The better of the two lens kits? (1 Viewer)

[JohnRice]

Ron, it is important you go with what you are comfortable with. If that is Canon, go for it. Regarding filters, it is something you can add later. Plus, now that I think about it, with the 18-55 in particular, since it has such a wide angle and it is so cheap, you might just skip it. If you were to get the 67mm for the 70-300, I would get the multicoated one. Again, it is up to you. I always saw it as a cheap insurance policy. Even if you only put it on in hazardous situations, you still need to have it to put it on. I do not use them on my pro gear, but I typically do on the 35mm stuff.


Oh yeah, I have no idea if OneCall will add a bag kit. You might as well try. Their site does always say to call for latest price.

 

[Sam Posten]

My 70-300 is plenty sharp for me at all focal lengths, corner to corner and no light fall off.

240 mm Monmouth U

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kadath/3956362853/in/set-72157622292554329/


210mm NY Giants

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kadath/4164889449/in/set-72157622827314509/


250mm Jonas Brothers

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kadath/4164885115/in/set-72157622827314509/


300mm MU

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kadath/3956368095/in/set-72157622292554329/


(Note I may have cropped any or all of them slightly for framing purposes, but still...


Bench tests are fine and all, but it's out in the real world that matters. And to me the Canon 70-300IS was slow to focus and the IS system loud and made 'clunking' sounds which I could actually feel the vibration of in my hands. YMMV.


Definitely get the SB600 if you go Nikon, you won't regret it. and finally, I don't use UV filters and only use lens caps in the bag. Or as Jay Maisel calls it "the f$@$ing missed the shot cap"

 

[JohnRice]

I love this part.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

You know, this has been the worst buying

experience that I can remember.


Of course you love this part, John.


I get advice on one brand and then someone

comes along and says no, don't buy that brand.


...and that is not a slam against anyone because

let's face it -- everyone has a preference based

on their own experiences.


Is buying HT gear this friggin' difficult?!


Do you know how many times this morning

I sat on the ONECALL page and kept switching

out devices, totaling the numbers, trying to decide

what to do?

In the meantime, I can't get sound advice
towards one particular model of camera.


....and the worst part is, both cameras cost

the same. The Rebel is $200 more expensive

but that is what I will spend on a speed light

for the Nikon.


I have one last question...I promise:

Does the lack of an autofocus motor on the

Nikon d5000 have any bearing on anything?
I take it the lenses I will be buying all have

the motors built into the lens?

 

[JohnRice]

Actually Ron, I was being sarcastic. The "I love this pert" comment was a thinly veiled, but good willed slam on the whole "measurebating" part that Man referred to a little while ago.


To answer your question, that Nikon body will only work with lenses which have their own motors. It is highly unlikely that will make any difference to you. Just keep in mind, in the future, that (for autofocus, at least) you need a lens with an integrated motor. Way back when autofocus first started in earnest, Canon made the decision to completely redesign their line, including an entirely new lens mount. Canon AF cameras had the motor in the lens from the beginning. This includes their first AF attempt back in the 80s, which I only mention because if I don't, someone will just have to jump in and correct me. Nikon, on the other hand, decided to keep their existing lens mount and incorporate the motor in the body. This let people use existing lenses, without AF. Since then, they have made lenses both with and without motors. In my case, for example, I need a body with a motor since I do not own a single lens with its own motor, but my lenses are all designed for film cameras.

 

[JohnRice]

BTW, this really is more difficult, in a way, than buying HT gear, because the brand of body you choose brings a certain commitment to that brand along with it.


BTW, through the decades, I have used Canon, Olympus, Minolta, Nikon, Fuji (DSLR based on a Nikon body) and now Nikon DSLR, in addition to various medium and large format gear, and what it has taught me is, in the end, particularly with the 35mm and DSLR stuff is, it doesn't make a damn bit of difference. Too many people get wrapped up in thinking their gear makes them more or less talented or will have a considerable effect on how good their pics are.


In all this time, I have used two pieces of photo gear I consider to be truly great. My Nikon 70-180 Micro zoom (which is far more specialized an item than most people would have use for, plus it's no longer made) and my Cambo Master PC view camera. I also have to say, the Nikon N-90 was a truly awesome film SLR. My point is, none of this stuff will make that much of a difference. Nothing you are looking at is genuinely better than the other.

