Support NeoGAF

[fart]

i'm like 99% sure you won't regret it if you do. it's awesome, even on FX.

this might be a good time to ping your local camera shops. some small shops out there are sitting on stock that's moving at non-internet speeds. this is largely because small camera shops are almost universally horrid places run by idiots, but it's worth a try anyway.

 

[Zyzyxxz]

To Zyzyxxz, re: con photography - those dealer room lights and the fluorescents in the hallways will put you at about f/2.8 and 1/60 at ISO 400. I would totally recommend the 35mm f/1.8 for the purpose. A wider angle would also be useful (especially a 24mm given the crop frame) but you'd be set with the 35.

Thanks for the recommendation but how is this lense better than the one that comes with the D40 kit?

I ask because all these numbers don't make any sense to me and I'm confused by lenses stats.

 

[radios shipping overview]

Thanks for the recommendation but how is this lense better than the one that comes with the D40 kit?

I ask because all these numbers don't make any sense to me and I'm confused by lenses stats.

The kit lens is fairly "slow" - i.e. the maximum aperture isn't particularly good for low light. The lower the aperture f-number - i.e. f/1.8 or f/3.5, the better the light-gathering capability. The D40's kit lens's max aperture (smallest f-number) is between f/3.5 and f/5.6. You need a max aperture of f/2.8 or lower for most indoor light without flash at ISO 400. Most indoor lighting is fairly dim, even if it doesn't look it. The 35mm f/1.8 - not a zoom, fixed at the 35mm focal length - is very, very good for low light.

Use your camera in M mode and get familiar with adjusting the shutter speed and aperture manually, and these things will start to make more sense (and you'll be able to use them to improve your shots).

 

[Rentahamster]

Yeah, the kit lens image quality is great (for a kit lens) at 5.6, 8, or narrower, but that's provided you got enough light (outdoor daylight photography, for example).

If you're shooting indoors, a wide aperture is great for letting more light in so that you can use a lower ISO, higher shutter speed, or lower flash power.

 

[fart]

so if you switch your d40's info display to graphic mode and the mode dial to Av (aperture priority), there's a picture of an iris that varies as you spin the control dial (the right-hand dial near the shutter). that iris represents an actual mechanical iris in the lens. as the iris in the lens opens, more light is allowed through the lens. as it closes, less light is allowed through the lens.

for various physical reasons, as you close that iris, the image cast by the lens gets sharper, with more distinct edges (up to a certain point -- about f8-11 on a d40), and the region of space which is in focus (called the depth of field or DOF) becomes larger. conversely, opening the iris allows you to take brighter pictures in low light, but makes the image a bit blurrier, and reduces the depth of field. lenses are also built such that there's a mechanical stop on the aperture which keeps it to a reasonable diameter for a given lens design (ie, as large as the element the aperture is in front of). high quality fixed focal length lenses (which are simpler optically than zooms) have the largest maximum aperture stops, and on top of that tend to have higher light transmission ratios, which makes them much better in low light (brighter pictures), and allows the photog to shrink DOF with large apertures.

let's take your kit zoom as an example. dpreview says it's f5 at 35mm. the 35/1.8 is (naturally) f1.8 at 35mm. that means the iris on the prime opens up to 4x the area of the zoom. this translates more or less directly into a 4-fold increase in light sensitivity for the whole optical system (you actually get a bit more than that because the prime is less complicated mechanically and optically). pretty cool!

 

[Zyzyxxz]

The kit lens is fairly "slow" - i.e. the maximum aperture isn't particularly good for low light. The lower the aperture f-number - i.e. f/1.8 or f/3.5, the better the light-gathering capability. The D40's kit lens's max aperture (smallest f-number) is between f/3.5 and f/5.6. You need a max aperture of f/2.8 or lower for most indoor light without flash at ISO 400. Most indoor lighting is fairly dim, even if it doesn't look it. The 35mm f/1.8 - not a zoom, fixed at the 35mm focal length - is very, very good for low light.

Use your camera in M mode and get familiar with adjusting the shutter speed and aperture manually, and these things will start to make more sense (and you'll be able to use them to improve your shots).

thanks, that made alot more sense.

 

[Instigator]

I can't seem to decide between the Nikon D5000 and Olympus E-620. I'm not asking for someone else to make the decision for me, I'm just expressing my dilemma.

D5000 pros:
- Impressive ISO performance (better than Olympus)
- Good image quality
- Lots of lenses to choose from, including third-party
- video (don't need HD though)
- swivel LCD

D5000 cons
- nonsense about IS and autofocus with some lenses (yeah, yeah, I know why, but it still sucks)
- Brick-like body
- Kinda pricey (even more so with kit lens)
- swivel LCD not as well placed as on the Olympus

E-620 pros
- Smallish body for a DSLR
- Smallish lenses too (particularly relevant with telephoto lenses)
- good image quality
- truckfull of features
- swivel LCD
- cheaper
- in-camera image stabilization (yes!)

