I just got that lens today. I am only taking a couple lenses with me to Europe. This keeps me light and gives me lots of options. I am based in Vegas, so it was great to see you using the lns on stuff I recognize.
@@ddmcreative that’s awesome!! I appreciate the watch and I hope that you have a great time in Europe. Would love to hear how the lens does for you when you get back!
Is it possible for you to share the RAW images with us so we can see to what extend the images are able to brightened? I have a Z8 and am interested in this lens but f8 at night is a tough compromise for the weight and cost saving in this lens.
Unfortunately I don’t have that ability. When I met up with Nikon, we did a camera switch. They had me use their Z 8 with the new lens and they filmed on my Z f. I only brought an SD card with me, so that went into the Z 8’s secondary slot which was set to recording JPEGs. I didn’t think to check on the menus if their secondary slot was recording RAWs or JPEGs because we were pressed for time. Sounds like a bad excuse 😅 but it is what is. Lesson learned. I appreciate the watch regardless!
In all photos your stills came out very much darker than the video of the same subjects. And this is photographing scenes lit by bright lights - Vegas, the brightest. Is this a function of the slow aperture that was not compensated for? All of my Z lenses, the 50 and 35 S 1.8s, the 24-70 S 4.0 and even my F mount 28-300 3.5-5.6 come out very much brighter. So is this a limitation of the lens, or the exposures you choose? Perhaps being thrown off by the contrast of bright lights and shadow areas, and exposing for the lights?
Hey! Thanks for watching and I appreciate the questions. That's a pretty fair and accurate evaluation, and I agree that the images are darker than the video footage. I'll do my best to answer all questions: The main reason you see the video footage being brighter than the photos is that the video was recorded with my Nikon Z f camera using a 40mm f2 lens. I looked at the EXIF data of the video footage and pretty much everything was shot at 1/60, f3.5 and ISO 1250. All of my images were kept around 1/125 - 1/320 so that I could try and keep the images somewhat sharp with no motion blur. My aperture was pretty much at the widest it could go whenever I extended the Zoom, so if I was at 28mm, my f-stop was at 3.5/4, and if I was at 400mm, my f-stop was at f/8. For the ISO, I had between 1000 - 12800 at times. So, keeping my shutter speed up around 1/125-1/320 is one of the main driving factors as to why my images seem darker than the videos. Is this a limitation of the lens or exposure you chose? In this scenario, yes, I'd say shooting with this lens at night like this is pretty limiting while on the go. If you have the time to set up your tripod and really dial your images, I'm sure you could get better results, but ideally, a lens like this would really shine during the daytime, or in better lighting conditions. Even though Vegas seems bright with the lights, it doesn't mean it was perfectly ideal lighting conditions haha. I could definitely take my Nikon Zf with the 40mm f2 lens and take much brighter images with my lens stopped down to f2 vs f4-f8 with the new lens. And then just overall, I only had about 30-40mins to use this lens and Nikon said that I couldn't use my Z f with the lens so I had to use their Z 8. So, there was that unfamiliarity with the Z 8 I had to compensate for on the fly haha. To make matters worse, the images I shot were not recorded in RAW because I only had an SD card on me, and the SD card slot on Nikon's Z 8 was set to recording JPEG and I didn't realize it when we got started to...so these images are straight out of camera. WITH all that said, I still prefer the look of these darker images, because I know that if these were RAW, I could definitely pull details out of those shadows. I generally expose for the details in highlights and so when there are bright lights like that on the Vegas strip, it's only natural that your shadows will be very dark, but that isn't necessarily a bad thing. I hope this helps give more context to the video for you!
@@TLDAcademy could you edit them? I shoot RAW and I expect to edit in Lightroom before exporting a JPEG, usually to Apple Photos where I will sometimes tweak them even further.
@@lawrose4 I could edit them but since they are JPEGs, I’m more limited in what I could do with the files and honestly don’t feel the desire too haha. Normally I shoot in RAW 100% of the time, it just happened that for this video, the SD card slot was set to record in JPEG and I didn’t catch it until after we were finish 😅
I think the active d lighting was on and also the camera was exposing for brighter lights .. underexposing subjects .. even if they were JPEGS you can still increase the exposure these pics are not doing justice to the lens .. or you forgot to use auto ISO and gave no chance to camera to properly expose .. orelse you used pin point matrix and camera is exposing to the lights .. cannot understand how it can be this underexposed..
