Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: GRUNHERZ on May 14, 2004, 01:48:22 PM
-
:D
The battery is charging as I write this.
(http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond70/Images/frontview-001.jpg)
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond70/
-
Woohoo!!! Welcome to the DSLR club, you'll never go back!!!
Muhahahahahaha!!!!!
-
Originally posted by SaburoS
Woohoo!!! Welcome to the DSLR club, you'll never go back!!!
Muhahahahahaha!!!!!
That was fast, you DSLR stalker. Thanks! The camera feels great in my hand and I cant wait to get some time to begin learning to use its features and capabilities. :)
-
When are you going to post the artistic nudes?
-
No photos? c'mon Grun. Lets see a macro shot.
-
I dont have a macro len$... Only have the standard kit lens right now.
-
The standard lens is good enough to take a few shots of nekkid Amreekan vimen, right?
-
Nice camera
got a SQ here got to have such a camera 2 when i grow up
here a pic i made with it(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/277_1082107322_bloem.jpg)
-
does it have the back focus problem that that boards forums talk about?
-
Congrats Grun!
How much does a camera like that one cost? I'd love to get a nice camera like that.
-
Holy watermelon is this thing fast!!!! :D
Its fast, everything is so so fast... Startup, AF, continous shooting, fast, fast, fast...
Havent been looking at the photos yet, I just got the battery charged and and went outside to play. ;)
I will check out the backfocus and moire a bit later when I get more time.
:D
-
Camera with lens is $1299.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Camera with lens is $1299.
Well, there go my hopes..........for now. Is it a digital?
-
Yes its a 6 megapixel CCD sensor digital.
-
I bought the Nikkor 50mm 1.8D today. This photo was taken just after buying it:
(http://www.elclubdigital.org/4images/data/media/7/TorreMarc.jpg)
1/160, f/8.
For just 90-100$ you get one of the sharpest lenses available today, so go to your nearest shop and buy one, NOW ;)
I'm also thinking about buying the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8, anyone tried one of those?
-
Originally posted by DA98
I bought the Nikkor 50mm 1.8D today. This photo was taken just after buying it:
(http://www.elclubdigital.org/4images/data/media/7/TorreMarc.jpg)
1/160, f/8.
For just 90-100$ you get one of the sharpest lenses available today, so go to your nearest shop and buy one, NOW ;)
I'm also thinking about buying the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8, anyone tried one of those?
Very nice pic there.
-
Gratz Grun. Can't wait to see some of your pics.
-
By the way, few questions for ya'll digi guys.
Can digi do black an white?
How does it compare to film based b&w?
I'm into doing Ansel Adams type stuff is why I ask.
Current setup is;
N80
Quantary 28/80 F22
Quantary 70/300 F22
-
Originally posted by DA98
I bought the Nikkor 50mm 1.8D today. This photo was taken just after buying it:
(http://www.elclubdigital.org/4images/data/media/7/TorreMarc.jpg)
1/160, f/8.
For just 90-100$ you get one of the sharpest lenses available today, so go to your nearest shop and buy one, NOW ;)
I'm also thinking about buying the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8, anyone tried one of those?
Yep I will be getting the Nikkor 50mm 1.8 soon. All I hear about is good. :)
But first I want to buy nikon capture, a nice tripod and learn on my 18-70DX kit lens.
-
Originally posted by DA98
I bought the Nikkor 50mm 1.8D today. This photo was taken just after buying it:
(http://www.elclubdigital.org/4images/data/media/7/TorreMarc.jpg)
1/160, f/8.
For just 90-100$ you get one of the sharpest lenses available today, so go to your nearest shop and buy one, NOW ;)
I'm also thinking about buying the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8, anyone tried one of those?
Great pic!!! Very nice :)
-
Lesseee..
The other lens choice I will have to make will be for telephoto.
Right now I need to keep it "cheap" (gosh notice how this hobby makes you descibe $250 items as cheap :( ) so my choices are between,
Nikkor 70-300ED for $250
or
Sigma 70-300mm APO Zoom Macro Super II for about $200
The sigma appeals to me because of the macro but there is disagreement as to which is sharper lens.