E-620 cons:
- noiseland after ISO 800
- limited choices of lenses
- XD/Compact Flash support
- video inexplicably absent

 

[fart]

i think you've nailed the +/- pretty well. i assume you've considered a d60/d90 too? the d90 in particular is actually slightly less than the d5000 if you're OK with a refurb (they're basically new, but usually have a 90 day warranty instead of 1yr).

also when you pair the nikon with any of the kit lenses you get VR. if you're happy with the kit lenses (and you may be quite; they're excellent), this erases the stabilization differences. also keep in mind that IS is only useful at slow shutter speeds and when used carefully, so it's not quite the panacea many want it to be (including me). basically, if you're a from the hip shooter, you'll still want fast lenses and high iso perf.

these questions may or may not be relevant:

what focal length range do you actually want? which leads to

how many lenses do you actually think you're going to want in the near term (w/in 6 months)?

do you want more or less DOF? (more = 4/3, less = APS-C)

how important is size to you?

are you going to shoot fast action of any kind? (my friend who shoots oly hates hates hates the AF -- slow and inaccurate)

viewfinder size. do you care? (look through both)

are you willing to play around in the used markets, to sell or buy? (there is 0 used market for anything not canikon)

do you know anyone (family, close friends, etc) who shoots either nikon or oly?

what is your _total budget_ for camera crap? (think 1yr)

which one was more comfortable when you played around with it?

i think the last is the most important, honestly

oh, one more: how important are the wider focals to you? if they're at all important you need to get as large a sensor as you can afford (APS-C is probably the sweet spot).

 

[captive]

i think you've nailed the +/- pretty well. i assume you've considered a d60/d90 too? the d90 in particular is actually slightly less than the d5000 if you're OK with a refurb (they're basically new, but usually have a 90 day warranty instead of 1yr).

also when you pair the nikon with any of the kit lenses you get VR. if you're happy with the kit lenses (and you may be quite; they're excellent), this erases the stabilization differences. also keep in mind that IS is only useful at slow shutter speeds and when used carefully, so it's not quite the panacea many want it to be (including me). basically, if you're a from the hip shooter, you'll still want fast lenses and high iso perf.

these questions may or may not be relevant:

what focal length range do you actually want? which leads to

how many lenses do you actually think you're going to want in the near term (w/in 6 months)?

do you want more or less DOF? (more = 4/3, less = APS-C)

how important is size to you?

are you going to shoot fast action of any kind? (my friend who shoots oly hates hates hates the AF -- slow and inaccurate)

viewfinder size. do you care? (look through both)

are you willing to play around in the used markets, to sell or buy? (there is 0 used market for anything not canikon)

do you know anyone (family, close friends, etc) who shoots either nikon or oly?

what is your _total budget_ for camera crap? (think 1yr)

which one was more comfortable when you played around with it?

i think the last is the most important, honestly

oh, one more: how important are the wider focals to you? if they're at all important you need to get as large a sensor as you can afford (APS-C is probably the sweet spot).

Going to have to disagree, especially in the days of the internet.
You can find just about anything used for just about any brand camera. You can still find legacy Oly OM glass that will work in manual focus on digital oly stuff with an adapter of course.
Local camera shop had the Oly Zuiko 50-200 and sold it in less than a week about a month ago.

Anyway these are good questions to ask before buying a camera.


Fart - which model and which lenses does your friend have auto focus issues with and what is he taking pics of?
They just released firmware updates for the E30 and E3 which is supposed to help with that. Also the SWD lenses are much faster focusing than the rest of the lenses especially when paired with the E3 or E30.

 

[fart]

Going to have to disagree, especially in the days of the internet.
You can find just about anything used for just about any brand camera. You can still find legacy Oly OM glass that will work in manual focus on digital oly stuff with an adapter of course.
Local camera shop had the Oly Zuiko 50-200 and sold it in less than a week about a month ago.

obviously i'm exaggerating somewhat, but not a lot. haunt any of the big used venues that aren't ebay and you see canikon stuff moving and almost nothing non-canikon. it should tell you something that POTN is one of the biggest used venues for camera equip, and is basically canon exclusive. bottom line: good canikon stuff moves in minutes to hours almost anywhere. you're going to have to work to find a market for oly stuff.

Fart - which model and which lenses does your friend have auto focus issues with and what is he taking pics of?
They just released firmware updates for the E30 and E3 which is supposed to help with that. Also the SWD lenses are much faster focusing than the rest of the lenses especially when paired with the E3 or E30.

good q. i think it was a 14-42/e-520 i saw him with. i assume it's the kit lens, so it should be ring motored-ish. he said something about it going to contrast detect focus as a failover (which didn't make any sense), and something about lots of hunting. i only used it for a few minutes so i can't corroborate. there was also notable amazement when he used my d80/50g for 30 minutes or so because "the af is so fast, and it locks on so quickly!" which is hilarious if you're at all familiar with either the d80 or the 50g (hint: butt slow).

i think he does a lot of candid stuff.

oh, that reminds me. if you think you might want to do a lot of ttl flash, the nikon system is by far the best.

similarly, if you think you might want to collect _lots_ of lenses, including specific pieces of old pentax, minolta, oly, nikon stuff, you want to go canon (nikon bodies can only mount nikon MF because the F mount has such a long registration distance).

 

[BlueTsunami]

www.fredmiranda.com is a good Photog site that has a Buy/Sell forum with people who sometime sell Alternative Lens. But as fart stated, you have to go digging for non Canikon lenses and even then, you probably wont' find the exact lens you want.

 

[Rentahamster]

Currently, I don't really see how anyone can buy a camera that's not Nikon or Canon (I guess Sony's not that bad, too, nowadays).

I really don't like to sound like the type that bashes other brands, but, well, there's pretty much no contest, IMO. Image quality and auto focus on Canon or Nikon bodies is much better than other brands. I know some others who shoot Olympus and Pentax...whenever they come out with a new product my friends try to compare it to my Nikon and Canon equipment with high hopes in order to justify their purchase.

They always walk away disappointed. But yet, they don't change brands. The mind boggles.

 

[captive]

Currently, I don't really see how anyone can buy a camera that's not Nikon or Canon (I guess Sony's not that bad, too, nowadays).

I really don't like to sound like the type that bashes other brands, but, well, there's pretty much no contest, IMO. Image quality and auto focus on Canon or Nikon bodies is much better than other brands. I know some others who shoot Olympus and Pentax...whenever they come out with a new product my friends try to compare it to my Nikon and Canon equipment with high hopes in order to justify their purchase.