@@lokeshmahendrakar4948 hey! Thanks for watching and I appreciate your feedback :) not sure if you’ve read on the other comments but the camera I used was Nikons and we were pressed for time so I didn’t have time to check if Active D lighting was on. As far as being underexposed, again, I like to underexpose my subjects so I can pull out the details in post. I absolutely agree that these photos can be edited. For this video, I didn’t want to edit them and I just wanted to show what came out of camera, similar to what I did in my other videos using the Nikon Z f in the black and white mode, only posting what came straight out of camera. As far as doing justice, I think your opinion of the video is perfectly fine. My video doesn’t go nearly as deep as other channels. I just had the opportunity to hang out with Nikon for 45mins and use a new lens at night at the Las Vegas strip. I was really pleased with the results and I think a lot of people will enjoy this lens! Thanks again for watch! I love being able to dialog with other photographers and learn from their perspectives. Mahalo.
Unfortunately 28mm is often not wide enough for scenic trips as a travel lens. Too bad it's not 24-400 like the Olympus M.Zuiko which truly covers a useful range.
Thanks for the feedback! I appreciate the watch. Intersting...I mean, why stop at 24mm when you can go with a 18mm-400mm Tamron? I'm more of a prime lens photographer so this was a pleasant experience for me, especially with how well it performed at night. This lens will definitely make someone happy. Cheers.
@@TLDAcademy I was referring to full frame equivalent of 24mm at the wide end. The Tamron 18-400 is only the equivalent of 29mm at the wide end since it is Canon APS-C. Having a superzoom start at 24mm is somewhat of a rarity.
@@yohan2437 you're totally right. I wonder if the trade off of being 24-400 vs 28-400 wasn't worth. I'm sure it was more cost effective to keep it at 28mm, as well as keeping the weight and the length of the lens more compact. For more casual shooters, I think this lens works perfectly fine and will be able to achieve a TON of what photographers need. It was a fun lens to shoot with. Very fast focusing, and silent.
You can use anything at night if you are so inclined, but why? Why would anybody shoot with such illsuited slow superzoom in LV at night? It makes zero sense, my favorite lens for LV is 16-35/2.8.
And I completely agree with you! Honestly, we were both working the exhibition at WPPI and we had limited time in Vegas. Nighttime was the only chance we had to get out and use the lens 😊 but I was more than pleased and happy with the results. I appreciate the watch!
Often times I like to get everything in focus as much as possible. What's the point of using a limited zoom fast lens if you are going to be closing down the aperture for more DOF and to 'disappear' the moving people you don't care to capture walking around by using a slower shutter speed with IBIS and or VR? Maybe you don't get the point because you limit yourself creatively in what you shoot when it comes to evening photography. Not everyone needs shallow DOF or high shutter speeds for low light. Also, people are too afraid to bump up ISO these days, especially when high ISO performance is so excellent in most modern cameras.
I just got that lens today. I am only taking a couple lenses with me to Europe. This keeps me light and gives me lots of options.
I am based in Vegas, so it was great to see you using the lns on stuff I recognize.
@@ddmcreative that’s awesome!! I appreciate the watch and I hope that you have a great time in Europe. Would love to hear how the lens does for you when you get back!
