According provided by Nikon 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6GII VR II AF-S DX Nikkor lens huge thanks Vyacheslav Kravchina.
Nikon 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6GII VR II AF-S DX Nikkor Review
Nikon 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6GII VR II AF-S DX Nikkor was introduced at the end of 2013 and became a replacement for an existing similar lens Nikon 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6G VR AF-S DX Nikkor. For the first time the lens could be seen as a regular on the camera Nikon D3300.
A line of standard (i.e. 'whale') class 18-55 / 3.5-5.6 lenses for cameras Nikon DX:
- Nikon 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6G ED AF-S DX Nikkor SWM Aspherical - first version. It was produced from 2005 to 2006. It exists in two colors - black and gray / silver. Announced with the camera Nikon D50.
- Nikon 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6GII ED AF-S DX Nikkor SWM Aspherical - second version. It was produced from 2006 to 2007. There are no serious differences from the first version, the lenses use the same optical circuit. It exists in two colors - black and gray / silver. Announced with the camera Nikon D40.
- Nikon 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6G VR AF-S DX Nikkor SWM Aspherical - third version. It was produced from 2007 to the present day. Has a built-in image stabilizer (Nikon VR, Vibration Reduction). Unlike the first two, it does not have 'ED'-elements in its optical scheme. Announced with the camera Nikon D60.
- Nikon 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6GII VR II AF-S DX Nikkor - the fourth version. It has been produced since 2013. Unlike the third version, it has a new optical circuit and can be folded compactly for transportation. Updated stabilization system. For the first time he could be seen with a camera Nikon D3300.
- Nikon DX AF-P Nikkor 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6G - fifth version. Available since January 2016. It has a new optical circuit and a new stepper focus motor. Went on sale with the camera Nikon D3400.
- Nikon DX VR AF-P Nikkor 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6G - the sixth version. The same as the fifth version, but with a built-in image stabilizer. It was presented simultaneously with the fifth version. Went on sale with the camera Nikon D3400.
- Nikon Nikkor Z DX 16-50 1: 3.5-6.3 VR - seventh version, for mirrorless cameras such as Nikon z50... Available from Fall 2019. New optical design, foldable body, reduced aperture and built-in image stabilization.
Sigma at one time produced an interesting alternative to similar whale lenses in the face of a faster Sigma Zoom 18-50mm 1: 2.8-4.5 DC OS HSM.
Nikon 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6GII VR II AF-S DX Nikkor with front and rear cover
Main technical specifications of Nikon 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6GII VR II AF-S DX Nikkor:
| Review Instance Name | Nikon 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6GII VR II AF-S DX Nikkor 20041147 |
| Basic properties |
|
| Front Filter Diameter | 52 mm, plastic thread for filters |
| Focal length | 18-55 mm EGF for Nikon DX cameras is 27-82.5 mm (that's right, EGF recalculated even for Nikon DX lenses!) |
| Zoom ratio | 3.06 X (it’s customary to talk just about 3x zoom) |
| Designed by | for digital cameras Nikon DX |
| Number of aperture blades | 7 rounded petals |
| Tags | focal lengths for 18, 24, 35, 45 and 55 mm, bayonet mount mark and hood mount. 'L' mark for lens parking. |
| Diaphragm | 18 mm from F / 3.5 to F / 22. 55 mm from F / 5.6 to F / 36. The lens is deprived of the aperture control ring, control is via the camera menu (G - lens type) |
| MDF | 0.28 m during auto focus (with a maximum magnification ratio for macro photography of 1: 3.3) .0.25 m during manual focus (with a maximum magnification ratio for macro photography of 1: 2.8) |
| The weight | 195 g |
| Optical design | 11 elements in 8 groups. The optical scheme includes 1 aspherical element (in the optical scheme, the aspherical element is shown in blue). The image of the circuit is clickable. |
| Lens hood | Nikon HB-69, bayonet type (not supplied, and must be purchased separately) |
| Manufacturer country | MADE IN THAILAND |
| Instructions | See |
| Period | From December 2013 to the present day (at least until the summer of 2015), later Nikon DX VR AF-P Nikkor 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6G is replaced / supplemented |
| Price | View -> |
All kit lenses from Nikon class 18-55 use standard 52mm filters and are very similar in appearance. Also, all have an aspherical front lens. Interestingly, to replace the second version 'GII'version has arrived'VR'(with image stabilizer) in the optical scheme of which the' ED 'element has been removed. Thus, the first two versions ('G'and'GII') have one aspherical element and one' ED 'element in their optical design, and subsequent' VR 'versions have only one aspherical element each. Because of this, it is rumored that older lenses had better image quality. In addition, for some reason, the new version on its body does not have the inscriptions 'Aspherical' and 'SWM' (other models had such inscriptions - proof link for MKI, proof link for MKIII) Of course, image quality does not always directly depend on special elements in the optical scheme of the lens and, whatever one may say, new versions are still better than old ones. You can see the optical circuits of all Nikon DX lenses in this section, and the complete decoding of the letters'G, VR, AF S, DX, SWM, AM'can find here.
Although the optical scheme of the lens is the same 11 elements in 8 groups with one aspherical element as in the previous version, in fact it is redesigned, which is clearly visible in the schematic image:
Optical design Nikon 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6GII VR II AF-S DX Nikkor versus Nikon 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6G VR AF-S DX Nikkor
Most likely, the processing of the optical circuit was required in order to make the image quality better, especially when used on new multi megapixel cameras that are very picky to optics. Nikon 18-55 / 3.5-5.6GII VR II, like other similar lenses, has only 3x zoom (55/18 = 3.06X) and a small maximum aperture F / 3.5-5.6. The lack of aperture is partly compensated by the stabilizer, and there is no point in demanding something more from a simple 'whale' lens.
