Photography related discussions

[BoredSysAdmin]

Imo Nikkor 18-200MM VRII is very starter lens which you'd need rarely change.

Not sure if this is the best price, but good set here:
http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-D90-Digital-18-200mm-Accessory/dp/B001KJ4EXY/ref=sr_1_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1282924746&sr=1-1

Walmart price is better one, but skips on memory card ($40-45 value, bag - $60-80 and cleaning kit roughly 15-20), unfortunately they are out of stock...

 

[Warpdrv]

That looks familiar with the 18 - 200 af

I also remember some 50mm....

Is the Nikon 50mm f/1.8D AF, or worth the money to step up to the Nikon 50mm f/1.4 AF D

I think we got the 50mm f/1.8d for her dad....

Big differences here ? or just for the pros..... which would not be ahh me...

 

[BoredSysAdmin]

That looks familiar with the 18 - 200 af

I also remember some 50mm....

Is the Nikon 50mm f/1.8D AF, or worth the money to step up to the Nikon 50mm f/1.4 AF D

I think we got the 50mm f/1.8d for her dad....

Big differences here ? or just for the pros..... which would not be ahh me...

50mm Primes are great for portraits and low light outdoor
Imo best tool for beginner photographer like me and you is good raw processor like DxO Optics Pro - Which so annoying to get it from online , I almost consider buying it
Adobe Lightroom CS3 should be comparable, but is much more expensive.

I always shoot RAW so I can fix my amateur mistakes later on Like exposure and white balance

 

[Warpdrv]

Interesting, I have alot to learn about this stuff....

I'll look into that software.... thank you...

Should be far easier learning with a digital over a film base for sure. That is the prime reason that I was waiting to get a nice SLR.

Anyone have input on the 50mm lens differences..?

 

[mike c]

That looks familiar with the 18 - 200 af

I also remember some 50mm....

Is the Nikon 50mm f/1.8D AF, or worth the money to step up to the Nikon 50mm f/1.4 AF D

I think we got the 50mm f/1.8d for her dad....

Big differences here ? or just for the pros..... which would not be ahh me...

depends on what you're gonna use it for.

start with the kit lens (or the 18-200), get an external flash and a tripod. from there you will see what you need.

www.adorama.com
www.bhphoto.com

tripods from manfrotto, benro or gitzo would be great.

 

[mike c]

got some mugs as well free from canon philippines.

one is real.

 

[Sheep]

That looks familiar with the 18 - 200 af

I also remember some 50mm....

Is the Nikon 50mm f/1.8D AF, or worth the money to step up to the Nikon 50mm f/1.4 AF D

I think we got the 50mm f/1.8d for her dad....

Big differences here ? or just for the pros..... which would not be ahh me...

The D series lenses (50mm F1.8D, 50mm F1.4D) are pretty old. The 50mm F1.8D is a good value, at 140 dollars CAD. The 50mm F1.4G (G not D) is a superior lens, but is 550CAD (I don't know how much it is for you). The 18-200 is not a starter lens, it's a travel lens. It will do everything you would normally need, in 1 lens. But, it sucks. It's not sharp, it has lots of distortion, and colour fringing. This is why you have more then 1 lens. If you're not serious, a 18-200 is a great choice, it has VR, and autofocus. However, a 17-55 F2.8 plus a 50mm F1.4 and a 70-200 F2.8 VR would be a nice combination as well. Just prepare to throw down 4 grand for glass. Right now I have an 18-70mm F3.5-4.5 (under 200 CAD used) and a 70-200mm F2.8 VRI (1300 used). My 50mm bit it when some sand got in it camping. I'm planning on picking up a 35mm F1.8 and a 10-20 Sigma before Germany.

SheepStar

 

[Warpdrv]

What do you guys think of this.....
http://milwaukee.craigslist.org/ele/1922436619.html

Wondering what you think would be a good deal for this...


Also, what are the prices going to be like for that newer model, the Nikon D7000 - or comparable Canon model

 

[Sheep]

What do you guys think of this.....
http://milwaukee.craigslist.org/ele/1922436619.html

Wondering what you think would be a good deal for this...


Also, what are the prices going to be like for that newer model, the Nikon D7000 - or comparable Canon model

That is a pretty good deal. The 18-55 is a meh lens though. The bag is pretty good. I'm planning on grabbing one of theirs as well.

