Support NeoGAF

[mrkgoo]

Hi all,

Looking to get into photography in a big way and I'm currently dithering between the Canon 500D and the Nikon D90.

From what I can tell of the reviews they pretty much seem to equal near abouts.

Now my main use will be for landscape shots (with the minor family event I guess).

So I've come to GAF for advice.

I think most people would simply say both cameras are great, and just go with whatever feels better to you. That said, I do (I know others don't) believe that it's a system you're entering into. After getting a body, and you are fairly serious, you will end up getting more lenses, perhaps even expensive lenses. Obviously, there's no way to tell what you like, or for you to know about those lenses, but it's important to note that if you ever choose to get them, it becomes less easy to switch as you build a repertoire of lenses for one format.

In short, you will change your camera body, but the accessories will hang around much longer. That said, either system is well-revered and either choice will serve you more than fine.

 

[Aegus]

Thanks for that.

Going to be an expensive life (what with my other hobby of rock climbing) :lol

 

[mrkgoo]

Thanks for that.

Going to be an expensive life (what with my other hobby of rock climbing) :lol

Rock climbing sounds like a lot of fun.

Better expensive and happy, right?

 

[Hcoregamer00]

Damn, I was hoping to get the Canon 70-200L f2.8 with IS, but the lenses are disappearing and rising in price fast.

It went from an average of $1,400 to $1,800 in a matter of three weeks. There better be a 70-200L f2.8 mark II or there will be hell to pay.

 

[captive]

I think most people would simply say both cameras are great, and just go with whatever feels better to you. That said, I do (I know others don't) believe that it's a system you're entering into. After getting a body, and you are fairly serious, you will end up getting more lenses, perhaps even expensive lenses. Obviously, there's no way to tell what you like, or for you to know about those lenses, but it's important to note that if you ever choose to get them, it becomes less easy to switch as you build a repertoire of lenses for one format.

In short, you will change your camera body, but the accessories will hang around much longer. That said, either system is well-revered and either choice will serve you more than fine.

A great lens is a great lens for decades, a great body is a great body for only a few years. With the way sensor technology keeps advancing i find this to be true.


This is part of the reason I went with Olympus as their glass is exceptional.

 

[BlueTsunami]

Damn, I was hoping to get the Canon 70-200L f2.8 with IS, but the lenses are disappearing and rising in price fast.

It went from an average of $1,400 to $1,800 in a matter of three weeks. There better be a 70-200L f2.8 mark II or there will be hell to pay.

Lenses in general are spiking up in prices crazily. With that said, I think my next lens purchases will be the Canon 200/2.8 : D~~~~

THE FUCK! the 200/2.8 is $800! I remember when it was $650 new! WOW

 

[Maximilian E.]

Sorry for not reading the whole thread. I dont know if impressions were posted but what is gafs opinion about Nikon D5000?

I was looking at the Canon 450D, but it seems that it does not have the video-recorder feature, it only takes photos. A friend recommended me to check the NikonD5000, a bit bit more expensive but not by much...

So, what does gaf think?

 

[BlueTsunami]

Sorry for not reading the whole thread. I dont know if impressions were posted but what is gafs opinion about Nikon D5000?

I was looking at the Canon 450D, but it seems that it does not have the video-recorder feature, it only takes photos. A friend recommended me to check the NikonD5000, a bit bit more expensive but not by much...

So, what does gaf think?

Looks to have a respectable price point. Just for some food for thought, the Canon T1i does record video too and it sits around $780 (with Kit lens) on Amazon. It records 1080p @ 20fps and 720p @ 30fps.

 

[RefigeKru]

I've recently come across some images on the internet, and I'm not particularly knowledgeable with techniques/lenses since we only used Rangefinders/DSLRs with Stock Lenses/Holgas, etc at my college but if I post them here would someone be able to venture a guess as to how they got the images to look that way?

 

[BlueTsunami]

Go ahead, post it. If I can extract EXIF data, that would probably help too. Is a lighting technique or something?

 

[RefigeKru]

Go ahead, post it. If I can extract EXIF data, that would probably help too. Is a lighting technique or something?

