Support NeoGAF

[BlueTsunami]

Interesting! I just discovered there's also two versions of the Pentacom, a 6 blade and 15 blade design.

Another Russian lens of interest is the Tair-11A (135/2.8) which has 20 aperture blades...

Original Link: http://www.flickr.com/photos/arpaagent/3081779564/

There are definitely a good amount of odd M42 lenses, especially from Germany and Russia.

 

[tino]

Well, what I'm saying is that even entry-level Sony A-Mount cameras can do AF and IS on 25 years worth of Minolta lenses, and therefore bang for the buck in the used lens market is often better - particularly when compared the the entry/mid-range Nikon bodies that can't autofocus on the pre-AF-S lenses.

So can Pentax. And Pentax has longer backward compatibility back to screw mount lenses. I don't think Sony's air plane naming scheme entry level SLRs are all that special compare to Pentax's entry levels. At lease Pentax has the weather proof gimmick.

Your criticism of Nikon is valid. I won't recommend crippled Nikon entry level SLR unless you can start out with a D200. You can get an used D2x for pretty cheap now btw.

 

[Lucius86]

Going off to Italy in a month, looking to get some nice shots of their architecture, which is normally not what I like shooting but I fancy a change.

I currently have a Nikon D5000 with the stock 18-55mm lense, along with a Tamron 70-300mm F/4 - 5.6. Nothing amazing, as you can see, but they have served me well with getting to grips with an SLR.

I'm still fairly new at this, but I have managed to get a few shots I am happy with. I am really struggling with night shots however, and it is something I am looking to improve.

Is it worth getting a prime lense to get that lower aperture for night shots without having them all blurry and grainy (I have recently purchased a tripod too).

Forgive my stupid questions

 

[MultiCore]

Is it worth getting a prime lense to get that lower aperture for night shots without having them all blurry and grainy (I have recently purchased a tripod too).

Forgive my stupid questions

Yes. Primes are amazing. They're not for everything, but when you find your use for them, nothing else will do.

f/1.8 is a great start, but it's fun to mess with the f/1.2 stuff too.

 

[Lucius86]

Yes. Primes are amazing. They're not for everything, but when you find your use for them, nothing else will do.

f/1.8 is a great start, but it's fun to mess with the f/1.2 stuff too.

Sweet, glad I'm on the right page - now the problem is what fixed range do I go for!

Would you pros say this is a good point to start off with, as it seems to be close enough for use with people and archiecture too? http://www.pixmania.co.uk/uk/uk/2538832/art/nikon/af-s-dx-nikkor-35-mm-f-1.html

 

[MultiCore]

Sweet, glad I'm on the right page - now the problem is what fixed range do I go for!

Would you pros say this is a good point to start off with, as it seems to be close enough for use with people and archiecture too? http://www.pixmania.co.uk/uk/uk/2538832/art/nikon/af-s-dx-nikkor-35-mm-f-1.html

I'm no pro, but that will get you close to the 50mm range on a crop sensor body, and that's what used to be the stock lens range that every camera came with.

I think you'll be happy with it, but on the other hand, it might just be the first of many. :O

I suggest you shoot in the 35mm (52mm actual) range on your kit lens for a while, just to see if you're going to be happy with that field of view.

 

[345triangle]

i love my 35 1.8 (sony) for street stuff, but it'd have to be a hell of a big building for it to be much use in architectural photography on a crop sensor. still easily my favourite lens, though! i think it's a good choice as a first prime.

next on my prime list are the 85mm 2.8 and 50mm 2.8 macro.

 

[Lucius86]

Cheers for the useful feedback guys - much appreciated

 

[MRORANGE]

Sweet, glad I'm on the right page - now the problem is what fixed range do I go for!

Would you pros say this is a good point to start off with, as it seems to be close enough for use with people and archiecture too? http://www.pixmania.co.uk/uk/uk/2538832/art/nikon/af-s-dx-nikkor-35-mm-f-1.html

I have the 35mm f1.8 it's amazing, I can honestly say I've never touched the kit lens after this (although I do miss being able to go to 18mm)


pic of Duke I took a week ago with the 35mm f1.8:

the only other ones you can go for at the moment are the 50m fx 1.4 or 1.8 since the there is no af-s motor in the d5000

 

[RapidCancel]

Here you go...