What a dillema. :(
-
Grun,
Register for the following forums. Try their search feature first before posting questions. Figure you'll get better answers there than here.
Nikon Lens Forum (http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/forum.asp?forum=1030)
Nikon D70 Forum (http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/forum.asp?forum=1034)
-
I read the dpr nikon forums a lot and nobody seems to agree, especially in choosing between these two lenses. ;)
My post about it here is as much venting as anything else. :) :D
-
Everytime I see the word Nikon, I get that damn Paul Simon song stuck in my head.
-Sik
-
I know zero about the level of photography you guys are at but this guy is selling a bunch of camera stuff ,,,,,
http://cgi6.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewSellersOtherItems&userid=hapnlin&ssPageName=STRK:MEDW:MESOI
I have purchase other items from Ken's collection and was happy with transactions. Dunno if you can use it but I'm sure its in topnotch shape
-
I've heard bad things about Sigma lenses in general. Have you priced a Tamron lens?
edit: seems to me that, for only $50 more over the Sigma price you'd get some confidence in the Nikkor lens quality.
-
The problem is that in Spain, Nikkor lenses are ridicously overpriced (I paid 170€ for the 50mm, while in the US it costs only 100$; 170€ are 205$... :mad: ). Also, while the Nikkor 70-200 HSM is widely available here, the 70-200 non-HSM, wich costs a lot less but offers the same optical quality is out of stock. So the only alternative left is the Sigma, wich costs a little less than the non-HSM, and A LOT less than the HSM (I can buy the Sigma for 750€; a USED Nikkor HSM costs 1200€...).
About optical quality, opinions vary a lot. Some people say it's great, some say its junk, some say it's on par with the Nikkor, some say it can't even be compared with it... It seems that the only way to find out the truth is going to the shop and buying it.
-
The lens accounts for more that 50% of the equation regarding final output. If you spend $1000 for a body expect to match that in lenses. No point in buying a Sports Car and then slapping bald Firestone tires on her. That said it's better in the long run to spend big on a lens that you'll use the camera for most and build from there.
Browse Ebays and use B&H to benchmark, you can pickup some sweet deals on Batteries, Microdrives and lenses like a mint Nikkor AF-D 80-200mmm F2.8 IF ED for $550 US, sweet.
This is the data base you want, click on camera and then lens and see for yourself.
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/
Sab, i just p/u a new Hitachi 4G Microdrive $193 US and two new BP511 1350mAh Li-Ion bats for $11.00 US each, also sweet. :aok
-
Jigsaw, check individual digital camera models to find which if any let you choose effects other than color. My old Sony Digital Mavica (shot only 1024x768 max on 3.5 floppy disk) offered negative, sepia, b&w, and solarize options.
I never used them, and apparently most people don't since I think you'll find most digital cameras stick to color only. Try Sony first -- maybe it still offers those effects in its newer cameras.
My fav digital cameras remain the color-only Nikon Coolpix 995 and 775, both superceded by newer models.
-
Waaa?..... just use photoshop.
-
Wow niiiice camera ! I may upgrade in a few years. I have an OLYMPUS C-2100 (aka the UZI) had for about 3 years now, I highly reccommend this camera to anyone interested in starting a hobby with DSLR, you can still get them on ebay for around 400 bucks. It is a great camera to snap airshows even if it is only 2mega pix. heres a reveiw
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusc2100uz/
here is a link to ebays listings
http://search.ebay.com/olympus-c-2100_W0QQfromZR8QQsatitleZolympusQ20cQ2d2100QQsokeywordredirectZ1
-
So far so good.
Mine does not seem to have a moire problem, maybe just a tiny tiny bit that I may be imagining, or a backfocus problem as best I can tell.
But I have a lot more learning to do.
:)
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
So far so good.
Mine does not seem to have a moire problem, maybe just a tiny tiny bit that I may be imagining, or a backfocus problem as best I can tell.
But I have a lot more learning to do.
:)
When you do take a few snaps of your town and post them, be good to see. Hope to buy a DSLR soon and do the same.
...-Gixer
-
Originally posted by Torque
Waaa?..... just use photoshop.
