|
evil_bunnY posted:You can get plenty of OOF areas with a Crop sensor and a fast 50. Yeah, for sure. I posted this in the Canon thread so SoundMonkey might probate me if I post it a third time.. but I LIKE IT. Nifty 50 1.8 wide open with a 450D (XSi apparently to you American folk). 
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 00:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 21:29 |
|
|
Tony Montana posted:Yeah, for sure. lol if you think i'd either make or enforce a rule that involved me having to count how many threads an image was posted in
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 00:55
|
|
|
70D , 50 1.4 @ F2 - You definitely don't need a 200mm f/2
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 00:57
|
|
|
timrenzi574 posted:70D , 50 1.4 @ F2 - You definitely don't need a 200mm f/2 Yep. I was going to say, my Nikon D3200 with the 50mm f/1.4 lens produces beautiful bokeh on portraits, usually around f/2 as well. I know that full frame and medium/large format can produce way better, but you can totally get good bokeh on portraits for not too much.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 01:13
|
|
|
Tony Montana posted:Yeah, for sure. timrenzi574 posted:70D , 50 1.4 @ F2 - You definitely don't need a 200mm f/2 ok so both of these are tiny subjects framed closely I was saying if you want the hot hot delicious bokeh on a full length portrait (of an adult) you want the 200 f/2. You can certainly make do with a crop sensor and your platform's 2.8 zoom or a 50mm or even the 35mm to get some oof backgrounds but it's not gonna give you super amazing bokeh. My favorite bokeh is adapted lenses on crop mirrorless bodies, if I were buying my camera poo poo today I'd get a fuji and a t/s adapter for nikon.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 01:42
|
|
|
I realize there's probably a mirrorless thread but I follow this thread so I'm going to ask here. My 20 month old broke my really old point and shoot that I use for work. Real Estate Appraisal, so I shoot exterior and interior pictures of houses. I'm torn between buying a rugged point and shoot just for ease of use at work. Or do I buy a mirrorless camera? We currently have a canon xsi and sigma 30 1.4. It would be nice to be able to have an autofocus which could keep up with a toddler yet still be lighter and easier to fit into a stuffed full diaper bag. Things I need for work. Wide Angle. Flash (for shooting in attic's) Things I want for personal use. Something fast enough to follow a toddler and as good or better as our current DSLR setup. (canon xsi + sigma 30mm 1.4) Hdip fucked around with this message at 03:08 on Jul 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 02:10
|
|
|
What is your current DSLR setup? And yeah, mirrorless thread is over here
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 02:15
|
|
|
Dren posted:ok so both of these are tiny subjects framed closely Yeah - that was very close and uncropped. This one is less tightly framed (cropped from bottom right maybe 1/3 of the frame) @ 85mm f/2.8 , and the rock wall and plants in the far back (30ft away or so) are just mush. I guess if you have a space constrained environment and 7 grand to burn, the 200/2 would be perfect, but I have to settle for a more plebian lifestyle  
timrenzi574 fucked around with this message at 04:41 on Jul 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 04:30
|
|
|
Took the thread's kit lens advice into account, did a bunch more research. Gave serious thought to m43 cameras, but decided that I could live with the DSLR I've mentioned since it's still pretty small and has better lens options. Plan A shifted to "get a D5100 body used ($342 keh) and an 18-55mm kit lens new ($119 VR, $197 VR I, both B&H)," but that price total is $461-$539. I would not be able to afford a VR II kit lens on that budget, but I think I could make do with the old VR model (which I've used before on my friend's D3100). Plan B is to get a D3200 on Amazon for $479 new which comes with the old VR kit lens. I'm not inclined towards the higher MP count (and the resulting processing slowdown) or the fancy wifi stuff, but it seems like a more direct analogue to what I've shot with before, it's $60 cheaper than getting a used D5100 with the same lens, and it's a new body (with the 1-yr warranty) that will supposedly hold value better than the D5100. Main drawback I've read relative to the D5100 is that the latter has slightly superior low-light functionality. My question is this, since I'm not experienced enough with deeper functionality on a DSLR to automatically pick the D5100 - is there any reason not to get the D3200 and put the money I'd be saving towards a better lens than the VR? I'm leery about getting a used body and paying more for the same lens or less for an inferior one when the D3200 seems like a safer financial investment.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 07:12
