The DSLR Thread

[StarScream]

Originally Posted by ntomer

Now is the time to upgrade my gear, and I have got a good deal on a D300 (with MB-D10 grip, less than 10000 shots) and I am buying that. I also want to upgrade lenses and want to buy a good UWA and a good walk-around lens. I had decided upon Nikon 16-85 and Tokina 11-16 but then came the twist in the tale...

Tokina isn't available in India with bill and warranty. And I don't want to spend 36.5K without that assurance. So I am gravitating towards Sigma 10-20, which is available for 28K. Tamron 10-24 is available for 1K less, but is reportedly inferior to Sigma.

Now comes the more confusing part. I was decided upon Nikon 16-85, but the more I read about it, the more doubts I have. People say it's no great shakes and not at all value for money. Build quality is definitely good and it has a metal mount but how much would that matter.

Please tell me how goodis Tamron 17-50 F/2.8 in comparison to Nikon 16-85? And are there any other good walk-around lenses in this range (less than 35K)?

\N

For whatever its worth, my travel kit is a Nikon 18-200 VR and a Tokina 12-24/f4. From your choices it seems you want a fast mid-range zoom and the 18-200 VR may not suit your needs but if I were you I'd use that for its sheer versatility and carry a prime for low-light situations.

The Tokina wide angles are available on Flipkart with bill and warranty from what I can tell.

Originally Posted by shajufx

Does it really matter ? When it comes to real life situations, nobody cares if you carry a golden ring or red ring or no ring, images speak for itself and its very very rare people ask if you had a ring on the lens. Frankly I dont mind having golden & red on a single lens

So true. The picture is what matters. My greatest satisfaction is when one gets a great picture with a not-so-great lens.

Originally Posted by MindSpeeDs

I do feel that canon has finally gone ahead in the AF department which was Nikon forte.

I don't understand this. In SLRs it was the other way around. For the longest time Nikon's dedication to the F-mount meant its was years behind Canon in AF. It's only now that Nikon can be considered at par. Most of their lenses have been upgraded but there are still a few that use the old screw-drive AF.

[MindSpeeDs]

Originally Posted by clevermax

By looking at the raw images, NEX5N has got better iso performance than even A77!

A77 would have the NEX7 sensor. Probably even 7 would have better ISO performance than A77 because the 77 has a translucent mirror. I've read that it does make a difference

Originally Posted by R2D2

That inconsistent quality is what puts most serious amateurs (me included) and pros off 3rd party. I had an experience with Tamron in the early 2000s. I hasten to add Zeiss lenses are an exception but their prices are, well, sky high

One sure needs to have luck or the flexibility to change copies (till they get a sharp copy) with the tammys and sigs! But if you are lucky u r lucky indeed.
Zeiss is in a league of its own. MF would be the the only other deterring factor apart from price.

Originally Posted by R2D2

You did come across as on in your first post but now that you've articulated your thoughts further, no you don't

My bad. I did think i was lucid enough even in the first post to not sound like one

Originally Posted by R2D2

The NEX5 and 7 are very good cameras but IQ wise the Nikon V1 is good too. If I had to buy an EVIL camera today, Nikon-1 (can use my FX lenses and other accessories) and the Sony NEX would be on the top of my list followed by Fuji

If there's a company that will give the Canon/Nikon duo a run for their money in imaging tech it is Sony. It's quite simple, when you make sensors the kind that Sony makes and with their expertise in electronics albeit consumer, it won't be long before it is snapping at the heels of the big two. Another reason why Canon needs to pull up its socks and get into the EVIL segment like Nikon did with the Nikon-1 system.

The reflex mirror has is its days numbered. They only need to sort out the immediacy/lag time and other issues with EVs. But as things stand today I prefer the optical viewfinder. I am not a fan of PNS style small cameras as the ergonomics are bad and camera shake is an ever present issue especially with telephoto lenses. The pro level cameras are superb in ergonomics but their size and weight are a big problem. If they can shrink the size of the say 1D and D3/D4 bodies to the D800/5D size by incorporating an EV it would be welcome.

The NEX5 was the first from sony in this segment. There were a lot of issues (that generally come with being the 1st) that were fixed. Then came the 5N. It seems world apart from the 5. The 7 has evolved even more, controls are more convenient, has the built in evf.. at double the price.
Nikon 1s - Great cameras. I feel competition has edge in this segment though.

Canon G1X is an entirely different segment and once it fixes some of the more bothersome bugs associated, will be amazing.

Sigma foveon is an amazing sensor but only at lower ISOs

Fuji - like sigma even they have changed the conventional sensor and actually did a fantastic job. Waiting for my 5n to be sold so that i can pick the xpro1! Won't have the same felxibility as the nex though.

Only indicates that every player in this field is thinking out of the box and coming up with something brilliant.

EVF has come a long way and has a long way to go before it can think of replacing the ovf. AF is a key issue that makes it difficult (for now) to replace the traditional dslr.
They might fix the issues eventually but can't do much about the lenses! Physics

[WindRide]

I have always liked the form factor of old-style SLRs (i own an FE and LOVE it to bits). My wish was to one day have a digital version of FE.

The Olympus OM-D E-M5 has got me salivating. Hope Nikon comes out with a retro style EVIL cam too.