They always walk away disappointed. But yet, they don't change brands. The mind boggles.

Sorry im not tryin to sound harsh, but you'd have to turn a pretty big blind eye to what can be produced by equipment not named cannikon.

I couldnt be happier. Oly lenses are sharrrppp. My 12-60 f2.8 SWD is fantastic, 84 wide at 12 then a standard zoom to 60. And very sharp for such exotic glass.
50-200 SWD is a full pound lighter than the the Cannon equivalent, sealed and around 700-800 dollars less brand new.

So im going to have to disagree fully. In this day and age all the brands have very nice stuff, the limitation is with the photographer and very rarely the equipment.

 

[Kung Fu Jedi]

Just got my new D90 last week. Barely had time to play with it, but so far I'm loving what I've seen. I'm upgrading from a D40, which is a great little camera, but I've found that I've begun to outgrow it following a recent trip, and I wanted something with more options.

Need to get familiar with the D90 before I leave for Australia in a couple of weeks.

 

[fart]

www.fredmiranda.com is a good Photog site that has a Buy/Sell forum with people who sometime sell Alternative Lens. But as fart stated, you have to go digging for non Canikon lenses and even then, you probably wont' find the exact lens you want.

for a more concrete example: i'm going to be putting my d80 up this week (hopefully), and i expect it to go in a day or two the way i'm pricing it (about half what i paid 2 years ago).

there's been an e-520 up for the last two weeks for a reasonable looking price and 0 people have expressed interest in it. it's a bit like buying a korean car in the US right now.

FWIW: i'm certainly not saying that 3rd party brands are crap. oly and pentax have some of the best lens designers in the business. similarly, the sony cameras are getting better, and the lenses are starting to catch up. what i'm saying is that no one else uses any of the above, so get used to being an equipment island.

suggestions: 4/3 gives you really high pixel density over the very center frame. that can actually be really useful for long (and i mean 300mm+) tele work.

pentax has the only good selection of APS-C pancake primes, and their older film primes are famous for their character and build.

sony gives you the cheapest way of getting at their sensors, although the implementations of the sensors aren't quite as refined (particularly at high iso) as the nikon implementations.

the problem of course is that these unique strengths are going to have to cover for major weaknesses of each brand, and except for sony, there's a reasonable chance of all three of the systems disappearing because of the downturn and general muddling about.

 

[BlueTsunami]

for a more concrete example: i'm going to be putting my d80 up this week (hopefully), and i expect it to go in a day or two the way i'm pricing it (about half what i paid 2 years ago).

there's been an e-520 up for the last two weeks for a reasonable looking price and 0 people have expressed interest in it. it's a bit like buying a korean car in the US right now.

Ahhhh, I see what you mean now. With that in mind, the trends I've noticed is that only the most exotic non Canon/Nikon lenses are the ones that sell at a reasonable price. So yeah, that argument is definitely true (in regards to reselling personally bought equipment).

 

[fart]

Ahhhh, I see what you mean now. With that in mind, the trends I've noticed is that only the most exotic non Canon/Nikon lenses are the ones that sell at a reasonable price. So yeah, that argument is definitely true (in regards to reselling personally bought equipment).

yah, no one wants a sony kit lens, but you can sell an 18-55 vr in good shape for a pretty reasonable price.

 

[Kung Fu Jedi]

I'm in a similar boat with selling my D40. Haven't put it up for sale yet, but I expect it'll go quickly when I do. While the other companies have made huge strides in the DSLR arena, it's still Nikon and Canon leading the pack in my opinion.

Although I have to say, I was really impressed when I played with the Panasonic G1 recently. Great little camera, and their new high end model coming out in June looks great too.

 

[Forsete]

sony gives you the cheapest way of getting at their sensors, although the implementations of the sensors aren't quite as refined (particularly at high iso) as the nikon implementations.

Not sure about the lower end, but on the higher end they are competing. The A700 gives better colours at high ISO compared to the Nikon D300 with firmware 4.

Also the A900 can come very close to the D3X if you use the same "trick" Nikon does (crush the blacks).

 

[fart]

i have no idea what you're talking about. d3x shadow noise measures extremely well. nikon got this out of the sony sensor with toppings and very careful readout.

also dxo has the d300 a stop ahead of the a700 at high isos in their color-centric measurements. again, careful readout and toppings.

never underestimate the signal and semi guys at nikon. they're really really good and seem to be allowed to be much less practical than their counterparts elsewhere.

regardless, these kinds of measured differences are usually academic unless you're an optimal pixels type and will go through the trouble of trying to get perfect exposures and carry an 800$ 8 lb tripod everywhere you go.

 

[Instigator]

i think you've nailed the +/- pretty well. i assume you've considered a d60/d90 too? the d90 in particular is actually slightly less than the d5000 if you're OK with a refurb (they're basically new, but usually have a 90 day warranty instead of 1yr).

I consider the D5000 as a D90-lite already with an extra swivel screen. Apart from solving the autofocus issue, the extra bulk of the D90 is a big turn-off.

As for D60, I like the size and price, but it might not be enough of a departure from my old, but manual point-and-shoot camera. I don't do large prints much, but I am definitely a pixel peeper.

also when you pair the nikon with any of the kit lenses you get VR. if you're happy with the kit lenses (and you may be quite; they're excellent), this erases the stabilization differences. also keep in mind that IS is only useful at slow shutter speeds and when used carefully, so it's not quite the panacea many want it to be (including me). basically, if you're a from the hip shooter, you'll still want fast lenses and high iso perf.