Tried that with color prints. Doesn't have the same warmth. If you greyscale it, looks flat. If you export a color channel (green seems to work best) the lighting looks wierd. You can get some funny looking animated gifs if you scroll through all three channels though.
Was in Ritz today dropping off rolls for a scrapbook I'm putting together and asked about the D70. Saleswoman told me I'd need to replace the lenses and not just the body to get a similar setup to my N80 now. Cost would be close to 3k according to her. So, I'll be sticking with film for a while yet it looks like.
-
Originally posted by Halo
Jigsaw, check individual digital camera models to find which if any let you choose effects other than color. My old Sony Digital Mavica (shot only 1024x768 max on 3.5 floppy disk) offered negative, sepia, b&w, and solarize options.
I never used them, and apparently most people don't since I think you'll find most digital cameras stick to color only. Try Sony first -- maybe it still offers those effects in its newer cameras.
My fav digital cameras remain the color-only Nikon Coolpix 995 and 775, both superceded by newer models.
The Mavica does the same thing that many photo programs can do, nothing magical. I have a newer Mavica at work and I hate it.
Its a big bulky overpriced POS. My little Cannon digital Elph out performs it in every way, except it can't record onto a floppy or take sepia pictures - whoopty doo. I am not impressed with Sony cameras. Even their memory and batteries cost 50% more than their competition.
eskimo
-
Originally posted by jigsaw
Tried that with color prints. Doesn't have the same warmth. If you greyscale it, looks flat. If you export a color channel (green seems to work best) the lighting looks wierd. You can get some funny looking animated gifs if you scroll through all three channels though.
Was in Ritz today dropping off rolls for a scrapbook I'm putting together and asked about the D70. Saleswoman told me I'd need to replace the lenses and not just the body to get a similar setup to my N80 now. Cost would be close to 3k according to her. So, I'll be sticking with film for a while yet it looks like.
I have a program that is inferior to photoshop and it can give a picture any look, color or effect that a mavica or film camera with filters or special film can.
Spend $500 on a digital camera, you'l save that $500 in film and processing in very little time.
eskimo
-
Jigsaw, why would you need to buy new lenses? Are they really old? Is it because of the 1.5 multiplier?
-
Originally posted by eskimo2
I have a program that is inferior to photoshop and it can give a picture any look
Spend $500 on a digital camera, you'l save that $500 in film and processing in very little time.
What's it called? It might be worth my looking in to. I agree on the cost savings. Since I've gotten back on the photo wagon, I can see where film processing would get quite pricey.
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Jigsaw, why would you need to buy new lenses? Are they really old? Is it because of the 1.5 multiplier?
Current lenses are the Quantaray's that came with the N80 kit back in December 03. I was thinking they should work fine since it was still a Nikon body but, she was saying I'd need a new set "because it's a digital lense." I'm not real up on knowledge for high end digi stuff, so I wasn't sure. Thinking about trying to find a more experienced sales person to talk to next time I'm in there that I can get more info from. I knew about the 1.5 multiplier, but that's about where my knowledge ends on the difference.
-
From what I know 35mm lenses should work on DSLRS...
Now what some manufaturers have done is to produce lenses specifically for DSLRS but that doesnt mean regular 35mm lense wont work on digital cameras.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
From what I know 35mm lenses should work on DSLRS...
Now what some manufaturers have done is to produce lenses specifically for DSLRS but that doesnt mean regular 35mm lense wont work on digital cameras.
Be careful on 3rd party lenses. Because of the backward engineering, some are not compatible with the newer digital SLRs (autofocus and such).
For example, some older Sigma lenses had compatability issues and can't be re-chipped to the newer DSLRs.
When OEM camera makers design a new camera, they make sure it works with their own line of lenses, not the aftermarket ones.
-
Originally posted by SaburoS
Be careful on 3rd party lenses. Because of the backward engineering, some are not compatible with the newer digital SLRs (autofocus and such).
For example, some older Sigma lenses had compatability issues and can't be re-chipped to the newer DSLRs.
When OEM camera makers design a new camera, they make sure it works with their own line of lenses, not the aftermarket ones.
Guess I could take one of my lenses to the store or have them pull out one like it and see if it works ok.