|
|
|
Somebody is probably selling a vr2 on your local Craigslist for $100 right now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 08:31
|
|
|
28mm, f7.1. Look at that nice out of focus area. poo poo by TomOlson, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 16:07
|
|
|
zgrowler2 posted:Took the thread's kit lens advice into account, did a bunch more research. Gave serious thought to m43 cameras, but decided that I could live with the DSLR I've mentioned since it's still pretty small and has better lens options. Plan A shifted to "get a D5100 body used ($342 keh) and an 18-55mm kit lens new ($119 VR, $197 VR I, both B&H)," but that price total is $461-$539. I would not be able to afford a VR II kit lens on that budget, but I think I could make do with the old VR model (which I've used before on my friend's D3100). I would also look at Pentax, though I am a fanboy. The K-30 pretty much sits at the price range your looking for and offers more features than the D5100 including weathersealing and built in shake-reduction. Hell you could get one in blue if you wanted: https://www.keh.com/363522/pentax-digital-pentax-k-30-crystal-blue-with-18-55mm-f-3-5-5-6-da-al-wr-52-digital-camera-16-3-m-p Plus the 18-55 WR completes the weather sealing and is a pretty drat good kit lens.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 16:19
|
|
|
If you dont buy full frame, you a scrub. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 16:59
|
|
|
zgrowler2 posted:Plan B is to get a D3200 on Amazon for $479 new which comes with the old VR kit lens. I'm not inclined towards the higher MP count (and the resulting processing slowdown) or the fancy wifi stuff, but it seems like a more direct analogue to what I've shot with before, it's $60 cheaper than getting a used D5100 with the same lens, and it's a new body (with the 1-yr warranty) that will supposedly hold value better than the D5100. Main drawback I've read relative to the D5100 is that the latter has slightly superior low-light functionality. Plan B sounds like the best deal for you. And even though it has an "old" VR lens, and doesn't have the low light capability of other DSLRs, if you are coming from cell phones and point-n-shoots, an entry level DSLR with a kit lens will be orders of magnitude better and it will take years for you to start feeling limited by what that camera offers. And don't worry about the body holding value. That is the part that wears out and becomes obsolete the fastest. You want to agonize more over lenses, because those are the parts you can keep using for many years as you upgrade the bodies.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 21:27
|
|
|
RangerScum posted:
But enough about your posting.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 22:47
|
|
|
Local Craigslist has a D5100 with 18-55mm VR lens, strap, and bag for $425. I checked on that this morning and haven't received a response yet (the ad is about a month old, so I'm not too optimistic). If it's available, I'll take it, but if not, the 3300 is increasingly enticing since the D5100 is the only listing in-state for any of the Nikon models I'm looking at. A good friend of mine who does professional work is pushing the D5100 as more upgrade-proof, which I can understand, but it's like you said - it'll take me quite a while to exhaust the features on the D3300. Hell, I barely clicked away from Auto ISO when I used the D3100. I've got a ways to go. I looked at Pentax equivalents briefly this morning. While I do appreciate the weather-sealing and in-body stabilization, Nikon seems more user-friendly and accommodating with lenses. If I knew anyone local who'd let me try out a Pentax, I'd be interested in the opportunity, but I don't see myself buying one at this point. Thanks again to everyone for the advice. Y'all are super helpful. e: on Pentax, the idea of shooting in the rain uninhibited has some deep appeal to it, especially since we have a bunch of areas around the county that look pretty jaw-dropping in heavy rain, but I wouldn't wanna make an all-around purchasing decision based on one niche case. zgrowler2 fucked around with this message at 23:05 on Jul 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 22:58
|
|
|
pretty sure the 3200, 3300, 5200, and 5300 all have the newer sensor and you're probably going to want that so don't buy a 3100 or 5100
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 23:20
|
|
|
Yah, nothing is upgrade proof, and the D5100 has already been superseded. By the time you reach the limits of what you can do with something like the D3300 (which could possibly never happen) the D5100 will probably be painfully old. And if you never really left the auto modes of the DSLR your borrowed for a short time, you haven't even scratched the surface.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 23:30
|
|
|