 

[Sam Posten]

Originally Posted by JohnRice


Go try stuff out and see what you like. Reviews and bench tests are for the crazies.

 

[Sam Posten]

Originally Posted by JohnRice In all this time, I have used two pieces of photo gear I consider to be truly great. My Nikon 70-180 Micro zoom (which is far more specialized an item than most people would have use for, plus it's no longer made)

I think you've said you use yours for flat art image reproduction, is that right? I still wanna try one of those bad boys on bugs some day, that's got to be a fun beast to wrangle. My favorite bugographer Dale McClean uses his with a specialized shorty tripod and loves his.

 

[Sam Posten]

Originally Posted by Ronald Epstein


I get advice on one brand and then someone

comes along and says no, don't buy that brand.

I hope you arent lumping me in with that. I use whatever I can get my hands on and I think you will be equally impressed with either of the two major brands and I have friends who love their Sonys, Panasonics, and Olys. I also noted before you started that buying a camera based on prices on a magazine is like dancing to architecture =) My offer still remains too, you are more than welcome to take my d5000 for a spin for a day or two and I can outfit you with 2 of the 3 lenses you are looking at too. One of em has never even been out of the box, plus you can try the 18-200 if you like. If you go the canon route you are welcome to try my 17-40 and/or lensbaby.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

Ron,


Yeah, the only reason we haven't brought up the missing AF motor thing so far is that we just didn't think it'd matter to you given your requirements -- figured one less thing to confuse you.


http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/7.htm


_Man_

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

Originally Posted by Ronald Epstein But yeah, the lens is very sharp indeed from 70-200mm even at/near wide open.


_Man_

 

[JohnRice]

Originally Posted by Sam Posten


I think you've said you use yours for flat art image reproduction, is that right? I still wanna try one of those bad boys on bugs some day, that's got to be a fun beast to wrangle. My favorite bugographer Dale McClean uses his with a specialized shorty tripod and loves his.

I've never done art reproduction, and to be honest, if I did, I would use a view camera and roll or sheet film. My use for the 70-180 Micro is mostly small products, but anything reasonably small is perfect for it. What makes both it and the Cambo great, in my opinion, is they both take physically difficult tasks and make them much easier, almost effortless, so long as you have the understanding of what you want to accomplish nailed down. Macro photography can be downright infuriating.


A little aside I just had to throw in, which probably nobody will find interesting. There is one positive to the decline of film photography. I've been thinking about actually doing some photography for fun, and since I find digital photography fundamentally ungratifying, plus if I come up with something I love, I'd wish it was shot on at least medium format anyway, I've been wondering about actually using my Bronica SQ-A outfit again. I still have a wonderful, fully functioning (but incredibly messy) darkroom, and I love B&W. B&W paper is outrageous these days, but it occurred to me I could shoot and develop the film, then scan it and have it digitally printed. One of the best digital printers in the country, FinePrint, is actually right next door to work.


Anyway, I've been looking on eBay, and Saturday I snagged a good looking 65mm PS for $67.00 shipped. Holy smokes! That lens was probably $1,000. So, I have two bodies, various finders and backs, including a very cool 35mm Panoramic one, 40mm, 65mm, 80mm, 150mm and 250mm. I'd like a 110mm Macro, but those still fetch a few hundred bucks. A 50mm might be nice too.

 

[JohnRice]

Ron, consider this...


You came into this having seen Neil use his 55-200 and coming away believing that was the be all and end all of perfection. You are now tearing yourself apart deciding between two other lenses which are both, by all accounts, significantly better than the lens you were originally idealizing. The shots Neil took with that lens are every bit as good as they always were, and you know that either of the options you are considering is even better. All this torment because some digithead took pictures of a graph and posted the results online. Tell me. How often do you plan to photograph graphs?

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Gents, Still have not made my choice. I can’t. But then again, I don't need the camera tomorrow so I can sit on this a few more days. My heart wants the Canon Rebel T2i but I do see the fun factor in the d5000 -- especially with its MODES settings that you just turn the dial to things like CANDLELIGHT, FOOD, SILHOUETTE, PORTRAIT. Sorry to have been such a pain going back and forth here with you guys. All of you have been very patient. Thank God it came down to two cameras because someone else is urging me to go Pentax, but I am not going there. Will let you know what I decide shortly.