The two walls dividing the bag internally are attached via velcro so they're easily removed.

I can, as I posted before, slip my DSLR (Rebel XT) with my Zeiss 50/1.7 attached (as seen in the center slot) in that same center slot on its side. As relatively small as the bag is, it can hold quite a lot.

Thanks dude...one last question, where and how much? =]

 

[Stalfos]

Thanks dude...one last question, where and how much? =]

Amazon has it for just over $70 http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00009R89L/?tag=neogaf0e-20

 

[spineduke]

Is it worth getting a prime lense to get that lower aperture for night shots without having them all blurry and grainy (I have recently purchased a tripod too).

Forgive my stupid questions

Just a minor nitpick, you're looking for a lens with a larger aperture. (It's inversely related)

Second, be aware that in low light situations, a large aperture can do wonders, but you will at times struggle with the DoF. (Try getting a group shot of everyone in focus at f/1.8 and you'll understand). Primes are great, but I'd also suggest you to seriously take a look at a bouncing flash - probably the best bang for buck in terms of the $$$ you'll spend on expensive primes.

 

[Timedog]

I have the 35mm f1.8 it's amazing, I can honestly say I've never touched the kit lens after this (although I do miss being able to go to 18mm)


pic of Duke I took a week ago with the 35mm f1.8:

the only other ones you can go for at the moment are the 50m fx 1.4 or 1.8 since the there is no af-s motor in the d5000

Was this at that Portland comic/anime/whatever convention?

 

[MRORANGE]

Was this at that Portland comic/anime/whatever convention?

This was in London, UK, outside a GAME store, he was just standing around taking pic's with people.

 

[Timedog]

Is there a good Canon 35mm prime lens (I have a APS-C, so it'd be close to 50mm on a full frame) that isn't an L for like $1400? Maybe I'll just spring for the L and not buy another lens for a year .

 

[East Lake]

Zeiss Distagon?

About 1100, manual focus.

Edit: I read that a bit wrong, heh.

 

[golem]

Is there a good Canon 35mm prime lens (I have a APS-C, so it'd be close to 50mm on a full frame) that isn't an L for like $1400? Maybe I'll just spring for the L and not buy another lens for a year .

How about the f/2 version?

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=141317&page=13

 

[Timedog]

How about the f/2 version?

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=141317&page=13

http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/157-canon-ef-35mm-f2-test-report--review?start=1

That bokeh looks worse than my kit zoom lens

 

[Danoss]

Is there a good Canon 35mm prime lens (I have a APS-C, so it'd be close to 50mm on a full frame) that isn't an L for like $1400? Maybe I'll just spring for the L and not buy another lens for a year .

Canon hasn't updated their non-L lenses in that area of primes for some time; it is well overdue. Your choices would be the Canon 35mm f/2 or the 28mm f/2.8 from their stable. Personally, I found the bokeh/out-of-focus areas on these lenses to be ugly and distracting.

The popular alternatives are the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 (which I own and love, the sharpness is great and the bokeh/out-of-focus areas are quite pleasing); or the Sigma 28mm f/1.8. I personally haven't used the Sigma 28mm f/1.8, but I have heard good things about it also.

I would suggest that you choose between the two Sigma lenses as I think they are the best choices for this focal length (as I said, I'm only going by word of mouth for the 28mm). Check out photos taken with them if that helps guide you and by all means take your camera with you, pop into a store and ask for a play with both of them. Take some shots in store, examine them at home and see which you prefer.

 

[Danielsan]

I’m currently deciding on a new lens and I would love for some input from our residential photographers. This Wednesday I tried my hand with concert photography for the second time. As everyone should know, my Nikon 18-55mm f/3.5-.56 kitlens absolutely does not cut it when working in low light conditions. I was forced to shoot at ISO 800 and slow shutter speeds (1/25 – 1/50) and even at these settings I was pretty much underexposing every shot. The resulting shots are heavy on grain and/or have fallen victim to blurred motions (mostly hand gestures).

My initial choice is to wait for Nikon’s new af-s 50mm f/1.8, which comes out in June.
It’s roughly 9.5 times as light strong as my current lens at a focal length of 50mm which would allow me to bump down the ISO to 400 and significantly increase the shutter speed. The Nikon prime should roughly set me back about €200.