As an update, Craigslist offer on the D5100 fell through. After lots of painstaking research on the D3200 and some inherent issues with the model, I decided to take a hard left and go with a refurbished Pentax K-30 w/ accompanying 18-55mm lens ($450, both pieces weather and dust-resistant, $30 for a 3-year warranty). Beats both the D3200 and the T3i by the numbers in image quality and most other areas that aren't video (I don't care much about video), plus legacy lens access is a cheaper and more accessible perk than a plethora of upgrade options.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2014 16:48
|
|
|
Welcome to Pentax. You've just fallen for the usual post-hoc rationalizations that most new-Pentax-DSLR owners use - weathersealing, legacy glass, pretty, pretty numbers. Don't forget to talk about the dual control wheels and practice waving your hand dismissively every time somebody says "full frame". Now shoot pictures. Lots and lots of pictures.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2014 16:52
|
|
|
Also, TAv mode and 2 user-defined modes.  (Yeah, I know that Canon and Nikon have custom modes on their dials.) Rotten Cookies fucked around with this message at 19:30 on Jul 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2014 19:21
|
|
|
hail satan, etc. Camera should hopefully be here by Saturday.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2014 20:14
|
|
|
Currys / PC World have sent me a letter offering me the 5 year knowhow insurance on the D3200 I bought a few weeks back. It's £60 for 5 years, which seems like a pretty astonishingly good deal. Doesn't insure against fire, theft or weather damage, but it does insure against non-negligent accidents and any repairs. Seem like a good deal? Anyone have any experience with them? Ordinarily I wouldn't go with C/PCW but the camera was on clearance for £240.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 13:10
|
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:Currys / PC World have sent me a letter offering me the 5 year knowhow insurance on the D3200 I bought a few weeks back. It's £60 for 5 years, which seems like a pretty astonishingly good deal. Doesn't insure against fire, theft or weather damage, but it does insure against non-negligent accidents and any repairs. non-negligent accidents? so like, a car wreck? I have to assume that "crap I dropped my camera" falls under negligent accidents, and thus not covered. Usually those types of extended warranties are a license to steal, but I'm not sure if UK consumer protection laws help that some.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 13:30
|
|
|
timrenzi574 posted:non-negligent accidents? so like, a car wreck? I have to assume that "crap I dropped my camera" falls under negligent accidents, and thus not covered. Usually those types of extended warranties are a license to steal, but I'm not sure if UK consumer protection laws help that some. The clause in question says they won't cover "repair of the product which has been neglected, abused, misused or damaged intentionally. You must take reasonable care of the product." It specifies on the front of the policy the benefits are "unlimited free repairs including parts and labour, protection from technical faults, protection from mishaps, speedy repairs, no fault no charge, free replacement if it can't be fixed in 14 days." Mostly I'm worried about a repeat of what happened with my Minolta 5d where it stopped working from a manufacturing fault. tldr: my reading is that it covers 'mishaps' that are not due to 'neglect, abuse, misuse or intentional damage.' Bobby Deluxe fucked around with this message at 13:53 on Jul 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 13:50
|
|
|
Seems like you'd be betting £60 on "My camera will suffer from a problem that is covered under this slightly vague descriptive list". If you win that bet, you get a £240 camera replaced or repaired for £60; if you lose that bet you either get a £240 camera that just keeps working (because no "mishaps" happened in 5 years) or you have a £240 shelf decoration. That's a quarter of the The big risks to a camera, as far as I can tell, are things covered by tenant's or home insurance (theft, fire) or not covered by any insurance ever (being a dumbass). None of those things are covered by this policy. You might, if something happened, be able to argue that the camera should not have been rendered non-functional by whatever apparently minor thing happened, but is spending hours and hours on the phone with some insurance company minion worth £180 to you? Put another way, do you want to spend £300 on a £240 camera?
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 16:57
|
|
|
Where do these knockoff lenses come from? http://www.ebay.ca/itm/85mm-Portrai...=item4622ef1d7f I mean, for that price I can only assume it's a knockoff. But do they even work? Wouldn't it be a lot of effort to make a fake Canon lens?
