Digital cameras: One lens or two?
but
by kalel33 - 4/7/09 12:25 PM In reply to: Nikkor 50 mm f1.8 is another option by egelbOn a D40 and D60, the 50mm F1.8 does not autofocus, which is very debilitating.
Just buy the 35mm
by kalel33 - 4/7/09 2:25 PM In reply to: Yea I just noticed that when looking at the specs by barkal_lIt's the 35mm equivalent to 50mm, with the crop factor considered. It's only $200.
http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-35mm-AF-S-Digital-Cameras/dp/B001S2PPT0
That's what I'm leaning toward
by barkal_l - 4/7/09 2:38 PM In reply to: Just buy the 35mm by kalel33Although this is second on my list behind some sort of zoom/general purpose lens for the stuff thats not close up. I'm torn over the whole 18-55 and 55-200 combo or the 18-200 route (is the $300 premium worth the convenience and better build?).
lens choice
by hjfok - 4/6/09 12:39 AM In reply to: You got that right! by barkal_lI will pick the fast lens 35mm f/1.8 for indoor museum work, unless you plan on using tripod for longer exposure when using slow lenses. As you can see in my posted photo, the shutter speed at ISO 1600 and f/2.8 is still quite slow, but thanks to image stabilization, the image is still reasonably sharp(the photo was taken handheld without tripod). Anything slower than f/2.8 will likely show up blurry without a tripod. The 35mm on the D90/D60/D40 is essentially a normal perspective lens (considering a 1.5x crop factor).
As for the zoom lens, sounds like you mainly use it for zoo photos, so you will be shooting in broad daylight and the animals are not likely going to be moving at any fast speed. You can just buy a cheap kit telezoom.
Zoos more or less for the zoom needs, but
by barkal_l - 4/6/09 10:12 AM In reply to: lens choice by hjfokfor when I do airport spotting, I'm thinking that I need the faster lens to able to capture any sort of quality pics when shooting planes in the air. This was the main weak point of my Sony DSC-V1 P&S-- not horrible by any means, but the noticeable shutter lag makes it hard to get the pic you want (many of the mid-air pics I took ended up with the plane either leaving or entering the frame and/or were a bit blurry as I had to move the camera with the plane's flightpath in an attempt to compensate for the lag).
shutter lag
by hjfok - 4/7/09 1:25 AM In reply to: Zoos more or less for the zoom needs, but by barkal_lIf you are shoot in daylight, most D-SLR should not have much lag even if you use a kit telezoom like 50-200mm VR. A higher ISO should easily take care of the problem during overcast days. I don't do airport spotting, and don't know how high a quality image you need or how close a shot you need. There are many softwares like Photoshop and their plug-ins that can help to enlarge and crop, reduce noise, sharpen, correct lens abberations, and correct exposure, etc, should you need enhancement.
The Sony DSC V1 is very slow, especially in lower light. I had one years ago when it first came out, so I know how bad it is. The D-SLR will make the DSC V1 feel like a snail.
D60 with new 35mm f1.8
by Joliet Eddie - 4/6/09 7:11 AM In reply to: But by kalel33Just got the new 35mm f1.8 lens for my Nikon D60. It is a very nice lens, especially for the money ($199!). Fast. Great for all sorts of shooting. Although it is NOT a macro lens, it does focus to within 12". At 35mm DX this lens is the equivalent of a 52-55mm prime lens on a full-frame camera, so it is fine for work in a museum setting. And it's fast enough to work indoors especially at 400 ISO, which on my D60 gives an image quality pretty close to that of 100 or 200 ISO.
One versus two lenses
by jimsberg - 4/6/09 5:12 PM In reply to: One lens or two? by barkal_lI agree with the two lenses theory and suggest that you get the 55-200 as a VR type to control the vibration problem with the longer lens. I also suggest that if you can find one, that instead of the 18-55 lens, get the better 18-70 lens. If, however, you want VR on the 18-55/70 lenses, you'll have to settle for the 18-55 VR version as Nikon never made the 18-70 version with VR, unfortunately.
It was replaced
by kalel33 - 4/6/09 5:59 PM In reply to: One versus two lenses by jimsbergThe version out now that fits the 18-70 is the 16-85VR lens, which the Nikon people really like.
One lens or two
by brianclark4 - 4/6/09 11:57 PM In reply to: One lens or two? by barkal_lIt is better to invest in good quality glass, ie.f2.8 or lower with image stabilisation if possible as this is the item that gives you the quality image. The camera is secondary to this prosess to some extent. You still need a camera with a good image sensor, but no need for one which has more than say 6-8 million pixals, unless you intend to blow the image up beyond A3. I also agree with most peoples sugestion of two lenses rather than one, which goes from wide to super zoom, as the quality is compromised on this type of lens.
Back to the same question 18-200 VR vs 18-55 + 50-200 VR
by hjfok - 4/7/09 8:06 PM In reply to: One lens or two? by barkal_lAgain the best choice depends on what you do. You mentioned you like to do museum work, and use the zoom for zoo and airport spotting during daytime. And you have budget constraint. So 35mm f/1.8 and 50-200mm VR combo will be better than 18-200 VR or 18-55/50-200 combo. You need a fast lens close to normal perspective for museum work. You budget can only afford fast prime lenses. For museum work, the 35mm may be better than the 50mm lens, especially if you sometimes take photo with bigger piece of art. On a APS size D-SLR camera body with 1.5x crop factor, the 35 mm gives normal perspective whereas the 50mm (75mm equivalent) is more like a portrait lens and you have to stand farther to capture larger art objects. Besides the 50-200mm VR lens will cover the 50mm range, so won't it be better to get a 35mm lens which will at least give you normal perspective?
Yeah 35mm perspective looks a lot better for museum stuff
by barkal_l - 4/7/09 8:31 PM In reply to: Back to the same question 18-200 VR vs 18-55 + 50-200 VR by hjfokbased on pics on dpreview of both the 50 and 35. My concern was in having the flexibility to go down to 18mm but as you point out 35 is probably a happy medium, and the price is of course good. The lone remaining issue seems to be, since I'm getting budget lenses (even though the 35 is a really nice one, I'm obviously not splurging on zooms), does that mean that it's not even worth upping to a D80, which I can get used for the same price ($500ish) as a new D60?
again
by kalel33 - 4/7/09 9:24 PM In reply to: Yeah 35mm perspective looks a lot better for museum stuff by barkal_lWhat will the D80 give you that the D60 doesn't?
I was under the impression that it has better build quality
by barkal_l - 4/8/09 9:01 AM In reply to: again by kalel33based on reading reviews of both. I understand the functionality argument, that for several hundred more it doesn't make much sense, but for the same price, if the D80 is indeed more robust/better quality (not to say the D60 is bad, which it does not seem to be) that would seem to be the better option. But if there is really no substantive quality difference then D60 is certainly fine.
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
 |
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
