[nishad.hameed]

has a D60 with kit lens. and now i have the below choice on the next selection

1.BRAND NEW NIKON 70-300mm f/4-5.6G AF ZOOM-NIKKOR POWERFUL LENS WITH BILL & WARRANTY- INR. 6800
2. 55-200MM VR Nikon Lens - Barely Used - 6 Months old - INR. 8500



need advice from the guru's

[TOR]

Originally Posted by nishad.hameed

1.BRAND NEW NIKON 70-300mm f/4-5.6G AF ZOOM-NIKKOR POWERFUL LENS WITH BILL & WARRANTY- INR. 6800

From where are you getting this quote? Even for this non VR version the price is quite good.

You would be having the 18-55 right now on the cam-so with the 70-300 there would be a gap in the coverage between the two lenses(ie between 55 and 70mm).

[nishad.hameed]

Originally Posted by TOR

From where are you getting this quote? Even for this non VR version the price is quite good.

You would be having the 18-55 right now on the cam-so with the 70-300 there would be a gap in the coverage between the two lenses(ie between 55 and 70mm).

it is from a Chennai based Nikon dealer. with bill and warranty. I understand the gap, but my worry is that a non-VR 70-300 will be worth?

[gd1418]

Read a review here and make up your mind - Nikon 70-300mm G

Originally Posted by nishad.hameed

it is from a Chennai based Nikon dealer. with bill and warranty. I understand the gap, but my worry is that a non-VR 70-300 will be worth?

[TOR]

For a different view point to what Ken Rockwell gives for the 18-105 review have a look here at Thom Hogans take on the same.

Also his viewpoints on the Nikon DX lens range as such.

[clevermax]

Slightly off-topic, but I guess this is the thread for such a question..

I currently use Photoshop CS2 and it is working fine, satisfies my PP needs (still photographs). I was thinking about upgrading to CS4 but the reviews says that CS4 is not the one to have, because of its large memory footprint when compared to CS3 and CS2.

Anyone here switched from CS2 to CS4? How is the experience? Does it slow you down with your work? (Post processing pictures). I am not interested in the new features it has to offer, OpenGL functions / 3D texturing and stuff like that.

BTW, Did you ever notice the common Easter egg in all Photoshop versions?

This was the codename of the project Photoshop 9.0 (CS2)

[SPARKled]

@nishad.hameed: I have used the non VR 70-300G and frankly I would give it a miss. Lots of CA and is quite soft at 300mm. The VR version would be a much better option. If on a budget go for the Sigma or Tamron 70-300 which are better than the non VR Nikon G version

@gd1418: There is absolutely no problem in going for the non body motor Nikon bodies as Nikon have, since last few years, and will include the AF motor on the lens in all their new lenses. Also if you have a lot of AF or AF-D lenses or will buy them in the future, only then going for a body AF motor makes sense.

@phamilyman: I am not clear about this quote of yours 'There is a slight weakness at the D5000 vs 500D space (the lack of onbody AF pinches)'. Canons lenses have always had a lens motor and their bodies (EF bodies) have never had a lens motor. Nikon's have had a screw driver AF module for their older lenses and are now slowly but surely transitioning to lens motors as opposed to body motors for AF. So whats the weakness that you are talking of? Almost all except for a Tilt and shift lens released by Nikon in the past few years have had lens AF motors or I am not sure if they are lagging any way.

[SPARKled]

Originally Posted by TOR

For a different view point to what Ken Rockwell gives for the 18-105 review have a look here at Thom Hogans take on the same.

Also his viewpoints on the Nikon DX lens range as such.

Ken Rockwell's comments should always be taken with a 'pich of salt'. I would give a greater emphasis to Thom's take on the same subject.

[HellwratH]

Got my hands on a Sigma 105 mm f/2.8 macro lens. The build quality is awesome, and sure does require a good tripod as its very heavy. The pictures come out pretty sharp. Will post some macro photographs soon.

[yzfrj]

Originally Posted by robimahanta

.i believe you would much better off buying a semi DSLR or even a nice PnS instead of wasting money just to see how its like to get a DSLR.

True, but somehow "the need to get a DSLR"

Originally Posted by TOR

The Nikon D3000 makes a great entry level camera.