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 17:00
|
|
|
Same place all knock-offs come from. China.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 17:25
|
|
|
triplexpac posted:Where do these knockoff lenses come from? They're not knockoffs of anything, they're never branded as actual Nikon or Canon lenses. They seem to be mostly sold under the Opteka or Vivitar name. They're just cheap, Chinese made portrait lenses likely made with an optical design from an older 85mm lens from another manufacturer with an expired patent.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 17:27
|
|
|
triplexpac posted:Where do these knockoff lenses come from? Cant be any worse than a Bowyer.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 17:39
|
|
|
Also it's manual focus, if that matters.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 17:39
|
|
|
quote:85mm f/1.8 manual focus, digitally-optimized fisheye lens with Canon mount "for Canon" does not mean "Canon". It means "Third party". Quality of third-party lenses ranges from very good (Sigma, Tamron) to hilariously bad (Phoenix, modern Vivitar). I don't know about that particular lens or manufacturer, but that's a pretty picture of some horses.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 17:52
|
|
|
i'm interested in getting a 70-300 mm lens for my nikon d3200. can anyone recommend me a lens? cheap but still good. i'm hoping to keep the budget under $200-250 if possible
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 23:12
|
|
|
im an orange posted:i'm interested in getting a 70-300 mm lens for my nikon d3200. can anyone recommend me a lens? cheap but still good. i'm hoping to keep the budget under $200-250 if possible That price range would seem to fit a used Tamron 70-300mm VC USD. Not sure about Nikon's offerings in that range though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 23:58
|
|
|
im an orange posted:i'm interested in getting a 70-300 mm lens for my nikon d3200. can anyone recommend me a lens? cheap but still good. i'm hoping to keep the budget under $200-250 if possible
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2014 00:01
|
|
|
theloafingone posted:That price range would seem to fit a used Tamron 70-300mm VC USD. Not sure about Nikon's offerings in that range though. The 70-300 VR (the Nikon one) is middlin and costs way too loving much for what it does. Go with the Tamron VC used.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2014 00:01
|
|
|
As an update, very pleased with the Pentax K-30. took it out for a few test shoots around town and the kit lens does real well. Bought a Vivitar Series 1 v3 70-210mm to accompany it and that lens is gorgeous. Heavy, imperfect, but gorgeous. There's something about manual focus that resonates with me. Gonna try to get a Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4 at some point before the year's up, maybe a 200mm f/4 if I can stretch my budget. Think I'll be set for a while at that point. Question - I keep seeing things about reverse adapters for macro. Are those usable with zoom lenses or primes only? I don't think I'd need or want one unless I get into really detailed macro (210mm at min range of 0.8m on the Vivitar is good for most things that aren't super close-ups), but I'm curious as to what all can be used with them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 23:58
|
|
|
zgrowler2 posted:As an update, very pleased with the Pentax K-30. took it out for a few test shoots around town and the kit lens does real well. Bought a Vivitar Series 1 v3 70-210mm to accompany it and that lens is gorgeous. Heavy, imperfect, but gorgeous. There's something about manual focus that resonates with me. I guess there's no reason you COULDN'T use a zoom, but most people used relatively short primes (fiddys, 28s, etc). It can be cool for like REALLY TINY stuff, but the working distance is hilariously small, as is the DoF. It's certainly worth blowing $10 on a reversing ring and giving it a shot, but don't count on it being your breakthrough into the world of macro.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2014 00:32
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:I guess there's no reason you COULDN'T use a zoom, but most people used relatively short primes (fiddys, 28s, etc). It can be cool for like REALLY TINY stuff, but the working distance is hilariously small, as is the DoF. It's certainly worth blowing $10 on a reversing ring and giving it a shot, but don't count on it being your breakthrough into the world of macro. Sounds neat, thanks. I wasn't expecting fantastic results by any means, but I may give it a shot sometime.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2014 01:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 21:29 |
|
|
zgrowler2 posted:Question - I keep seeing things about reverse adapters for macro. Are those usable with zoom lenses or primes only? I don't think I'd need or want one unless I get into really detailed macro (210mm at min range of 0.8m on the Vivitar is good for most things that aren't super close-ups), but I'm curious as to what all can be used with them. A DCR-250 or other decent quality diopter thing might work really well with that 70-210 for pretty serious macro stuff. I tried one on my basic Canon 70-300 and it basically became a ~0.3x-1.5x adjustable macro lens with pretty good working distance and subjectively 75% the image quality of my 100mm L macro lens. Got the DCR from a goon for $60, and you should be able to find it for around that price pretty easily. I think a couple goons with very prolific insect photos in the macro thread use this or similar on basic lenses.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 23:41
|
|
