|
Hmm okay thanks for that, yeah I've only been handling small(ish) payments from clients so far which may not have been marked as products/services, possibly why the funds have been available immediately. Going to see if I can brave Paypal customer support and get some firmer details. Thanks for the heads up!
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 22:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 12:16 |
|
|
Costello Jello posted:Okay, well that hasn't been my experience for business transactions using paypal. Maybe it's faster if you mark as a gift or something like that, but that leaves the buyer with little protection so you'd probably have a hard time convincing someone to mark it like that. BTW asking for things to be marked as a gift is both a really terrible idea and will cause bad things to happen to your account in both the gear selling thread and in SA-Mart.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 22:31
|
|
|
Quick question: I'm coming from a Pentax (picked up a shutter-replaced D600) and I miss my tamron 18-50 like nobody's business. Are there any similar Sigma or tamron lenses that cover full frame for not a ton of money?
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 22:32
|
|
|
WugLyfe posted:Quick question: I'm coming from a Pentax (picked up a shutter-replaced D600) and I miss my tamron 18-50 like nobody's business. Are there any similar Sigma or tamron lenses that cover full frame for not a ton of money? That exact focal length, probably not (not for cheap at least), that field of view, yes, from both Tamron and Sigma. Since you have a screw drive you can probably pick up an older Tamron/Sigma 24-something for not very many dollars.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 22:37
|
|
|
The AF-D 35-70 is pretty good and like $400ish?
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 22:46
|
|
|
1st AD posted:The AF-D 35-70 is pretty good and like $400ish? While you're right on both counts there, that's not really a similar FOV.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 22:48
|
|
|
http://www.sigmaphoto.com/product/24-70mm-f28-if-ex-dg-hsm sounds like what you want but it isn't exactly cheap. (~$800 MSRP)
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 22:58
|
|
|
Kenshin posted:http://www.sigmaphoto.com/product/24-70mm-f28-if-ex-dg-hsm sounds like what you want but it isn't exactly cheap. (~$800 MSRP) Don't buy glass new unless it's so new that there's nothing on the used market.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 23:07
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:Don't buy glass new unless it's so new that there's nothing on the used market. Aside from a 35mm 1.8 el cheapo new, the two lenses I most want are a 24-70 and 70-200 2.8, but I can never find them on Keh and I worry about the used quality I'd get from anybody else. Is eBay a suitable alternative?
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 00:10
|
|
|
GunForumMeme posted:Aside from a 35mm 1.8 el cheapo new, the two lenses I most want are a 24-70 and 70-200 2.8, but I can never find them on Keh and I worry about the used quality I'd get from anybody else. Adorama, B&H Maybe not like Keh-tier but a drat sight better than eBay probably.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 00:31
|
|
|
1st AD posted:The AF-D 35-70 is pretty good and like $400ish? I got one for $150 but that was an insane deal, I think the ebay average is around $250-300 last I checked. SoundMonkey posted:Don't buy glass new unless it's so new that there's nothing on the used market. And even then, just wait until it hits the used market.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 01:39
|
|
|
What about the 24-85 f3.5-4.5 (or the older f2.8-4) There's also the 28-70 f2.8 but $$$
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 02:05
|
|
|
Wild EEPROM posted:What about the 24-85 f3.5-4.5 (or the older f2.8-4) If you can deal with a bit less on the wide end, the Nikon 28-80 f/3.3-5.6G (note: 3.3 not 3.5) is loving amazing and you can usually get one for under $100. It's the one and only thing K-Rock was right about.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 03:34
|
|
|
Or you can get the 28-85 AF-D with macro! I think I got one on KEH for $30 and it's good for a walkaround lens.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 03:38
|
|
|
I thought he was pretty right about the 80-200 f4 ai-s. Under a hundred bucks, and despite being manual focus and no metering on my d90, it's sharp and good.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 03:39
|
|
|
All sound like fun options! I'm looking for as-sharp-as-possible, so I'm okay if the lenses are a bit different on focal length. I already have a 50mm f/1.8 AF-D which works, but obviously not for everything. I do a lot of product photography, some portraits—I'm just in a weird place having to dump what I'm comfortable with due to a super bloody dispute over a warranty repair.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 04:07
|
|
|
