Go Back   Team-BHP > Around the Corner > Shifting gears > Gadgets, Computers & Software


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 3rd April 2009, 17:46   #631
Senior - BHPian
 
StarScream's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Noida/Delhi
Posts: 1,247
Thanked: 633 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vasudhir View Post
What's his budget and area of interest in photography. Since this is a DSLR, you need to keep in mind about the cost of lenses going forward. And Nikon lenses are anyday costlier than Canon ones.

Rgds,
Sudhir
Now, that's a sweeping statement methinks.
StarScream is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2009, 18:45   #632
Distinguished - BHPian
 
Sam Kapasi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Mumbai (but wat
Posts: 6,989
Thanked: 1,451 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vasudhir View Post
Nikon lenses are anyday costlier than Canon ones.
Hey Sudhir,
That statement doesn't seem right to me.

Sam
Sam Kapasi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2009, 19:31   #633
Senior - BHPian
 
extreme_torque's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 3,542
Thanked: 1,305 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by StarScream View Post
The 18-200VR is a fantastic lens for what it does. Yes, it is not the ultimate in quality but if you were to replicate its range with quality glass you will -
a) spend a lot more
b) carry a lot more weight
c) probably not get VR/IS throughout the range.
The lens is very good at many things and spectacular at none. Comparing it with quality lenses misses the point of what this lens is designed to do - give ultimate range and convenience in a compact, light-weight package.
If convenience is what anyone is after why buy a DSLR at the first place. There are a lot of ultrazooms out there which are cheaper than the cost of the 18-200 lens itself and give you more range + features.
Besides I can replicate even greater range for cheap... a combo of Canon 18-55 IS + 55-250 IS for about 400$ but then that really isnt my thing.
extreme_torque is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2009, 19:41   #634
Senior - BHPian
 
finneyp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 2,609
Thanked: 142 Times
Default

ET, If I want the performance of a DSLR and travel as light as possible (with minimum lens), I have a option in 18-200 lens.
Yes, the image quality at some range may not be at par with prime lens, but for some that compromise is fine.

Last edited by finneyp : 3rd April 2009 at 19:43.
finneyp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2009, 20:00   #635
Senior - BHPian
 
extreme_torque's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 3,542
Thanked: 1,305 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by finneyp View Post
ET, If I want the performance of a DSLR and travel as light as possible (with minimum lens), I have a option in 18-200 lens.
Yes, the image quality at some range may not be at par with prime lens, but for some that compromise is fine.
Its the glass up ahead that matters. So DSLR performance == how good is the lens upfront. Believe me you will be more dissapointed having a good body but worse output just because of a cheap lens (in IQ).
As I said, you can replicate even greater range using a combo of the kit lens and the 55-250mm both IS.
extreme_torque is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2009, 20:07   #636
Senior - BHPian
 
StarScream's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Noida/Delhi
Posts: 1,247
Thanked: 633 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by extreme_torque View Post
If convenience is what anyone is after why buy a DSLR at the first place. There are a lot of ultrazooms out there which are cheaper than the cost of the 18-200 lens itself and give you more range + features.
Besides I can replicate even greater range for cheap... a combo of Canon 18-55 IS + 55-250 IS for about 400$ but then that really isnt my thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by finneyp View Post
ET, If I want the performance of a DSLR and travel as light as possible (with minimum lens), I have a option in 18-200 lens.
Yes, the image quality at some range may not be at par with prime lens, but for some that compromise is fine.
Well, finneyp gets it.

There are a couple of assumptions in your post, extreme. Correct me if Im wrong. One, a Dslr implies that one has to carry a lot of kit or travel heavy. Second, the 18-200VR is a crappy lens quality-wise and equivalent to p&s optics.

I own a Dslr for the flexibility it affords me in terms of picture taking ability and being able to use different lenses for different situations. Within that subset, there are times when I want to carry just one lens. At moments like those the 18-200VR is great lens to have. It is a very good performer which produces sharp, contrasty images. Not as good as Nikon's best but better than their cheapest lenses - to answer you about the two-lens combo with the added advantage of not having to change lenses, which may well make you miss the shot (Also true about the expensive glass).
Incidentally, I wasn't a believer in super-zooms until the advent of digital and the 18-200VR. It's biggest drawback is distortion but in digital that can easily be corrected during post-processing.
StarScream is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2009, 20:14   #637
Senior - BHPian
 
extreme_torque's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 3,542
Thanked: 1,305 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by StarScream View Post
There are a couple of assumptions in your post, extreme. Correct me if Im wrong. One, a Dslr implies that one has to carry a lot of kit or travel heavy.
A kit lens and a 70-200 IS wont make much of a difference as far as weight is concerned.