However as of today I’m also considering the Tamron 28-70mm f/2.8.
It’s roughly 4 times as light strong as my kit lens at a focal length of 55 (and up) which would allow me to bump the ISO down to 400 and double my shutter speed. It is quite a bit more expensive than the Nikon prime as it costs somewhere between €350 and €360.

The reason I’m considering this lens over the 50mm prime is the versatility in focal length.
Whilst looking back at my shots, I found out that I often shoot at focal length between 35 and 50mm. The Tamron lens would allow me to take wider shots as well as zoom in on the
action. The venue I frequently attend allows me stand really close to the podium, but during concerts there is pretty much no opportunity to move around and get closer or further away from the action at which point the prime would put me at a disadvantage.

What would you guys recommend? Do any of you have any experience with the Tamron lens? Would the versatility in focal length be worth the extra €150 as well as the extra hit in light strength? Are there any other lenses that you guys would recommend over these two? If you guys have other recommendations please take the fact that I have a Nikon D3100, and thus require auto focus to be in the lens, into consideration.

 

[spineduke]

I’m currently deciding on a new lens and I would love for some input from our residential photographers. This Wednesday I tried my hand with concert photography for the second time. As everyone should know, my Nikon 18-55mm f/3.5-.56 kitlens absolutely does not cut it when working in low light conditions. I was forced to shoot at ISO 800 and slow shutter speeds (1/25 – 1/50) and even at these settings I was pretty much underexposing every shot. The resulting shots are heavy on grain and/or have fallen victim to blurred motions (mostly hand gestures).

My initial choice is to wait for Nikon’s new af-s 50mm f/1.8, which comes out in June.
It’s roughly 9.5 times as light strong as my current lens at a focal length of 50mm which would allow me to bump down the ISO to 400 and significantly increase the shutter speed. The Nikon prime should roughly set me back about €200.

However as of today I’m also considering the Tamron 28-70mm f/2.8.
It’s roughly 4 times as light strong as my kit lens at a focal length of 55 (and up) which would allow me to bump the ISO down to 400 and double my shutter speed. It is quite a bit more expensive than the Nikon prime as it costs somewhere between €350 and €360.

The reason I’m considering this lens over the 50mm prime is the versatility in focal length.
Whilst looking back at my shots, I found out that I often shoot at focal length between 35 and 50mm. The Tamron lens would allow me to take wider shots as well as zoom in on the
action. The venue I frequently attend allows me stand really close to the podium, but during concerts there is pretty much no opportunity to move around and get closer or further away from the action at which point the prime would put me at a disadvantage.

What would you guys recommend? Do any of you have any experience with the Tamron lens? Would the versatility in focal length be worth the extra €150 as well as the extra hit in light strength? Are there any other lenses that you guys would recommend over these two? If you guys have other recommendations please take the fact that I have a Nikon D3100, and thus require auto focus to be in the lens, into consideration.

Can you rent lenses where you live? It's difficult to say if 2.8 would suffice for low light concerts. You may be slightly disappointed with the results (But it is a far more versatile and useful lens - Worth the money)

 

[345triangle]

is the d3100 really that bad in low light? i'm surprised that 800 would be too grainy on a camera like that, but if it's the case then i don't think 2.8 would be enough. maybe i just have low noise standards. otherwise, i'd have suggested the zoom over the prime for the same reasons you were thinking of - i love my 35 1.8 for walking around, but that's because i can walk around, and framing from a still position would be even more difficult with a 50 on a crop sensor.

i have a friend who uses that tamron lens on a canon (400D? i think) and she really likes it for general purposes, anyway.

 

[Danielsan]

is the d3100 really that bad in low light? i'm surprised that 800 would be too grainy on a camera like that, but if it's the case then i don't think 2.8 would be enough. maybe i just have low noise standards. otherwise, i'd have suggested the zoom over the prime for the same reasons you were thinking of - i love my 35 1.8 for walking around, but that's because i can walk around, and framing from a still position would be even more difficult with a 50 on a crop sensor.

i have a friend who uses that tamron lens on a canon (400D? i think) and she really likes it for general purposes, anyway.

