Digital photography

.

1 Attachment

ooo

Hey! I enjoy a bit of photography every now and then, so will probably partake in this thread every now and then.

A couple of years ago I had the odd exhibition and was picking up a bit of freelance work (nothing exciting - just a few corporates through contacts I already had, although one was at the House of Lords, which was pretty cool), however I don't go out with cameras as often as I'd like these days though - finding the time is the challenge.

Anyway, here's my site for those that are interested... www.skintphotography.com

Not always true. The 18-55 supplied with low-end Nikon kits is a very capable lens, even wide open.

Agree. the nikon kit aint bad!

for a lot of peoples needs 1k+ lenses arent needed, but they are nice to have around.

The Nikon d5100 is probably the best new camera going for £600 at the moment - it has better noise characteristics than the 550d/600d, and in other areas they're a wash from what I've seen. Lens wise, the off-brands have the cheap wide zooms. I had the Sigma and it did really well.

The 5d classic will probably have better image quality but the tiny LCD and ancient focusing system would be the limiting factor. It also lacks video, if that is important to you. However, if you go this route you could make use of one of the best bang-for-buck lenses Canon makes, the 17-40mm f4 L, at the wide end.

Why do you care if It's got a tiny LCD? I rarely use mine anyway, and get annoyed when people use them to look through all their pictures, just wait till you get home.

I agree that the AF could be faster on the 5D but for the money I don't think you'd beat it.

Blimey, you've all gone soft! I expected to have to endure some pretty thick abuse to dig out good advice. Thanks a lot. Quite a lot of conflicting advice - which I guess means "everybody's needs are different - decide what you'll need it for and pick to suit".

The general consensus seems to be that newer sensors are worth the money, but pixel counts and newness of lenses aren't. TBH I'm inclined to go for the Nikon D5100 with the 18-55mm lens, and then save for a wide angle lens maybe even a non-zoom to save a bit of cash - the Tokina everyone seems to rate as the cheapest acceptable wide angle lens and it's about £400.

Why do you care if It's got a tiny LCD? I rarely use mine anyway, and get annoyed when people use them to look through all their pictures, just wait till you get home.

I agree that the AF could be faster on the 5D but for the money I don't think you'd beat

I need to review shots periodically, and quickly. It's important, and a large screen makes it 10x easier. I suppose in a leisure situation it's not quite as important bit I think it adds an awful lot to the experience.

Why do you care if It's got a tiny LCD? I rarely use mine anyway, and get annoyed when people use them to look through all their pictures, just wait till you get home.

Wow, you must be really easily annoyed. Worry about your own shit, not how other people use their cameras.

If you'd said D90 then maybe, but D100? Come on... Yes investing in good lenses is the thing to do, but not at the expense of a better sensor, better autofocus, better handling - basically 6 years of digital camera improvements between those two models, and 10 since the D100 was released. There's a sensible middle ground for the DSLR purchaser in 2012, and the D100 is nowhere near it.

Yeah D90, but I'm looking at a cost thing. The guy is on a limited budget. Also, cheap D100, not really going to lose value anymore, so if it all goes well, then upgrade to a better camera.

What you say about sensor/focus/handling - I couldn't disagree more. A Nikon Pro body is a Nikon Pro body. I used mine for five years solid and it never let me down.

Also who was whinging about having a small review screen? Really? Yeah, bigger is better, but nobody needs a big screen, and any photographer relying on the review screen is asking for trouble. Plus bigger will cost more money - something the poster is short on.

http://nikonrumors.com/2012/02/15/nikon-nps-roadshow-gear-stolen-worth-100k-including-d4-d800.aspx/

So who knows someone in Ireland?

Bit silly really. Soon as someone posts a photo taken with one of those cameras or goes to repair them, they'll trace them. Still... be nice to play with all that gear...

i need to review shots periodically, and quickly. It's important, and a large screen makes it 10x easier. i suppose if your a photographer rather than a chimp it's not quite as important bit i think it adds an awful lot to the experience.

ftfy.

Why be that person? I should have known I'd wind up some trolls by expressing an opinion based on personal experience.

If we're going to make the need/want argument we may as well forget half the features of any current camera. You don't need 75 metering modes or a large bright screen or 480 focus points or blah. That is unless of course you do need them, heaven forbid. Not everyone takes pictures in the same way, of the same things, or for the same reasons..

