|
Solaron posted:I have a D3200 with the 18-55 lens. My daughter dropped the camera and now it only sometimes focuses. Is there something I can do to find out whether it's the lens or the camera that's screwed up? I don't know a lot about this and need to learn more. :\ I'll bet if you go to a camera shop and ask them to mount a known working lens on your camera, they would be happy to do so. If it focuses fine, you know it's your lens that's broken.
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2014 21:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 18:06 |
|
|
Bonus: breaking the 18-55 kit lens is difficult to describe as a "bad thing" (assuming that buying another lens isn't going to break your wallet)
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2014 22:14
|
|
|
Kenshin posted:Bonus: breaking the 18-55 kit lens is difficult to describe as a "bad thing" (assuming that buying another lens isn't going to break your wallet) It won't break my wallet, I was just concerned that the entire camera was screwed. The local camera repair shop here in Cinci (the one close to me, at least) closed last month but I found another 30 minutes away so I'll head there and see if they'll mount a working lens and test it for me. I'm very new to photography so I don't know the pros and cons of the different lenses. Should I go for another one of the same if this one is truly dead, or is there another I should look at? Looks like this replacement is ~$200.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2014 23:35
|
|
|
Solaron posted:It won't break my wallet, I was just concerned that the entire camera was screwed. The local camera repair shop here in Cinci (the one close to me, at least) closed last month but I found another 30 minutes away so I'll head there and see if they'll mount a working lens and test it for me. If you can spend a little more, the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 is a good upgrade. this one on Amazon. Maybe not from that specific retailer, but that lens.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 00:33
|
|
|
I am after lens recommendations, and I don't really know anything about what's available for Nikon. I have a F-801s/N8008s film body, and I'm looking for decent lenses that are compatible with its AF and preferably also its metering - I have a slew of film bodies that are fully manual and I want one where I can pick it up and not have to worry about that stuff. As far as I can tell this means AF and AF-D lenses but not AF-I or AF-S. AI and AI-s won't matrix meter, but I can live with that. VR won't break anything but won't work, G apparently has some issues with this body. Currently I have a Nikkor 35-70/2.8 and a Sigma 100/2.8 Macro. Also have a Nikon 1.6x teleconverter. I love the Sigma 100mm but sometimes it is just a bit too long. Mainly I take pictures of my friends out climbing or getting drunk or both, and sometimes I take landscapes. I'm thinking 28mm, 35mm, 50mm fast prime sort of area would go nicely with what I already have. Any classic lenses or great deals on decent older glass out there? Third party is fine.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 01:32
|
|
|
big scary monsters posted:I am after lens recommendations, and I don't really know anything about what's available for Nikon. I have a F-801s/N8008s film body, and I'm looking for decent lenses that are compatible with its AF and preferably also its metering - I have a slew of film bodies that are fully manual and I want one where I can pick it up and not have to worry about that stuff. As far as I can tell this means AF and AF-D lenses but not AF-I or AF-S. AI and AI-s won't matrix meter, but I can live with that. VR won't break anything but won't work, G apparently has some issues with this body. I think a nifty 50 AF will work with that camera and is only a hundred or so new.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 02:51
|
|
|
That nifty 50 Should work, it's an AF-D lens. For the 35, your option is basically the 35mm f2. It's also AF-D.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 06:22
|
|
|
I was looking to get into Sports/Wildlife a bit more and am torn between two cameras. I wanted a crop body for the reach, but I'm stuck between the D300S (bigger buffer, higher fps, stronger build) and the D7100 (better AF, higher res). Either way, I'm looking to buy used. Any reason you guys know of that I should get one versus the other?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 06:26
|
|
|
Solaron posted:It won't break my wallet, I was just concerned that the entire camera was screwed. The local camera repair shop here in Cinci (the one close to me, at least) closed last month but I found another 30 minutes away so I'll head there and see if they'll mount a working lens and test it for me. The Tamron recommended above is a great option if you're wanting another all-around zoom lens. If you find that you don't really need the ability to zoom you can get a prime (either the 35mm f/1.8 or the 50 f/1.8). Personally I love primes and don't mind "zooming with my feet".
