DSLR advice? What camera's and lens to consider? - Page 3

Michael Harris · 06-29-2007, 03:24 PM

Quote:

But, one last thing I would recommend, before you pull the trigger, is to try them in your hand first. See how they feel, how much they weigh.

Very good advice. How the Nikon D-70 felt in my hand was the tie breaker with a Canon EOS of similar quality. The D-70 just felt "right". Even though it is a bit old by current standadard, I love that camera.

Keith Plucker · 06-30-2007, 12:59 AM

I recently purchased a D80 with the 18-70 and I just added 50/1.8. It is my second camera and my first DSLR.

I got the D80/18-70 from Circuit City online. They had the D80 body on sale at the time for $920 plus I got a 10% off coupon from ebay for $2. I then got the CC credit card which qualified everything for 17 months same as cash. I could pay the entire thing off right away but I figure why not make a little interest off it. They really ding you for interest if you don't stick to their terms so be very careful with payments if you do it this way.

Anyways, looking back if I did it again I think I would go with either the Tamron 17-50/2.8 or the Sigma 18-50/2.8 Macro rather than the 18-70. I rather have the faster lens than the extra reach. You may want to look at these lenses as an alternative to the 18-70.

-Keith

Man-Fai Wong · 06-30-2007, 01:42 PM

Keith,

With the $$$ saved on the 18-70, you can always add a prime like the 35 f/2 (or maybe Sigma 30 f/1.4) for times when you need a brighter lens. Personally, I find that I could often use a bit faster than f/2.8 in situations where the 18-70 is not bright enough, so I decided to just add some primes instead of selling my 18-70 for one of the f/2.8 wide zooms. But that's just my own take and preference. Now, if I could get a f/2.8 wide zoom w/ IS built-in for a bit more, then I'm probably all there.

Some are expecting/hoping Nikon will follow Canon and update their 17-55 f/2.8 w/ IS, but it'll probably be too expensive for me even if they keep it at the current ~$1200 price.

Chris,

I'm not usually bothered by the wavy geometry distortion at the wide end (except on few occasions) nor the bit of vignetting at/near wide open near the wide end. But then again, I haven't been using the lens much for photos where the distortion would be very apparent, eg. wideangle architectural photos w/ lots of straight line geometry taken in a straight-on manner, wide photos w/ straight lines lined up horizontally to the frame along the top and/or bottom (in landscape orientation).

And since I am often using my primes instead of the 18-70, I also rarely (need to) shoot the lens wide open, so haven't had too many occasions when the bit of vignetting might be an issue. I tend to use the 18-70 stopped down a bit -- maybe a stop or more usually. Still, the vignetting haven't bothered me at all when I do shoot it wide open on occasion. FWIW, I'm not sure, but I suspect most other APS crop wide zooms also vignette a bit when shot wide open -- that's just how things are w/ lens designs though the amount of vignetting can vary. And the same happens w/ FF 35mm wide zooms on FF bodies.

Finally, if I do get the Tokina 12-24 f/4, I might never again use the 18-70 where the wavy distortion would even show up -- and actually, I'm not sure I'd still need that lens anymore.

_Man_

Chris PC · 07-04-2007, 03:45 PM

Without beating a dead horse, what other lens should I consider instead of the 18-70 we're now discussing? What other Nikon and/or Sigma zooms or primes should I consider? I'd like another wide-zoom like an 18-70 or 55-whatever rather than a prime to start out with.

Man-Fai Wong · 07-04-2007, 04:41 PM

Chris,

If the 18-70 doesn't suit you, I'd suggest checking out the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 or maybe Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 Macro. The Tamron choice would assume you're not going for the D40/D40x.

_Man_

Chris PC · 07-04-2007, 04:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Man-Fai Wong

Chris,

If the 18-70 doesn't suit you, I'd suggest checking out the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 or maybe Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 Macro. The Tamron choice would assume you're not going for the D40/D40x.

_Man_

Thanks. I don't really know if the 18-70 suits me or not. At $299 used I was figuring it would be ok, but if the "wavy" distortion is bothersome, that is bad. Vignetting is also not my fave. Body wise I am deciding between the D50 and the D80 and choosing a lens to go with

Chris PC · 07-04-2007, 10:44 PM

Took a look at the D50 and the 18-70. Looks good for a start. Will decide on either of the D80 or D50 and the 18-70. I'm sure it's a good lens to start with.

Chris PC · 07-05-2007, 09:45 PM

Picked up the following:

Used D50 with only minor wear/cracking on the rubber eye-peice.
Nikon 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G ED-IF AF-S DX Nikkor.
Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED AF-S VR Nikkor.

I figure I'll play with this setup until I can acheive the photo's I hope for and if I need a better body in the future, a D80 or D200 or whatever may replace them in the next few years will be my next step. In the meantime, I'll see how the len's work. Should be fun

Chris PC · 07-07-2007, 10:22 AM

I notice that many people find no use for film SLR once they go with digital SLR. Any thoughts on that and roughly what my kit would be worth used?

Nikon FE
Nikor 50 mm 1.8
Sigma mini-wide II 28 mm
Sigma DL Zoom 75-300 mm

thanks,

Man-Fai Wong · 07-07-2007, 03:25 PM

So did you get that D50 kit?

RE: your old film SLR kit, you're probably better off just holding on to them than try to sell them at this point unless you don't have space for them. You never know. Maybe you'll find use for them some time in the future. OTOH, maybe you can donate them to some charity for a tax deduction, or maybe just give them to a niece or nephew who might be interested in learning photography and might need a basic full manual film kit to start off.

_Man_

Chris PC · 07-07-2007, 04:24 PM

Yep, I got the used D50 with only minor wear/cracking on the rubber eye-peice, Nikon 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G ED-IF AF-S DX Nikkor, Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED AF-S VR Nikkor. I guess at first I just listed them, but I've since edited the above post so it makes more sense now.

I just dont know if I will have the need for film slr. Perhaps I will compare the two for a while. It's weird having two kits, including the 3 lens' with the film slr. It would be nice to slim down my setup to the DSLR and the P & S digital and eliminate the film slr, but perhaps I will wait a bit.

So far it's working ok. I am capturing in the biggest fine JPEG's I can. I forgot that I didn't get software with the camera, nor a owners manual since it was used. Raw or NEF photo's or whatever they are called are not usable or viewable on my PC and I have a photoshop program from 2002. I will download a manual and capture using the best JPEG settings for now.

Although the sharpness of the photo's is starting out ok, I can tell that I would appreciate the increased MP of the D80/D200 camera's for shot's of birds etc where I want to get a closer shot of a far away bird etc. At least it would seem to make sense that way.

It's working ok, but of course, I am already thinking about the D80/D200 even though I don't "need" them quite yet. The camera performs as I was hoping, ISO and WB are all I change in P mode and I do my best to focus and play around. I'll figure out the fully manual route next. I was never a totally manual film SLR user yet either. I was thinking that if I hold on to this camera for a while and do my best with it and learn to make it sing, then by the time the urge for better controls and more MP comes, perhaps there will be an updated D200 (maybe with SD cards too)... and then I can look at that. That is if I survive without upgrading to the D80 in the next little while.

If anybody has any hints for the D50 or links, let em' rip and I'll learn the camera's characteristics and how to make the most of it for now