Nikon 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6GII VR II AF-S DX Nikkor when focusing on MDF
A funny thing - on the lens barrel in golden letters you can find its name 'Nikon DX VR AF-S Nikkor 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6GII', where the pointer 'II' stands next to the letter 'G'. In the name of the lens, written near the front lens, surprisingly, the pointer 'II' has already moved to another place, and the lens has become known as 'Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6G VR II'. Usually in my review I indicate the name of the lens exactly as it is written on its body, in this case it became a mystery to me how to indicate the name correctly. In brochures, and on the official website, the name 'Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6G VR II' is used, since it is customary to write the modification number there after the name of the lens. In fact, there is no difference, but it should be noted that in the case of two similar lenses Nikon DX AF-S Nikkor 18-200mm 1: 3.5-5.6G ED SWM VR IF Aspherical и Nikon DX AF-S Nikkor 18-200mm 1: 3.5-5.6GII ED SWM VR IF Aspherical manipulations with the designations 'GII' and 'VR II' misled people, forcing them to believe that the new version 18-200 / 3.5-5.6 has a new generation stabilization system. As a result, in the review I named the lens 'Nikon 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6GII VR II AF-S DX Nikkor'.
Rear view of Nikon 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6GII VR II AF-S DX Nikkor
Stabilizer
In the new lens, unlike Nikon 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6G VR AF-S DX Nikkor, uses an improved stabilization system, allowing to obtain 4 steps of compensation excerpts, while the previous model only claims 3 stages (therefore the designation 'VR II' is very relevant here). In numerical terms, this means that you can shoot at shutter speeds 16 times slower than required by a lens without a stabilizer. For example, when shooting stationary subjects at 55mm focal length, instead of limiting at 1/60 sec., You can shoot at 1/4 sec.
The stabilization system also worked well on the old lens, but on the new one it got even better :). On the lens housing you can find stabilization system operation switch 'VR ON / OFF' (Stabilizer On / Off), you can leave it constantly on and generally forget about its existence.
Disconnect the stabilizer only in rare cases, for example, when shooting with a tripod, or to save battery power. The stabilizer works almost silently. It is stated that the stabilizer can determine the movement of the camera during the creation of panoramas
Nikon 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6GII VR II AF-S DX Nikkor front view
L button
To use the lens, you must first unlock it. To do this, you have to press a special button that holds the lens in the 'L' ('Locked' - 'Locked') position, located on the zoom ring and turn it towards the 18 mm mark, after which a slight click will be heard. To fold the lens, just press the button in the same way and turn the zoom ring in the opposite direction. When folded, the lens is noticeably shorter than in the working one, with a protruding trunk. Personally, I don't like the fact that to 'activate' the lens you need to press and twist something else, with the Nikon 18-55 / 3.5-5.6GII VR II I shot and transported it without bothering with this button.
On camera Nikon D80, D700 and, most likely, on many other old cameras, when the camera is folded, the lens 'does not see', and the error 'F–' blinks in the aperture value field. Also, when folded, nothing is visible in the viewfinder.
On camera Nikon D3300, and most likely, on many other modern cameras, when the lens is folded, the camera displays the message “Before taking a photo, turn the zoom ring to extend the lens”.
View of the lens with a lens hood on the camera Nikon D3300. The photo does not show the original hood.
Focusing
Ultrasonic focus motor integrated in the lens SWM (Silent Wave Motor) will allow you to focus on All Nikon Digital SLR Cameras, even on the simplest.
Nikon 18-55 / 3.5-5.6GII VR II has a focus switch 'AM', be sure to set it to the' M 'position for manual focusing, otherwise the focus motor may be damaged. Unfortunately, the lens does not have a continuous manual focus control mode - Nikon M / A.
Auto focus on the lens not fast. The focusing speed is exactly the same as the previous version of the lens.
When focusing front the lens does not rotate, but drives forward with the trunk of the lens. Focusing manually is inconvenient, the focus ring moves only 45 degrees, and the focus ring is not rubberized. Of course, the lens is designed for fans who use exclusively automatic focus.
Symbols on the Nikon 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6GII VR II AF-S DX Nikkor
The lens has different MDF when working with automatic and manual focusing. The body is marked with '∞-0.28m / 0.92ft' focusing limits, which is real only when working with autofocus. In this mode, you can focus up to 28 cm and at the same time obtain a maximum magnification ratio of 1: 3.3, but if you switch to manual focusing mode, the MDF will become 25 cm, and the magnification ratio for macro will become 1: 2.8, which is very good for the standard 'zoom'. With the Nikon 18-55 / 3.5-5.6GII VR II, it is very easy to shoot small objects up close. Why there is a limitation of the MDF in automatic focusing mode - I do not know.
Nikon 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6GII VR II AF-S DX Nikkor and Nikon 80-200mm AF Nikkor 1: 4.5-5.6D
When the focal length changes, the front lens moves forward with the trunk, but does not rotate, while the rear lens moves like a pump, creating a slight vacuum cleaner effect (sucking in air, and with it dust). When the focal length changes, the lens trunk travels in waves - it lengthens and then shortens.