Supposedly the D3100 is pretty great with higher ISO values. Still, the amount of grain is quite noticeable this time around. I will upload a couple of examples when I get back from work. Thanks for the feedback thus far guys!

 

[BlueTsunami]

http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/157-canon-ef-35mm-f2-test-report--review?start=1

That bokeh looks worse than my kit zoom lens

Unfortunately a lot of the lenses at and wider than 35mm in regards to bokeh leave a lot to be desired. The only way you'll get pleasant or even neutral bokeh (not harsh but not imposing) is through the Sigma 30/1.4 (which I think is supposed to have nice bokeh) 35L (which is renowned for its smoothness), Zeiss 35/2 (as Antimatter posted, this one is a little more harsh but still pleasant) or a Leica-R 35mm Summicron (which I believe is also supposed to be fairly smooth).

 

[chaostrophy]

Is there a good Canon 35mm prime lens (I have a APS-C, so it'd be close to 50mm on a full frame) that isn't an L for like $1400? Maybe I'll just spring for the L and not buy another lens for a year .

It's a little longer than 35, but the Voigtlander 40mm F2 ($450) is a great lens, if you don't mind manual focus. (review is for Nikon mount, but it's available in Canon mount as well)

 

[mclaren777]

I'm looking to buy something that will make the pop-up flash on my T2i not suck so much. Any suggestions?


$30
http://www.lightscoop.com/

$10
http://photo-tips-online.com/review/zeh-bounce-pop-up-flash-reflector/

$17
http://www.garyfongestore.com/puffer-pop-up-flash-diffuser.html

 

[Danielsan]

is the d3100 really that bad in low light? i'm surprised that 800 would be too grainy on a camera like that, but if it's the case then i don't think 2.8 would be enough. maybe i just have low noise standards. otherwise, i'd have suggested the zoom over the prime for the same reasons you were thinking of - i love my 35 1.8 for walking around, but that's because i can walk around, and framing from a still position would be even more difficult with a 50 on a crop sensor.

i have a friend who uses that tamron lens on a canon (400D? i think) and she really likes it for general purposes, anyway.

As promised a couple of pics that demonstrate the noise in my pictures from wednesday.

A crop from the last picture at 50% of the original size:

 

[luoapp]

As promised a couple of pics that demonstrate the noise in my pictures from wednesday.

What are the iso, shutter speed?

 

[captive]

As promised a couple of pics that demonstrate the noise in my pictures from wednesday.

http://i.imgur.com/IGts1.jpg[IMG]

[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/U8IQB.jpg[IMG]

[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/y1Oh4.jpg[IMG]

[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/blPhX.jpg[IMG]

A crop from the last picture at 50% of the original size:

[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/ILoph.jpg[IMG][/QUOTE]
couple of things.

these don't look bad at all.

Were you spot metering?

The 50% crop looks more like miss focus/motion blur than noise.

Its a nice fine grain that IMO looks very nice. If you printed these you wouldn't even be able to tell.

But you should definitely get rid of the kit lens for this type of stuff.

 

[Danielsan]

What are the iso, shutter speed?

All of the pictures were taken at ISO 800

As for shutter speed and aperture:
1. 1/20, f/5.3
2. 1/25, f/5,3
3. 1/50, f/5.3
4. 1/50, f/5.3

couple of things.

these don't look bad at all.

Were you spot metering?

The 50% crop looks more like miss focus/motion blur than noise.

Its a nice fine grain that IMO looks very nice. If you printed these you wouldn't even be able to tell.

But you should definitely get rid of the kit lens for this type of stuff.

Yes I used spot metering, though to be fair, I mostly just winged it based on my gut and what the camera + lens would let me get away with.

You are right about the crop containing some motion blur, it's just that the noise is very noticeable in the background.

I'm definitely leaving the kit lens at home next time. I just didn't have the means to purchase something more suitable until now. Guess I've made my choice and I'll be going for the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 The versatility of the lens is probably going to do me more good than the sheer speed of the Nikon prime. Shooting at ISO 800 with the Tamron would at least allow me to take better action shots with a high shutter speed.

