|
I took this on my honeymoon back in December on a train between Minneapolis and Portland. We were going through a pitch black tunnel, with the only light present being that coming from her iPad. I had the camera an Auto because I was a babby that hadn't read Understanding Exposure yet, but I pointed the camera in her direction and this is what I got: I guess my point is that the D5100 has pretty awesome low light performance. E: Just checked, according to EXIF that's only ISO 6400, lol. At HI2 or HI3 you'd be blinded based on the glare from the tunnel wall. FISHMANPET fucked around with this message at 01:06 on Apr 25, 2013 |
#
?
Apr 25, 2013 01:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 00:42 |
|
|
FistLips posted:My brother has one of these: http://forum.mflenses.com/panagor-auto-wide-angle-f2-35mm-t41867.html You may find that the lens no longer focuses to infinity when mounted with an adapter. M42 camera bodies have the lens mount closer to the imaging plane than Nikon F-mounts do, so adapting one of these onto a Nikon is a bit like adding a very short extension tube. As a result, there are two types of M42->Nikon adapters:
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2013 02:43
|
|
|
FistLips posted:My brother has one of these: http://forum.mflenses.com/panagor-auto-wide-angle-f2-35mm-t41867.html In all honesty you will be best off just going out and buying yourself an equivalent Nikon lens. You'll spend $20 for the adapter, bare minimum, and it won't give you infinity focus. You can find lots of off-brand Nikon-mount lenses cheap if you look around.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2013 03:02
|
|
|
Not sure how but my 50mm took a hit to the thread  Anyone know the cost of repairs or if it's even worth fixing? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2013 04:23
|
|
|
Ashex posted:Not sure how but my 50mm took a hit to the thread It's all over. Time to switch to Canon 
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2013 04:36
|
|
|
krooj posted:It's all over. Time to switch to Canon Screw that, I'm getting a 4/3.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2013 04:54
|
|
|
Thanks, guys! That was more or less what I was afraid of. Think I'll just see if I can find a regular modern version that fits 
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2013 07:03
|
|
|
Ashex posted:Not sure how but my 50mm took a hit to the thread Or just live with it. I have a 50 that is cracked worse than that; takes some effort to get a filter on, but it's okay.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2013 13:46
|
|
|
I'd just dremel off that section if you ever need to mount a filter.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2013 13:48
|
|
|
FISHMANPET posted:I took this on my honeymoon back in December on a train between Minneapolis and Portland. We were going through a pitch black tunnel, with the only light present being that coming from her iPad. I had the camera an Auto because I was a babby that hadn't read Understanding Exposure yet, but I pointed the camera in her direction and this is what I got: Or maybe you only perceived the tunnel as pitch black as your eyes haven't adjusted to it yet.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2013 16:39
|
|
|
Would I be correct in assuming this is not worth the money to get repaired?
Krelas fucked around with this message at 07:47 on Apr 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2013 04:28
|
|
|
Krelas posted:Would I be correct in assuming this is not worth the money to get repaired? You are correct. Sell it as parts camera, buy used/refurb upgrade. Nikons refurb store has a ton of good deals right now. Or better yet, just use your Super ME PENTAX! Musket fucked around with this message at 17:39 on Apr 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2013 17:25
|
|
|
Krelas posted:Would I be correct in assuming this is not worth the money to get repaired? drat, that's gnarly. Is it functional at all apart from the flash? p.s. nice pentax
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2013 17:33
|
|
|
Yeah the camera still works surprisingly enough. I think I'm going to pick up a D7000, they're such good value right now. Story for those that are interested: I was at a dance party on a portable stage and I went to walk off the stage at the back. The stage however, wasn't symmetrical and where I had assumed it extended out, there was nothing and so I free fell onto the camera and my face. There was a speedlite mounted, so it was pushed horizontal when I landed on top of the camera and took the hot shoe and popup flash with it. Fortunately enough, I'm fine, the lens is fine and the speedlite is fine, mounting a flash again isn't going to happen though. Also I didn't have it insured, that's something I'm going to do from now on.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2013 09:05
|
|
|
Krelas posted:Yeah the camera still works surprisingly enough. I think I'm going to pick up a D7000, they're such good value right now. Anyone who smugposts about Sony's dumbass hotshoe design gets a six-hour.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2013 09:06
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:Anyone who smugposts about Sony's dumbass hotshoe design gets a six-hour. Have to admit his camera would be safe though - he wouldn't have ever been able to find any flashes to put on it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2013 14:06
|
|
|
So basically Nikon said "Hey you know how Pentax makes those awesome colourful cameras??" And then they said "Hey you know how Apple makes those commercials??" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvCjI5ZTNJ0
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2013 03:18
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:So basically Nikon said "Hey you know how Pentax makes those awesome colourful cameras??" I'm the really discordant black parts.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2013 03:27
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:So basically Nikon said "Hey you know how Pentax makes those awesome colourful cameras??" I like how 5 seconds in when he raises the camera, the image on the LCD just stays the same.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2013 03:29
|
|
|
Kazy posted:I like how 5 seconds in when he raises the camera, the image on the LCD just stays the same. Because he had it in [P]ro-mode. Duh.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2013 04:03
|
|
|
I seem to have lost the charger for my D40, and while I've been considering getting a newer/less poo poo Nikon DSLR for a while now it's probably not happening right away. What kind of charger should I get? Supposedly 3rd-party ones should be just fine, any in particular I should look for? I also recently spotted a "one size fits all" kind of charger in a local store, has anyone tried such a thing?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2013 13:57
|
|
|
nielsm posted:I seem to have lost the charger for my D40, and while I've been considering getting a newer/less poo poo Nikon DSLR for a while now it's probably not happening right away. I got a 3rd party charger from Gadget Infinity and I've had no problems with it, for all of ten bucks.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2013 23:47
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:I got a 3rd party charger from Gadget Infinity and I've had no problems with it, for all of ten bucks. Ive also bought plenty of aftermarket nikon chargers. Power 2000 makes good ones.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 00:57
|
|
|
Musket posted:Ive also bought plenty of aftermarket nikon chargers. Power 2000 makes good ones. Mine said "Kingma" and had a tiny sorta Norse looking viking dude on it, so if you want viking power, order from gadgetinfinity I guess. (Bear in mind mine is charger for EN-EL3e, I don't know what the Christ D40s use, but I'm sure they have a charger for it.)