The lens can be purchased with an original Nikon HB-69 bayonet hood, which is installed in special grooves near the front lens. The hood can be installed in the opposite direction for transportation, in which case access to the focus ring will be lost.
Nikon 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6GII VR II AF-S DX Nikkor view on the ZK Nikon AF N8008s
Behavior on Nikon FX cameras
Nikon 18-55 / 3.5-5.6GII VR II designed for cameras Nikon DX (cropped cameras) and when used on Nikon full-frame cameras (in 'FX' crop mode) it will produce black edges in the image, as shown in the first photo below:
It's funny, but in the range of focal lengths from 24 to 55 mm, the dimming of the corners when used on a full-format camera is not so serious.
If on Nikon FX cameras select 'Image area' -> 'Auto. DX Crop '->' On ', then after attaching a Nikon DX lens to such a camera, the camera will automatically use' DX Format (24x16) '.
Cunning: if in the menu of full-size cameras in the “AF point illumination” setting, select “Off”, then after you enable the cropping mode 'DX 24x16 format (in fact, crop), the unused area of the image visible in JVI, will be darkened, which will greatly facilitate sighting / photography using the Nikon DX lens.
because of crop factor Nikon DX cameras EGF lens (equivalent focal length) will be 27-82,5 mm (18 * 1.5 and 55 * 1.5, where 1.5 is crop factor Nikon DX cameras). Please do not write in the comments with the 'Shift' button held down and a million exclamation points that 'DX lenses are designed for cropped cameras, and therefore, it seems, the focal length does not need to be recalculated'. For cropped cameras EGF recalculated always, for any lenses without any exceptions. In general, this range of focal lengths is really convenient - here you have both a wide angle of 18 mm and the ability to get a little closer using 55 mm.
Inside Nikon 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6GII VR II AF-S DX Nikkor. Users are better off not seeing all of these boards :)
The lens barrel is made of plastic, including a plastic bayonet mount. From the bayonet side, boards, springs and other internals of the lens are visible. Nikon 18-55 / 3.5-5.6GII VR II made in Thailand. The aperture consists of 7 blades and closes down to F / 22 @ 18mm and F / 36 @ 55mm. The lens itself is very simple - apart from the focal length values, the bayonet mount mark and the hood mount, there is nothing useful. For example, a whale lens SMC Pentax-DA 1: 3.5-5.6 18-55mm AL also has a focus distance scale.
Everything is relative. Nikon 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6GII VR II AF-S DX Nikkor is not so small. Left on the photo shows the lenses Industar-50-2 3,5 / 50 и MS Helios-81H 2/50
Image quality
When used on Nikon D80 I did not notice any serious differences from the previous version as an image. Perhaps on cameras with a breathtaking amount of megapixels, such as Nikon D3200, D5200, D5300, D3300, D7100 You can see the improvement in the picture.
Supplement after Nikon D3300 Reviewon which I used Nikon 18-55 / 3.5-5.6GII VR II, the latter showed itself very, very well. See examples in D3300 review.
Here link to the archive with the originals - 704 MB, 79 photos in .NEF format (RAW) from cameras Nikon D80 (DX) and D700 (FX). More sample photos on Nikon 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6GII VR II AF-S DX Nikkor with original RAW files can be found in the Nikon D3300 review.
Nikon 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6GII VR II AF-S DX Nikkor view on the ZK N8008s, the lens is mounted backwards with reverse macro adapter KO-N / 52 produced by the Arsenal plant, costing 5 cu :)
The Nikon 18-55 / 3.5-5.6GII VR II is the lightest lens for Nikon DX cameras, weighing only 195 grams and will not get in the way when traveling or hiking. The lightest autofocus zoom lens in the Nikkor lineup is Nikon AF Nikkor 35-80mm 1: 4-5.6D MKII with a weight of 180 grams.
By the way, this lens can be easily converted into a super macro lens, which is described in the 'Macro adapter for Nikon G-type lenses'. If there is a desire to change or supplement the Nikon 18-55 / 3.5-5.6GII VR II with something else, I recommend that you look into section on the selection of cameras and lenses Nikon.
What the creators of this button really dreamed about :)
My experience
Not for the record. Of course, a whale lens is not the pinnacle of perfection. This is a pretty soulless plastic lens with a hard image. Even today, 3x zoom is a fossil from the Paleozoic era. I observe that many users who bought a DSLR camera for over 9000 units of currency, and at the same time received a similar whale, are unhappy with the zoom ratio. Some people sell an SLR camera along with a prime lens, then I have to do it in personal correspondence anwser the questions like “Where to turn the zoom?”. Sometimes, to make an interesting shot with the Nikon 18-55 / 3.5-5.6GII VR II, you have to make love with your camera for a long time. True, the one who, after all, learn to take good pictures on a whale - will take good pictures on any optics... Therefore, to summarize, a whale lens is a two-faced beast, and it is bad with it, and not good without it. As for the Nikon 18-55 / 3.5-5.6GII VR II itself, this is a logical evolutionary development of standard lenses with a tilt for modern mirrorless cameras.
Video review can be viewed at my youtube channel:
Prices for various modifications of Nikon class 18-55 / 3.5-5.6 lenses:
Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment. Many different photographic equipment can be found on AliExpress.