Thanks TOR

Originally Posted by gd1418

+1 for that TOR. But by saying this I do not want to restart or ignite the Canon Vs Nikon debate..

Originally Posted by SPARKled

@yzfrj: You cant go wrong with either of them. Also don't really bother about spot metering and the other technical jargon right now. The metering with either systems is as good as anything out there.

As of now go see what fits better in your hands and is easier to operate. Prices should not really be a deciding factor if they are priced close to each other. If you are still undecided go for the cheaper option.

Thanks, I should "test drive" the cam eh ?
My friend has a 1000D for the D3000 I'll go to a shop and see.

Thanks for the advice all you guys.
Will update once I have made up my mind and muster the courage to spend close to 30k (wife is gonna kill me) for a cam.

[kkr2k2]

Originally Posted by robimahanta

.....
But since you are not interested in the finer nuances of photography and don't want to spend much on a camera..i believe you would much better off buying a semi DSLR or even a nice PnS instead of wasting money just to see how its like to get a DSLR.

I also wanted to own a DSLR till recently. But did a small analysis of the digi cams I have(Fuji S5100 and Canon A610) w.r.t. DSLR esp the things I am going to miss in a DSLR.
First thing the DSLR is bulky, you need a seperate bag to carry the camera body and lenses. Only the micro four third cameras can be similar size to the Semi-DSLRs. But they are costly and lenses is a head ache. My ideal upgrade for the Fuji S5100 in my opinion is a camera on the lines of Sigma DP1 / DP2 with a zoom lens with a range of 28 to 400 mm (or above) preferably with F2.8 to 4.

Then my Fuji S5100 focal length is equivalent to 35 to 350mm, and F2.8 to 4.1. Now such an equivalent lens on a DSLR would cost a bomb! and weighs a ton!

Originally Posted by yzfrj

True, but somehow "the need to get a DSLR"

Is your need for DSLR got to do with the mirror mechanism and the optical view finder or with the kind of the pictures they take. If it is got nothing to do with the SLR thing. You can have a look at Panasonic G1. Its on par with DSLRs in taking pictures, yes it has the Live View which you are keen on. Its compact. Price is similar to the D3000. And yeah! you can mount other lenses on it. Check this link for lens compatibility.

[SPARKled]

Yes I would agree with kkr2k2 regarding the Panasonic G1 and similar micro 4/3 systems. They have an image quality rivaling DSLRs atleast at lower ISOs but their availability is the only thing of concern as of now at least here in India.

[jaysmokesleaves]

Hi Guys,

I got my Canon EOS 500D with the 18-200mm lens from jjmehta yesterday. After seeing all the kit lenses on offer I feel that the 18-200mm lens is one heck of a deal.
Kit costed: 74k.
Its not as heavy as I read in many reviews. Its focuses quite fast and is quite a capable lens for all ocassions. Ive left it on the body for ever. Im still getting used to the Canon. The clarity of the display is outstandingly sharp. Its delightful to view pics in such clarity.
The camera now is part of my daily travel accessory in my bag.
Thank you all for your inputs which helped finalize my purchase.

Cheers,
J

[TOR]

Originally Posted by kkr2k2

Then my Fuji S5100 focal length is equivalent to 35 to 350mm, and F2.8 to 4.1. Now such an equivalent lens on a DSLR would cost a bomb! and weighs a ton!

This generalization of the f stops is not entirely true, aperture values will be same but the depth of field from the prosumer Fuji will be quite different to that on a d-SLR with even a APS-C standard sensor.

For example the DOF at 2.8 will be equivalent to the DOF at 4 in case of the D-SLR.So if portraiture is ones field of work then the larger sensor makes a lot of sense.

Low light performance is a totally different aspect!

[Hoopoe]

Originally Posted by clevermax

I was thinking about upgrading to CS4 but the reviews says that CS4 is not the one to have, because of its large memory footprint when compared to CS3 and CS2.
BTW, Did you ever notice the common Easter egg in all Photoshop versions?
This was the codename of the project Photoshop 9.0 (CS2)

Hey Clevermax. Photoshop CS4 does have a bit larger footprint but the speed, memory handling and overall capabilities are vastly improved. I have been using it ever since it was launched and faced fewer problems than the previous PS versions. We can talk privately about this if you have specific questions.