WugLyfe posted:All sound like fun options! I'm looking for as-sharp-as-possible, so I'm okay if the lenses are a bit different on focal length. I already have a 50mm f/1.8 AF-D which works, but obviously not for everything. The 28-80 3.3-5.6G is sharp as all hell and has a relatively good close-focus distance. I'm on a crop sensor and it's what I mostly use when I don't know what I'll be shooting.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 05:23
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:The 28-80 3.3-5.6G is sharp as all hell and has a relatively good close-focus distance. I'm on a crop sensor and it's what I mostly use when I don't know what I'll be shooting. Would you say that's sharper than the 18-70mm 3.5-4.5? That's my usual walk around, but it's a bit dull. I know I'm comparing prime to zoom, but my 35mm is leaps and bounds sharper. I'd like to have a mid range zoom that gets a little closer to the level of the 35mm.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 19:06
|
|
|
JesusDoesVegas posted:Would you say that's sharper than the 18-70mm 3.5-4.5? That's my usual walk around, but it's a bit dull. I know I'm comparing prime to zoom, but my 35mm is leaps and bounds sharper. I'd like to have a mid range zoom that gets a little closer to the level of the 35mm. I honestly can't say, not having extensive experience with the 18-70, but I'll go with "probably", and seriously these loving things are almost free. I got mine for $25 with a bonus N55 attached to it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 20:17
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:The 28-80 3.3-5.6G is sharp as all hell and has a relatively good close-focus distance. I'm on a crop sensor and it's what I mostly use when I don't know what I'll be shooting. Wait I'm I reading this right? That lens will work on a body without an AF motor built in, like my D5100?
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 22:43
|
|
|
FISHMANPET posted:Wait I'm I reading this right? That lens will work on a body without an AF motor built in, like my D5100? No, it needs an AF screw. Its a G with out a motor.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 22:48
|
|
|
OK, So AF-S is what works on dumb babby bodies like mine.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 22:53
|
|
|
FISHMANPET posted:OK, So AF-S is what works on dumb babby bodies like mine. Yeah, I can see how you'd be thrown, since most/all modern G lenses are also AF-S, but there was a time when they made G lenses without built-in motors. e: you could probably also use AF-I lenses but chances are you won't even see one of those in your lifetime.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 23:29
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:I honestly can't say, not having extensive experience with the 18-70, but I'll go with "probably", and seriously these loving things are almost free. I got mine for $25 with a bonus N55 attached to it. I just happened to grab a 28-80 3.3-5.6 G along with a 70-300 4-5.6 G and an F75 body for $40 today. Is there any difference between the black and silver models? Unfortunately mine are silver so the lenses don't match my F100, but whatever. Glad to hear the 28-80 is so well received. I've never actually used a lens with an AF screw before, being a D5100 owner with AF-S lenses, but holy crap, are they ever loud. Nice and fast AF though. BANME.sh fucked around with this message at 06:23 on Oct 1, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 06:12
|
|
|
BANME.sh posted:I just happened to grab a 28-80 3.3-5.6 G along with a 70-300 4-5.6 G and an F75 body for $40 today. Is there any difference between the black and silver models? Unfortunately mine are silver so the lenses don't match my F100, but whatever. Glad to hear the 28-80 is so well received. None that I know of, it's purely a cosmetic thing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 06:27
|
|
|
Neat, grabbed one from Keh. I think I'm also going to pick up the Nikon version of my beloved Rokinon 85mm f/1.4, but I'm always in need of a good quality macro or portrait lens. Anything with a wide (wider than f/2) aperture I should know about? Thanks again for the replies 
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 15:37
|
|
|
Here's a hands on review of the D750 http://www.rossharvey.com/reviews/nikon-d750-review D750 underexposed  D750 pushed 5 stops  Comparison to 5D3  I shoot Canon and read Canon gear forums and, I'll tell you what, Canon users are losing their goddamn minds. Its insane.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 18:12
|
|
|
The D800 has similar ability to push exposure at base ISO.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 18:23
|
|
|
Same with the D600/610. I don't know why they're suddenly losing their minds when the D800 had this ability like 2 years ago.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 18:26
|
|
|
I know, its been going on for a while. This is just the latest. Its super funny watching the camera version of climate change denialists go on internet screaming fits about how dynamic range doesn't matter and only bad photographers need better sensors etc.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 18:29
|
|
|