An accurate list of all Nikon DX Nikkor lenses
- 10.5 mm/ 2.8G AF Fisheye [gold ring]
- 35 mm/1.8G AF-S
- 40 mm/2.8G AF-S Microphone
- 85 mm/3.5G AF-S VR Microphone
- 10-20 mm/4.5-5.6G AF-P VR
- 10-24 mm/3.5-4.5G AF-S
- 12-24 mm/4G AF-S [gold ring]
- 16-80 mm/ 2.8-4IN AF S VR [gold ring]
- 16-85 mm/3.5-5.6G AF-S VR
- 17-55 mm/2.8G AF-S [gold ring]
- 18-55 mm/3.5-5.6G AF-S [black / silver]
- 18-55 mm/3.5-5.6GII AF-S [black / silver]
- 18-55 mm/3.5-5.6G AF-S VR
- 18-55 mm/3.5-5.6GII AF-S VR
- 18-55 mm/3.5-5.6G AF-P
- 18-55 mm/3.5-5.6G AF-P VR
- 18-70 mm/3.5-4.5G AF-S
- 18-105 mm/3.5-5.6G AF-S VR [Thailand / China]
- 18-135 mm/3.5-5.6G AF-S
- 18-140 mm/3.5-5.6G AF-S VR [Thailand / China]
- 18-200 mm/3.5-5.6G AF-S VR [Japan / China]
- 18-200 mm/3.5-5.6GII AF-S VR
- 18-300 mm/3.5-5.6G VR
- 18-300 mm/3.5-6.3G VR
- 55-200 mm/4-5.6G AF-S [black / silver, Japan / China]
- 55-200 mm/4-5.6G AF-S VR
- 55-200 mm/4-5.6GII ED VR
- 55-300 mm/4.5-5.6G AF-S VR
- 70-300 mm/4.5-6.3G AF-P
- 70-300 mm/4.5-6.3G AF-P VR
Results
Nikon 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6GII VR II AF-S DX Nikkor - expected update from previous version Nikon 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6G VR AF-S DX Nikkor SWM Aspherical. A whale lens, he is also a whale lens in Africa, with all its obvious advantages and disadvantages :).
In January 2016, a new model came to Nikon 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6GII VR II AF-S DX Nikkor add / change - Nikon DX VR AF-P Nikkor 18-55mm 1:3.5-5.6G.
Material prepared Arkady Shapoval. Training/Consultations | Youtube | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | Telegram
Current do not pay fuck this glass with FR of 18-55mm all these bells and whistles like "GII VRII" ??? Am I dumb? :) Is it stupid to rip off the dough? Zlaby damn :(
Please unsubscribe a bit more culturally in the comments :)
I like to photograph the city at night, so the aperture and stabilizer are important to me.
Let's say the goal: to take an evening photo, it is impossible to use a tripod.
Which lens in this situation will be better than the Tamron AF 17-50mm f / 2.8 SP XR Di II LD Aspherical [IF] VC or this updated kit from Nikon?
Thank you for your help.
Please write a little programmatic comments.
Yes, it is, nothing to do with the money!)
At the mention of this magic button (locking the lens in the “folded” state), I immediately thought: it would be better to focus M / A instead.
the lettering on the button is a masterpiece!
Cool video review! For more of these! Thank you Arkady!
We will try to shoot more and more video reviews, while raising their technical and creative level.
Do not. The Johannes has repeatedly proved its failure and lowering a good site to the level of a video blog and all sorts of max and 10500 makes me a sad pony.
Well, as can be seen from the same review, for my part, I do not forget about the text :) Everything Will Be Alright!
Arkady, I propose to shoot part of the video with a lens from the review, it would be interesting, I think ... for one point, indicate the equipment on which the shooting is performed.
A year and a half has passed, and the situation with video reviews has not moved forward. And without video today, nowhere, especially high-quality. But you did it and not bad. Any jerk with a phone imagines himself a video blogger. Compared to what is being shot now, you looked like real professionals.
and me and so the norm, the people flock to the video. Here and now with the adequacy is not always smooth and will become very bad. There are at least no frank students here. The Kalabukhov house will disappear. Nuivonah these videos
With adequacy, now I’ve strained everywhere, and video is becoming a priority way of presenting information and should not be neglected.
On the official website in the features of the lens appear:
SWM, SIC (Super Integrated Coating), VR, AM, 195g. Aspherical element is specified only in the specifications. Apparently, this will not surprise anyone.
But I wonder how Super Integrated Coating affects picture quality? Do I understand correctly that its main function is to "insure" the picture from the negative influences of side and back light?
SIC is molded on all modern Nikon lenses, this is also not surprising. Imagine a lens without enlightenment - with no contrast, glare-unstable with incomprehensible color rendition. Enlightenment gets rid of this.
After all, he wasn’t in the previous version?
SIC (or its previous version NIC) has been on all lenses since the 1970s. This is a "feature" by default, in fact, that's why I don't even mention it.
Oh yes, I confuse this with a super-mega-nanocrystalline coating :). thanks
Nano Crystal Coat is a different story and optics with a different price tag :)
So, ok - let's start with the good. Thank you for the review - it is gratifying to see that you continue to delight us with new reviews, including videos. And now the tar. It is very annoying to be constantly playing with the grip and changing the plan in the video review, moreover, even when the operator translates the frame from the front, he cannot hold the camera - as if the rocking on the ship - can of course now be the so-called. trend, but it certainly doesn't improve perception.
PS: In the new lens, the biggest plus is the fixed thread for the light filter - the rest, by and large, is secondary.
Sincerely.