Nah, just the depth of field. I'll link to the blog and images in particular I'm talking about.

http://www.theblogisfound.com/

http://www.theblogisfound.com/images/content/_7N21470.jpg
http://www.theblogisfound.com/images/content/_7N21465.jpg
http://www.theblogisfound.com/images/content/_7N21478.jpg
http://www.theblogisfound.com/images/content/_7J13155.jpg

In a lot of shots the blur seems almost circular. It's not just photoshop magic is it? ¬_¬

 

[Mik2121]

I have absolutely NO clue about photography, but the second pic you linked seemed like something done with a tilt-shift camera? Either that, or photoshop.

 

[BlueTsunami]

Nah, just the depth of field. I'll link to the blog and images in particular I'm talking about.

http://www.theblogisfound.com/

http://www.theblogisfound.com/images/content/_7N21470.jpg
http://www.theblogisfound.com/images/content/_7N21465.jpg
http://www.theblogisfound.com/images/content/_7N21478.jpg
http://www.theblogisfound.com/images/content/_7J13155.jpg

In a lot of shots the blur seems almost circular. It's not just photoshop magic is it? ¬_¬

Not exactly sure. It doesn't exactly look like a Tilt/Shift lens, I almost want to say it looks lensbaby'ish (or photoshoped to look like that)

http://www.lensbaby.com/optic-comparison.php

Edit: Probably photoshoped, a lot of the shots seem like snapshots (not in quality but just in visiting monuments and vacation like shots). So they may have been done in post.

 

[Mik2121]

Not exactly sure. It doesn't exactly look like a Tilt/Shift lens, I almost want to say it looks lensbaby'ish (or photoshoped to look like that)

http://www.lensbaby.com/optic-comparison.php

Edit: Probably photoshoped, a lot of the shots seem like snapshots (not in quality but just in visiting monuments and vacation like shots). So they may have been done in post.

Again, I know nothing about photography but yeah, the lensbaby thing seems to blur the pics with some kind of radial motion blur, whereas the pics linked by RefigeKru are just blurred, so yeah I'd guess Photoshop too.

 

[RefigeKru]

Damn it all.

Thanks guys.

 

[mrkgoo]

Damn it all.

Thanks guys.

I dunno.

this pic:
http://www.theblogisfound.com/images/content/_7N21478.jpg

Check out the bokeh in the blur, and the circular spots of light - it looks very lens-like. I don't know much about photoshop, but my understanding with tilt-shifts is that they can tilt (and shift) the plain of focus, this making things that at a similar distance actually fall outside the DOF. I'm thinking some of those shots are tilt shifts.

http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/article_pages/using_tilt.html

Basically, I lean towards tilt-shift lenses, as the quality of blur looks more like a lens. Again, I have no idea what photo shop can do - for example the last image looks like it could be done with digital manipulation.

 

[Rentahamster]

I want to say tilt shift lens, but it could be a Photoshop (http://www.tiltshiftphotography.net/photoshop-tutorial.php).

I don't think it was a real tilt shift because some of things that should be out of focus aren't. I'm not 100% sure about that though. I could be wrong.

 

[Hcoregamer00]

Lenses in general are spiking up in prices crazily. With that said, I think my next lens purchases will be the Canon 200/2.8 : D~~~~

THE FUCK! the 200/2.8 is $800! I remember when it was $650 new! WOW

Seriously, the lenses are going up in price for a very very short time.

There better be a good reason for this crap.

 

[captive]

Seriously, the lenses are going up in price for a very very short time.

There better be a good reason for this crap.

Most of the companies making the lenses are Japanese... the dollar vs the yen is the culprit.

 

[mrkgoo]

I want to say tilt shift lens, but it could be a Photoshop (http://www.tiltshiftphotography.net/photoshop-tutorial.php).

I don't think it was a real tilt shift because some of things that should be out of focus aren't. I'm not 100% sure about that though. I could be wrong.

Here's a list of their gear from their website:

what camera, lens, flash, etc do you guys shoot with?
here is a list of what's in our gear bags:

NIKON D700 . three of these...two for nate and one for jaclyn

NIKON D300 . one of these for jaclyn...basically just sits in her bag as a backup

NIKON 24-70 F2.8G ED . 2 of these bad boys...this serves as our main lens which is used for 90% of our images.

NIKON 20mm F2.8 . one of my favorite wide lenses! wide, sharp, and small!

NIKON 35 F2

NIKON 45mm F2.8 PC-E TILT SHIFT . nate's bendytime lens!