I wish they'd make an APS-C camera with similar tech to the 750... I really like having printable pixel counts for my birding pictures (and thus like crop sensor for the additional reach factor), but I'd rather not spend $3k for the D810. (I know it isn't possible for it to have the exact same capabilities, don't worry, but getting some of that dynamic range and the great high-ISO performance would be fantastic on a camera for birding) Kenshin fucked around with this message at 18:36 on Oct 1, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 18:32
|
|
|
Yeah, they don't seem to be all that interested in doing crop cameras any more. Although the actual advantage of crop is pretty minimal in real world usage, in my experience. The better IQ of full frame (or APS-H in my case) is roughly equal when cropped to the same FOV, at least for the newer high MP FF cameras. You still have to get physically close to get good bird photos.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 18:41
|
|
|
800peepee51doodoo posted:Yeah, they don't seem to be all that interested in doing crop cameras any more. Although the actual advantage of crop is pretty minimal in real world usage, in my experience. The better IQ of full frame (or APS-H in my case) is roughly equal when cropped to the same FOV, at least for the newer high MP FF cameras. You still have to get physically close to get good bird photos. Yeah, that's why I'm saying I could feasibly go to the D810 without losing the printability of my shots. It would just feel a bit silly going from a D3200 with a Sigma 120-400mm to a D810 with a Sigma 150-600mm and not gaining any reach. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 18:53
|
|
|
800peepee51doodoo posted:Yeah, they don't seem to be all that interested in doing crop cameras any more. The D7100 exists and has a 24mp sensor that is almost 14 stops.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 19:00
|
|
|
1st AD posted:The D7100 exists and has a 24mp sensor that is almost 14 stops. Eh, true, but 6fps with a 6 shot RAW buffer is pretty marginal for birding or sports, which is what you'd want a high end crop for, I would think. Sensor and AF are better than the 7Dc/70D by a good bit though. I guess I was comparing them to Canon who have put out the 70D and now the 7DII since the D7100 came out when I said "interested in crop". Kenshin posted:Yeah, that's why I'm saying I could feasibly go to the D810 without losing the printability of my shots. I think you would see a bit of reach increase with the longer lens on the full frame, especially with a D810. Crop FOV doesn't translate 1:1 to extra reach. You don't really get 1.5x the number of pixels on subject plus the smaller pixels on the crop mean more noise. I met a guy using a D800 and 500 f4 VR doing bird photography. He wasn't struggling with reach.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 19:55
|
|
|
Struggling with his credit card bill though, I'm sure.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 19:58
|
|
|
My dad birds. He uses a M/43 camera and a 600mm F4 and can print up to 11x14 without any care in teh world. He is not showing any of his birds in museums or galleries. He does give them to friends and a group of birders that he belongs to and none of them seem to complain about the IQ of his prints or files. If you are not going to sell $10,000.00 prints, what does it matter if you use a D7100 and a rented 400mm/600mm?
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 20:02
|
|
|
Well, yeah, I'm most likely going to buy a D7100 fairly soon. I was just disappointed that they haven't announced a D7200 with the new autofocus tech. Believe me, if I could afford to drop the $3k on the D810 I would immediately, but as it is a hobby and I don't (even try to) make money off of it, I'm just not in a financial position to be doing so. That said, the D750 is tempting even though it is well above my desired budget, because with that amazing dynamic range and high ISO performance I'd be able to get great shots at f/8 with my telephotos in fairly lovely light.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 20:05
|
|
|
800peepee51doodoo posted:Yeah, they don't seem to be all that interested in doing crop cameras any more. Although the actual advantage of crop is pretty minimal in real world usage, in my experience. The better IQ of full frame (or APS-H in my case) is roughly equal when cropped to the same FOV, at least for the newer high MP FF cameras. You still have to get physically close to get good bird photos. APS-Crop was *always* just a stopgap solution until full 35mm frame sensors got cheap and good enough to replace them, that's how the camera mfrs have always looked at the situation. 10 years from now I'll be surprised if you can buy a new crop camera from either Nikon or Canon, and if you can, it'll only be to silence those that dumped a lot of cash into crop format lenses
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 20:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 12:16 |
|
|
Seeing as both those brands' mirrorless offerings fell flat on their loving faces, I'd wager they'll keep selling APSC for a while, or die.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 20:47
|
|