IS/VR would be part of an upgrade experience since I've lived without it all this time.

It interests me for telephoto shots and low-light indoor shots.

these questions may or may not be relevant:

what focal length range do you actually want?.

Essentially, I am not into macro shots. 2 good lenses covering a large focal range would probably be enough for everyday life with, maybe, one prime lens for portraits.

For example, I'm very interested in the 70-300 lens from Olympus which I find as no equal on the Nikon side. I know I would use it a lot.

I prefer the all-in-one lens solutions from the Nikon side (lots of choices). And yes, I know there are compromises with those lenses but when abroad, I travel light and having one lens acting like a super zoom (10-15x) camera would be very practical.

how many lenses do you actually think you're going to want in the near term (w/in 6 months)?

Probably 2.

do you want more or less DOF? (more = 4/3, less = APS-C)

DOF as Depth of Field?

how important is size to you?

Fairly important. it'd be a camera I'd have with me nearly all the time (although not necessarily around my neck).

It's not so much how it feels in my hands but how cumbersome it is to have along. This will probably kill the D5000 when the big day comes.

are you going to shoot fast action of any kind? (my friend who shoots oly hates hates hates the AF -- slow and inaccurate)

Some marathons and kid shots. Most of what I shoot is static though.

viewfinder size. do you care? (look through both)

Size is not an issue. But I do like viewfinders.

are you willing to play around in the used markets, to sell or buy? (there is 0 used market for anything not canikon)

Not really.

do you know anyone (family, close friends, etc) who shoots either nikon or oly?

Nope. So I'd be the one to look up to when people around me decide to upgrade.

what is your _total budget_ for camera crap? (think 1yr)

2 grands. No more.

which one was more comfortable when you played around with it?

Haven't done that yet, too dangerous, I'd walk away with a camera.

I prefer to let the reviews come in and have the body prices come down a bit in the meantime.

i think the last is the most important, honestly

oh, one more: how important are the wider focals to you? if they're at all important you need to get as large a sensor as you can afford (APS-C is probably the sweet spot).

Depends on what you mean with wider focals. I am tempted by the pricey ultra wide angle lenses (not fish-eyes though) for both cameras, but the limited focal range means those would be novelty items for just a few occasions.

With Olympus, I think I'd be fine with a combo of the 12-60 and the already mentioned 70-300. The former lens matches closely the focal range I am already used to with my current primary camera (24mm-140mm), it is said to be much better than the already good 14-42 kit lens and it would make up for the prime portrait lens problem with Olympus since it outperforms Olympus' sole 50mm lens in nearly everything (except in size). 24 mm is wide enough.

With Nikon, I'm still debating, but I'd probably skip the kit lens.

 

[Forsete]

i have no idea what you're talking about. d3x shadow noise measures extremely well. nikon got this out of the sony sensor with toppings and very careful readout.

I've compared Nikon and Sony models in low light with high ISO several times - most of the time, the Sony camera will give one full step less exposure than the Nikon. Not only that, but the Nikon uses a tone curve which crushes the deep shadows to black and compressed the rest of the range closer to linear - removing loads of apparent noise in the process (black level clipping). The combination of clipping the black and increasing exposure transforms a high ISO shot.

In ACR, you can try the effect - take a normal (dark) ISO 3200 shot on an A700 or A900, and set the black level slider to 0 and the tone curve to Medium Contrast. The shadows, where noise is most visible, will look very bad. Now increase the exposure by +1 but clip the black level to 10 (the default is 5) and set the tone curve to Linear.

What I found was that if I used the default Nikon D3X tone curve with the Sony A900 in Iridient RawDeveloper (one of the few programs which allows such a switch of 'hidden' processing parameters), then increased the Sony exposure to match the Nikon, the A900 high ISO really was much the same the Nikon high ISO - far better than any default result. So, it is not an inevitable fault of the camera, more a badly chosen combination of in-camera and external processing parameters which makes Sony high ISO worse than it needs to be.

Link

Unless I am reading that wrong, exposing the image in a certain way will give you about the same results.

also dxo has the d300 a stop ahead of the a700 at high isos in their color-centric measurements. again, careful readout and toppings.

I'm going after what I've seen in comparisons, and at high ISO the D300 pictures look more washed out, while on the A700 with firmware 4 the colours are preserved better, the benefit of the D300s images is less colours noise. The two cameras are very close, then again they also share the same Sony CMOS sensor.

There was a huge difference before the 4th firmware was released, no doubt. Sony went crazy with the noise reduction, heavy handed watercolour look which I dont like at all.

I didnt know the DXO website listed the A700.

Edit: I've checked DXO now, and you are correct. Weird how real world examples can make things look different.
I'm happy to see the total score difference was only .3
Btw what system are you with fart, and what model?

 

[mrklaw]

I wish Canon would remake their 17-85IS lens, so it could be the equivalent of the 24-105L IS for crop cameras.

I have a 50D and the 24-105 which I love, but I would like it a little wider. But most of the 17-18mm zooms are too short for my taste - I like to be able to go longer than 55mm for a walkaround.

a 17-85f4L IS would be perfect. 17-55 f2.8 IS is a great lens, but its too short, and I don't *need* 2.8. I'd trade that for a longer constant f4 lens.


What are the current options for a wider walkaround zoom? eg starting at around 17-18mm, decent speed (so no slower than f4) and decently long too - longer than 50-55mm anyway.?

 

[Forsete]

News from Sony and Pentax.

Three new mainstream DSLRs from Sony, a refresh of their A200, A300 and A350 models.
The new models are aimed at users who are coming from point-and-shoot cameras.

Some features.