-
Originally posted by jigsaw
What's it called? It might be worth my looking in to. I agree on the cost savings. Since I've gotten back on the photo wagon, I can see where film processing would get quite pricey.
Current lenses are the Quantaray's that came with the N80 kit back in December 03. I was thinking they should work fine since it was still a Nikon body but, she was saying I'd need a new set "because it's a digital lense." I'm not real up on knowledge for high end digi stuff, so I wasn't sure. Thinking about trying to find a more experienced sales person to talk to next time I'm in there that I can get more info from. I knew about the 1.5 multiplier, but that's about where my knowledge ends on the difference.
The program that I use most is called MGI PhotoSuite 4. I’m not even sure where I got it; I think it may have come with my old HP camera that I bought in 2000. I’ve seen and tried out a number of programs that were free with cameras: (my Cannon, and at work an Olympus & a Sony) as well as a few others. The light freebie Photoshop program is comparable, but I have yet to use the full blown Adobe Photoshop. From what I’ve seen and read, Adobe Photoshop is as good as it gets (for regular consumers) but it’s also pretty spendy. Even though I haven’t seen one, I can’t imagine that there are not plenty of other photo editing programs that are every bit as good as MGI, and also cheap. Word of warning however, a lot of these programs have their own file management systems that do not have anything in common with Windows. I can’t imagine why in the world they would think that a Windows computer user would want to relearn new terminology and a new file locating concept, it’s really annoying. In one program it took me over 30 minutes to locate my flash reader and then another 10 to realize that you couldn’t select files with the mouse, you had to use the keyboard arrows. WTF were those programmers thinking?
The bottom line is: MGI is good and cheap.
Probably many others are also good and cheap.
There are some pretty poor programs out there as well.
Cost effectiveness:
I have a degree in photography. Even so, my wife and I would take about 4 months to shoot a roll of film. I just hated paying through the nose for film and processing. In 2000 we bought the cheapest 2 meg. camera that we could find (HP 315) and a decent printer (HP 932C). Since then, we take dozens of pictures every week, sometimes even dozens a day. It completely changes the way you think about taking pictures. Want a great picture of something? Take 100 shots and pick one. It’ll cost you 17 cents for the 8 ½ x 11 photo quality paper that you print the best shot on. Save that shot on your hard drive, erase the flash memory, reuse it 1,000,000 more times. I have a complete B&W darkroom setup that I will probably never use again because I can do everything faster, cheaper and better on my PC.
I sold all of my high end film cameras in 96 when I realized what was going to happen to film photography when digital took over. I miss my 180 degree fisheye lens, and nothing else.
eskimo
-
Great points, Eskimo. I abandoned my faithful Nikon and Canon 35mm cameras for good after getting the digital Nikon 775 and 995. Now can shoot frames the way the legendary Life photographers blazed through film rolls.
At a recent orchid show took more than 200 pics without even realizing it, and incredibly easy and fast to weed, organize, and share the best via e-mail.
Totally agree too about cumbersome bundled photo management programs with some digital cameras. Much better to just use Windows photo management.
-
Since i have my nikon SQ i'm realy getting to love the hobby.
Today i made a lot of photo's and macro photo's.
Getting the sense of light and setup
there is gonna be a lot to explore and experiment.
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/277_1085337030_dscn1780.jpg)
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/277_1085337084_dscn1762.jpg)
-
I can't help it im to enthousiastic :)
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/picpopup.php?ImgId=6829)
-
Great pics Bug.
Now ya'll got me thinking of ways to ditch my N80 to offset the cost of going to a D70.
-
Hmmm lotsa camera stuff and no boobie shots.
You guys suck as photographers sorry.
-
Originally posted by Vulcan
Hmmm lotsa camera stuff and no boobie shots.
You guys suck as photographers sorry.
You want boobies? How about this then? Isn't she lovely?
(http://www.hawaiiaudubon.com/pix/booby.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Vulcan
Hmmm lotsa camera stuff and no boobie shots.
You guys suck as photographers sorry.
