[Torqueguru]

Originally Posted by TOR

The New D3000 makes a better 'first' buy. More over there is a double recall going on for the D5000.

Considering the prices the D90 is much better compared to the D5000 for a little bit more money.

D3000+18-105VR makes a great first time combo-both should be available for below 30K.

My first buy was kinda over the top, so i guess you are right with this. But seeing my friends use their D5000s, I thought they are a pretty good deal, and provide exceptional value for money. I am talking of first hand experience with handling and using the camera as I had quite often checked the out, I did not go by the reviews.
Regards,
TG.

[sj_koova]

Originally Posted by StarScream

Congratulations! If I didn't have the 80-200/2.8, this may have been a lens I would have seriously considered.

I would love to acquire 80-200/2.8 any day, but it is beyond my budget.
I hope 70-300mm VR can meet my expectations.
Thanks for your suggestion.

[gd1418]

I've decided to keep all my current glasses and add the Sigma 150-500 to the kitty, pocket permitting.

Thank you for all your valuable suggestions and advice..

Originally Posted by chaudhrysan

@gd1418
More food for thought. Keep the 18-135. Don't go for a fast mid range zoom, instead go for the 35mm/f1.8 G DX and the 50mm/f1.4 or 1.8 and let the foot do the zooming

If you intend to keep the 70-300 VR, my suggestion would be to go for the 300mm/f4 AFS with a TC14E telecon. Though I don't own one, I have used it and the IQ is excellent. But!! I just realized that no VR may be a no no in your case. Well, in that case we have the 300/f2.8 VR AFS with a price sticker that is ouch!!

Originally Posted by StarScream

chaudhrysan you have a taste for expensive glass!
Both Muni and gd have budget limitations.

For gd, why do you recommend the 35/1.8 DX and the 50mm lenses? Wouldn't one of those suffice, as a fast `normal' prime?
On the long side, if 400/5.6 is what he needs, the 80-400 VR in place of the 70-300 VR may be a better choice. The 80-400 will be $1,400 compared with the 300/4 and the TC-14E, which will be about $1,800 together. With the 80-400 he will lose AF-S and VR II but will gain telephoto range in one package. The 70-300 VR will also be the easiest lens to sell without losing much money. So net cost about $900 for the 80-400 VR.

[chaudhrysan]

@StarScream

For Muni the 18-105 VR will add $350.

Actually the difference should work out to about $170. IMO is worth spending, if budget allows, as the extended range is more practical w.r.t. 18-55mm. Also, you are more likely to still use this lens later on (when you have indulged in some lens lust) for its sheer convenience and size. I know all of us have to work within our budgets, but sometimes it may be better if we can try to extend our budget a bit for a more practical choice.

For gd, why do you recommend the 35/1.8 DX and the 50mm lenses? Wouldn't one of those suffice, as a fast `normal' prime?

Yes, you are right. I guess my mind was scrambled a bit. Owning a 24/f2 and the 50/f1.8, my mind somehow had this concept of a 2 fast primes kit. In fact if I were to start new today, I would buy the 35/f1.8 only with a camera body (no kit zoom lens) and add other lenses later on as I needed them.

chaudhrysan you have a taste for expensive glass!

Look, I have made a lot of mistakes and hopefully learnt a few things. Number one, this hobby becomes expensive the moment you start thinking of a DSLR, make no mistake. Later on, when the lens lust kicks in, and many times you buy things that you may regret.

Buy the best option within your budget (or a wee bit stretched budget) when you start. But after that, later on once you know what you want, try not to compromise on your glass. Wait if you have to.

Hey, I bought my 80-200/2.8 at 40k and the prices I see today on the web is over 1k US. I guess a good used would still be in the 800 range. Whereas, today my D70s would only sell for 15K or so and that too if I include the kit lens. The good lenses retain their value far better. I have a Sigma 28-70/2.8 that I am not too fond of. I doubt whether I can get anyway near half to what I spent, if I were to sell it today.

Today, I want a sharp 300mm. I know that I can't afford and certainly not justify the 300/f2.8 ever. Heck, I can't even afford the 300/f4 yet, but I shall wait till I can gather enough for it

[TOR]

Originally Posted by chaudhrysan

@StarScream

Actually the difference should work out to about $170.

The D3000 or the D5000 can be bought as body only and then the 18-105 added on, then the price difference would be minuscule.

This is what i did for my D60 and 18-105 combo and i guess the combination does cover 90% non specialized use.

[StarScream]

Originally Posted by chaudhrysan

In fact if I were to start new today, I would buy the 35/f1.8 only with a camera body (no kit zoom lens) and add other lenses later on as I needed them.

I agree with you about that completely. You learn so much more if you start with a prime. A smaller range zoom like the 18-55 is the closest to the ideal prime solution, I guess. But going to your point about mistakes, a newbie will always choose the zoom to the prime because it seems more value for money...

