Photography related discussions

[NicolasKL]

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

Heh, you found one of the seven people on the planet that actually bought a DC290. It pretty much was a terrible camera, and totally overpriced, but it did take some pretty nice pictures. I didn't really do any research before I bought it, and if I had I probably would have got a Coolpix 800 or 950, I just went to BB (I don't even think they had the Coolpix at the time) and shot a few photos with each of the higher end cameras and the DC290 looked the best.

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

Was lucky in one way. Cameras were up to 5 or 6 MP when it broke so an old bulky Kodak 2 MP wouldn't have been worth much. Maybe 200 bucks. Not lucky in another way, in that BB would only allow me to spend the money on the spot, wouldn't give me a gift card worth a thousand, and the first Digital Rebel was due out within weeks. Ended up with a Sony DSC-F717 (or 707?). Not a bad camera, but would have rather had the Rebel.

 

[NicolasKL]

I pulled the trigger on the NEX-5 with both lenses (18-55 and 16mm prime). Plus a leather body case and extra battery. Wanted to get the fisheye lens at the same time but it was out of stock.

I'll probably get it and also the 18-200mm when it comes out, even though the 18-200 will probably make the 18-55 fairly useless.

 

[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 would bet that the Sony NEX-5 with the 16mm prime will take the cake for compactness for the next year or two at least. As far as performance goes I think the playing field is pretty level right now, just depends what your priorities are regarding size and features. It'll be interesting to see what Nikon and Canon do though.

 

[Sheep]

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?

Micro 4/3s and 4/3s use the same size image circle, just smaller internal distances between the sensor and lens (I think).

They are nice and compact, but anything bigger then a pancake lens on a Micro 4/3s is still pretty big. I personally liked the Sony A55. The built in HDR merge was pretty cool.

SheepStar

 

[Highlander]

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.

Prior to your post I had heard of mirrorless cameras but knew nothing of them. I've now had a cursory read of Wikipedia's entry and am unconvinced that they will compete with DSLRs for a very long time, perhaps even ever.

Yes, they possess relatively large image sensors, but of course the sensor is only part of the story in terms of final image quality. Ignoring the question of whether the lens mount on these cameras will accept legacy lenses (refer below), there would then be the very real issue of, for the finest image quality, mounting relatively heavy lenses on a small lightweight body.

Problem 1: Potential warping of the camera body from cantilevering a heavy lens from it. This would result in an increasing misalignment of the lens optical centre with, theoretically, the centre of the image sensor (in reality they are never aligned exactly).

Problem 2: This problem is more aesthetic in nature but would, I suspect, deter potential customers from purchasing such a camera in the first place: simply holding such an off balance camera while shooting would be quite uncomfortable and a significant turn off for the more elderly who, in my experience, have no interest in handling heavy camera gear.

In general, do they take the same lenses (per brand) or is it a whole new ball-game?

This is a leap of faith on my part, but I would be very surprised if Nikon changed their mount. They have kept the same F-mount mount since its inception and I suspect they would consider it a great commercial advantage to offer the use of their extensive lens range to purchasers of mirrorless cameras. Of course, Nikon doesn't yet offer a mirrorless camera...yet.

 

[NicolasKL]

Seems like the Sony NEX will use almost any lens with an adapter, and I see adapters for Canon, Nikon, Leica, etc, for sale on eBay. Looks like it's the same for u4/3 cameras as well. How well they work may be up in the air and may vary though, pretty sure most of them will lose AF when used with a NEX and maybe other functionality as well.

 

[Ito]

I want to do more off camera flash work lately but I only have one 580EX II so I am debating on what the best/cheapest option would be. Right now I am debating on buying either ST-E2, Another 580EX II, or pocket wizards. I had way too much fun shooting with an off camera flash when I had a chance (was borrowing a 430EX and using the 580 as a master).

 

[Sheep]

I want to do more off camera flash work lately but I only have one 580EX II so I am debating on what the best/cheapest option would be. Right now I am debating on buying either ST-E2, Another 580EX II, or pocket wizards. I had way too much fun shooting with an off camera flash when I had a chance (was borrowing a 430EX and using the 580 as a master).

Depending on where you are, studio strobe kits are not that expensive. I'm really considering some.

SheepStar

 

[Sheep]

New lens.



SheepStar

 

[BoredSysAdmin]

Nikon D7000: Camera Road test with CHASE JARVIS

 

[NicolasKL]

Fedex is taking absolutely forever to deliver my NEX-5. It was free shipping so I can't ***** too much, but it's driving me nuts.