[clevermax]

Originally Posted by MindSpeeDs

A77 would have the NEX7 sensor. Probably even 7 would have better ISO performance than A77 because the 77 has a translucent mirror. I've read that it does make a difference

It steals some light yes. But how it makes a difference is probably because of the way the ISO settings are calibrated. In SLTs, the ISOs are slightly over calibrated. This is done probably to compensate some of the light reduction. I've read in a review that in SLT-A35, ISO100 setting is actually calibrated to be somewhere near ISO125. Same may be applicable to SLT-A77 as well.

When you think about the concept of translucent mirror stealing 25% of the light coming in, you will definitely have doubts on how the camera is going to perform in low light conditions. But after using one, you will almost forget that it has a translucent mirror. You won't really notice any difference (The DSLR Thread) at all.

[clevermax]

Some pictures of very new Sony Alpha A37 has been found on net.

[Exclusive] Hands-on Sony Alpha A37: DSLR Entry Level Terbaru

16MP sensor, most features of A57.

[white-rabbit]

Few more clicks from me.Please comment on my progress.
All by kit lens

[white-rabbit]

Guys,a quick question.

Why do I see blurred edges always in the photographs?Is it because of the uv filter I am using?

when I zoom,I could see all the edges blurred.

[nkrishnap]

Picked up a Tamron 70-300 mm Di VC USD lens to replace the canon 55-250 mm IS lens. Yes to test it out.

Also replaced the smaller Lowerpro bag with the Lowerpro runner 200AW bag.

[W.A.G.7]

Originally Posted by white-rabbit

Why do I see blurred edges always in the photographs?Is it because of the uv filter I am using?

when I zoom,I could see all the edges blurred.

If I know correctly, the UV filter doesn't have anything to do with the blurriness. From the photo posted above I think you have opened the aperture wide enough. You should try changing the aperture from wide open to something smaller say F8 or F10 and then check the same shot again.

In a nutshell, the depth of field is gone wrong, that's all. Also try taking the photo from some distance, you are too near to the tomato. And try to take another shot of the same tomato with the dial on the camera set to macro mode.

Experts here can clarify more, I am no expert in photography. Just that I own a DSLR and know a few terms

[white-rabbit]

Originally Posted by W.A.G.7

If I know correctly, the UV filter doesn't have anything to do with the blurriness. From the photo posted above I think you have opened the aperture wide enough. You should try changing the aperture from wide open to something smaller say F8 or F10 and then check the same shot again.

Could you please explain it more?Will opening / closing Aperture effect the object defenition?

May be the attached Exif for first photo helps.

[R2D2]

Originally Posted by white-rabbit

Could you please explain it more?Will opening / closing Aperture effect the object defenition?

May be the attached Exif for first photo helps.

Yikes! The EXIF shows the aperture at F22! It is stopped way down and diffraction begins to set in.

To read more about diffraction and understand what it is check these links.

Understanding Lens Diffraction

Diffraction

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tut...hotography.htm

Put the camera in aperture priority mode, open the lens up to f4 or f/5.6 (or F8 if you want more DOF) and try again. Not sure what kit lens you are using. But if the UV filter is one of those Marumi plain glass ones take it off as well.

[ampere]

I think the problem as R2D2 mentioned is F22. Many landscape tutorials online advocate use of high F numbers for good landscape captures.
(As they want you to get everything in focus) Some how they never mention that diffraction would set at some point in time above a certain F-stop.
For full frame it would better. But for 1.6X crop sensor anything above F11 would not give good results.

I have felt this with my own 550D.

[white-rabbit]

Originally Posted by R2D2

Yikes! The EXIF shows the aperture at F22! It is stopped way down and diffraction begins to set in.

To read more about diffraction and understand what it is check these links.

Understanding Lens Diffraction

Diffraction

Diffraction Limited Photography: Pixel Size, Aperture and Airy Disks

Put the camera in aperture priority mode, open the lens up to f4 or f/5.6 (or F8 if you want more DOF) and try again. Not sure what kit lens you are using. But if the UV filter is one of those Marumi plain glass ones take it off as well.

Originally Posted by ampere

I think the problem as R2D2 mentioned is F22. Many landscape tutorials online advocate use of high F numbers for good landscape captures.
(As they want you to get everything in focus) Some how they never mention that diffraction would set at some point in time above a certain F-stop.
For full frame it would better. But for 1.6X crop sensor anything above F11 would not give good results.

I have felt this with my own 550D.

Thanks for shedding some light.So aperture is the villan here.Let me see how to master it.

So in general,for land scapes,lower f numbers will do,right?

[arvind71181]

Originally Posted by white-rabbit

Thanks for shedding some light.So aperture is the villan here.Let me see how to master it.

So in general,for land scapes,lower f numbers will do,right?

Landscapes will need an f number in the range of f8 or above I guess as this would lead to more of the frame being in focus (which will help in landscapes) Lower f numbers will lead to a shallow depth of field, resulting in lesser part of the frame being in focus

[W.A.G.7]

Originally Posted by white-rabbit

So in general,for land scapes,lower f numbers will do,right?

I don't think so. Lower F number means that aperture will be wide open, whereas the higher F numbers mean the smallest opening. That aperture should be somewhere between F8 and F13 I feel, if you are going to photograph landscapes.

Secondly every lens has its own F stop range where it will deliver the best performance and the picture will be the sharpest. I think that's known as the sweet spot. You can check online about the sweet spot of your lenses and try to take the landscape photos in that aperture range. But again, let the experts clarify this.

P.S: Is it the kit lens that came with the camera?