[yzfrj]

Originally Posted by kkr2k2

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.

Thanks for the advice.
My SLR thing is comparable to getting a 4x4 just for the capability to take it off the road and in reality I might never take it off the road.

From what I saw G1 is 10k expensive than D3000 at this time.
As you pointed out G1 is a whole new breed of camera.

[StarScream]

Originally Posted by SPARKled

Yes you do have options for the 80-400. The Sigma 150-500 OS is as good or better than the slow Nikon 80-400. In fact the focusing with the HSM motor makes the 80-400 a no go now. Even Tokina now has the 12-24 with the lens motor for AF with newer bodies. The 70-200 by Sigma and Tamron are pretty good and they compare well with the Nikon 80 - 200 as well as the 70-200 VR. Not to mention all the third party lenses are cheaper than their nikon counter parts. Nikon will slowly but surely update all their lenses soon with G and AF-S designations without any doubt.

oh so now we are talking third-party lenses? I thought we were talking Nikon range only. You keep moving the goal posts in this discussion every time a factual answer is put forth.

Looking at the new market share reports Nikon are clawing back to the place they gave up to Canon a few years back and by the looks of it, yes they are abandoning their back ward compatibility philosophy too. But I am sure they will provide it with their top bodies even in the future. In fact this was seen even during their film body days when they removed AI and AI-S metering capability with their entry level SLRs and now they are going further with the introduction of the G lenses instead of the D lenses. The screw driven AF may be old and arcahaic but don't discount it as something primitive or un-sophisticated. Except for the noise it generates during AF action it is as accurate and in same cases faster to focus than eqivalent AFS or USM lenses. Take the Nikon 85 1.4 vs Canon 85 1.2 for example. The focusing speed when used with a high torque motor body like the F6,F5,D2X etc will shame many an AF-S lens in speed of focusing.

Spark, you've seen the lenses I have, right? So I obviously don't have a problem with the screw-drive system. I actually want them to include it in all their bodies for greatest compatibility with the Nikkor range. However, it is archaic because a) it is noisy b) certain lenses like my 80-200 suffer from massive torque recoil (it's like shooting a gun) and c) the beauty of the AFS or USM system is that it is not dependent on the body. Even a low-end body can drive the best glass without a drop in AF performance.

One day Nikon may upgrade their lens line up but they are very slow. There are a number of lenses in their line up that have crying out for an upgrade but they haven't done it, choosing instead to introduce a plethora of consumer DX AFS zooms.

You're not comparing like to like with the Canon 85/1.2 vs the Nikon 85/1.4. 1.2 vs 1.4 might not seem like much but the Canon weighs twice as much as the Nikon. There is just more glass to move around. You can't stack all the odds in favor of the Nikon - best body, lighter lens and then compare. A better test for AFS/USM superiority would be to put the Nikon on an entry level screw-drive AF body versus the Canon on an entry-level body and then see the difference.

That's a pretty good kit you have. That 28 2.8 is one I am going to have in my hands soon. So do you scan your images taken with the Leica or just use slides or print them? Boy you have a classic in your hands and I hope you never intend to dispose it off.

The 28/2.8 AIS, manual focus or the 28/2.8 AFD? The AF 28/2.8 is not a patch on the old one, which was a classic in sharpness and close focusing ability. I use the Leica mostly to shoot B&W print film. I don't intend to sell it.

About Leica, well I still think Leica in today's age is over rated. The Toyota vs the 911 analogy does not really hold ground here as the 911 is a far superior car to anything Toyota has been able to dish out save for the new electronics bits which are not really the indicator of a superior car. But Japanese glass today is as good as German glass and their cameras don't really compare except for the aesthetic and the fun element. Annie Leiboivitz as you rightly shoots canon for her bread and butter, had she shot Leica any more than she does now, she would have be bankrupt sooner.

You asked for one photographer. I gave you a name. A Leica rangefinder doesn't work very well for focal lengths 90mm and above. Using another system for longer focal lengths becomes imperative. For unobtrusiveness, less weight and sheer picture quality a Leica cannot be beat. Having shot with quality Nikon glass I can tell you that the images they produce cannot compare with Leica in terms of `creaminess'. The Leica has a surreal quality to it. Nikkors have Japanese precision going for them - sharp and contrasty but it's not the same.