SheepStar

 

[Highlander]

Warpdrv,

I really need to get a decent camera - tired of looking at my crappy pics that I post...

When I read this I immediately thought what BoredSysAdmin wrote:

Speaking of buying older camera models - old doesn't mean bad...In good photo 90% is skill and creativity and 10% is camera...I seen some amazing shots done with cheapest cameras...

Google for photos taken with a budget/moderate camera and you will find many exceptional examples. Obviously the camera makes a contribution to picture quality, but it is certainly the case that a poor camera in knowledgable hands is capable of great images.

You will do yourself the greatest favour by reading photography books/attending photography courses. Both these options should result in a marked increase in 'keeper' photographs in a very short period of time. I have a number of books I can very highly recommend if you are interested, though bear in mind that some are biased towards landscape photography.

Who wants to post up some links for...suggested lenses...

This question cannot be best addressed without first knowing what kind of photography you are interested in, e.g. Portrait, Landscape, Sports.

Imo best tool for beginner photographer like me and you is good raw processor like DxO Optics Pro...Adobe Lightroom CS3 should be comparable, but is much more expensive.

I would add to the above list Capture NX2, especially if a Nikon body is purchased. Nikon software best converts Nikon RAW files. I imagine the same holds true with Canon et al.

Warpdrv, note also that while I agree fully with BoredSysAdmin that shooting in RAW format is the best way to go (a RAW file is effectively a digital negative), you should be prepared for large image files, and the cost associated with storing them.

Hope this helps.

 

[mike c]

need more space for what's coming

 

[Sheep]

New Lens. 1 more coming soon.



And another self portrait.


SheepStar

 

[BoredSysAdmin]

Google for photos taken with a budget/moderate camera and you will find many exceptional examples.
[

Here: I found some example shots done by dpreview with one of worst cameras they ever had - kodak dc290
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/reviewsamples/albums/kodak-dc290-review-samples/slideshow

As you can see, most of them aren't that bad as much as composition, colors and light. Of course the technical side is lacking, but still one can make decent shots with crappiest camera.

Remember, camera body isn't relevant - you'll replace it in few years. However your lens will stay. Make your choice based on better lenses, don't over concentrate on body (unless it's a 20 years old cheerleader body

 

[NicolasKL]

Here: I found some example shots done by dpreview with one of worst cameras they ever had - kodak dc290

Eh? Sure, it sucks compared to modern cameras, but I had a DC290 and dpreview (and I) thought the image quality was pretty good at the time. The camera had plenty of other issues, but image quality wasn't one of them (and I don't think you're attempting to compare things like value or the menu system by linking to photos from it). I remember about 2 years after I got it my sis got her first digital cam (I think an Xmas present from her husband) and it was a 400 or so dollar 4 MP and we were both on vacation in Hawaii at the time and other family members were scrolling through our pooled collection of photos and kept remarking that half of them looked pretty crappy and half of them looked really nice, and it was the difference between the two cameras.

First digital I ever had. Camera was just released and MSRP was either 999 or 1099. Best Buy had it for 999, online places had it for 870ish IIRC. Was leaving for vacation and didn't have time to wait for shipping so I haggled with BB and got it for 970 including a 4 year purchase protection plan.

3.5 years later it broke (shutter was sticking randomly), they sent it out for repair, couldn't really be repaired, I ended up with a grand in store credit. Best deal ever.

 

[NicolasKL]

I'm thinking of selling my E-PL1 and getting a Sony NEX-5.

 

[droht]

I'm thinking of selling my E-PL1 and getting a Sony NEX-5.

I played around with the NEX-5 in a store and was somewhat impressed. E-PL1 as well. I would definitely choose the Sony based on that limited trial.

But if I am going to buy a Sony camera I think it would be the newly announced A55. Very interesting for only $750.