 

[JohnRice]

Stick with one of these two. I'm not sure how stable Pentax is these days, for one thing, and they certainly are not as fully invested in DSLRs as Nikon or Pentax. I would go Sony before Pentax. Oops, I didn't say that. Just ignore it.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

As we have said, Ron, you cannot go wrong with either Nikon or Canon. Both are excellent camera systems. The choice can seem more daunting than home theater equipment because each manufacturer has a "closed" system, meaning that you are committing to using not only their camera body, but also lenses, flashes, etc. Home theater equipment, on the other hand, can be mixed and matched between different manufacturers. Imagine buying a Sony TV and then being forced to buy all Sony audio equipment, speakers, etc.


As for those "modes" on the Nikon D5000, if they are anything like the ones on Canon's cameras, I will once again urge you to instead learn the basic principles of photography and forgo any of those automatic modes. The camera is trying to guess what you want, and more often than not it will guess wrong. You are much better off learning how to use the manual modes and tell the camera exactly what you want it to do.


I have recommended the book "Understanding Exposure" by Bryan Peterson to several people who want to learn more about the basics of photography. It is $17 on Amazon, which is a bargain compared to the amount of money you will be spending on the actual camera equipment. The book is well-written and easy to follow for a beginner.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Scott,


Thank you.


I plan on buying a video that each brand offers. The

video gives an introduction to their cameras and features.


Absolutely, I will spend the $17 on that book as well if

you feel it is geared to someone like me who knows
nothing about DSLR cameras. It needs to talk to someone

on my level so I hope it has crayons included.


I am just sitting here not doing anything right now.

I cannot make up my mind. It really is a toss-up between

both cameras and until something tilts the scale in favor

of one or the other I am just going to wait a few days.

 

[JohnRice]

Ron, since the principles of photography are universal, (regardless of the "sensor" used, all is the same) I also recommend a long out of print book, "The Joy of Photography". You can get one used from Amazon for $4.00 shipped. Excellent introduction to photography. Not the "digital" version, just the plain old 80s book from Kodak. It may also encourage you to NOT think of digital "changing the rules" of photography, which it doesn't. You still have to deal with light, exposure, ISO, aperture and shutter speed.

 

[Bob Graz]

A month or so ago I was ready to pull the trigger on the DS5000 with 2 kit lens (18-55VR and 55-200VR). Why, because Nikon was offering dealers $150 rebates so B&H was selling that package for $809. That was so cheap that I figured I'd use the 2 kit lens until I could upgrade. Ideally I'd like the DS5000 with the 18-200VR and a prime lens and I'd be good to go. I looked at Nikon and Canon and the Nikon felt better in my hand. I'm a former Olympus OM-1N 35 mm guy (that was a long time ago) so I value quality and smaller, easier to lug sizes. That's why I chose the DS5000 over the D90. The D90 is an awesome camera but it's to big for my purposes and so would be the glass lens you'd want to really take full advantage of what you had.


Unfortunately one of my 22 year old HVAC systems died and I replaced both systems. We are in a 5+ week heat wave here in Raleigh and my upstairs was 90+ with no AC. So AC won over a new DS5000 (and cost 10x+ more).


So I value "luggability". Smaller/lighter camera with lighter lens (18-200VR being best trade-off for me) is better than bigger, heavier and more robust.


I also don't want to spend a fortune. I love the creativity that my old OM-1N gave me and want that now in a DLSR. I'm am so, so tired of point and shoots. But I'm not a pro, never will be a pro. I'm an intermediate level amateur and happy just to experiment and have fun.


So now that I'm living in AC again and getting over the shock of putting in two new Carrier systems, maybe later this year when Nikon feels generous again...

 

[Scott Merryfield]

Ron,


The Peterson book is written with beginners in mind, uses lots of photographs as examples for teaching, and suggests lessons for trying out the techniques being discussed. However, I am sure that the book John recommends is just as good or better, knowing his expertise in the field, and it is less expensive. As John said, the principles of photography have not changed at all in the transition from film to digital.