When I shoot a video (all videographers will forgive me now, because I'm just a photographer) I shoot myself from a tripod at f2.0 on a Nikon D5100 camera, turning the screen towards me to see what is happening there, and during shooting I do not move frame by frame, but I just make different takes of different angles, after which I stitch everything into 1 video, and the depth of field does not go anywhere and the background is beautifully blurred. And I sew the change of plans with the standard transition “dissolve for 0.20 seconds transition” and it seems that everything turns out not bad.
And by the way, a question to Arkady: “How can I add AVATARK to my comments? Like a user LYNX and Vladimir Morgunov, otherwise I'm tired of being faceless ”
But what about the D300s and its video, and how can hands after the D300s generally touch such small things as the D5100?
How to add is described here https://radojuva.com.ua/about-radojuva/ For everyone.
Yes, how to say small things Arkady, of course I agree that after the D300s in control and size of the case is not ice. But let's be optimistic and admit that you can shoot on FED 5c))) which I recently tried by the way))) Here is what came of it (there are pictures in the review)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9d2b7X3jf4
I like the D5100: the rotary screen (which is not available in the D300s and it is not very convenient to shoot video with it), the video quality (better than in the D300s), and a less noisy matrix than in the D300s, and of course its dimensions and inconspicuousness with 35. When I go on a mission (that is, I shoot for money), of course I shoot with the D300s for convenience, and the D5100 is always in my backpack in case of a breakdown or as a second camera with a high-aperture fix for a “quick portrait” at the time of reporting on 17-50mm f2.8. And when I shoot for the soul and for myself, I have to carry all my junk to the scrap and I dart around the streets and courtyards with a D5100 + 35 around my neck in search of “interesting people” for a portfolio on the site.
D300s will not forgive you :)
Forgive you. After all, it was not for nothing that I left him in my set. And not the carcasses that I used to have. Such as the D3100, D7100 and D700 which I sold all by choosing exactly the D300s. But the D5100 also doesn’t bast, and with good glasses, oh, how surprising it is at times, it’s not for nothing that I advise it to all amateur photographers as the BEST DSLR for the home.
It's no secret - why the 300s turned out to be better than the newer carcasses, let alone the full-frame d700?
The 300s has a magic letter 's' - Superior :)
Comrade Trehsotkovich - what's the point of filming EVERYTHING and / or ALWAYS at f / 2, if we're talking about video?
I shoot video at f2.0 because our “city” does not have a beautiful background. No, of course I can shoot a review of the lens, for example, against the background of torn roads, or against the background of children who sneak up to see what I am doing there))) or against the background of ugly houses painted with obscene words) but why? who will watch such a video later? Here Arkady was once charged in the comments that his eyes were running around, but what will they tell me if I record a video against the background of a three-letter word ??? therefore f2.0 and I do not injure the spectator's psyche with our cheerful “town”)))
Yes, alas, one should admit - is it possible to escape from our reality to the European Union? ;) or shoot everything at f / 2)))
Do not idealize the European Union, especially its “members” from the Baltics and Eastern Europe!
Do not litter in the forum Arcadia. Here we are only talking about photography and not about the best countries in the world. You have not opened America to anyone by writing that in Eastern Europe and the Baltic states it is a paradise. Everyone knows that.
I know such a problem
it was a test of the pen and this style is now really in trend. in the future it will be a little less twitchy, but you definitely won’t get static from us)))
And what are your goals - to convey information to the viewer or to show off a narrow grip and epileptic twitching of the camera?
I think it’s too early for you to present Volodya :)
Firstly, it is not "presented", and secondly, not - not early, I am a spectator - I see and evaluate more objectively than the one who creates the video sequence. After all, I did not write something like “uh” or “the author drink yadu” - I pointed out specific shortcomings that interfere with the perception of information. You should have listened, not kicked off with a hint of prof. superiority.
I don’t kick it, but as for the photo blog, there are really a lot of unnecessary requirements. Pay for our work and we will do these reviews at least on the ears :)
The discussion has exhausted itself. Further conversation does not make sense. All the best.
Well, yes, if there is nothing to cover, it is easier to get away from the conversation :)
almost correctly wrote AM not “the author drink yadu” but “aftar drink yaGu” :) And by the way, I would change my nickname in place of AM, because AM is translated from Kazakh into Russian as “pi… yes” :) no offense but I just live in Kazakhstan and was shocked by such a nickname :) Urgently ask me, or if these are your initials, then at least divide by dots :) And at the expense of the shortcomings of Arkady's video, I'll tell you: "Your RIGHT video clip in the studio !!!" ... And then many here bail in comments, but they themselves can not remove ANYTHING. Arkady is shooting at least something, but what did you shoot? So I also sometimes shoot video clips about photographic equipment and small lessons from a photo, and I know how hard it is to do, firstly if you read the text on the camera from a piece of paper, it turns out as I was told "sad g ... but" but if I speak to the camera from myself then there is much to be missed. Try it yourself and then send us a link HOW TO DO IT, I'm serious, try it. And thanks to Arkady for those videos that he does (does it for us for FREE !!!)
... Arkady is shooting at least something ..
nefigase “at least something”. Let's be objective, it's better than Arkady's blog, there is nothing on the subject of photos in Runet, and on the Internet as a whole there are also not many worthy alternatives.
So do not underestimate the merits of Radozhiva.
Well, we monitor all the reviews, so far the like / dislike ratio from the point of view of the picture is about 50/1. further questions will be?
