Team-BHP (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/)

-   Gadgets, Computers & Software (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/gadgets-computers-software/)

-   -   The DSLR Thread (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/gadgets-computers-software/11582-dslr-thread-1005.html)

The best budget option is probably Canon EF-S 55-200mm IS which costs around 12k. Another budget option is Tamron 70-300mm VC (EF-S mount) which will cost 30k+. Although Sigma and Tamron have non-stabilized 70-300mm lenses which are around 10k, Canon with IS (Image Stabilization) would be a better option.

For even more reach, there are Sigma/Tamaron 10-400mm, 150-600mm lenses but will cost much more, 60K to 100K.

I have heard that Future Forward at Lajpat Nagar rents Lenses but have no personal experience. They have a website called cameraonrent.

I've been out of touch for some time now, so no clue about the mirrorless cameras and if they represent a better option than the DSLRs, so that might be worth checking out. (Somewhere on this forum there must be a thread that discusses that ad nauseam I'm sure ;))

But, since you've already bought the camera and if you're going to stick with the Canon DSLR then short answer: 75-300, seems a decent value at 17k https://in.canon/en/consumer/ef75-30...gory=ef-lenses

BUT...

The thing about wildlife photography is that the best opportunities happen really quickly and in low light. So unless you're lucky enough to have the bird or beast plonk right in front of you in broad daylight, a slow lens (that's where the f number comes in, the lower the better) will not give you great shots. And generally zoom lenses give worse results than primes (75-300 is a zoom, a 300 is a fixed focal length prime lens (explaining, since you mention you don't know anything about lenses)).

The trade off is weight and cost. A 'fast' 300mm prime will be significantly heavier and more expensive than a 'slow' zoom. Like this one: https://in.canon/en/consumer/ef300mm...gory=ef-lenses

But all else being equal (the conditions, the skill of the photographer), the prime will certainly give better pics than a zoom.

Then there is also something called Image stabilization. The lenses without IS are cheaper but in low light conditions the absence of some sort of auto stabilization will tell in blurry images. Again, in good light you can just increase the shutter speed and compensate.

(Canon confuses things further with their 'L' (luxury) series, not really sure if that's worth anything more than a fancy white paint job and bragging rights though ;))

Finally, I'll say that I went through the same process. So, I rented out a couple lenses over a couple of trips and used them before deciding what to buy. I'd suggest doing that.

I should have clarified this. The camera was bought in 2012. At that time, I was advised that it was a good buy. I went with the kit lens as I was not sure what were the other options out there.

Life keeps getting in the way of her doing more with the camera but we both of enjoy birdwatching and I thought a good lens will be a good addition. Not sure if we want to invest in a new camera at this point.

Thank you for the information.

Thank you. This is very useful information. Will look up the lenses and Future Forward.

Thank you for breaking this down in detail. I really appreciate it.

Like I said above, we have had this camera since 2012 but are using it more so appreciating the need for better lens. I will try renting the lens for now and see what she thinks. Thanks again!

Hi Guys, back with one more query.
I grappled with the options of shifting over to Mirrorless system but for someone like me who ventures out into the wild 3-4 times an year, I did find it not worth. Now my queries:-
1. Between Nikon D500 and Nikon D750 (aside from the fact that it is Crop vs Full frame sensor), which one fares better in wildlife?
2. If I choose Nikon D750, does it mean that all my DX lenses will require to be traded for FX lenses? My workhorses are the DX 70-300 mm Nikkor and Tamron 150-600mm (G1) lenses.
3. Nikon D500 is 2 years old with 35k shutter count and I am getting it for 65,000 while Nikon D750 is also 2 years old with a shutter count of 65k and I am getting it for 55,000.
Thanks

That depends - full frame fares better in low light, crop sensors have the so called 1.5x "zoom" factor (it's not really a zoom" that causes the subject to be closer in the VF and of course in the photo itself. Crop can have higher pixel density. If you shoot a lot then crop creates smaller files than full frame so you won't need so many flash cards.

Yes, they will need to be changed. Full frames lenses are more expensive than crop lenses. And some pro grade FF lenses can get very expensive.

Shutter count is not the only measure of wear and tear. A shutter assembly can be replaced for < Rs 10K depending on the model of course. What you need to check is the sensor, overall body condition. If you want to shoot only wildlife the D500 is the one you pick. Otherwise save yourself the inevitable upgrade to full frame and go in for the D750 now but with the additional financial burden of buying FF lenses.

1. Birds exclusively - D500, else D750 does everything.
2. D750 will work with all kinds of lenses, it will even accept older lenses without chip as well as DX lenses. You can shoot full frame lenses in crop mode as well.

Once you use a full frame, there is no going back.