SIGMA 50mm F1.4 . fast and tasty!

sSIGMA 50 F2.8 1:1 MACRO . for the ring shots better than the canon 55 macro cuz it focusses down to 1:1 magnification! (vs. 1:2)

NIKON 85mm F1.8 . yup, two of these too...we only use them for the ceremony!

NIKON 180mm F2.8 . we have two of these bad boys...we only use them for the ceremony!

NIKON SB-900 SPEEDLIGHT . three of these bad boys

NIKON SB-800 SPEEDLIGHT

pocketwizard plus II transceiver . used to trigger flashes remotely

sunpak readylight 20 . a cool compact little videolight that can help out with portraits in very dark situations...we also use this for basically every ring shot we do.

a whole crapload of rechargeable AA batteries for flashes, etc.

4GB sandisk extreme IV CF cards . about 40GB of CF ca

This obviously doesn't mean it rules out photoshop, but I think those shots are within the realm of a tilt shift.

From the northlight-images link above:

Red line is plane of focus. The more you tilt (and if you look at the link, the closer you bring in the focal length) you can nearly get the POF parallel to the ground (nearly).

 

[Rentahamster]

Here's a list of their gear from their website:


This obviously doesn't mean it rules out photoshop, but I think those shots are within the realm of a tilt shift.

I guess I'm wrong

 

[toxicgonzo]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azAJ2T1r_Ew

Holy cow, is that real? If so, that's really awesome.

 

[RefigeKru]

Thanks Mrkgoo. This is why I love GAF.

Google'd "tilt shift lens" and got this photo;

http://www.afashionshooter.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/twisty1_mg_4389.jpg

I just love the depth of field. I'm a whore for it. WAY out of my price range though.

 

[fart]

Hi all,

Looking to get into photography in a big way and I'm currently dithering between the Canon 500D and the Nikon D90.

From what I can tell of the reviews they pretty much seem to equal near abouts.

Now my main use will be for landscape shots (with the minor family event I guess).

So I've come to GAF for advice.

get a last gen slr and a proper tripod setup. the key thing you're going to want out of your slr is about 10+mp and the closest thing to mirror lockup that you can afford. i'm not sure what's offered on the canon side, but starting with the d80, you can do a 0.5s pre-shot mirror release. other good candidates on the nikon side that give you a bit more pixel optimization are used d200s and d2xs. the d2x in particular is an excellent landscape camera, and should cost you less than a d90 in user condition. on the canon side your benchmark is a used 5d.

if you're serious about continuing down this landscape/nature photography path, you _will_ a) be buying lenses and possibly obsessing over them and b) not care that much about the ergonomics of your camera. basically, ignore all the other advice i give in this thread. you really are buying into a system as a landscape photographer, and lens availability will often dictate your camera (modulo weight, which i imagine will be that much more important to you as a climber).

you will also be spending a ton of money on tripods. basically, read thom hogan's gear articles, as he's the best reference on the internet by far if you plan on hiking/climbing into la-la land to take pictures:

this one is the most important
http://www.bythom.com/support.htm

nikon-specific, but easy to extrapolate the general lessons to the canon system (weight vs quality)
http://www.bythom.com/rationallenses.htm

 

[fart]

now is a really terrible time to buy high end lenses. production has contracted below demand nearly across the board, and the soaring yen has fully kicked into effect. i hope you guys are set for a while even the used markets are horrific.

 

[Rentahamster]

now is a really terrible time to buy high end lenses. production has contracted below demand nearly across the board, and the soaring yen has fully kicked into effect. i hope you guys are set for a while even the used markets are horrific.

I'm gonna love buying the new Nikon 70-200 VRII!

Spoiler

 

[fart]

:lol do you have kids? if so, sell them now before prices drop.

 

[Mik2121]

:lol do you have kids? if so, sell them now before prices drop.

Sell the kids?

 

[Rentahamster]

Sell the kids?

Yes, they will fetch a high price as slaves mining dilithium underneath the vast glacial wastelands of Rura Penthe, muahahahaha!!!

 

[stldave2]

I'm gonna love buying the new Nikon 70-200 VRII!

Spoiler

Ditto. I saw the announcement and got excited, but after seeing the price (and the fact that I won't get an FX until the D700 replacement comes out) I think my 70-200 VRI will cut it for now:lol

 

[BlueTsunami]

Thanks Mrkgoo. This is why I love GAF.