• New user friendly UI
• All models feature image stabilisation (SteadyShot)
• AF motor in all three houses
• A330 and A380 feature LiveView
• A230 and A330 share the same 10.2 Megapixel sensor
• A380 features the 14.2Megapixel sensor
• Slots for SecureDigital and Memory Stick Pro Duo
• ISO up to 3200
• New grip design
  

Also four new lenses.

• A new kitlens, 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 with a SAM autofocus motor. Price around 200USD
• A telephoto lens 55-200mm f4-5.6 also with a SAM autofocus motor. Price around 230USD
• A 50mm f1.8 portrait lens with a SAM autofocus motor. Price around 150USD
• A 30mm f2.8 macro lens with a SAM autofocus motor
• All these lenses are for crop sensors (DT lenses)

A new flash which when mounted on the A900 will be able to controll the other Sony flashes (The A900 does not have a built in flash which normally controlls the other flashes, like on A100-A700). HVL-F20AM with a guide number of 20, will cost ~130USD

New flash

Pentax K-7

• New Version of Samsung 14.6MP CMOS APS-C Imager in 23.4 x 15.6mm
• ISO Speeds: ISO 100-3200, 6400 Available on Expansion
• OVF 100% Image Coverage, 0.92X Magnification
• Live View with contrast AF
• Video recodring at 1280x720 30fps maximum
• 3.0" LCD screen with 920,000 pixels
• Sealed body
  

Looks like a very nice camera from Pentax.

 

[fart]

I consider the D5000 as a D90-lite already with an extra swivel screen. Apart from solving the autofocus issue, the extra bulk of the D90 is a big turn-off.

As for D60, I like the size and price, but it might not be enough of a departure from my old, but manual point-and-shoot camera. I don't do large prints much, but I am definitely a pixel peeper.

yep, sounds like you shouldn't consider the d90 heavily. the d60 will have significantly higher resolution, dr, etc. than your p&s, but isn't a standout among APS-C cameras. the sensor shared by the d90 and d5000 is. it's not only a stop ahead of the older sony 10mp ccd that's in the d60 (and the lower end sony A series) in SNR, but it's also a stop ahead in DR. this actually makes it one of the highest DR sensors you can buy today (including FF sensors).

IS/VR would be part of an upgrade experience since I've lived without it all this time.

It interests me for telephoto shots and low-light indoor shots.

it's quite nice for tele, but not all that great for indoor shots (less effective at wide focal lengths). also won't allow you to freeze action, and stabilization lock latency is non-negligible.

Essentially, I am not into macro shots. 2 good lenses covering a large focal range would probably be enough for everyday life with, maybe, one prime lens for portraits.

For example, I'm very interested in the 70-300 lens from Olympus which I find as no equal on the Nikon side. I know I would use it a lot.

if you like really long teles (that 4/3s 70-300 will go to 600mm effective!) and are on a budget, you do want to go with the smaller sensor. the nikon 70-300 is very nice on APS-C up to 200mm (reasonably usable up to 300mm), but it's the longest budget lens you're going to find for a d5000. anything longer than 300mm in the nikon system is currently an exotic.

that said, the 18-55vr and 55-200vr are a killer combo for nikon APS-C. they won't get you the same tele reach, but they're stupendously inexpensive and of extremely high optical quality.

I prefer the all-in-one lens solutions from the Nikon side (lots of choices). And yes, I know there are compromises with those lenses but when abroad, I travel light and having one lens acting like a super zoom (10-15x) camera would be very practical.

if you want a bit more detail on the nikon DX consumer line, you may find it helpful to cross-index thom hogan's nice concise opinions http://www.bythom.com/nikon-dx-lens-summary.htm and the photozone MTF tests http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests

DOF as Depth of Field?

yes. the 4/3 system has more dof by a factor of about 1.6 or so? (i think). diffraction limits hit earlier as well, after f5.6 or so with the newer higher density sensors apparently. sensor size has manifold impacts on quite a few things.

Fairly important. it'd be a camera I'd have with me nearly all the time (although not necessarily around my neck).

It's not so much how it feels in my hands but how cumbersome it is to have along. This will probably kill the D5000 when the big day comes.

i haven't held a d5000 yet, but the d40/60 series body is not all that much bigger than an e510, carry-wise. if the d5000 is really too big for you, and you're not in a rush, there should be a d60-sized camera with the same sensor out this year. no swivel screen of course.

Size is not an issue. But I do like viewfinders.

spend some time with the VFs before you say this.

Haven't done that yet, too dangerous, I'd walk away with a camera.

do this early and often

I prefer to let the reviews come in and have the body prices come down a bit in the meantime.

yep, this is volume equipment and there's reasonably good price pressure downwards still. oly in particular is dumping price right now. my guess is they have a _lot_ of unsold inventory piling up.

Depends on what you mean with wider focals. I am tempted by the pricey ultra wide angle lenses (not fish-eyes though) for both cameras, but the limited focal range means those would be novelty items for just a few occasions.

i'm kind of a wide guy, so by wide i mean < 20mm, but anyway aps-c wide zooms:

nikon 10-24
tamron 10-24
sigma 10-20
nikon 12-24
tokina 12-24 (I/II)
tokina 11-16 2.8

about half of these are very reasonably priced. i would also add a canon rebel of some kind to your list btw, which adds the excellent canon 10-22 as an option.

With Olympus, I think I'd be fine with a combo of the 12-60 and the already mentioned 70-300. The former lens matches closely the focal range I am already used to with my current primary camera (24mm-140mm), it is said to be much better than the already good 14-42 kit lens and it would make up for the prime portrait lens problem with Olympus since it outperforms Olympus' sole 50mm lens in nearly everything (except in size). 24 mm is wide enough.