No-one has even asked this guy what he's planning to shoot yet everyone seems to know exactly what would be best based on their own experience.

If the guy wants a cheap decent first DSLR, I still recommend a used d80 as a great, reasonably modern, compact, cheap and high specced place to start, that won't feel as old as it actually is. Sorry if that offends anyone!

I know, I was only kidding!

:)

We can't all live in the dark ages ;) I chimp a bit, but a big, high resolution screen just makes things so much easier. Live view is also a great when fine tuning focus for eg. night sky shots - where Canons find autofocus difficult.

Like Elias and Barnes fighting for possession of the soul. Thanks for the suggestions - I am leaning towards the more beginner-orientated camera, I think. I think we'll enjoy the camera more while we learn with some of the newer innovations/gimicks/aids.

When I came on LFGSS asking about how to get a single speed bike, I was told, "Just buy one" but instead I sourced all the parts and built it myself. Once I was done I realised I'd have been better off buying one, but I could only appreciate that, and make the most of the advice with the knowledge gained from building the bike I got.

Ok need some help/reassurance/general guidance...

I used to shoot on a crappy but reliable Nikon D40 (towards the end of it's life with a really lovely 35mm f1.8 prime) until a friend of mine borrowed it and dropped it. Thankfully the lens survived but the body was knackered and she offered me enough money to cover the repairs (which as it turns out was almost the price of the same camera new). After lots of introspective thinking about what I needed from a camera and the usual reading of forums etc, I bought a Fuji X100 yesterday for myself for my birthday. I figured I would be more likely to take more photos if I had something a little more compact, and since I was so used to shooting with a short-ish prime I wasn't worried about the fixed lens. I also figured I have a lovely Praktica which I shoot film on and I can always borrow the 5d MkII from work for serious business.

However, I've been playing with this X100 and beautiful as it is I can't get over how excruciatingly slow it is. The pictures it takes are OK, but I can't really face the thought of spending more time focusing the lens (or just as much time waiting for it to autofocus) than enjoying taking pictures. I feel like I've made a really bad, expensive decision and although I haven't checked yet, I suspect Calumet won't let me return it simply because I don't like it.

I guess what I'm looking for is for someone to either tell me what I'm doing wrong and help me embark on a happy relationship with my new camera or tell me I've made the wrong choice and they'd be interested in buying it off me...

if you sell it right away, people on ebay will likely pay so close to RRP that you won't be loosing much (even after fees).

I bought a fuji s5600, after a year I got a 6500 thinking it would be better, and it was, but the not the asking prices worth, so after about 3months bunged it on ebay and made more than what I paid for it from high street shop (dixons?). Paid like £195, got £238 back+p&p lol and had a few months occasional use out of it.

I don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater but I'm so used to a responsive auto focus, and the lack of depth of field preview in normal shooting mode is a real pain in the arse. Is anyone who's got one able to shed some light?

I don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater but I'm so used to a responsive auto focus, and the lack of depth of field preview in normal shooting mode is a real pain in the arse. Is anyone who's got one able to shed some light?

First and foremost, forget manually focusing it.

You can put it in mf mode and use the ael/afl button on the back to autofocus (not sure if you need to set this up or if it does it in std settings) then press the rear thumbwheel to magnify and fine tune with the focus ring but using the focus ring alone will get you no where fast. Some people report that using back button to focus in mf mode is faster than focusing with a half press of the shutter button in af-c or af-s. Think af-s is supposed to be faster than af-s but I prefer single servo af so haven't tried it.

Make sure you're running firmware v 1.13. Lots of people are reporting faster AF after the latest update, I don't actually see it myself but if you're suffering give it a go.

Using the EVF instead of the OVF should give you faster AF too and will also give you DOF preview. I think. Makes the af at close distances more accurate too.

One thing I only found out recently, if you get the red rectangle and AF! because the af can't lock on the lens doesn't do what most af lenses would do and park itself at infinity or close focus - which will almost always render a horribly out of focus image - it automagically goes to 2m (I think, maybe 2.5m) if this happens so it's like having a scale focus lens and you might get something usable if you go ahead and take the shot anyway.

Ugh, seriously considering a D7000 with a 35mm 1.8 at tho mo. My 450d is starting to fall apart and I could do with some high iso love.

The 35 is lush

^ badly regret selling mine.

Especially as it would have worked fine with me F100