Google'd "tilt shift lens" and got this photo;

http://www.afashionshooter.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/twisty1_mg_4389.jpg

I just love the depth of field. I'm a whore for it. WAY out of my price range though.

if you really like DoF, check out some fast telephoto prime lenses. You can get really good subject isolation even from the non expensive ones. Canons 100/f2 comes to mind (I think its a $300-$400 lens). Then there's the 200/2.8L that was around $600 a half a year ago (but is now $900).

Here are some galleries to look through for the DoF Addicted...

Canon 100/2 ($450): http://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/CanonEF100mmf2USM/
Canon 135/2L ($1000): http://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/CanonEF135mmf2LUSM/
Canon 200/2.8L ($830): http://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/CanonEF200mmf28LIIUSM/

The cool effect you get from Fast Telephotos if you fit someones whole body into the frame, its easier to blur out the environment somewhat. This gives that cool 3D effect. Put that Telephoto lens on a 35MM camera (or full frame digital), the effect is more pronounced.

 

[Rentahamster]

Wow that Nikon compact camera with built in projector is pretty cool. I wonder how well it really works, though.


http://nikonrumors.com/2009/08/04/nikon-coolpix-s1000pj-now-official.aspx

 

[Lucky Forward]

I just love the depth of field. I'm a whore for it. WAY out of my price range though.

if you really like DoF, check out some fast telephoto prime lenses

Pardon my nitpicking, but what you two are really referring to is shallow or minimal depth of field:

Depth of field

In optics, particularly as relates to film and photography, the depth of field (DOF) is the portion of a scene that appears sharp in the image. Although a lens can precisely focus at only one distance, the decrease in sharpness is gradual on either side of the focused distance, so that within the DOF, the unsharpness is imperceptible under normal viewing conditions.

For some images, such as landscapes, a large DOF may be appropriate, while for others, such as portraits, a small DOF may be more effective. In cinematography, a large DOF is often called deep focus, and a small DOF is often called shallow focus.

I've taken landscapes with the camera on a tripod where I stopped down to f/22 or f/29 for maximum depth of field, and I've done portraits where I've focused on the eyes at f/1.2 for minimal depth of field, but either way, all photos have depth of field to one degree or another.

 

[BlueTsunami]

Pardon my nitpicking, but what you two are really referring to is shallow or minimal depth of field:

Depth of field



I've taken landscapes with the camera on a tripod where I stopped down to f/22 or f/29 for maximum depth of field, and I've done portraits where I've focused on the eyes at f/1.2 for minimal depth of field, but either way, all photos have depth of field to one degree or another.

Yeah should have been specific as to what I was to what exactly I was referring too but I figured RefigeKru would understand (seeing as the converstation leading up to that post was talking about minimal DoF). But I'm going to call it Bokeh from now on, how's that? :3

 

[RefigeKru]

Haha yeah. Thanks for the lens suggestions Tsunami, I'll probably have a camera by mid September.

 

[mrkgoo]

Yeah should have been specific as to what I was to what exactly I was referring too but I figured RefigeKru would understand (seeing as the converstation leading up to that post was talking about minimal DoF). But I'm going to call it Bokeh from now on, how's that? :3

Well, Bokeh is not technically accurate either. Bokeh refers to the aesthetic quality of the out of focus portions, not how much is blurred, or blurring in general. It's generated by things like the circularity of the aperture and quality of the lens elements at a guess.

 

[mrkgoo]

Wow that Nikon compact camera with built in projector is pretty cool. I wonder how well it really works, though.


http://nikonrumors.com/2009/08/04/nikon-coolpix-s1000pj-now-official.aspx

Neat idea, but sounds like it'd be a huge drain on the battery.

 

[BlueTsunami]

Well, Bokeh is not technically accurate either. Bokeh refers to the aesthetic quality of the out of focus portions, not how much is blurred, or blurring in general. It's generated by things like the circularity of the aperture and quality of the lens elements at a guess.

Oh I know, I was just joking (I know how much people hate the word, even if used correctly).

 

[mrkgoo]

Oh I know, I was just joking (I know how much people hate the weird, even if used correctly).