I got a picture of a nice pair of tits just yesterday:
(http://www.fatdrunkbastards.com/FDB/forum/uploads/MiniD/F11E7_2004-05-23-1600-02-800.jpg)
-
mmmmmm....tufted tits, my favorite.
-
Hope no one minds a post of a dweebish Canon S45 shot:
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/64_1085414645_ynpbigfalls.jpg)
-
A pair of photos shot last sunday at the Barcelona Zoo with my new Sigma 70-200 2.8:
(http://www.elclubdigital.org/4images/data/media/2/Girafa.jpg)
(http://www.elclubdigital.org/4images/data/media/2/Flamenco.jpg)
I'm in love with the D70 :)
-
Stunning photos in this thread, wonderful recordings.
Would be interesting to know file sizes of photos posted.
E.g., for most my purposes, up to 8x10 and computer sharing, I prefer 3.3 and even 2.1 megapixels, not wanting storage sizes of more than around a meg or less jpeg.
My current computer viewing is 1024x768 for just about everything from text to photos to on-line flight simulation.
Do any of you with the highest 5 or 6 or 8 meg equipment find yourselves still carrying around 2 or 3 meg pocket cameras too? Or do you stay only with the larger higher rez more professional cameras even for non-paid personal photography?
-
Originally posted by Halo
Do any of you with the highest 5 or 6 or 8 meg equipment find yourselves still carrying around 2 or 3 meg pocket cameras too? Or do you stay only with the larger higher rez more professional cameras even for non-paid personal photography?
Even though my Canon S45 will shoot up to 4 megapixels, I shoot at half that for most things, and even as small as 640x480.
-
Hi Halo,
I still use my Canon A70 a lot. I think it's the perfect complement for a DSLR; when the D70 stays home I carry the little and versatile A70 with me. Carrying a big DSLR with an even bigger lens in certain places or situations is like yelling out loud "I'm a good target, please come and steal my really expensive camera!". Then there is the intimidating factor; some people reacts negatively when someone points a big, black, bulky camera at them, so for taking candids a little compact camera is much better. And last but not the least, when I know that I'm going to end very drunk, carrying the D70 with me is out of question ;)
About megapixels, I always use the higher setting available. Even when the final output is going to be a 800x600 pic, I found that the result of converting from say 6 MP is way better than doing so from 3 or 4 MP in terms of sharpness and general quality.
-
Thanks for the additional info, slimm50 and DA98. DA98, wonderful link to your gallery. Radiant photography.
-
My thoughts on the D70, off to the Darkside.
(http://members.rogers.com/ereid/Canon10d.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Torque
My thoughts on the D70, off to the Darkside.
Are you saying you prefer the Cannon 10D?
MiniD
-
Originally posted by Torque
My thoughts on the D70, off to the Darkside.
(http://members.rogers.com/ereid/Canon10d.jpg)
What made you dislike the D70 so much as to switch over entirely to Canon?
-
One of my concerns about getting into a DSLR is not only the initial cost of the camera and a few memory sticks. But that I'll get hooked and end up spending a small fortune on extra lenses as well.
...-Gixer
-
The Canon 10D/300D CMOS sensor is better than the Nikon D70 CCD. It's absolutely noise free at ISO100 and it reacts to highlights MUCH better than the Nikon. That's one of the problems I have with the D70; you have to be very careful with blowing any highlight, because the sensor saturates horribly. The CMOS images show saturation in a more natural manner, more film alike.
It's metalic body and chasis is another plus; I don't know how will the D70 plastic body react to the weight of the 70-200 over time...
-
Originally posted by eskimo2
The program that I use most is called MGI PhotoSuite 4.
Don't forget Paintshop Pro (http://www.jasc.com) - 75%-85% of the functionality of Photoshop at 20% of the price.
BB
-
Originally posted by Gixer
One of my concerns about getting into a DSLR is not only the initial cost of the camera and a few memory sticks. But that I'll get hooked and end up spending a small fortune on extra lenses as well.
...-Gixer
Yes.
-
lol
So if I look at getting a Cannon 300D with it's 18-55mm lens and can only afford one other lens what's a good choice?
...-Gixer
-
What are you planning to do with the camera?
-
Originally posted by Mini D
What are you planning to do with the camera?