Thank you everyone for the advice and suggestions.
I went ahead and bought a Nikon D500 with 40k shutter count but very well maintained. It came along with Neewer Battery Grip, XQD Card and the camera bag of course. All this within 50,000. I am happy that I won't have to let go of my DX lenses and yet have upgraded to a substantial gear.

I need some advice from fellow members.

I have a Nikon D7000 with 3 lenses (18-55mm, 35mm and 70-300mm). All the lenses got fungus due to the Bangalore weather. Also the camera was unused for years apart from occasionally taking it out, charging batteries etc. The last time I have taken some good number of photos with it was around March 2018. I know it is bad to keep the camera idle and inside the bag in damp environment

I would like to take the lens to Nikon service center and clean it.

What is the approximate cost for this?
Do I need to service the camera also?
Any other thing I need to do or follow?

Sorry to hear about the fungus. Cleaning it can be tricky and without looking at how much it has spread and how long it has been on the lens it will be difficult to provide a reasonable estimate.

Here's an excerpt from nikonimgsupport.com:

I am assuming that the camera body and the lenses were stored in the same bag. My suggestion would be to get the lenses and the body serviced by Nikon for peace of mind. Even if the fungus isn't visible on the sensor right now - it may spread after some time if left untreated.


If you don't foresee using the equipment regularly but want to keep the camera and lenses you can either purchase silica gel packets and put a few in your camera bag or buy a small dry cabinet. I have been using the silica gel with my 7D2 and all the lenses (which at one point had been unused for about 1.5 years in Hyderabad) and haven't had any issues till now.

Thank Joe for your advice.

I think I need to prepare for the worst. I find the inner glass on the 70-300mm has lot of fungus.





I use silica gel also but I think they saturate quite easily.



I was in Chennai with my Camera for a couple of years and I never faced any issue. Probably because of the high heat. It is the Bangalore weather that is the culprit. Also in Chennai I had lot of photographic opportunities as the beach was nearby. I tend to use the camera more often.

I advise other DSLR owners to take your camera out frequently and use it.

Hello.

I am a newbie in photography. I am getting a great deal for a New Nikon D5300 which is still with a dealer. I know its a discontinued model. I just wanted to ask the experienced members whether this will be a good buy. I won't be upgrading the camera anytime soon if I purchase the D5300.

I would also like to mention I am just a noob in photography. I want to purchase the DSLR to get a better hang and understand the art of photography.

Your guidance will be highly appreciated.

Hello dpaul,
When I started out with Photography I learnt quickly that it is not the camera that matters but your dedication and hard work. Sure a good camera can help getting that near perfect shot but the same photo can be taken with any camera as long as you know your settings.

Coming to your predicament, how much extra would you have to spend for the D5600? The D5300 is a capable camera but if you can manage the budget for a D5600 it would allow you to use the DSLR for more years as it is newer.

No matter what you choose, have fun with your machine and watch plenty of tutorials to help with your learning. I'll be more than happy to help in any way. From one new learner to another.

The difference between the price at which I am getting the D5300 and D5600 is almost Rs 20,000/-. Hence my quandary.:Frustrati

No you don't have to sell those lenses when you upgrade to FX, I use the same lenses for FX and DX. I've a D3200 and D610. Both serve me well. You can use the above zooms for both. In DX you get a reach multiplied by 1.5 times in 35 mm terms. The images of the White Tiger used a 70-300mm on D3200 and Pelican in flight using a Tamron 150-600mm again on a D3200. The Shikra taken with D610 with a Tamron 150-600mm. Hope this helps.

Fungus is a common problem give to Nikon Service they'll be able to clean it. It's nothing major, even if you use it it will happen as it did to me. But if it isn't affecting the image quality go ahead and shoot. The 'fungus cleaning' is bread and butter for Nikon Service: so use due diligence as you would when you leave your car for service. These two macro images of Rose in my garden were taken yesterday with my 9 year old D3200 and equally old MicroNikkor 105mm f/2.8 VR.

Great images Dr AD. You should go in for the lovely latest lens Nikon AF-P DX 10-20mm wide angle for the the Nikon 3500 it's very cheap and delivers great results. I think it's something like 25K. But can be used only on the latest DX cameras of Nikon like the Nikon D3500. Though basic it's good. My D3200 is delivering great results even after 9 years of service.

I would say, go with D5300.
D5300 and D5600 have same sensor, same focusing mechanism and almost same everything. I think where D5300 looses is in the touch screen that D5600 has.
I am using D5300 and I had bought it over D5600 even the cost difference between them was less than 5K INR when I bought it in Oct 19.

Both are good cameras but if 20K is the price difference, I would pickup D5300 without blinking an eye.
I hope you are going to get bill-warranty etc from dealer for D5300.