DSLR advice? What camera's and lens to consider? (1 Viewer)

[DanaA]

Now, somebody else will have to confirm this as I'm the beginner here, but my inkling was that the model number of the lens will contain AF if it contains the AF motor. Ex: Tamron 28-300mm F/3.5-6.3 AF XR Di LD. This is just an inference on my part though.

Steven: Nice pictures, but as a failed aquarium keeper myself, my hat's off to you. That is a beautiful series of shots from beginning to now. Stunningly nice aquarium.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

I believe the current Canon EF mount lenses were first introduced in 1987. Their lenses previous to that were designated "FD" mount. As long as your lenses are "EF" mounts, you should be fine. Here is a description of the different focus motors in the EF mount lenses.

 

[Steven Simon]

Dana,
I did Salt water over 20 years back.. Totally different today.... The internet has a ton of info on Salt Water.... I have 80 pounds of live rock which serves as a Biological Filtration system in itself... As well as a Protein Skimmer, and HOB filters... I can tell you this... It's like a part time job having a SW tank.. Always something that needs attention.... But I enjoy it...

 

[Scott Merryfield]

Dana, that "AF" label is Tamron, Tokina, and Sigma's designation for an auto focus lens. However, whether that lens has a focus motor in the lens will depend on the mount. There must be one there for a Canon mount, since the Canon EOS mount camera bodies have never had a focus motor. However, that is not necessarily the case for a Nikon mount -- since all Nikon cameras before the D40 had the focus motor in the body. Remember, the third party lens manufacturers like Tamron offer their lenses in several different mounts for different camera brands.

Any Canon-brand lens with an EF or EF-S designation will contain a focus motor, since Canon's EOS bodies have never contained a focus motor and Canon only makes lenses for Canon bodies.

 

[Chris PC]

Probably going to Henrys. I'll probably check out the D80 and figure out what a really good lens is for it, and then may pick up a used D50/D70 or D100 for now and get into it and then upgrade later. Baby steps. Or...I may jump right in with the D80.

Any idea whether or not my Sigma 28 mm 2.8 and 70-300 that I use on my Nikon FE would meter on any of the Ninon D camera's listed above? The D80?

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

Chris,

If those lenses are manual focus only, then they probably won't meter w/ any Nikon DSLR below the D200. You can probably still use them in manual exposure mode, which might still be worth your while for situations where you have enough time to go full manual -- and having immediate feedback w/ in-camera histogram, etc. can help ease the process a whole lot. Certainly could be novel fun at minimum and perhaps helpful for refreshing yourself w/ the basics -- and if you never did it before, might be worth your while to learn the Sunny f/16 rule for instance.

One thing. If you're going to focus manually, you'll probably want the D80, not the lower models, since the viewfinder is quite a bit larger on it -- though still not as large as those on good film bodies. Some people also buy and replace the viewfinder's screen w/ a 3rd party split-prism focus screen -- the Katz-eye one (http://www.katzeyeoptics.com/) seems quite nice though it's a bit expensive for casual use.

_Man_

 

[ErichH]

Purchased the 40 and SB400 a few months ago - just fun.
I could hang a bigger lens and flash on it, but 90% of the time I wouldn't need them. Amazing speed for the price.

I used to think it would take 2k to reach this type of performance. What a great time to get a DSLR.

 

[Chris PC]

How would a used D50 compare to a D40/D40x?

 

[JohnRice]

Canon has never made an auto focus SLR that didn't have the motor in the lens. This even goes back to their first failed attempt (the T-80, I think) in the late 70s or early 80s. I don't know if that means any EF lens is compatible with all current bodies, but all Canon AF SLR lenses have the motor integrated.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

Chris,

You can see a basic comparison between the old D50 and D40 on the 1st page of the D40 review on dpreview.com:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond40/

For the D40x, just add the change to 10MP along w/ availability of ISO100, and that's pretty much the diff (over the D40). I imagine noise grain is slightly higher at the per pixel level, but possibly slightly better overall when you normalize for the total MP count, eg. if you resize from 10MP to 6MP for comparison.

RAW IQ is basically the same between D50 and D40 though the D40 should churn out somewhat better in-camera JPEGs, particularly if you like how it does high ISO NR.

If I were choosing, I'd probably go w/ the D50 instead of D40 mainly because the D50 has the built-in AF motor needed for non-AFS lenses -- and I don't really need the smaller size of the D40. Beyond that, each has other minor pros and cons. If you're thinking about the D40x, I'd suggest spending a bit more and move up to the D80 instead.

_Man_

 

[Scott Merryfield]

All Canon EF lenses will work on all current Canon camera bodies. Canon EF-S lenses, however, will only work on the crop sensor bodies, such as the XT, XTi, 20D, and 30D.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

BTW, RE: the Canon lens situation, I really don't like how they added EF-S to the landscape (unlike how DX works for Nikon). While it's great to already have the option to move up to a full frame (or 1.3x crop) body w/in the system, it's bad that one has to be concerned about future compatibility issues in choosing an EF-S lens for a 1.6x crop body. And if you don't get an EF-S lens at least for wideangle use, you'll be rather limited in your choices for wideangle on a 1.6x crop body. Fortunately, there are some very nice 3rd party offerings to help fill the gap nowadays. Still...