50/1 looks no. better than 50 / 1.8 :-)
I set myself the goal of creating an interesting product that is relevant from the point of view of modern trends, which will have both a sufficiently deep semantic load and a fun, modern wrapper. Unfortunately for you, at the moment this shooting style is in trend, watch modern cinema and see for yourself. I repeat - look for one single plan and read the text from a sheet of paper from other testers, this is not and will not be.
Contemporary cinema is also my yardstick. I pointed out to you that the picture does not allow you to focus on the very essence of the review. This time. Two - no one asks you to shoot static, but what happened, for example, in the first review was much more pleasant to contemplate than in review # 2. Three - the way you react indicates that you are too idealizing the work done. I understand that you have invested time, effort and no one pays you for it, and it does you honor, BUT criticism is an integral part of any creative process and if you perceive it as an insult, this is your right, although in vain. (I do not there was a goal to belittle the result of your work or to offend you).
PS: trolls can rest.
+1
Funny, you just criticize normally, and do not write in the style of "show off a narrow grip ... epileptic twitching ..." :)
In the first comment, I was quite neutral. Yes, maybe the next ones looked more aggressive, but only because one of the authors of the video spoke in such a way that he is more concerned about “being in trend” than how such techniques are justified and he does not really care how they are perceived. I expressed my opinion - this is my right, you can shoot video reviews as you like - this is your right.
And you do not involve others, they were talking with me, and in response to my well-grounded remark about "presenting" on 20.07.2014/09/15 at XNUMX:XNUMX, they gave birth to a huge chunk of text :) right now you will shut up "maybe the next ones looked more aggressive" :) Usually I am very I am loyal to the commentators, but sometimes you still need to put people in their place, right?
You think it is reasonable - I don't think so. Now I’m explaining to you - to “screw it up” to the wrong address.
Then I'm sorry, I am also wrong. Will we close this topic and disperse on a cheerful note? and then the flood was bred :)
Great review. Including a video review. Thanks Arkady.
Just do not photograph please, as a macro example, a dollar :)
To all photographers of good and smart shots!
I have not seen the best reviews. Respect.
Review neither take away nor add, great! Separate respect to the operator :)
Hello! Please invite Arkady to review the wonderful Voigtlander Nokton 58mm f / 1.4 SL II lens again.
As I see, being able to take pictures, you can squeeze a decent quality of photos out of a whale lens!
Fine. I really liked it. It’s a pity there is just no way to test new lenses on new matrices.
Looking forward to new reviews.
thanks to Arkady for his work, many people watch the video reviews, but the main thing is that the text is there, not everyone can properly absorb information from the video, all the same, the text is interesting to me, and the question on the video is why is such a low contrast the black light is not black but the series is this lens during processing it happened.
I beg you, many even write clearly, and not in the form of an incoherent set of words and a stream of thoughts, they can’t, and you speak for the ease of assimilation of it. ((
To be honest, I do not like an overly contrasting picture, well, that's my taste. besides, given that many people here do not like the "twitchy" style, so imagine what they will say when I add a deep cinematic post to the twitchy style, an overabundance of BOKE, refocusing, constant penetrations and changes in the size of plans ... then from me here stone will not remain on stone)))
C'mon, in Radozhiv the majority of civilized people, thank God :)
Please tell me if you do not remove the lens from the parking lot, that is, can you take pictures from the lock?
The answer to your question is in the review:
Thank you!
A very educational test. Sometimes a whale is a very useful thing. I agree that the whale is a very double objective.
Good review. Thanks to the author. It is a pity that in the folded state the focal length is not 24-28mm? he wouldn’t have a price then :)
sealed with a question mark :)
Dear Arkady! In the 90s, there was information that plastic optical elements were used in inexpensive lenses. How is the matter now? Thanks.
It is necessary to disassemble and try on the tooth, since such information cannot be found in the specifications. Some lenses actually use hybrid or all-plastic elements.
I do not know for sure, but I also heard that plastic lenses are used in the 18-55 whale. But as for me, WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE from what is the lens? He photographs gorgeous for this price, the sharpness is ringing (in contrast to the SOVKOVSKY dull soapy "painting" NEDO "lenses"), you can get excellent pictures with your head on your shoulders and attentiveness. The front glass and the back glass are made of glass (I personally checked it for a tooth, as Arkady said), which means you won't get to the plastic lenses and won't scratch them, which means they don't care if they are even plastic, the main thing is what picture they give in the end.
I think maybe some kind of super-sophisticated plastic can be much better than glass for some unknown optical indicators, so you can consider this as new technology.
What a manner of scolding everything, how did shovel glasses offend you? Moreover, the very first ones were Zeiss ones, obtained from reparations, and Zeiss schemes were used. So do not drive the wave, if you do not like something, it does not mean that it is bad. Try to shoot a HOLGA pinhole, most likely you will not like it, but there are whole societies of lomography lovers who are delighted with this piece of plastic.
Sovkov glasses are cool because they can be thrown at clients and killed to death) In general, I do not have any phobias about the scoop. I already wrote somewhere that I filmed with Helios from Zenith screwed to D300s and I even liked its fantastic bokeh. But the fact that it glares at 120% and a white veil goes over the frame and sharpness disappears, and the frame becomes soapy, this is really infuriating. Therefore, I once and for all made a verdict for myself: a scoop means not for commercial photography. Some Soviet glasses are really good in terms of the picture, but their ease of use and the unstable result from frame to frame are annoying. Of course, if you are an amateur, or photograph for yourself, then I highly recommend Soviet glasses, as they are indestructible, cheap, and sometimes give out a more delicious picture than Nikon's, but be prepared for the fact that the shooting will take a long time and you will get tired. As for Nikon glasses, which I love, they SIMPLY WORK, and give a STABLE result in any conditions, and the picture is 9 out of 10 points in quality and beauty.