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 06:47
|
|
|
GunForumMeme posted:I was looking to get into Sports/Wildlife a bit more and am torn between two cameras. I wanted a crop body for the reach, but I'm stuck between the D300S (bigger buffer, higher fps, stronger build) and the D7100 (better AF, higher res). Either way, I'm looking to buy used. Any reason you guys know of that I should get one versus the other? If you're going to get into bird photography, the higher resolution and better AF of the D7100 will be worth it.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 07:57
|
|
|
Moon Potato posted:If you're going to get into bird photography, the higher resolution and better AF of the D7100 will be worth it. Mostly would be for sports. What wildlife I would shoot would be larger animals. I don't have the patience for birding.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 13:58
|
|
|
Kenshin posted:The Tamron recommended above is a great option if you're wanting another all-around zoom lens. Is there a good resource online to help me learn why I would want one over the other? I don't know that I really used the zoom a whole lot. As long as I can have a high resolution picture that I can crop or expand a little for printing and stuff, I'm happy at this stage of experience. I can afford the Tamron, but I don't know if I really need it, honestly.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 14:29
|
|
|
Solaron posted:I'm very new to photography so I don't know the pros and cons of the different lenses. Should I go for another one of the same if this one is truly dead, or is there another I should look at? Looks like this replacement is ~$200.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 14:35
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:You first want to make sure your lens is actually the issue. Then buy another kit lens second hand for like $100. A 35/1.8G DX is also a good option if you want a prime. Evidently all of the local camera stores closed - Ritz and Cord camera both closed all of their Cincinnati stores in the last 3 months. There's a newish store near Dayton I'll head to and have them verify it's my lens, and then I'll try and decide from there which lens to go with. Thanks for the help, guys.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 14:52
|
|
|
Places like bestbuy will also have lenses available to try.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 15:16
|
|
|
Wild EEPROM posted:Places like bestbuy will also have lenses available to try. I highly doubt you can walk into a best buy and try a 24-70 nanocoated. I would rent a lens and actually use it real world, for what you shoot, from one of the handful of lens rental companies online. IIRC one of our own, works for one. Shooting tvs and moms/dads with strollers in a bestbuy is not a good test.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 15:18
|
|
|
Jesus christ he just needs a lens to test. Renting one would cost 25% of what his body's worth.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 15:37
|
|
|
Wild EEPROM posted:Places like bestbuy will also have lenses available to try. Places like Best Buy are only going to have kit superzooms or other non-pro and yet expensive MSRP lenses.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 16:16
|
|
|
1st AD posted:Places like Best Buy are only going to have kit superzooms or other non-pro and yet expensive MSRP lenses. Doesn't he just need a lens to try just to make sure his body isn't broken? That would be perfect for Best Buy,
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 16:20
|
|
|
Wont be shocked if best buy tells him to gently caress off. They have made it pretty known they are sick of window shoppers. They would assume hes just looking to go buy it on his smart phone via amazon. Then again, thats assuming the wageslave undergrade/drop out gives a gently caress.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 16:22
|
|
|
There's no way some dude at Best Buy is going to let him try a lens. Solaron: once you've verified that it is the lens that is broken and not the camera body, then you can decide on your lens. Honestly if you didn't use the zooming much you'd probably do just fine with the 35mm f/1.8G lens, which can be had for <$200. You'll be able to get beautiful, sharp photos out of it (certainly better and sharper than the kit zoom lens you've been using!). A few tips to start out: * While the lens works fine at f/1.8 it will give the sharpest images a little bit above that, f/2 and up. You'll mostly be changing the aperture based on how much available light there is and how shallow you want your depth of field to be. * Auto-ISO with minimum shutter speed is your friend as a newbie. Set a reasonable max ISO (3200 is probably good), set your default ISO to 100 and a nice fast shutter speed (at least 1/100sec) so that you're just adjusting the aperture (in aperture-priority mode) and you'll be off to a great start to experiment with. The Prime lens has very fast autofocus and those wide-open apertures give it great light-gathering capacity. You'll be pretty surprised how much better it is in low-light than the zoom. Now of course you'll lose the ability to change your field of view, but it really isn't that much of a loss. I found that working with primes all of the time as a new photographer helped make me think about how I was framing things since I couldn't change my field of view by zooming.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 16:40
|
|
|