You could have made the whole video more meaningful to photographers if the captioning included the full exposure settings
You’re absolutely right. I’ll consider it for the next time! I appreciate you watching 😊
无论是变焦范围、最近对焦距离、放大倍率、体积重量、光圈值和价格，我觉得尼康已经做到最优解。它根本就是Z24-200 的升级版，我非常喜爱。14-30+28-400是一个爬山远足+旅行+街拍的最佳组合。
感谢您的观看，并感谢分享您的反馈！
我正在使用谷歌翻译，所以如果翻译不正确请原谅我。
我同意！我认为尼康生产的固体镜头非常轻巧且紧凑。许多尼康用户都会对这款产品感到非常满意！
@@TLDAcademy 谢谢您的的回复。我目前拥有14-30和24-200，因为我什么都拍，没有固定题材，于是总觉得24-200不够长。而我手中的Sigma150-600，除了拍小鸟，真不想带出门，因为体积与重量携带不方便。而28-400虽然光圈小一点，但今天的相机高感与防抖完全可以弥补光圈的不足（除了浅景深与高速快门速度之外），因此这个28-400可以满足我的要求。未来我应该会把24-200换成28-400。
@@phillipliu8247 真棒！我实际上拥有一台 200mm-400mm f4 尼康镜头，它很大！我只拿出来给冲浪者拍照。我拥有很多定焦镜头，但我不喜欢随身携带所有定焦镜头。我可以看到自己拥有这样的镜头，并且只在旅行时随身携带。您目前使用什么相机机身？
Is it possible for you to share the RAW images with us so we can see to what extend the images are able to brightened? I have a Z8 and am interested in this lens but f8 at night is a tough compromise for the weight and cost saving in this lens.
Unfortunately I don’t have that ability. When I met up with Nikon, we did a camera switch. They had me use their Z 8 with the new lens and they filmed on my Z f.
I only brought an SD card with me, so that went into the Z 8’s secondary slot which was set to recording JPEGs. I didn’t think to check on the menus if their secondary slot was recording RAWs or JPEGs because we were pressed for time.
Sounds like a bad excuse 😅 but it is what is. Lesson learned. I appreciate the watch regardless!
Do you have a Flickr page? Would love to see these images in detail, to gauge noise.
I do have Flickr, but I don't have the images uploaded. That's a great suggestion though! I'll let you know if I end up doing that!
In all photos your stills came out very much darker than the video of the same subjects. And this is photographing scenes lit by bright lights - Vegas, the brightest. Is this a function of the slow aperture that was not compensated for? All of my Z lenses, the 50 and 35 S 1.8s, the 24-70 S 4.0 and even my F mount 28-300 3.5-5.6 come out very much brighter. So is this a limitation of the lens, or the exposures you choose? Perhaps being thrown off by the contrast of bright lights and shadow areas, and exposing for the lights?
Hey! Thanks for watching and I appreciate the questions. That's a pretty fair and accurate evaluation, and I agree that the images are darker than the video footage. I'll do my best to answer all questions:
The main reason you see the video footage being brighter than the photos is that the video was recorded with my Nikon Z f camera using a 40mm f2 lens. I looked at the EXIF data of the video footage and pretty much everything was shot at 1/60, f3.5 and ISO 1250. All of my images were kept around 1/125 - 1/320 so that I could try and keep the images somewhat sharp with no motion blur. My aperture was pretty much at the widest it could go whenever I extended the Zoom, so if I was at 28mm, my f-stop was at 3.5/4, and if I was at 400mm, my f-stop was at f/8. For the ISO, I had between 1000 - 12800 at times. So, keeping my shutter speed up around 1/125-1/320 is one of the main driving factors as to why my images seem darker than the videos.
Is this a limitation of the lens or exposure you chose? In this scenario, yes, I'd say shooting with this lens at night like this is pretty limiting while on the go. If you have the time to set up your tripod and really dial your images, I'm sure you could get better results, but ideally, a lens like this would really shine during the daytime, or in better lighting conditions. Even though Vegas seems bright with the lights, it doesn't mean it was perfectly ideal lighting conditions haha. I could definitely take my Nikon Zf with the 40mm f2 lens and take much brighter images with my lens stopped down to f2 vs f4-f8 with the new lens.
And then just overall, I only had about 30-40mins to use this lens and Nikon said that I couldn't use my Z f with the lens so I had to use their Z 8. So, there was that unfamiliarity with the Z 8 I had to compensate for on the fly haha. To make matters worse, the images I shot were not recorded in RAW because I only had an SD card on me, and the SD card slot on Nikon's Z 8 was set to recording JPEG and I didn't realize it when we got started to...so these images are straight out of camera.