Sony A55 - key specifications
16.2MP (effective) APS HD CMOS sensor
Fixed, pellicle-type semi-translucent mirror
Maximum ISO 12,800 (with a quasi-ISO 25,600 'Multi-frame NR' option)
15-point phase-detection AF array with 3 cross-type AF points
Electronic viewfinder with 1.15 million dot resolution
Built-in GPS
Electronic level in EVF/LCD with pitch/roll indicator
Dual-purpose Memory Stick/SD card slot
10fps continuous shooting rate
1080p AVCHD movie mode with continuous AF
Articulated 3in 'TruBlack' LCD with 912k dots
socket for external microphone
2x magnification mode in live view
Face-detection AF (focus via nearest phase-detection AF point)

 

[Audioholics]

I have to admit, I am fascinated by the new mirrorless systems... In terms of performance and compactness I'm waiting for this to really take off. In general, do they take the same lenses (per brand) or is it a whole new ball-game?

 

[NicolasKL]

I have to admit, I am fascinated by the new mirrorless systems... In terms of performance and compactness I'm waiting for this to really take off. In general, do they take the same lenses (per brand) or is it a whole new ball-game?

I'm by no means an expert but I believe the micro 4/3rds cameras will use any regular 4/3rds lens with an adapter, but not anything else (other than the micro 4/3 specific lenses of course).

I think the Sony will use any Alpha DSLR lens, with an adapter, but I think you usually (or always?) lose auto focus.

 

[NicolasKL]

I played around with the NEX-5 in a store and was somewhat impressed. E-PL1 as well. I would definitely choose the Sony based on that limited trial.

But if I am going to buy a Sony camera I think it would be the newly announced A55. Very interesting for only $750.

Sony A55 - key specifications
16.2MP (effective) APS HD CMOS sensor
Fixed, pellicle-type semi-translucent mirror
Maximum ISO 12,800 (with a quasi-ISO 25,600 'Multi-frame NR' option)
15-point phase-detection AF array with 3 cross-type AF points
Electronic viewfinder with 1.15 million dot resolution
Built-in GPS
Electronic level in EVF/LCD with pitch/roll indicator
Dual-purpose Memory Stick/SD card slot
10fps continuous shooting rate
1080p AVCHD movie mode with continuous AF
Articulated 3in 'TruBlack' LCD with 912k dots
socket for external microphone
2x magnification mode in live view
Face-detection AF (focus via nearest phase-detection AF point)

The Oly actually scores better on dpreview than the Nex, but the two big complains on the Nex aren't really an issue for me. 1 is that the menu system sucks, which I'm pretty much used to with my point and shoots and doesn't really bother me. The second is that the AE isn't that reliable (tendency to overexpose IIRC) but with the E-PL1 and the things that I'm usually shooting (a lot of very dark pine tree covered topography or very bright snow covered) I always have to adjust or bracket anyways.

I like the smaller size of the Nex, and the build quality (metal mount and body). Plus I think I'll get a lot of use out of some of the extra features (in camera HDR and panoramas, and the easy to access "background defocus"). The LCD looks great also (the size, resolution, and the tilt). I will miss the built in flash though, and I hope they make a more serious pluggable flash than the little thing that comes with it.

 

[BoredSysAdmin]

Eh? Sure, it sucks compared to modern cameras, but I had a DC290 and dpreview (and I) thought the image quality was pretty good at the time. The camera had plenty of other issues, but image quality wasn't one of them (and I don't think you're attempting to compare things like value or the menu system by linking to photos from it). I remember about 2 years after I got it my sis got her first digital cam (I think an Xmas present from her husband) and it was a 400 or so dollar 4 MP and we were both on vacation in Hawaii at the time and other family members were scrolling through our pooled collection of photos and kept remarking that half of them looked pretty crappy and half of them looked really nice, and it was the difference between the two cameras.

First digital I ever had. Camera was just released and MSRP was either 999 or 1099. Best Buy had it for 999, online places had it for 870ish IIRC. Was leaving for vacation and didn't have time to wait for shipping so I haggled with BB and got it for 970 including a 4 year purchase protection plan.

3.5 years later it broke (shutter was sticking randomly), they sent it out for repair, couldn't really be repaired, I ended up with a grand in store credit. Best deal ever.

Darn, it looks like I accentually stumbled on a land mine, yes I admit I haven't had enough research trying to find good photos with bad cameras. just went with very low dp ratings

Kodak itself actually makes pretty good pro & specialty CCD sensors, but consumer line is usually severely lacking....

Wow, you are lucky sob. If you'd sell perfectly functional dc290 in mint share after 3.5 years, you'd get less than quarter of it's original value