The M9 looks interesting but hope they don't botch it up like the M8 magenta debacle. But man, did you see the price of the M lenses and the body. Phew

There is a reason why they command those prices and a reason why people pay them.

@sandeep.mishra: the Sigma 30 1.4 is another lens that comes to mind immediately as fast low light prime.

I wouldn't touch a Sigma with a barge pole, a bit like how I wouldn't touch a Skoda. Tell me Spark, if Sigma is as good as Nikon and Nikon is as good as Leica, then Sigma is as good as Leica, correct?

[SPARKled]

Originally Posted by StarScream

oh so now we are talking third-party lenses? I thought we were talking Nikon range only. You keep moving the goal posts in this discussion every time a factual answer is put forth.

I think we need to be more open in our approach. Why cant we discuss 3rd party lenses which work as well as the original Nikkors on Nikon bodies. If there is a customer for the 600 f4 and 500 f4 and the likes its unlikely that he would be asking for opinions for a body on this forum.

Originally Posted by StarScream

The 28/2.8 AIS, manual focus or the 28/2.8 AFD? The AF 28/2.8 is not a patch on the old one, which was a classic in sharpness and close focusing ability.

No I am not talking of the AF 28 but the AIS 28.

Originally Posted by StarScream

I wouldn't touch a Sigma with a barge pole, a bit like how I wouldn't touch a Skoda. Tell me Spark, if Sigma is as good as Nikon and Nikon is as good as Leica, then Sigma is as good as Leica, correct?

Well no of course not, Sigma or Nikon may be as good as Leica, But for the average D3000 and the D5000 customers or the average advanced amateurs like myself and many more D90 and D300 or the even the D3 customers, I would seriously look long and hard at the the 105 macro, 150 macro, 30 1.4, 50 1.4, 100-300 f4, 70-200 2.8, 500 4.5, 300-800, 150-500 and some more EX lenses. I would look hard at a few Tamrons and Tokinas too. Lets not dismiss Sigma on face value.

[StarScream]

Originally Posted by SPARKled

No I am not talking of the AF 28 but the AIS 28.

Well no of course not, Sigma or Nikon may be as good as Leica, But for the average D3000 and the D5000 customers or the average advanced amateurs like myself and many more D90 and D300 or the even the D3 customers, I would seriously look long and hard at the the 105 macro, 150 macro, 30 1.4, 50 1.4, 100-300 f4, 70-200 2.8, 500 4.5, 300-800, 150-500 and some more EX lenses. I would look hard at a few Tamrons and Tokinas too. Lets not dismiss Sigma on face value.

And what would you use the 28 on? What's your kit?
I'm talking from experience when I say I wouldn't touch them. Their image and build quality was suspect. Perhaps things have changed.

[SPARKled]

Originally Posted by StarScream

And what would you use the 28 on? What's your kit?
I'm talking from experience when I say I wouldn't touch them. Their image and build quality was suspect. Perhaps things have changed.

Yes the cheaper Sigmas are a suspect but the EX line is their professional line and is quite good and compares very favorably with the Nikon and Canon top guns.

I have a D50, F65 and D200 (sold it about a month back). Glass is 12-24 F4, 35-70 2.8, 50 1.4, 50 1.8, 85 1.8, 180 2.8, 300 f4, 1.4 TC, 100 3.5 Vivitar macro and the 18-55 and 55-200 kit lenses.

I am trying to procure a 105 2.5 and a 28 2.8 AIS from KEH and hope to use it in my next D300 or wahetever I will buy soon.

Future Plans : Upgrade path will be 600 f4 followed by the 300 2.8. The 300 f4 and the 12-24 will be used to part fund these. Final step will be full frame body and 14-24 2.8. Thats it I will be done then. As you may seen I am prime fanatic and not a zoom lover.

[maven]

Great to see Leica being discussed, i had posted a Leica query only a few days back having not come across much of a mention about this brand in the posts. My fascination with this camera is growing and with the onward research journey --

Leica & market share: the S costs 15grand+ and the M is 7grand+, and we havent even added the lenses. So its the cost that is the deterrent. The difference isnt even marginal its huge. Would some one be willing to pay so much more? to each his own.