There’s another problem. Glass preserves its physical properties over time. How God behaves through plastic, say 30 years, God knows. Clouding, deformation, etc. I observe such a picture - people, apparently by inexperience, completely get rid of whales 18- 55. Probably tired of clinking sharpness and voluminous picture. The categoricality of Alexander Trekhsotkovich is simply amazing.
glass also does not retain physical properties, this was discovered by examining stained glass windows in old churches - the bottom of each stained glass element was thicker than the top, at first they could not understand why and how such glasses were made, and then realized that they were made ordinary, with the same thickness, just for 300-400 years, glass flowed down, making the bottom thicker than the top. The lens does not lie in one position for 300 years, so the glass in it can be considered eternal :) Arkady, thank you for the review, the operator and all the commentators too :)
Now I already have a complex on something. I then bought a loshara D300s and it has an aluminum case, which means that in my life (60 years of use) I will erase the case and my children and grandchildren will not be able to make money on photography, because they will have a daddy camera with holes ???? Oh, what have I done !!! They gave me a camera for big money that won't even last 100 years !!!! Aaaaaa ... I'll sue Nikon!
Yes, I heard about the windows of temples, glass is an amorphous body - such a state of aggregation of matter, neither one nor the other. In this respect, plastic is "better" - after all, it is a solid body (:
it's all nonsense about the glass of temples. I watched the film, there is a flow of glass over time, long tubes of type cannot be stored vertically, and so on. mentioned and glass in windshields ... google.
Answer to Iznurenkov. What are the next 30 years? When you buy pants for yourself, do you take them for 30 years too? My grandmother still keeps a 20-liter cast-iron pan from the 60s in the closet, and says that it is better than the current ones, that the current bullshit, and that they can be pierced when you scrape the fried potatoes from the bottom with a knife, but the old uuuuuu, that was then quality… .. Think wider. All equipment, including lenses, MUST have an expiration date and resource. And even if we estimate that a whale 18-55 costs 3000 rubles, and you, for example, shoot an open air for 100 rubles (God forbid, of course) how many times will you pay off the lens before you have lens clouding and deformation ???? Nothing is eternal. Even if we take into account that you are shooting not for money for it, but for yourself, I don’t think that even after 7 years you yourself will want to shoot something like that))) Although there are individuals such as my grandmother) Maybe you are one of those people. Then a cast-iron camera with a titanium lens and aluminum (not rubber, which in 30 years will wear off to holes) handles to help you!
For a long time I haven't posted anything here))) As for me, glasses 18-55 are good at 18 mm. A kind of fix with the ability to zoom. At 18 (my whale has at least) the best sharpness. And the aperture ratio of 3.5 is not bad. The further you zoom in, things get worse and darker. It is a pity that the alternatives for the SHU on the crop are nothing - 10-24 for a lot of money and similar glasses from 3 sides. So I live with 35 and 50 fixes and 18-55 for SHU. The set of lenses is certainly redundant for such a short range, but what I want from 18-55 at 35 and 55 millimeters is achievable only at hole 8. And it's oh, how dark that even a flash does not help. Here 17-55 2.8 the answer to all questions, but there is no trust in sigma and tamrons, everything is on order. So I'm afraid that they will bring a soap-making pipe - you can't really check it in the store and then suffer. Eh, why is the native nikkor 17-55 not worth at least 30 thousand ... so I would live))))
Dmitry K. I fully support you. They wrote everything correctly. I want to write to you about the Nikkor 17-55 f2.8G DX that I bought from novya in the store, and used it for exactly a year, after which there was stress with money and I sold it (I sold it in vain, I had to use it as Iznurenkov for 300 years and bequeathed to my grandchildren by inheritance) after which I took Sigma DC 17-50mm f2.8 EX HSM OS and have been using it for half a year now. After all this, I can say that Sigma is nothing worse than Nikkor in the picture, that is, with Sigma I am afraid on the set to climb into the crowd of drunken guests at a wedding, and with Nikkor I was a greyhound like a tank and climbed everywhere because it was sooooo tightly made and the trunk that leaves it leaves inside the hood, and at the sigma the trunk leaves along with the hood and then you need to be careful with the glass. Still in sigma, I don’t like that when you focus, the focus ring rotates under your fingers, and you didn’t like that if you focused on autofocus and want to manually focus it to the desired result, you will have to switch the focus switch to M mode and only then turn the focus ring to Otherwise, you will roll his head. Well, of course, the focusing speed of Nikkor is several times higher than that of Sigma. And in terms of aperture, it seems to be the same here, and 2.8 here and there gives a ringing sharpness throughout the field, XA is not there, the bokeh is a bit better at Nikkor, the Sigma is very warm in color. In the back-end, Nikkor never gave a glare at all) and Sigma only gives a glare. In short, if you do not have much money, then Sigma is an excellent choice for every day, excellent value for money. If money is enough, then of course Niccor.
Here in my video review of Sigma you can look at the Speed test there I did to show how fast it focuses https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-6JE6b8pmg&list=UUpl9O0WQIuGohuEPCrhcuMg
5 times I forgot about the switch and twisted with the same hands. Nothing is folded.
Funny, my whale is 18mm sharper in the center than at the edges.
Most likely a miss of autofocus.