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 03:27
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:Mine said "Kingma" and had a tiny sorta Norse looking viking dude on it, so if you want viking power, order from gadgetinfinity I guess. If Krock had his way the D40 would have been teh last dslr ever made and would have been powered by god himself (with matching 18-200 and SB400, the ultimate kit).
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 15:19
|
|
|
My wife has a Nikon D3000 we bought about 2 years ago, and now my wife wants to advance in her photography, which means another lens is needed. What is a good lens for taking pictures of people at distances further than the stock lens will take? I would be comfortable with spending about $250.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 11:15
|
|
|
For $250? Samyang’s† 85 mm f/1.4. No autofocus, but you’re not going to do better on that budget. †I don’t know about that lens in particular, but Samyang’s products are sold under a ridiculous number of brands, including Vivitar, Falcon, Rokinon, Walimex, Bower, Pro‐Optic, and Opteka.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 11:29
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:For $250? Samyang’s† 85 mm f/1.4. No autofocus, but you’re not going to do better on that budget. 85mm is the stock lens that came with the camera. I'm thinking something that goes up to 200mm?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 12:32
|
|
|
Protons posted:85mm is the stock lens that came with the camera. I'm thinking something that goes up to 200mm? Nothing autofocus at that price (that's any good at least). The closest you are gonna come to is the 180mm f/2.8 AIS or 80-200mm f/4 AIS, both of which I have heard good things about. I would also consider a 105mm f/2.5 because it's a legendary portraitmaker, can be had for under $200 and you don't need 200mm to photograph people.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 13:22
|
|
|
The 55-200 is cheap enough, and if kit quality is fine, it'd get you the range you want.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 13:51
|
|
|
The need for this lens comes from my wife attending a graduation ceremony for her friends. She was seated in the middle of the auditorium and her stock lens couldn't focus on her friends that far away. The pictures turned out blurry and unfocused. What sort of lens should we get for taking pictures of people or things at slightly over average to medium ranges?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 13:56
|
|
|
Blurry is a question of technique, not equipment.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 14:11
|
|
|
Protons posted:The need for this lens comes from my wife attending a graduation ceremony for her friends. She was seated in the middle of the auditorium and her stock lens couldn't focus on her friends that far away. The pictures turned out blurry and unfocused. What sort of lens should we get for taking pictures of people or things at slightly over average to medium ranges? Depending on how well-lit auditoriums you expect to be shooting in, a regular kit-level zoom around 50-200mm range should be fine then. You shouldn't need any longer than 200mm for that use, at least. I also would wary of using a prime for that, since you may want to switch between close-ups of individuals and larger sections of the stage. You should be able to find a 50-200, 55-200, 50-250 or such within your price range, perhaps used. With kit zooms like that, you will typically get f/5.6 at the long end of the range, meaning you will need rather good ISO performance in poorly lit auditoriums. I'm not sure if D3000 is that well suited for low light.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 14:12
|
|
|
The 55-200 VR is probably the only thing in your price range that's new and has autofocus. It will suck indoors, but you pretty much have to start spending thousands of dollars before you will be able to get a long lens that performs well indoors. Old, used manual focus lenses are cheaper, but on the D3000 you would have to meter manually as well. That's fine if you like challenging yourself and learning things, but really sucks if you just want some photos of your friends.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 19:53
|
|
|
Is the D3000 a lovely camera or something?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 19:57
|
|
|
It can't drive the manual focus lenses very well, for that you have go to up to the D7000 or D7100, and you're looking at over $1000 to move into that. No offense to your wife, but I'm guessing she's shooting in Auto mode?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 19:59
|
|
|
Protons posted:Is the D3000 a lovely camera or something? It's just an older consumer-grade camera. It doesn't have the electronics necessary to meter or drive the autofocus of pre-digital, older lenses.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 20:06
|
|
|
Protons posted:Is the D3000 a lovely camera or something?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 20:43
|
|
|
FISHMANPET posted:It can't drive the manual focus lenses very well, for that you have go to up to the D7000 or D7100, and you're looking at over $1000 to move into that. No. I made drat sure that if I was doing to drop $500 on a camera then she wasn't going to use point and shoot auto mode. I don't think she has a problem with manual focus, and might even prefer it.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 22:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 00:42 |
|
|
Protons posted:No. I made drat sure that if I was doing to drop $500 on a camera then she wasn't going to use point and shoot auto mode. I don't think she has a problem with manual focus, and might even prefer it. Manual focus is not very fun with the small viewfinders of low-end models. It's doable when you have time to set up the shot, but it's not fun at all if you're shooting people.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 22:18
|
|