 

[BlueTsunami]

All of the pictures were taken at ISO 800

As for shutter speed and aperture:
1. 1/20, f/5.3
2. 1/25, f/5,3
3. 1/50, f/5.3
4. 1/50, f/5.3

Your shutter speeds are definitely very low (and as Captive stated you're seeing blurring, be it handshake or subject movement or a mixture of both) and the aperture being used is pretty small in contrast to what can be attained with fast lenses (like a 50/1.8 or 85/1.8). At f/1.8 (which is over 2 stops of light) with the same ISO speed you'll be hitting around 1/100 shutter speeds which I think would be good for this type of venue. Plus exposing for a subject correctly, even when noise is present, will still look remarkably good. Its when a photo is a bit underexposed (or completely) when noise really rear its head.

I would also make use of Manual Exposure since the camera trying to meter the performer with such a dark backdrop will be a bit hit or miss. I just read you're using Spot Metering which is definitely better than Center Weighted but constantly having to point at your subject to meter and re-compose seems like it would get tiring.

 

[tino]

I'm looking to buy something that will make the pop-up flash on my T2i not suck so much. Any suggestions?


$30
http://www.lightscoop.com/

$10
http://photo-tips-online.com/review/zeh-bounce-pop-up-flash-reflector/

$17
http://www.garyfongestore.com/puffer-pop-up-flash-diffuser.html

I suggest you use that money to buy a used manual flash on ebay. Nikon Canon Pentax well as long as its not Sony SLR can use single contact manual flashes. Just buy the one with the largest guide number.

 

[tokkun]

Your shutter speeds are definitely very low (and as Captive stated you're seeing blurring, be it handshake or subject movement or a mixture of both) and the aperture being used is pretty small in contrast to what can be attained with fast lenses (like a 50/1.8 or 85/1.8). At f/1.8 (which is over 2 stops of light) with the same ISO speed you'll be hitting around 1/100 shutter speeds which I think would be good for this type of venue. Plus exposing for a subject correctly, even when noise is present, will still look remarkably good. Its when a photo is a bit underexposed (or completely) when noise really rear its head.

True, but f/1.8 may be a challenge to get the entire performer and instrument/mic in focus for that type of shot at 50mm range.

 

[captive]

Yes I used spot metering, though to be fair, I mostly just winged it based on my gut and what the camera + lens would let me get away with.

You are right about the crop containing some motion blur, it's just that the noise is very noticeable in the background.

I'm definitely leaving the kit lens at home next time. I just didn't have the means to purchase something more suitable until now. Guess I've made my choice and I'll be going for the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 The versatility of the lens is probably going to do me more good than the sheer speed of the Nikon prime. Shooting at ISO 800 with the Tamron would at least allow me to take better action shots with a high shutter speed.

one thing i've learned is that noise in the out of focus area will always be more prominent, don't really know why, but it won't matter if you nail focus and exposure on the subject.

I think you'll do better with f2.8 but could still get more light with a f1.8. But as BlueTsunami said you'll have better shutter speeds at ISO800 f2.8.

Don't be afraid to go to ISO 1600 either, the noise really isn't that bad in these. And its always going to look worse if you pixel peep or crop severely.

 

[Danielsan]

Thanks for all the advice everyone. Much appreciated.

 

[tino]

I also suggest manual metering at night or room light situation. You basically has 1 or 2 meter combo in the whole evening anyway, its much faster and predictable with M mode. Auto metering is like using GPS. If the driving direction is dead simple, you can understand "re-route" faster with a physical map or just your brain.

 

[mclaren777]

I suggest you use that money to buy a used manual flash on ebay. Nikon Canon Pentax well as long as its not Sony SLR can use single contact manual flashes. Just buy the one with the largest guide number.

Someday I'll probably own a nice Speedlite but for now I'm just looking for something cheap/simple and I'm really impressed by what I've seen online from the Lightscoop.

 

[Phoenix4]

Just bought a Canon 60D and a 55-250mm F4-F5.6 from my holiday bonus. A step up from my 450D and i can use the zoom when shooting bears (in a nice way) during my holiday to British Columbia

 

[Jayayess1190]

June is going to be hot. The Sony Nex-C3, Panasonic GF3, and Olympus E-PL3 are all coming out in June. I want one of them.