Mainly outdoors,nature and holiday shots. Some sports and especially motorbike racing on the track where I can get pretty close so a massive telephoto isn't required.
...-Gixer
-
Originally posted by Gixer
lol
So if I look at getting a Cannon 300D with it's 18-55mm lens and can only afford one other lens what's a good choice?
...-Gixer
I'd probably probably some sort of 70-200 or 70-300 zoom.
With My D70 however the first extra lens I got was a Nikkor 50mm 1.8D beacuse its so cheap and sharp and good for low light.
I still havent dicided which 70-300 to buy..
-
Originally posted by Mini D
What are you planning to do with the camera?
He will shoot birds! Just like you, of course!!!
-
Originally posted by Gixer
Mainly outdoors,nature and holiday shots. Some sports and especially motorbike racing on the track where I can get pretty close so a massive telephoto isn't required.
...-Gixer
Most of the things you want to look for:
Focus speed
internal stability
These do matter. If you're only planning on buying one other lens, take the time and learn something about them first. If you don't, you'll be unhappy and wanting to buy another before you realize it.
MiniD
-
I've been tempted by the SLRs, but six (or so) months ago, I read about Fovenon X3 technology. It will pretty much obsolete all current digital cameras.
Don't recall too much about the article [discover or scientific american,] but essentially x3 embeds sensors at 3 different layers, one for each of the primary colors. Current digital cameras don't do anything like that and use an interpolation scheme to guess at the correct color.
I remember Sigma SD9 (x3 technology) outperformed Canon D60 and Nikon D100
http://www.foveon.com
curly
-
Originally posted by AKcurly
I've been tempted by the SLRs, but six (or so) months ago, I read about Fovenon X3 technology. It will pretty much obsolete all current digital cameras.
Don't recall too much about the article [discover or scientific american,] but essentially x3 embeds sensors at 3 different layers, one for each of the primary colors. Current digital cameras don't do anything like that and use an interpolation scheme to guess at the correct color.
I remember Sigma SD9 (x3 technology) outperformed Canon D60 and Nikon D100
http://www.foveon.com
curly
I was thinking the same thing, but I haven't heard much since then. It should be huge when it goes mainstream, but I've seen no marketing. It may be awhile.
eskimo
-
Thanks for the post on Fovenon X3 interesting reading. Makes you wonder how much longer film will be around. Day's are surely numbered, especially for the consumer market.
...-Gixer
-
AKcurly, thanks for the link -- hadn't heard about Fovenon X3 technology. Some great reviews linked there.
Hope the new digital 3-layer soon is bought by Nikon and Canon, translated into pocket digital cameras (and introduced to even better mopic/still combo pocket cameras), and Fovenon is rewarded handsomely for its innovation.
Oh, and hope the file storage can be held to around 1 meg or less per shot. Yep, I want it all -- max quality, minimum although ergonomic camera size, max and user-friendly features, and minimimum file size.
-
Damn... was hoping torque would come back and shed some light on his decision.
MiniD
-
Originally posted by slimm50
Hope no one minds a post of a dweebish Canon S45 shot:
Dweebish? try a Canon Ixus 400
(http://koti.mbnet.fi/fishu/temp/paivallista7.jpg)
Got it for free and before that I were able to freely 'borrow' S45.
I do miss the features.
Maybe someday I'll get money to buy an actual camera ;)
This birdie actually landed 1.5 meters from me, after catching a fish and some air combat with an another bird.
What a poser :D
Maybe theres some interest in those pics too, however a bit weak on the quality when I didn't have time to adjust camera properly :I
(http://koti.mbnet.fi/fishu/temp/paivallista3.jpg)
Right off the book on how to bounce an enemy.
(http://koti.mbnet.fi/fishu/temp/paivallista6.jpg)
Darn focus went in the forrest!
-
Originally posted by AKcurly
I remember Sigma SD9 (x3 technology) outperformed Canon D60 and Nikon D100
SD9 is a cheapest DSLR availible here in Russia.
The problem is that you'll have to use only Sigma lenses. Sigma makes some great lenses, but there are no "third party" optics for Sigma mount.