Quote:
Originally Posted by StarScream View Post
Second, the 18-200VR is a crappy lens quality-wise and equivalent to p&s optics.
No, its not as good and you can get much better quality by spending a little more on a quality glass but yes it wont be as convenient, but that isnt what I am looking for when clicking with a DSLR.
Have a look at this.... zoom creep... Buyer beware! Zoom Creep! - Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G VR IF-ED Lens - Epinions.com

Last edited by extreme_torque : 3rd April 2009 at 20:31.
extreme_torque is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2009, 20:32   #638
Senior - BHPian
 
StarScream's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Noida/Delhi
Posts: 1,247
Thanked: 633 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by extreme_torque View Post
A kit lens and a 70-200 IS wont make much of a difference as far as weight is concerned.

It will. My 80-200/2.8 is 1.5-2 kgs. That lens alone kills you as far as weight is concerned.


No, its not as good and you can get much better quality by spending a little more on a quality glass but yes it wont be as convenient, but that isnt what I am looking for when clicking with a DSLR.
it's not as good as what? Have you used it? And with all my experience in photography I can tell you the guy behind the camera is what matters, not the equipment. A crappy lens (and the 18-200VR is not) can produce fantastic images in the hands of a master.

And so what if it creeps. That doesn't detract from its strengths. I bought it knowing the issue exists. Incidentally, mine doesn't. That was a problem with the early batch.

Last edited by StarScream : 3rd April 2009 at 20:36.
StarScream is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2009, 20:33   #639
Senior - BHPian
 
finneyp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 2,609
Thanked: 142 Times
Default

StarScream, do you face zoom creep issue on your 18-200VR ?
finneyp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2009, 20:41   #640
Senior - BHPian
 
StarScream's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Noida/Delhi
Posts: 1,247
Thanked: 633 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by finneyp View Post
StarScream, do you face zoom creep issue on your 18-200VR ?
It does, if you really try i.e. shake it or hang it facing down zoomed out half way. It doesn't if it's at 18mm, even pointing downwards. The early reviewers faced an issue where the zoom mechanism was very loose and would voluntary zoom out from 18 to 200mm when hung facing down. That doesn't happen with mine.
StarScream is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2009, 20:41   #641
Senior - BHPian
 
extreme_torque's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 3,542
Thanked: 1,305 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by StarScream View Post
And with all my experience in photography I can tell you the guy behind the camera is what matters, not the equipment. A crappy lens (and the 18-200VR is not) can produce fantastic images in the hands of a master.
"The medium determines the message." I rest my case.
extreme_torque is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2009, 20:59   #642
Senior - BHPian
 
StarScream's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Noida/Delhi
Posts: 1,247
Thanked: 633 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by extreme_torque View Post
"The medium determines the message." I rest my case.
Exactly, I agree with you completely. The medium being the photographer, not the equipment.
StarScream is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2009, 21:05   #643
Senior - BHPian
 
gd1418's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Gurgaon
Posts: 3,578
Thanked: 655 Times
Default

My current gear is:

Nikon F801, D80 & Fuji Finepix S602 Zoom
Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 35-70mm f/3.3-4.5
Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED
Nikon AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED
Nikon Speed Light SB-24 & SB-400





Thanks Sudhir in advance....

Quote:
Originally Posted by vasudhir View Post
I have got all my Camera equipment's insured through House Hold Insurance Policy with Oriental Insurance. It is insured against Theft, accidental damage, etc etc.

The 150-500 is a good one. But you got to be lucky to get a good piece as there are lots of complaints on its quality. What equipment do you currently have on which you want to use a TC. I can probably help you to make the right decession.

Rgds,
Sudhir
gd1418 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2009, 21:18   #644
Senior - BHPian
 
StarScream's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Noida/Delhi
Posts: 1,247
Thanked: 633 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gd1418 View Post
My current gear is:

Nikon F801, D80 & Fuji Finepix S602 Zoom
Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 35-70mm f/3.3-4.5
Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED
Nikon AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED
Nikon Speed Light SB-24 & SB-400


Thanks Sudhir in advance....
I don't think you can use a TC with any of that stuff gd1418. Those lenses are good as is. With a TC you lose speed and so if you put a 2x TC with the 70-300 you'll get a f12 lens albeit get to 600mm on full frame. How long do you want to go? With the D80 and 70-300 you get to 450mm anyway because of the crop factor.
StarScream is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2009, 23:58   #645
BHPian
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 965
Thanked: 227 Times
Default

You need to check what your effective F-number will be with the TC attached. Beyond F5.6 autofocus will struggle.
Torqy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
DSLR Video Discussion Sankar Gadgets, Computers & Software 129 18th August 2017 19:07
On a Temple Visiting Spree! Returned with only 1 wish. Need a DSLR! mclaren1885 Travelogues 23 27th July 2007 11:21


All times are GMT +5.5. The time now is 10:31.

Copyright 2000 - 2017, Team-BHP.com
Proudly powered by E2E Networks