WITH all that said, I still prefer the look of these darker images, because I know that if these were RAW, I could definitely pull details out of those shadows. I generally expose for the details in highlights and so when there are bright lights like that on the Vegas strip, it's only natural that your shadows will be very dark, but that isn't necessarily a bad thing.
I hope this helps give more context to the video for you!
@@TLDAcademy could you edit them? I shoot RAW and I expect to edit in Lightroom before exporting a JPEG, usually to Apple Photos where I will sometimes tweak them even further.
@@lawrose4 I could edit them but since they are JPEGs, I’m more limited in what I could do with the files and honestly don’t feel the desire too haha. Normally I shoot in RAW 100% of the time, it just happened that for this video, the SD card slot was set to record in JPEG and I didn’t catch it until after we were finish 😅
I think the active d lighting was on and also the camera was exposing for brighter lights .. underexposing subjects .. even if they were JPEGS you can still increase the exposure these pics are not doing justice to the lens .. or you forgot to use auto ISO and gave no chance to camera to properly expose .. orelse you used pin point matrix and camera is exposing to the lights .. cannot understand how it can be this underexposed..
@@lokeshmahendrakar4948 hey! Thanks for watching and I appreciate your feedback :) not sure if you’ve read on the other comments but the camera I used was Nikons and we were pressed for time so I didn’t have time to check if Active D lighting was on. As far as being underexposed, again, I like to underexpose my subjects so I can pull out the details in post. I absolutely agree that these photos can be edited. For this video, I didn’t want to edit them and I just wanted to show what came out of camera, similar to what I did in my other videos using the Nikon Z f in the black and white mode, only posting what came straight out of camera.
As far as doing justice, I think your opinion of the video is perfectly fine. My video doesn’t go nearly as deep as other channels. I just had the opportunity to hang out with Nikon for 45mins and use a new lens at night at the Las Vegas strip. I was really pleased with the results and I think a lot of people will enjoy this lens! Thanks again for watch! I love being able to dialog with other photographers and learn from their perspectives. Mahalo.
Unfortunately 28mm is often not wide enough for scenic trips as a travel lens. Too bad it's not 24-400 like the Olympus M.Zuiko which truly covers a useful range.
Thanks for the feedback! I appreciate the watch. Intersting...I mean, why stop at 24mm when you can go with a 18mm-400mm Tamron? I'm more of a prime lens photographer so this was a pleasant experience for me, especially with how well it performed at night. This lens will definitely make someone happy. Cheers.
@@TLDAcademy I was referring to full frame equivalent of 24mm at the wide end. The Tamron 18-400 is only the equivalent of 29mm at the wide end since it is Canon APS-C. Having a superzoom start at 24mm is somewhat of a rarity.
@@yohan2437 you're totally right. I wonder if the trade off of being 24-400 vs 28-400 wasn't worth.
I'm sure it was more cost effective to keep it at 28mm, as well as keeping the weight and the length of the lens more compact. For more casual shooters, I think this lens works perfectly fine and will be able to achieve a TON of what photographers need. It was a fun lens to shoot with. Very fast focusing, and silent.
@@TLDAcademy24mm would have made it a bigger lens. And either at additional cost or additional compromises. Nikon does have a 24-200 though.
@mikeblack_pw If Tamron really considers that option, they will limit it to some we're 380mm. 😅
You can use anything at night if you are so inclined, but why? Why would anybody shoot with such illsuited slow superzoom in LV at night? It makes zero sense, my favorite lens for LV is 16-35/2.8.
And I completely agree with you! Honestly, we were both working the exhibition at WPPI and we had limited time in Vegas. Nighttime was the only chance we had to get out and use the lens 😊 but I was more than pleased and happy with the results.
I appreciate the watch!
Often times I like to get everything in focus as much as possible. What's the point of using a limited zoom fast lens if you are going to be closing down the aperture for more DOF and to 'disappear' the moving people you don't care to capture walking around by using a slower shutter speed with IBIS and or VR?
Maybe you don't get the point because you limit yourself creatively in what you shoot when it comes to evening photography. Not everyone needs shallow DOF or high shutter speeds for low light.
Also, people are too afraid to bump up ISO these days, especially when high ISO performance is so excellent in most modern cameras.
Images appear too dark.