Great stuff, thank you! I'll see if I can find a place to let me try a working lens to know if that's my only issue and then I do think I'll go with a Prime. I've read a few other places online that echo the sentiment that that will also force me to think more about my shots, and I didn't really ever use the zoom - or, if I did, it wasn't necessary. I have so much to learn.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 17:15
|
|
|
Musket posted:Wont be shocked if best buy tells him to gently caress off. They have made it pretty known they are sick of window shoppers. They would assume hes just looking to go buy it on his smart phone via amazon. Then again, thats assuming the wageslave undergrade/drop out gives a gently caress. The company might care, but the wage slaves don't give a single gently caress. None whatsoever. Worst case scenario:  I want to try out this lens before I buy it. Here you go It isn't what I want, byePretty sure bestbuy price matches too, and they should have the 35 1.8 as well.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 18:20
|
|
|
What does the "G" signify on these lenses? I'm looking at fixed focal length lenses on KEH and it seems like there's a lot of 28 and 35mm lenses, with a huge range of prices, and I'm getting lost trying to differentiate them. Like, everyone here has been praising the 35 f1.8 "G", which costs around $250 or so used, but there's also a 35 f1.4 G that costs $1600 (!), and a 35 F2 that costs $250 (but it lacks the G), and a 35 F2 "D" that costs $265. Actually is there just a simple guide somewhere that explains what Nikon's various letters and codes really mean? For reference I have a D3200 frame with the same 18-55VR kit lens as Solaron and after taking a couple thousand shots through it I'm... not super happy with it, although I'm not convinced that it's the lens that's holding me back (as opposed to mostly shooting in automatic modes). I would like to get a fixed ~35mm, but also at some point pick up a better zoom lens. My camera also came with a 55-200 VR lens which seems like it's way better, but I haven't been using it nearly as much. Eventually I also want a decent macro lens, but my budget is pretty limited right now so I'm thinking about just starting with a 35 and seeing what I can do with it.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 18:47
|
|
|
https://support.nikonusa.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/9919/~/glossary-of-nikkor-lens-terms
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 18:49
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:What does the "G" signify on these lenses? I'm looking at fixed focal length lenses on KEH and it seems like there's a lot of 28 and 35mm lenses, with a huge range of prices, and I'm getting lost trying to differentiate them. Like, everyone here has been praising the 35 f1.8 "G", which costs around $250 or so used, but there's also a 35 f1.4 G that costs $1600 (!), and a 35 F2 that costs $250 (but it lacks the G), and a 35 F2 "D" that costs $265. See my advice above, and for that camera (I have the same one) you want the 35 f/1.8G. Start shooting in aperture priority mode instead of the automatic modes, and with the prime lens you're going to suddenly be getting MUCH sharper images. It will also help greatly if you have Lightroom (or another RAW editor) and you're shooting in RAW. JPEG is less/no post-processing work, but with RAW you have a lot more flexibility and can fix lighting issues. I have several various lenses and the only time I ever use the 18-55mm kit lens is when I need to use it at or near 18mm since I don't currently have a good wide-angle lens. It's just not that great of a lens.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 18:57
|
|
|
The G means it doesn't have the aperture ring. Which means that if you have an old film camera, you can't adjust the aperture. The 35mm lenses you are talking about: 35mm f/1.4G: You don't want this one. It's good but as mentioned it's $1600. It's a full frame lens. 35mm f/1.8G DX: You want this one. 35mm f/1.8G FX: You don't want this one. There is no point in buying this one for a DX camera. 35mm f/2 AF-D: You don't want this one. It won't autofocus on your D3200 (since the lens doesn't have an autofocus motor and the body doesn't have the screw autofocus) 35mm f/2 AF: Same as the AF-D version. Don't buy this one. With your D3200, you want AF-S "G" lenses. If it doesn't have a motor inside, it won't autofocus.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 19:12
|
|
|
The G means Gimped. Lacks aperture ring, wont work on old rear end Nikon bodies. Somewhere is a krock chart.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 19:13
|
|
|
vote_no posted:https://support.nikonusa.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/9919/~/glossary-of-nikkor-lens-terms Perfect thanks! Kenshin posted:See my advice above, and for that camera (I have the same one) you want the 35 f/1.8G. Start shooting in aperture priority mode instead of the automatic modes, and with the prime lens you're going to suddenly be getting MUCH sharper images. It will also help greatly if you have Lightroom (or another RAW editor) and you're shooting in RAW. JPEG is less/no post-processing work, but with RAW you have a lot more flexibility and can fix lighting issues. I am shooting in RAW. I have been using the "ViewNX 2" software that came with the camera to convert to JPEG (as well as mess around with applying/not applying the camera's automatic color adjustments and whatnot). I have access to Photoshop CS5 on my work laptop, but it's a work license so it could go away and I can't put it on my main computer, and I hate editing photos on a laptop, so I only do that when I've got the laptop hooked up to one of my big monitors. Would you recommend Lightroom for a beginner? I'm