_Man_

 

[Chris PC]

Not bothering with the D40x. Seems odd. $200 less than the D80 and many features missing including the AF motor. I think I'm going to grab a nice lens or two and a D50 body and get into it and then maybe a D80 later...depending.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

While the EF-S lens compatibility issue is a small concern to me, I figure that if I do eventually want to migrate to a full frame body, the two EF-S lenses I own should not be that difficult to sell -- the EF-S 10-22mm and EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 are both very well regarded lenses. Right now, though, I have no plans to move away from the crop sensors. Full frame is much too expensive for this amateur, and the 1.6 crop cameras perform fine for my level of photography.

 

[Chris PC]

I went to Henrys and saw the D80 and some lens. I am still thinking of going with a used D50/70/100 to start with, probably a used D50, and a lens or two. Here are the lens that were mentioned to me at Henrys:

D80 was $1069
18-70 $330 with the D80
18-200 VR $869 with the D80

70-300 $449
70-300 VR $669

I think they are all ED glass. Any thoughts re these lens?

thanks,



P.S. Prices are in CDN

 

[JohnRice]

I would stay away from all-in-one lenses like an 18-200. Just be a man and split that over a few lenses. You're better off in the end with image quality.

 

[Chris PC]

Really? If that is the case in terms of image quality, I'm cool with that. 18-70 and the 70-300 VR with either of the D50 or D70. I wonder how the D100 compares. I like the D50's SD memory but there are features on the D70 that are missing on the D50.

 

[DanaA]

Chris, I've been spending quite some time of late at forums for Nikon owners and they pretty much rave about the 70-300VR. When I was considering getting the D40, I was drooling over that lens more than the camera itself. You might, if you want, check out some online sites like Beach Cameras, as they have the lens for $489. I know that they also have free shipping on much of their stock. Still, many aren't comfortable ordering things, especially vulnerable things, online, although Beach has a pretty good reputation. If you go there, you might also want to give a looksee at to the prices of the Nikon camera bodies.

Another place you might want to check is B & H cameras, as they well might have the best reputation of any online dealer.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

Yeah, unless you really need the all-in-one for traveling lite, etc., I'd go for "separates" for better IQ. Too bad Nikon doesn't (yet?) offer IS in one of their wider DX zooms like Canon did not long ago w/ a couple EF-S wide zooms. Would be nice to have the option of 17-55 f/2.8 VR and 18-70 VR much like Canon's 17-55 f/2.8 IS and 17-85 IS. Maybe they will do it in their next batch of lens updates. Right now, they only have the old 24-120 VR for wide zoom w/ IS -- and it's not a DX lens though I heard IQ can be iffy on it.

Anyway, the 18-70 is a pretty good wide zoom though it has a kind of odd wavy geometry distortion at the wide end -- not good for shooting architecture and such -- and needs to be stopped down a bit to avoid some light fall-off in the corners (mainly at the wide end). The light fall-off can be apparent or very noticeable if you're shooting a brightly and evenly lit scene that extends into the corners -- though you'd usually stop down some anyway for such situations. I forget, but I always shoot w/ the hood on, and the hood might increase the light fall-off, so maybe leaving it off for certain cases might help too -- and use of thick filters (like Polarizer) can be an issue for this as well. One other possible caveat is that this DX wide zoom will vignette throughout its entire range when used on a full-frame body, if you were thinking of ever wanting to use it on a FF body (though Nikon does not offer digital FF yet). Now, all this stuff might scare some folks off but most of it does come w/ the territory, and I'm just giving you a heads up on it.

For a good wide zoom, some folks also opt for 3rd party offerings like the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 (also an APS crop lens) instead while others go for one of the more expensive f/2.8 Nikkors, ie. 17-35 f/2.8 (full frame) or 17-55 f/2.8 (DX/APS crop lens). There are lots of ways to go w/ this as you can imagine, and you may eventually find yourself w/ some amount of overlap as you add lenses based on your "needs" -- perhaps a prime lens or three could be in your future. It'd be good to get a solid idea of what you'll be shooting for the forseeable future so you can plan your purchases better and don't end up w/ too much unnecessary overlap -- or needing to sell off lenses as you go.

For the tele zoom, I'd stay away from the older, non-VR 70-300s -- yes, there were 2 of them one w/ ED, one w/out. The recently released 70-300 VR has been getting lots of raves, so if you don't need f/2.8 in your tele zoom, then it seems like the best way to go right now -- and most f/2.8 tele zooms are >=3lb, cost a good deal more, and stops at 200mm. If you want to save some $$$ there, a solid alternative would be a used 70-210 f/4 though it's not VR and not AF-S -- you can usually find one on eBay for

 

[Chris PC]

Wow. Helpful alright, but requires reading and thinking hard...lol... No free lunch. I guess it depends on what I'll be happy with. I would prefer no serious vignetting, and I'm not cool with chromatic abberations and softness. I like a sharp picture. If there is some barrel or pincusion, I'm ok with that as long as things are sharp. I guess I have to get a lens and see what I'm ok with.

If I go for the more expensive setups, meaning, a D80 with either of the 18-70 AND 70-300 or the 18-200... I will have to seriously consider selling my film SLR body and lens. I can't see myself needing a film SLR anymore. I'm getting more and more into this, and I like having the better stuff, and I'm not wealthy, so I have to compromise somewhere.

I am curious what Nikon may be announcing soon. Anybody have an hints or know about any rumours?