 

[DTS]

Got my new Sigma 10-20mm yesterday, so far its been a pretty cool lens. Tomorrow I get my Nikon 50mm f1.4D

Shot @ 20mm

Shot @ 10mm

 

[mike c]

i was supposed to spring for it recently ... but logic, reason, amount of money all told me to stop obsessing about it

1) just didn't make sense to buy something so specialized if my lens lineup wasn't complete.

2) i was afraid the 200/2 would be too awkward to bring out most of the time (awkward from everyone looking at you)

3) i was sure using off cam flash would give me better portraits than the 200/2

4) i wanted to make sure if 200mm is workable for me ... just recently an 85 on crop (136mm equivalent) felt a bit long for me.

5) my bank account is wishing an image stabilized version of the 135mm would come out soon ...

and so i completed my lineup ... time to spend on useless stuff

Who are you trying to kid? Resistance is futile!

I absolutely agree that it's a specialized lens. I very rarely use mine but when I do, and I now have the 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII that I could more than 'get by' with, I absolutely love it. I suspect you will use yours far more than I do my mine, as landscapes are my forte.

They will at first as there's no getting away from the fact that the lens is very conspicuous. I wouldn't let that get in your way of making a great photo though.

One word of advice; start doing the weights. If the Canon 200mm f/2 is as heavy as the Nikon (3kg) it is on the limit of being comfortably hand holdable.

it's lighter than the nikon version 1 with a few more stops of IS

whoa! 200 f2! what does the nikon 200 f2 look like?

one day, the 200 f2 IS of canon will be mine.

that day is coming sooner than later

Fixed.

off by a few months, but called correctly

 

[mike c]

Got my new Sigma 10-20mm yesterday, so far its been a pretty cool lens. Tomorrow I get my Nikon 50mm f1.4D
Shot @ 20mm

great shot, what shutter speed was used on that one?

 

[DTS]

Thanks, that was taken with 1/5 sec.

 

[Highlander]

...it's lighter than the nikon version 1 with a few more stops of IS.

2.5kg for the Canon vs. 2.9kg for the Nikon. I doubt you'd find it sufficiently less heavy for it to be considered comfortably hand holdable. Then again, for all I know you may be built like Arnold Schwarzenegger.

...that day is coming sooner than later.

Wow. You may be aware that a new version has been announced by Nikon. VR II but otherwise identical optical formula as the VR I version. Even with VR II (supposedly) providing the ability to shoot up to four stops slower it doesn't match the Canon at (supposedly ) five stops.

I have to say, I consider the price of the Canon to be exorbitant at around 1.5x what I paid for my Nikon. True, the asking price for the VR II version from Nikon is (significantly) higher still, but in time that is almost certain to fall to current prices for the VR I version. As much as I love my Nikon 200mm f/2, I would not have bought it at the price Canon are asking for their own 200mm f/2, outstanding lens though it is without question.

Still, Mike, I well know how addictive purchasing high quality, precision optics can be, and if you do purchase this exotic lens I know you will view it as Gollum does the Ring. Enjoy it if you do indeed get it.

 

[mike c]

2.5kg for the Canon vs. 2.9kg for the Nikon. I doubt you'd find it sufficiently less heavy for it to be considered comfortably hand holdable. Then again, for all I know you may be built like Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Wow. You may be aware that a new version has been announced by Nikon. VR II but otherwise identical optical formula as the VR I version. Even with VR II (supposedly) providing the ability to shoot up to four stops slower it doesn't match the Canon at (supposedly ) five stops.

I have to say, I consider the price of the Canon to be exorbitant at around 1.5x what I paid for my Nikon. True, the asking price for the VR II version from Nikon is (significantly) higher still, but in time that is almost certain to fall to current prices for the VR I version. As much as I love my Nikon 200mm f/2, I would not have bought it at the price Canon are asking for their own 200mm f/2, outstanding lens though it is without question.

Still, Mike, I well know how addictive purchasing high quality, precision optics can be, and if you do purchase this exotic lens I know you will view it as Gollum does the Ring. Enjoy it if you do indeed get it.

i'm think i'm considered small-medium build in terms of strength

yes, i heard about the v2 of the nikon, but it would seriously suck to support a two system (canon-nikon) setup.

let's just say that i purchased the lens knowing i'd be happy even if it was just displayed in my drybox as a trophy ala Lladro or Baccarat

 

[Sheep]

Got my new Sigma 10-20mm yesterday, so far its been a pretty cool lens. Tomorrow I get my Nikon 50mm f1.4D

Nice! Yeah I bought that along with the 35mm F1.8 just before my trip to Germany. It used it the most of of my 4 lenses, around 85-90% of the time.

SheepStar

 

[mike c]

and for scale...

 

[DTS]

"and for scale..." Thats pretty cool. Enjoy!