My first post

[Michael J]

I wandered over here after visiting some dead threads in "that other" forum. I'm posting this here purely for your amusement and should anyone want to make a comment...

So last week, I was wondering, how much better is my Nikkor 50mm f/1.6 (on my D750) prime than the Tokina 24-70 f/2.8 zoomie that I quite like although it's way too heavy to carry around for more than a few minutes.

So I shot the bird here with both, both at 50mm at f/5.6 @ 1/25. The 50mm seems to be just a smidgen marginally sharper but hardly worth mentioning. Unfortunately, even though I tried to do a proper A/B comparison, for some reason the 50mm got a higher exposure bias that the camera threw on for some stupid reason, even though I was in manual mode. The 50mm here is a little darker even though I thought it was a faster lens. Or maybe I don't understand this "fast/slow" business. Or bias. Or anything.

I never claimed to be a good photographer. Or smart. LOL

The bird... that's a different story.

 

[dirk]

mmmmmhhhhh....

I am not sure what your question is...?

 

[PentUp]

which photo is from which lens?

 

[Michael J]

which photo is from which lens?

The first is the zoom, the second is the prime.

 

[Smaug]

What I get from this is that the zoom is so good that it's hard to tell apart from a prime for this type of subject.

Since it's so much bigger & heavier, you would carry it for versatility, but also know that it is a very high quality lens. (we assumed this for a long time, with fixed aperture zooms) It's nice to see it demonstrated, though.

Conversely, you would now carry the prime for its faster maximum aperture or lighter weight, but not really image quality.

I recognize your avatar pic from DPR; welcome!