-
Grun, you still like your D70? I'm seriously considering the Nikon D70s (http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/nikon/d70s-review/index.shtml) with the 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G ED-IF AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor Lens and a Nikon 70-300MM f/4-5.6G AF Zoom Nikkor Lens. My Canon G6 just ain't cutting it for sports photography.
-
A friend from work went out and bought that exact setup rip. It's a nice camera, but don't wast your money on the cheap 70-300mm lens. He was buying a new lens 3 months later. If you're going over 150mm in focal length, you're going to want stabilization control of some kind. For 300mm, you should be looking in the $700-$1400 price range. Especially if you plan on holding the camera by hand.
Also... the D20 is a bit better for sports. It can take pictures at 5 frames per second and has a 1600 iso setting for low light situations. The Nikon is better in situations that require a flash, but the Canon is definately better when you're not using a flash.
-
My wife bought me a Nikon D50. It came with Nikkor 18-55mm lense. :D
Some shots from garden.
(http://www.savanne.org/elukkaa/images/_DSC0010.jpg)
(http://www.savanne.org/elukkaa/images/_DSC0025.jpg)
(http://www.savanne.org/elukkaa/images/_DSC0039.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Mini D
A friend from work went out and bought that exact setup rip. It's a nice camera, but don't wast your money on the cheap 70-300mm lens. He was buying a new lens 3 months later. If you're going over 150mm in focal length, you're going to want stabilization control of some kind. For 300mm, you should be looking in the $700-$1400 price range. Especially if you plan on holding the camera by hand.
Also... the D20 is a bit better for sports. It can take pictures at 5 frames per second and has a 1600 iso setting for low light situations. The Nikon is better in situations that require a flash, but the Canon is definately better when you're not using a flash.
Thks for the reply. I already made the purchase this morning (and for the 70-300mm lens) but I'll use it as a "trainer" zoom lens. I have a monopod that I use to steady the camera. The D70 gets 3 fps so for the kind of amateur stuff I'll be doing it should be sufficient. I'm starting to get some side business on this movie making stuff, so I can justify the cost.:cool:
The mondo zoom will have to wait, this purchase makes about $2400 on camera equipment I've spent in just 8 months. Still love the Canon G6, its just NOT for sports...:eek:
-
Originally posted by mipoikel
My wife bought me a Nikon D50. It came with Nikkor 18-55mm lense. :D
Some shots from garden.
Nice shots Mipo, what was the shutter speed for the "Bee in flight"?
-
if you're shooting sports at dusk or under stadium lights you'll need a f 2.8 lens, regardless of what brand you buy.
even then your iso will be near 800-1600 to get the shutter up to counter blur.
-
Do you have the 70-200 2.8 Torque? If so, how do you like it?
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Nice shots Mipo, what was the shutter speed for the "Bee in flight"?
1/2500 sec - F/9
Sensitivity: ISO 800
-
People often say about Nikons terrible noise. Im not sure about that. These 2 pics are accidentially taken in ISO 1600 mode.
1/400 sec - F/10
Sensitivity: ISO 1600
(http://www.savanne.org/kuvat/DSC_0002_small.jpg)
1/500 sec - F/11
Sensitivity: ISO 1600
(http://www.savanne.org/kuvat/DSC_0001_small.jpg)
-
Are you nerds allergic to taking photos of scantily clad young ladies?
-
Look Vulcan...lay off the remarks about girls and nudity...got it?
Our society is simply TOO fixated on SEX!
SEX doesn't make the world go round.....
....it just makes your head spin.
-
Originally posted by Vulcan
Are you nerds allergic to taking photos of scantily clad young ladies?
Hell, we wouldn't be examining the photo for noise if their were a pair of tatas to look at!
Mipo, those look pretty clean to me, what was the original size? 3024?
-
Originally posted by Vulcan
Are you nerds allergic to taking photos of scantily clad young ladies?
Talk is cheap. Get over to the fdb bbs (http://www.fatdrunkbastards.com/forums/index.php) and post pictures. It had better be some new stuff.
-
WTF? All I have is a crappy 2 megapixel camera and you guys EXPECT ME TO POST?
-
Now I'm just hearing excuses.