And then your granny will be smarter than you .. No need to pile pots, pants and lenses in a heap. Every decade there have been great lenses, including among the “soviet bullshit.” There are many of them, believe me, my categorical friend, passing names calling his own granny "individual". Such lenses are valued, do not part with them for many years, do not sell them to buy another fashionable pants. Incompetence and categoricalness are bad in themselves, It's terrible if they are also militant.
Of course, of course, they don't sell them to ANYONE, they value them, they don't part with them for 100 years, they don't take pictures once again so that the aluminum doesn't wear off, they bequeathed to their grandchildren by inheritance .... Some kind of epic about immortal lenses)
I propose to ignore Sasha Trehsotkovich, there’s no sense in talking, and I’m tired of turning the wall in search of meaning
Easily. I’m not even offended if Arkady does it. But I, unlike many trolls here, I personally used a lot of Nikon lenses and carcasses myself, and everything I write, I’m writing not just from my thoughts, but from what I personally tried and what I shot and what difference I saw. I’m not a amateur kitchen photographer, I earn money by photography, and I know which glasses can be taken and which ones work out well and WORK in difficult conditions. As for the whale 18-55mm glass, I also had it on my very first D3100 carcass, where I learned the techniques of photography, so I wrote that it produces excellent ringing sharpness. Not from my thoughts I wrote, but because I shot them. And I think that I am not writing bullshit here. And I wouldn’t refuse that Arkady cleaned my texts with Iznurenkov where I write THAT EXPRESSLY does not apply to the topic.
Lord, enlighten this lad, for he does not know that he speaks.
+1
I support. Tired of it.
Great whale lens review, great video !!!!!
Don’t scold 18-55 for God's sake, of course, there isn’t enough zoom more preferable than 18-135, but this is a different price, there isn’t enough aperture for portraits. But he copes with the banal tasks of landscape, architecture, full-length photo. Tell me, what is the alternative to a wide angle on a crop for such money ???
here I am about the same. SHU on Crop or expensive and stupid, or a whale
Arkady. A little about the video sequence. You need to learn a little how to behave in the frame. Sometimes you look at an object from the side of the camera. Very often on the sides and on the object (lens). I'm not an expert, of course, but I think that the more you look into the camera lens, the more contact with the viewer. The camera - yes, it twitches. Better to shoot with a tripod and take several takes, choosing the right angles. Well, I will not talk about the cart, it is expensive and long. But steadicams with normal stabilization would be good. Plus, in the last review, the focus goes away many times. Of course, I understand that everything is done on the fly, but it would be possible to duplicate the failed moments. And yet - it seemed to me that in this review, compared to the first, there is less contrast. And one more thing - the operator often cuts his head (she leaves the frame). Although it may be such an artistic move ...
Another missing talent critic, damn it.
__________________________________________
And to me, for example, I prefer just a light and laid-out familiarization review without replay and show-offs, so do not impose your IMHs.
let the author of the video answer do not meddle. if you like looking at the subject of the review out of focus - please see. a little higher. where does the replay and show-off. all the same, only a little better.
Let the author answer?
__________________________________________
And what else does the author have to do in order to please you? Accept a comment to your attention if you consider it necessary.
Desu.
you know what's the matter ... for 100% information content there is a text review with a bunch of photos, a bunch of useful information, etc. - the video review is in addition, just a small free supplement to the main article. if we made these video reviews for money, then we would shoot the way the book writes - with wireless cranes, steadicams, carts and focusing devices - but since we do all this just like that, then we have the right to make the product the way it is to us like. so consider that this review was my personal whim, I just tried this style of shooting in practice and got a lot of valuable information on this subject and even more experience. of course, I will take into account all criticisms and will try to shoot more evenly. and a cut head is such an artistic move, you are right.
Thanks for the answer. I hope you will grow professionally ...
By the way, the steadic is inexpensive, and it improves the picture at times.
I do not want that steadic, which is inexpensive - I had one. if we buy, then a serious thing, with a carbon console, a movable gimble, a two-section arm and a lightweight West. and I no longer want to buy a clumsy Indian or a cheap Chinese, it's better without him at all. but I'm working on it, there will be a result soon.
“One likes a watermelon, and another like a pork cartilage.” To please all of us is a utopia.
http://www.pekarskas.com/#!untitled/zoom/c199t/imageb06
Fun for the sake of. I took a KIT 18-55mm from a friend, just not the same as in the review, but the usual one with VR and I shot one frame in the open air on it) the joke was that the girl was squeaking from this photo) So even at KIT, people can take WOW photos! It shoots not fotik and fotografFF;) The whale rules!
Famous backgrounds of Petropavlovsk?
Yes. The ones that I talked about) Here's how to shoot on such a background on f5.6)))) Throw tomatoes later)))
Have you tried to leave the city?
I tried of course. But laziness of customers sometimes does not allow this)
Well, even if the girl was beeping, then FograFF is really cool.
The review is interesting, although the lens is nothing, and I wanted to buy it))). The video is quite professionally made. Despite several focus flights, in principle, not critical. (In many multimillion-dollar blockbusters, the focus often goes out of sight, for example, this is given the closed aperture. On bd-rips, it goes straight into the eyes.) Of course, I would take it off the tripod myself, because I can't afford a camera trolley ...
If a digital SLR had not been invented, I would have become an operator ...
it is, I am a little out of focus, I lost my class ... I will try to get there. besides, the hole, perhaps, is also better to cover. thanks for the tip!