Sorry, I'm dense. I need jokes spelled out for me :/

 

[Hcoregamer00]

now is a really terrible time to buy high end lenses. production has contracted below demand nearly across the board, and the soaring yen has fully kicked into effect. i hope you guys are set for a while even the used markets are horrific.

Damn, there goes my dream of getting:
-Canon 70-200L f2.8 with IS (Shot up $400 in the past 3 weeks and is going higher and higher)
-Canon 24-70L f2.8 (maybe an updated edition with IS soon).

Forget it, I will just stick with my 28-135 f3.5-5.6. It is a decent enough lens to wait out this crap until the prices of the high end lenses start going down again.

 

[giga]

Oh lens prices are high now? Maybe now's the time for me to sell.

I feel like I don't go out nearly enough with my gear because I hate the size/weight. I'm talking about a 40D with a simple Sigma 30mm. (~3lbs)

What's a good suggestion for a lighter and/or smaller body with a pentaprism viewfinder. Lens selection must have good primes, as I live off my 30mm and 85mm.

 

[BlueTsunami]

What's a good suggestion for a lighter and/or smaller body with a pentaprism viewfinder. Lens selection must have good primes, as I live off my 30mm and 85mm.

I want to suggest a Four Thirds Camera but I believe all of them use Electronic Viewfinders. They are very small, light and use high quality removable lenses (I believe Olympus and Pentax have cameras out for this system).

Edit: I was wrong about Pentax, its mainly Olympus that has embraced this system of cameras

Edit2: I was wrong about the viewfinder too :lol, apparently they do use a mirror system (albeit smaller than a normal sized SLR).

 

[giga]

Yeah, I just can't use any non-prism VF. So damn dark and small--and I'm used to film SLRs myself. It's torture.

My best bet right now is the D90 it seems. D90 + 35 1.8 is a whole pound lighter than my current setup.

Anyone have any experience with Nikon's 85 1.8?

 

[Rentahamster]

Sorry, I'm dense. I need jokes spelled out for me :/

J-O-K-E-S olololol

Spoiler

sorry

Damn, there goes my dream of getting:
-Canon 70-200L f2.8 with IS (Shot up $400 in the past 3 weeks and is going higher and higher)
-Canon 24-70L f2.8 (maybe an updated edition with IS soon).

Forget it, I will just stick with my 28-135 f3.5-5.6. It is a decent enough lens to wait out this crap until the prices of the high end lenses start going down again.

Why don't you just get one or two cheap primes?

 

[Rentahamster]

Yeah, I just can't use any non-prism VF. So damn dark and small--and I'm used to film SLRs myself. It's torture.

My best bet right now is the D90 it seems. D90 + 35 1.8 is a whole pound lighter than my current setup.

Anyone have any experience with Nikon's 85 1.8?

Decent for the price, I guess, though the 1.4 is much nicer and more expensive.

 

[DarkAngelYuna]

Oh gawd, my Canon 5D Mark II came today. B====D~~~

 

[BlueTsunami]

Oh gawd, my Canon 5D Mark II came today. B====D~~~

omg I hate YOU ((((

Have fun with it!

 

[giga]

How much did a used D90 regularly average? (before prices went up) $700?

 

[Rentahamster]

How much did a used D90 regularly average? (before prices went up) $700?

Around $836 bucks recently.

http://camelcamelcamel.com/product/B001ET5U92

 

[Hcoregamer00]

Why don't you just get one or two cheap primes?

Nah, I am an "L Lens whore"

The two prime lenses I was considering was the 50mm f/1.2L and the 135 f/2L. The dodgy reviews of the 50mm scared me off from buying it, I will hold off until they release a "Mark II" that fixes some of the quality issues. The 135mm sounds perfect, but there is no IS and you need to increase the shutter speed to 1/200 to get "stutter free" shots.

For now the lens I really wanted to buy since it really has no issues was the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS, but as you see, the sharp increase in price ($400 in the last three weeks) moved it from "expensive, but still purchasable" to "fuck this, I will wait for a while."

I also wanted to look into the 24-70mm 2.8L lens, but I keep on hearing rumors floating on how there is a version with IS in the works, so I will hold off. I would gladly pay a premium to get IS with this great lens.

Oh gawd, my Canon 5D Mark II came today. B====D~~~

Grr...you lucky bastard.

I hate you