camera of being what's at fault - because there's awhole lot of difference between asking about why you're getting what you're seeing and saying, "OK, so what's with this vignetting crap?", when the only crap was your inability to research properly before buying. When I happen to be a both an owner and a big fan of the camera you're pointing fingers at them I'm going to take it personally, because there are people who are doing research that are going to come here, go to this subforum and see the title of your post, and I want to make sure that when they read through it (hoping that they do) that they realize that the "crap" has more to do with the OP than the camera. You were slinging sh*t out of ignorance, and that's the wrong way to walk into a room. Maybe it's you who needs to learn a little about how to ask a question.

and you're the only one who had to be adversarial in his reply and why? - because you thought i SHOULD have known? what the heck do you care? whether i'm at fault or not that doesn't excuse your condescending attitude ("does not magically..." , etc). sorry i don't care who you are, i don't take that crap from anyone.
and i wasn't slinging s*** which i assume you took from the thread title which i already explained was a joke.

 

[480sparky]

........... the thread title which i already explained was a joke.

Well, it appears no one 'got the joke' and we all took it seriously.

 

[fotojack]

OK, I think we're done here with this topic. Let's cool our jets, otherwise I'll just shut this thread down. It's a New Year...let's all get along and try to be a little more diplomatic in our responses. Thank you, and happy clicking.

 

[Slipperman]

If your Tamron lens is this one, I believe it is an FX lens. You can confirm if it is FX by putting it on the D750 but don't select the DX option for lenses--if you don't get the vignetting, you should be fine.

As far as 24-xxmm zooms, Tamron makes a really nice 24-70mm f/2.8 that includes VR, but it will depend on your budget. Sigma also makes a 24-70mm f/2.8 which is what I use--it's not quite as expensive as the Tamron.

Nikon makes a couple you might want to consider, too. There is the Nikon 24-85mm f/2.8-4D and a different Nikon 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G that has been used as a kit lens for some bodies. If you want a little longer zoom, Nikon makes the 24-120 f/4 which is nice. You will pay more for a longer length zoom, but the constant f/4 and the extended reach are terrific benefits; however, right now the Tamron is on sale making it the better choice for the same price with its constant f/2.8.

Of course, if you buy pre-owned, you will save a little. There may be other lens options out there--just a few to kick around some ideas in your head.

What I say next won't be the popular vote...but here goes: I am dismayed to read some of the replies. Slipperman, your question was naive and asked in a humble manner. For sure you were in the minority of not knowing the consequences of upgrading from DX to FX, but I highly doubt that every person who upgrades knows. Granted, most people probably will, but I doubt 100% will. And especially since you asked in a humble and affable way, I do not think some of these responses are appropriate. Although I am a female and am not knowledgeable about cars, I will say the comparison of a D750 to a Ferrari is exaggerated. In my opinion, a D4 or D4s might be a much more equal comparison to a Ferrari and isn't even applicable here. Zoom, zoom.

that Tamron is not the one i have though it has the same name. i'm hoping to exchange the one i have for that one.
as far as the rest, thanx... i think.
you'd be surprised at the thought processes people go through leading up to a question they ask. not always what you'd expect. since you've been so nice about it, i'll explain mine to you. this is a pic of pg 110 in the D750 user manual..



notice the 2 circles marked 'FX format image circle' and 'DX format image circle'. this to me implied that circles are involved - i just wasn't expecting them to show up in the picture so i thought i was doing something wrong. also notice that there is no mention of DX format vs FX format lenses. this is showing the viewfinder of the D750 only without lenses even being mentioned. in fact i don't think the difference between the 2 formats is discussed in the entire manual. so you might be able to see from the mention of circles on this page where i might get confused. it's not like i wasn't aware there were differences between the 2 types of lenses, it was simply that this page did not take it into account.
there i'm done.

 

[Slipperman]

Well, it appears no one 'got the joke' and we all took it seriously.

maybe not but most of you were pretty good natured about it which i didn't take offense to at all.

 

[sonicbuffalo_RIP]

maybe not but most of you were pretty good natured about it which i didn't take offense to at all.

Well @Slipperman....I don't want to keep this crappy thread going....but in the spirit of the way this forum works....there is a thumbs up button for thanks/like, and a thumbsdown button for disagree. Instead of arguing, hit whichever button suits your fancy, or a Best Answer button too. This might help alleviate a future meltdown. lol

 

[hark]

that Tamron is not the one i have though it has the same name. i'm hoping to exchange the one i have for that one.
as far as the rest, thanx... i think.

Ahh...then it would be a good choice to exchange your Tamron for one that is FX. You might want to consider selling 1 or 2 of your DX lenses and put the money towards an FX lens. An FX lens will work on a DX camera (unless it is one with a known compatibility issue). Just a thought.

 

[J-see]

There are plenty of great yet reasonable cheap lenses for the D750 out there. I personally prefer primes above zooms and will fill the gap between them by stepping forward or backward. I have some zooms for practical reasons or because primes in those lengths are way too expensive.

You have the 50mm which is a great lens. The 35mm is great too and cheap. Samyang has a 14mm and 24mm wide that are cheap and sweet if you don't mind manual focus. When you go longer than 50mm good primes are no longer that cheap and you could go zoom here as a compromise. I have the Nikon 70-300mm which did a good job on my D3300 but an even better on the D750. I rarely use it these days but for the price it's a decent lens.

There are more out there and you can always check DxO to compare performance and then buy what you consider worth the price.

I'd slowly change and get rid of all the DX as Hark suggested. Now you might think you can use them anyways but it won't take long before they collect dust.

Been there, done that, loads of dust too.