With Nikon, I'm still debating, but I'd probably skip the kit lens.

you might like the nikon 16-85, which is pretty astoundingly good for being a consumer lens (but a bit pricey compared to other optics in the system). it does match your current P&S almost exactly though. for a more budget option the nikon kit lens is actually also astoundingly good (and why the 16-85 is considered to be so damned expensive).

regarding portrait lenses, larger sensors are more ideal for portraits because of the increased DOF control. these are also pro bread and butter lenses, so the nikon and canon systems have gigantic multitude of options (and low-light primes in general).

 

[Alfarif]

Anyone know a good place online where you can get some umbrella lights? I looked on Amazon, but they don't really offer anything. What I've mostly found was just photographs selling their old equipment.

 

[fart]

Link

Unless I am reading that wrong, exposing the image in a certain way will give you about the same results.

that person has no idea what he's talking about whatsoever.

The two cameras are very close, then again they also share the same Sony CMOS sensor.

not quite. nikon seems to be manufacturing the sensors themselves (in a factory leased from sony it seems) and although the sensels are the same, and the sensor die is mostly likely of the same design, the sensor toppings (microlenses, etc) and off-board readout circuitry are definitely different, and there are very likely small differences elsewhere. in fact, nikon currently makes 2 distinct riffs on that same 12mp cmos design: one goes in the d300 and one is shared by the d90 and d5000. basically, although they clearly derive from the same design, the implementations in total are vastly different, and it's quite obvious from raw measurements.

Weird how real world examples can make things look different.

you've just quoted someone who applied a bizarre tone curve in a 3rd party raw processor and then complained that nikon's response curve crushed all the blacks (hint: no 3rd party raw processor even understands the response curve written by nikon cameras into raw metadata). sensor data is notoriously easy to destroy and takes a lot of experience to craft optimally. because of this, particularly when two cameras have a best measurable difference less than about a stop, the best image quality tends to come from the one you have the most experience with and the most optimized workflow for.

this doesn't help the guy who's camera shopping, but hopefully it will stop people from buying new cameras all the time (says the guy who just bought a new camera :X)

Anyone know a good place online where you can get some umbrella lights? I looked on Amazon, but they don't really offer anything. What I've mostly found was just photographs selling their old equipment.

i know the strobist guys tend to have specific places they shop, but in general i've had good experiences with B&H and adorama.

 

[Alfarif]

adorama.

Just what I was looking for. Thanks a ton!

What's funny, is that now that I think about it, I bought something from these guys off of Amazon. I wonder why the lights I was looking at didn't list them.

 

[Rentahamster]

Anyone know a good place online where you can get some umbrella lights? I looked on Amazon, but they don't really offer anything. What I've mostly found was just photographs selling their old equipment.

Hm? Quick search shows one right here: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B000P3XC3Y/?tag=neogaf0e-20

15 bucks and eligible for free shipping.

 

[Grimlock]

After reviewing these hand-on impressions of the new K-7, and the previews from DPReview and Imaging Resource, I have to think that-to paraphrase Mark Twain-rumors of Pentax's imminent demise have been greatly exaggerated. And they're even bringing out affordable weather-sealed lenses as well. As much as I love my K-20d, I have to admit to a certain lust for this new model. Now I'm busy figuring out what foods I can cut out to scrimp up enough cake for when this thing comes out....

 

[Futureman]

Anyone know a good place online where you can get some umbrella lights? I looked on Amazon, but they don't really offer anything. What I've mostly found was just photographs selling their old equipment.

You want umbrella lights? As in a studio light? Or you mean you just want an umbrella?

 

[nib95]

Guys, I really need a Canon 17-55 2.8 USM IS lens. But prices in the UK are insane right now. Any of you fancy shipping me over one and taking a small cut (premium) for your troubles? I figure it should still be cheaper than buying directly from the UK.

 

[fart]

After reviewing these hand-on impressions of the new K-7, and the previews from DPReview and Imaging Resource, I have to think that-to paraphrase Mark Twain-rumors of Pentax's imminent demise have been greatly exaggerated.

pentax's problem isn't that they make bad cameras. their problem is that they don't make any money doing it, their lens lineup interests exactly one type of photographer, and they move so little volume that retailers are increasingly refusing to stock their product. another new great camera that no one buys (or only buys at steep discount after a year of heavy overproduction) is unfortunately not going to change any of that.

 

[Instigator]

yep, sounds like you shouldn't consider the d90 heavily. the d60 will have significantly higher resolution, dr, etc. than your p&s, but isn't a standout among APS-C cameras. the sensor shared by the d90 and d5000 is. it's not only a stop ahead of the older sony 10mp ccd that's in the d60 (and the lower end sony A series) in SNR, but it's also a stop ahead in DR. this actually makes it one of the highest DR sensors you can buy today (including FF sensors).

The camera is also being discontinued, which, barring buying an used model at a later date, would force me to buy it brand new soon.

Another niggle with the D60 is the inability to set the JPEG quality when shooting RAW+JPEG. To me, it makes the feature useless and harks back to my trusty current camera where I alternate between RAW and a fine JPEG setting because I can't shoot both.

if you like really long teles (that 4/3s 70-300 will go to 600mm effective!) and are on a budget, you do want to go with the smaller sensor. the nikon 70-300 is very nice on APS-C up to 200mm (reasonably usable up to 300mm), but it's the longest budget lens you're going to find for a d5000. anything longer than 300mm in the nikon system is currently an exotic.

What Nikon offers is not half bad. After all, I'm used to being limited to 380mm with some of my older cameras. But the latest super zooms on the market are really upping the ante. While I don't generally like the image quality from those newer cameras, I would really like that tele power and Olympus appears to be offering something close, cheap and relatively small, all with DSLR-level quality.