Look, I have made a lot of mistakes and hopefully learnt a few things.

Who hasn't? I started with a zoom in the film days and later realized that I should have bought a prime.

Hey, I bought my 80-200/2.8 at 40k and the prices I see today on the web is over 1k US. I guess a good used would still be in the 800 range. Whereas, today my D70s would only sell for 15K or so and that too if I include the kit lens. The good lenses retain their value far better. I have a Sigma 28-70/2.8 that I am not too fond of. I doubt whether I can get anyway near half to what I spent, if I were to sell it today.

Today, I want a sharp 300mm. I know that I can't afford and certainly not justify the 300/f2.8 ever. Heck, I can't even afford the 300/f4 yet, but I shall wait till I can gather enough for it

Why not use a good TC with the 80-200 to get to a sharp 300mm? I use a Tamron 2x SP with mine and it works well. Perhaps not as sharp as Nikon TCs but it does the job. Also retains all AF and AF-S focus functionality. B&H sells it for $225:
Tamron | 2x SP AF Pro Autofocus Teleconverter | AF20PN700 | B&H
I own a D70s too. Suits my purpose well and I see no reason to join the megapixel race.

[chaudhrysan]

I think I am going wrong somewhere. Mentally, I have this concept of need for a 400mm focal length for wildlife. Hence the "need" for the 300/f4.

I am using a Kenko 1.4x telecon with my 80-200 with excellent results at the longer end (yes, a good sturdy tripod is a must). Doing some maths, on the DX body 200 x 1.4 x 1.6 (crop factor) = 448mm equivalent at f4 and very good results.

In good old film days, a 400mm tele was considered to be a pretty good wildlife lens, so is it the "desire" and not the actual "need" that is going around in my head? I think I am getting lazy. Instead of trying to get closer to the subject, I "need" a longer lens to bring the subject close.

[Samurai]

We have a member here who shoots birds with Canon 800mm f5.6 L IS. Is your need as bad as his?

[Knight Rider]

Originally Posted by navin

Yes I do this regularly. I stuff my DSLR with lens attached into a holster bag and stuff the holster bag into my backpack.

Thank you Navinji, also I heard you should not be fixing the lenses and carry the camera around from one of the forums, is it true?

[navin]

[quote=Knight Rider;1456808]

Originally Posted by navin

Yes I do this regularly. I stuff my DSLR with lens attached into a holster bag and stuff the holster bag into my backpack.

Thank you Navinji, also I heard you should not be fixing the lenses and carry the camera around from one of the forums, is it true?

The purists will say that but I have found no ill effects of doing so. I would however defer to Rudra-da for his opniion.

My camera body has a metal mount so do all of my lenses. lenses/bodies with a plastic mount might show faster fatigue.

[mclaren1885]

I think my 18-55IS is catching fungus. I just noticed it a few weeks back, is there a way to get rid of it or prevent it?

Putting up a pic where you can notice some dark spots iv circled. Is this fungus?


I can see quite a few spots like these when I view through the viewfinder. Mostly to the left top corner.

[pjbiju]

Originally Posted by mclaren1885

I think my 18-55IS is catching fungus. I just noticed it a few weeks back, is there a way to get rid of it or prevent it?

Putting up a pic where you can notice some dark spots iv circled. Is this fungus?

I can see quite a few spots like these when I view through the viewfinder. Mostly to the left top corner.

McLaren, if it is fungus in the lens, you should be able to see the fungus if you take out the lens and then look inside it under some bight sun light. If it is fungus, the only way to prevent further growth would be to store your lens in an enclosure that does not have moisture. You can also check by mounting another lens on your camera and then looking through the viewfinder to see if the spots are there. To get rid of the fungus (if it is there), you will have to take the lens to the canon service center. In your case I suspect these spots might be dust accumulated in the camera sensor. Small patches of fungus in the lens generally do not show up in the results. You will be able to confirm it from the viewfinder after mounting another lens.

[mclaren1885]

You might be right. It could be dust accumulated on the camera sensor. Should I try cleaning the sensor myself or is it better to give it to the Canon centre?

[gd1418]

Please do not attempt to clean the sensor yourself unless you are an expert and have done so in the past without any ill-effects.

It is better to give it to the Canon service centre..

Originally Posted by mclaren1885

You might be right. It could be dust accumulated on the camera sensor. Should I try cleaning the sensor myself or is it better to give it to the Canon centre?

[mclaren1885]

Originally Posted by gd1418

Please do not attempt to clean the sensor yourself unless you are an expert and have done so in the past without any ill-effects.

It is better to give it to the Canon service centre..

Thanks GD, I googled up some videos on youtube regarding sensor cleaning. It seems an easy task as long as you have the necessary tools. Shall take your advice and head to the Canon centre. Somehow, I have doubts if these guys will handle our cams with as much care as we do and do it the right way. Or maybe I should talk to the old man about it.