already pretty familiar with using photoshop (although the version I'm most proficient with is PS7), but there's no way I'm paying for it (especially not on a loving subscription basis, gently caress you Adobe). Musket posted:The G means Gimped. Lacks aperture ring, wont work on old rear end Nikon bodies. Somewhere is a krock chart. Hah! Well that's fine, I will never own an old rear end Nikon body. As long as the actual optics aren't gimped, I don't care about that backward compatibility. On the other hand, I am OK with manual focus. I don't take a ton of action shots - I'm more about landscape, portraiture, and macro. I'd be OK with just owning my one autofocus 55-200 and then manually focusing everything else forever. At least, right now I think I'd be OK with it. Given that... Wild EEPROM posted:With your D3200, you want AF-S "G" lenses. If it doesn't have a motor inside, it won't autofocus. Does this recommendation change at all?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 19:23
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Would you recommend Lightroom for a beginner? I'm already pretty familiar with using photoshop (although the version I'm most proficient with is PS7), but there's no way I'm paying for it (especially not on a loving subscription basis, gently caress you Adobe). Keep in mind it is more than just a photo editor, it's also for organizing and has plugins for Flickr, Smugmug, etc.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 19:26
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:On the other hand, I am OK with manual focus. I don't take a ton of action shots - I'm more about landscape, portraiture, and macro. I'd be OK with just owning my one autofocus 55-200 and then manually focusing everything else forever. At least, right now I think I'd be OK with it. The viewfinder in the D3200 (and the D3100, my camera) is pretty small. Manual focus on these is harder because of that. You can get a replacement focus screen for it, and supposedly it's not too difficult to install, but it's also $150. I tried a manual focus 50mm and couldn't consistently get sharp images.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 21:07
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:On the other hand, I am OK with manual focus. I don't take a ton of action shots - I'm more about landscape, portraiture, and macro. I'd be OK with just owning my one autofocus 55-200 and then manually focusing everything else forever. At least, right now I think I'd be OK with it. Do be aware that D3200 and other lower-end cameras also can't meter with any non-CPU lenses (look for a row of electric contacts in the mount), which means that almost every non-AF Nikkor lens will only work in full manual exposure mode. The screw-drive AF/AF-D lenses will still meter, but the focusing ring may not be well weighted and uncomfortable for MF use. Modern manual focus lenses such as those made by Samyang should be fine though, they do come with CPU contacts for metering/auto-exposure.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 21:29
|
|
|
Musket posted:The G means Gimped. Lacks aperture ring, wont work on old rear end Nikon bodies. Somewhere is a krock chart. He calls it gelded 
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 21:55
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Does this recommendation change at all?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 22:00
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:No. Just get the 35/1.8 DX if you want a prime. Do not get get a manual focus lens. Okiedokie. Thanks for all the help.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2014 00:27
|
|
|
GunForumMeme posted:I was looking to get into Sports/Wildlife a bit more and am torn between two cameras. I wanted a crop body for the reach, but I'm stuck between the D300S (bigger buffer, higher fps, stronger build) and the D7100 (better AF, higher res). Either way, I'm looking to buy used. Any reason you guys know of that I should get one versus the other? I've shot with the D300s and the D7000. The D300s was great but anything past 800 ISO was unusable (which, as a side effect, made me learn to use flash). The D7000 was excellent, and the D7100 is pretty much a direct upgrade.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2014 01:35
|
|
|
Is it worth it to upgrade from my d90 to the d7000? The 7000 is about 600 dollars, and the high ISO performance and af zones should be an improvement. I mostly shoot street at night and general touristy poo poo.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2014 04:20
|
|
|
Wild EEPROM posted:Is it worth it to upgrade from my d90 to the d7000? The 7000 is about 600 dollars, and the high ISO performance and af zones should be an improvement. Yep.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2014 05:09
|
|
|
Wild EEPROM posted:Is it worth it to upgrade from my d90 to the d7000? The 7000 is about 600 dollars, and the high ISO performance and af zones should be an improvement. The d7000 is far superior to the d90, especially in terms of high ISO quality. More than worth the money
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2014 05:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 18:06 |
|
|
The main thing I'm worried about with the D7000 over my D90 is that the D7200 may come out soon and the D7100 will drop in price to D7000 levels very quickly. Current D7000 prices here work out to about $650 USD (4500hkd or so), and D7100 prices work out to about $1000 USD (7000hkd) Of course I know that buying in HK means no warranty (since I don't live here).
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2014 15:31
|
|