I understand going with Nikon would mean limiting myself in terms of telephoto (while gaining in prime lenses, among other things). No perfect cameras. There are always trade-offs.

that said, the 18-55vr and 55-200vr are a killer combo for nikon APS-C. they won't get you the same tele reach, but they're stupendously inexpensive and of extremely high optical quality.

if you want a bit more detail on the nikon DX consumer line, you may find it helpful to cross-index thom hogan's nice concise opinions http://www.bythom.com/nikon-dx-lens-summary.htm and the photozone MTF tests http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests

Thanks.

I will check.

i haven't held a d5000 yet, but the d40/60 series body is not all that much bigger than an e510, carry-wise. if the d5000 is really too big for you, and you're not in a rush, there should be a d60-sized camera with the same sensor out this year. no swivel screen of course.

Where did you hear that?

i'm kind of a wide guy, so by wide i mean < 20mm, but anyway aps-c wide zooms:

nikon 10-24
tamron 10-24
sigma 10-20
nikon 12-24
tokina 12-24 (I/II)
tokina 11-16 2.8

about half of these are very reasonably priced. i would also add a canon rebel of some kind to your list btw, which adds the excellent canon 10-22 as an option.

Yes, I can see that, but ultra wide is not high on my list for me.

Walkaround, telephoto and portrait lenses are the priority for now.

And while I'm at it, here are my priorities in terms of camera bodies:

- Below 1000 bucks
- Relatively small and lightweight, for a DSLR.
- swivel LCD (I was out just yesterday taking photos of cliffs and, again, I could have used such a screen)
- Image stabilization solution (can be in the lenses, albeit not ideally).
- Better performance, larger buffer, quicker processing (Nikon has the edge over Olympus though both are much better than what I am used to)
- Significant bump in MP (from 8 MP right now), but not at the expense of image quality (the Canon Digital Rebel T1i is very disappointing in this respect)
- Sharp, noise-free pics (the Olympus E-620 shows weaknesses with the latter)
- A mix of quick, intuitive auto modes and lots of manual options (One of the reasons why I am not considering Pentax)

you might like the nikon 16-85, which is pretty astoundingly good for being a consumer lens (but a bit pricey compared to other optics in the system). it does match your current P&S almost exactly though. for a more budget option the nikon kit lens is actually also astoundingly good (and why the 16-85 is considered to be so damned expensive).

Yes, I've been looking at that lens as well. It's pricey, but not quite as much as the Olympus equivalent.

regarding portrait lenses, larger sensors are more ideal for portraits because of the increased DOF control. these are also pro bread and butter lenses, so the nikon and canon systems have gigantic multitude of options (and low-light primes in general).

That could explain why Olympus is not putting much effort in making these lenses.

P.S. I get the feeling you want me to buy Nikon.

 

[mrkgoo]

Guys, I really need a Canon 17-55 2.8 USM IS lens. But prices in the UK are insane right now. Any of you fancy shipping me over one and taking a small cut (premium) for your troubles? I figure it should still be cheaper than buying directly from the UK.

You're asking a pretty big favour of someone. Who takes the risk in shipping or if the product is defective?

Also as the initiator, you should really give an idea of the prices in both locations.

After tax is added, shpping, and insurance, it may not be as cheap as you think - obviously you'll have to respond in US currency, and the exchange rate is pooh.

I recently moved to the US, and while stuff is cheaper here, I would've made off like a bandit had I actually bought camera gear where I came from due to the exchange rate.

 

[fart]

d4000 rumors are courtesy nikonrumors, and common sense. the d60 is being discontinued which leaves an obvious hole in the lineup. nikon is very smart about parts reuse and doesn't try to reinvent things which obviously work (nor things that don't quite, sometimes :/, but this true of all of these companies). the obvious successor takes the digital board from the d90/5000 and sticks it in the d60 chassis. since d60 inventory is shrinking at slightly higher than projected rates, this could come a bit sooner (june/july) rather than later (august/september).

my personal view is that there's no reason to buy into 4/3s unless you absolutely have to have really really long telephoto (budget wildlife photog) or want a dunkable second camera (E-3, and are balls out rich). 400-450mm is easy to do on APS-C, and the difference between 450mm to 600mm is just getting a bit closer or cropping for most things/people. i've repeated it about a hundred times here, but i just don't think there's a compelling reason to buy non-canikon for 99%, and my experience is all with nikon, so that's what you get from me.

 

[Joe]

is there anything i can get for a nikon d40/60 that would allow me to have a tiltable lcd view screen?

for instance if the camera is on a tripod very low to the ground i would like an easier way to see what is in the viewfinder.

 

[Forsete]

I read that the Nikon D300 is being discontinued, which means the successor to my A700 should be coming soon.

Oh and I picked up a photographic magazine aimed at professionals. The A900 got some pretty good feedback in it. They said the professional lens offerings from Sony was limited as of now, but the stuff that is out is of very high quality. They were also impressed by some of the A900 features, like a full 100% coverage of the OVF even with a anti-dust system (they noted Nikon had said this was not possible ) and image stabilisation with all lenses.

 

[fart]

is there anything i can get for a nikon d40/60 that would allow me to have a tiltable lcd view screen?

for instance if the camera is on a tripod very low to the ground i would like an easier way to see what is in the viewfinder.

this may not be what you want to hear, but you could shoot tethered via wireless (eye-fi?) or USB.

 

[fart]

FYI: ritz has the 35/1.8 in stock

http://www.ritzcamera.com/product/541533725.htm

i doubt they'll last long. sorry about your wallet.

ETA: OOS!

 

[Tendo]

Thanks for pointing me here fart. Continuing my thread from here, I've begun searching cameta's store and have a few questions.

