>Other than compactness is there any other practical value in >having the 10mm if you hae the 10-30 on a V1? > >At these lens/sensors sizes does the added small wider f stop >add anything in practical image production? > >Basically wondering if it is worth buying other than >compactness. > >Jerry
It is 2.8, so somewhat more options to play with (un)sharpness. Whish Nikon would do some 1.4 or even better lenses for the V1.
>Other than compactness is there any other practical value in >having the 10mm if you hae the 10-30 on a V1?
It's a wonderful prime which has somewhat less edge distortion that the 10-30 and much less than the 10-110. It's also fast enough at f/2.8 to make low light shooting much more interesting - the wider aperture lets you see what's going on when looking through the V1 viewfinder, the camera has more light to work with and can therefore get a good focus lock much more easily, and at f/2.8 you've got the opportunity to use a shallower depth of field than the 1 Nikkor zooms can provide. The 10mm prime also provides better bokeh than either of the zooms.
I have both. As was pointed out, the 10mm prime is a bit faster (larger aperture), but from what I have seen in the images, this is not all that meaningful. I have shot the 10mm lens at f/2.8 and f/3.5 and there is not much difference. And this was not the reason why I bought the 10mm lens. Comparing images between the 10mm and the 10-30, even at the same aperture like f/3.5, there is a noticeable difference though. The prime is sharper and has better bokeh. That, and the faster handling (no need to unlock the zoom) are the primary reasons why I prefer it over the 10-30. I usually go out with the 10 and 30-110mm lenses, or just the 10. That's not to say the 10-30 is bad, it is actually very good, just that the 10 is even better.
#4. "RE: 10 mm lens?" In response to Reply # 3 Sat 03-Dec-11 02:23 AM by RRRoger
Monterey Bay, US
I bought the 10mm simply because it was on sale. At $150 it was too cheap to resist. I have not tried it yet, but sure I will because the V1 seems to be ISO limited. But, I am looking forward to using my 35 f/1.8DX with a future FT-1 adapter and new CX lens as well.
Quote>I have not tried it yet, but sure I will because the V1 seems to be ISO limited.<Quote<<<
I've tried it and it is definitely better than the 10-30, especially for landscape and portrait use. However I still use the 10-30 more because of the zoom range. And, the V1 + 10-30 still fits in my large pockets.
#5. "RE: 10 mm lens?" In response to Reply # 3 Sat 03-Dec-11 02:13 AM by jerry r
Tom & Howard
Thanks for your input. you have confirmed what I suspected and shall add the 10mm to our growing collection (Two V1's, his & hers with the 10-30 and 30-110) let alone our his & hers D7000's and other DSLR's. Hope it isn't that much better than the 10-30 or we'll end up with two 10mm's. Sharing does not seem to be an option when shooting.
I wish the 10mm had been a 1.8 or there-abouts. Actually a 1.8 at about 20 mm or 30 mm would be nice.
Now for the wide angle zoom!!!! Hope that it is soon.
I have said this elsewhere but the 10mm is superb. I also have the 30-110 and I find it less responsive and hence more challenging like using a normal point and shoot. I am trying to modify the settings e.g. VR to see if this helps. That said on my website rakmilphotography.com, Walkabout in Ottawa was all taken with the 30-110 and the posting yesterday on Toronto all taken with the 10 mm. The 10mm is fast, responsive and really makes the V1 a discrete camera. The 30-110 is slower to respond and not as accurate in framing given a VR bounce. More over the 30-110 takes time to turn on and adjust. I am getting better at it, but it is slow. When the weather clears and I have subjects my next test will be of the FT-1 with the DX 35mm. My assumption is the camera is best suited for primes.
Visit my website both D300and VI pictures (even some nikkormat and FTN shots).