 

[345triangle]

didn't the GF2 and E-PL2 only just come out a few months back? why would they replace them so quickly?

not that a busy release schedule is necessarily bad, seeing as i'm still just waiting for the new NEX lenses. could really use a 50 1.8 on this thing.

 

[Jayayess1190]

didn't the GF2 and E-PL2 only just come out a few months back? why would they replace them so quickly?

not that a busy release schedule is necessarily bad, seeing as i'm still just waiting for the new NEX lenses. could really use a 50 1.8 on this thing.

GF2 is not selling well, not sure with the E-PL2.

 

[Bitmap Frogs]

True, but f/1.8 may be a challenge to get the entire performer and instrument/mic in focus for that type of shot at 50mm range.

Go wide.

The wider you go, the more you get in focus.

Photography is a set of compromises, pick the one you are most comfortable with or move upwards to better gear with less compromises.

Anyways, tight focus with low noise>deep focus with mega-noise.

 

[tokkun]

Go wide.

The wider you go, the more you get in focus.

Photography is a set of compromises, pick the one you are most comfortable with or move upwards to better gear with less compromises.

Anyways, tight focus with low noise>deep focus with mega-noise.

Not sure I follow what you mean by "go wide". They were discussing a prime lens, so there is no way to go to a wider focal length. If you are talking about stopping down the aperture, then that negates the point of the original recommendation.

 

[Lucius86]

Just a minor nitpick, you're looking for a lens with a larger aperture. (It's inversely related)

Second, be aware that in low light situations, a large aperture can do wonders, but you will at times struggle with the DoF. (Try getting a group shot of everyone in focus at f/1.8 and you'll understand). Primes are great, but I'd also suggest you to seriously take a look at a bouncing flash - probably the best bang for buck in terms of the $$$ you'll spend on expensive primes.

Appreciate the feedback - I will have a look what's out there.

 

[Timedog]

Not sure I follow what you mean by "go wide". They were discussing a prime lens, so there is no way to go to a wider focal length. If you are talking about stopping down the aperture, then that negates the point of the original recommendation.

I think he means actually standing further away.

 

[tino]

GF2 is not selling well, not sure with the E-PL2.

GF2 is a shitty downgrade from GF1, Im glad is not selling well.

 

[Bitmap Frogs]

Not sure I follow what you mean by "go wide". They were discussing a prime lens, so there is no way to go to a wider focal length. If you are talking about stopping down the aperture, then that negates the point of the original recommendation.

He can swap the prime for a wider prime which means at equal apertures he'll have a bigger depth of field.

Anyways, bigger aperture is a choice too. Less things in focus? sure but at least he'll get usable results.

 

[opticalmace]

Camera folk! I bought myself a Sony Alpha-55. I like it a lot.

However, I am a noob and don't really know where to start. I am taking photos on auto and it is fun, but I don't know how to take "better" pictures.

Is there any reading material so I can start to understand what I should be doing? I know very little about all this. I have a vague idea of aperture settings and shutter speed but that is it.

tl;dr--where can i learn about how to take good photos (from the technical side)?

Thanks!

 

[Flo_Evans]

Well I went abit nuts and got a d7000

Love it!!

 

[345triangle]

GF2 is a shitty downgrade from GF1, Im glad is not selling well.

yeah, i have to say i liked the design of the GF1 a lot more.

Camera folk! I bought myself a Sony Alpha-55. I like it a lot.

However, I am a noob and don't really know where to start. I am taking photos on auto and it is fun, but I don't know how to take "better" pictures.

Is there any reading material so I can start to understand what I should be doing? I know very little about all this. I have a vague idea of aperture settings and shutter speed but that is it.

tl;dr--where can i learn about how to take good photos (from the technical side)?

Thanks!

congrats - i have the same camera and it's fantastic!

ages ago i got a book by david busch on the a550 series, 95% of which could apply to the a55 as well, and 60% of which would apply to any DSLR. it tells you all about the menus, what each mode does, the principles of SLR photography etc, but framed from the perspective of the alpha system so there are specific lens recommendations and things like that.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/143545944X/?tag=neogaf0e-20

turns out he's actually written a specific a55 one, anyway! i would definitely recommend it based on the version i had.