I'm looking primarily at the D40. I got to play around with one and loved the feel and price compared to canon's. I'm a beginner SLR user and am looking to shoot primarily my dog, friends and family, and wildlife. That is where the zoom comes in. Deer, small birds, etc. I'm working as a field biologist right now and not having a camera is KILLING me. I was looking at the 55-200mm VR lens. Cameta has them for around 200. Altogether I was piecing together:

Camera
Zoom Lens

Shipped that set is looking to be $612. The fish eye lens could be fun and was in that kit, same price as one without it. As someone just starting out is this a good way to go?

 

[Grimlock]

is there anything i can get for a nikon d40/60 that would allow me to have a tiltable lcd view screen?

for instance if the camera is on a tripod very low to the ground i would like an easier way to see what is in the viewfinder.

Well, Zigview makes these add-on LCD viewfinders for such a purpose, but they're not cheap. B&H prices show the low-end, non-movable screen version is $208 and the detachable screen ones are $400.

 

[mrkgoo]

Thanks for pointing me here fart. Continuing my thread from here, I've begun searching cameta's store and have a few questions.

I'm looking primarily at the D40. I got to play around with one and loved the feel and price compared to canon's. I'm a beginner SLR user and am looking to shoot primarily my dog, friends and family, and wildlife. That is where the zoom comes in. Deer, small birds, etc. I'm working as a field biologist right now and not having a camera is KILLING me. I was looking at the 55-200mm VR lens. Cameta has them for around 200. Altogether I was piecing together:

Camera
Zoom Lens

Shipped that set is looking to be $612. The fish eye lens could be fun and was in that kit, same price as one without it. As someone just starting out is this a good way to go?

Without really looking at your gear choice (I'm not a Nikon fellow), I think you'll be fine. I find that camera tech has converged to the point that it's mostly preferences that differentiate equivalently priced models.

You could argue you should think carefully about your upgrade path, but very few people know what they want or enjoy when they're starting out. A body, a couple of lenses covering a decent focal range is an excellent starting point.

After getting experience you'll then know what equipment suits your style more, or what features you need.

 

[Wario64]

er, nm

 

[Wario64]

FYI: ritz has the 35/1.8 in stock

http://www.ritzcamera.com/product/541533725.htm

i doubt they'll last long. sorry about your wallet.

Shipping Status Qty Item Price
Not yet shipped 1 Nikon 35mm AF-S DX NIKKOR f/1.8G Lens - New! - 541533725 - Fast, lightweight f/1.8 prime DX-format NIKKOR lens perfect for low-light conditions, travel, environmental po... $199.99
Shipping & Handling (Ground, 3 - 7 Business Days) : $0.00
Tax (CA) : $0.00
Total: $199.99


fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuccckkkk



On the plus side, I can ditch my 50mm 1.8 on Craigslist and get maybe like $90?


I wish this would have come sooner. Got a wedding tomorrow and my nephew's first bday on Sunday that I could have used this for. Ah well.

 

[BlueTsunami]

Wide angle, low light lenses = sex

My current dream lens is the Canon 24mm f/1.4 "L" (MKI or II). Being able to shoot at 1/24th a sec = low light shooting without having to bump the ISO too much and so wide that blurring isn't in your face. I've ran into this issue a lot with the 50mm.

 

[mrkgoo]

Wide angle, low light lenses = sex

My current dream lens is the Canon 24mm f/1.4 "L" (MKI or II). Being able to shoot at 1/24th a sec = low light shooting without having to bump the ISO too much and so wide that blurring isn't in your face. I've ran into this issue a lot with the 50mm.

If money were no object, what would everyone else get? (don't be silly and just say an EF-1200mm, f/5.6, and sell and get a hundred other lenses).

I would get an EF-85mm f/1.2. I really love the focal length. And to get better wide aperture performance with dreamy smooth bokeh. Ooooo. Or maybe the 135mm f/2.0 with a full frame (same same).

 

[BlueTsunami]

If money were no object, what would everyone else get? (don't be silly and just say an EF-1200mm, f/5.6, and sell and get a hundred other lenses).

I would get an EF-85mm f/1.2. I really love the focal length. And to get better wide aperture performance with dreamy smooth bokeh. Ooooo. Or maybe the 135mm f/2.0 with a full frame (same same).

I was at a crossroad recently, thinking about that. I've really had my fill of 50mm so which way would I go? Having used my kit lens, I've found I really like the 24-35mm range. I think Low Light and Wide would be my lens of choice (so the 24mm f/1.4).

I love the wide perspective but really close to the subject so you get the shallow DoF look. The Wider Field of View give it this unique perspective with the partial subject isolation.

 

[mrkgoo]

I was at a crossroad recently, thinking about that. I've really had my fill of 50mm so which way would I go? Having used my kit lens, I've found I really like the 24-35mm range. I think Low Light and Wide would be my lens of choice (so the 24mm f/1.4).

I love the wide perspective but really close to the subject so you get the shallow DoF look. The Wider Field of View give it this unique perspective with the partial subject isolation.

Hmm. 24mm just isn't wide enough on a crop camera. 17mm is fine, but imagine the 14mm. Or if you like the isolation a lot, how about a tilt shift?

 

[BlueTsunami]

Hmm. 24mm just isn't wide enough on a crop camera. 17mm is fine, but imagine the 14mm. Or if you like the isolation a lot, how about a tilt shift?

My dream setup would be with the 5D, which should give even more DoF. 14mm would have that perspective distortion (I would think?) but that looks to be a sick lens too.

The 24mm f/1.4 MKII looks awesome though. Better OoF blurring and generally sharper than the MKI, wide open. I'll probably end up renting it at some point.