Leica & Image quality: seems no two ways about this. the output looks superior- colour renditions, very crisp snaps, amount of detail captured etc.

[StarScream]

Originally Posted by SPARKled

Yes the cheaper Sigmas are a suspect but the EX line is their professional line and is quite good and compares very favorably with the Nikon and Canon top guns.

I have a D50, F65 and D200 (sold it about a month back). Glass is 12-24 F4, 35-70 2.8, 50 1.4, 50 1.8, 85 1.8, 180 2.8, 300 f4, 1.4 TC, 100 3.5 Vivitar macro and the 18-55 and 55-200 kit lenses.

I am trying to procure a 105 2.5 and a 28 2.8 AIS from KEH and hope to use it in my next D300 or wahetever I will buy soon.

Future Plans : Upgrade path will be 600 f4 followed by the 300 2.8. The 300 f4 and the 12-24 will be used to part fund these. Final step will be full frame body and 14-24 2.8. Thats it I will be done then. As you may seen I am prime fanatic and not a zoom lover.

Do you shoot a lot of wildlife?? You seem to have a preference for longer lenses. If you get the 300/2.8 then I recommend a Tamron 2x AFS tele-converter that will take you to 600/4 for the least cost. On a DX body it will get you even further.

[kkr2k2]

Originally Posted by maven

Great to see Leica being discussed....

Lets talk Leica for a while. The new M9 is a not priced high when compared to other full frame cameras. Only thing it is a Rangefinder mechanism rather than SLR. Rangefinder mechanism and SLR mechanism are two different technologies of photography. Its like reciprocating engines and rotary engines, both are internal combustion engine technologies.

Few days ago, I came across an interesting point of view(in and online blog) on Leica cameras for beginners, who are serious about learning photography. The author says, buy a used Leica for around $1000, learn / practise with it for a year. Lets assume you spend around $200 for film and its development. After a year you can sell your Leica. The good thing about the Leica cameras is that they hold their value or sometimes their value is appreciated. You will recover your $1000 and if you are lucky you might get something between $1000 to $1200. Now your money is back with you, go buy your favorite DSLR or any brand new model.

EDIT:
the links:

The Online Photographer: Why It Has To Be a Leica

The Online Photographer: The Leica as Teacher

[DieselFan]

Originally Posted by kkr2k2

Few days ago, I came across an interesting point of view(in and online blog) on Leica cameras for beginners, who are serious about learning photography. The author says, buy a used Leica for around $1000, learn / practise with it for a year. Lets assume you spend around $200 for film and its development. After a year you can sell your Leica. The good thing about the Leica cameras is that they hold their value or sometimes their value is appreciated. You will recover your $1000 and if you are lucky you might get something between $1000 to $1200. Now your money is back with you, go buy your favorite DSLR or any brand new model.

EDIT:
the links:

The Online Photographer: Why It Has To Be a Leica

The Online Photographer: The Leica as Teacher

I do not fully agree with this point of view. As I believe good photography is got by the substance which is 6 inches behind the camera. Camera is just a tool. Give a box camera to a good photographer and you may get a masterpiece. World famous masterpiece photograph even today are black and whites taken using very basic equipment. Best photographer in the history of mankind is Ansel Adams who in 1930s and 1940s took great photos using very simple equipment. see more in -http://www.anseladams.com/

[SPARKled]

Originally Posted by StarScream

Do you shoot a lot of wildlife?? You seem to have a preference for longer lenses. If you get the 300/2.8 then I recommend a Tamron 2x AFS tele-converter that will take you to 600/4 for the least cost. On a DX body it will get you even further.

Yes thats my main area of photography. Birding mostly. The 2X I had used degraded image quality quite a bit wheres the 1.4X is almost transparent on my 300F4 AFS. Yes I agree with you, thats the most economical way to to a quality 600 but in birding, even a 600 + 1.4 TC + 1.5X crop of the APS sensor body is limiting most of the times. You just cant have enough reach. But yes I am planning to get the 2X as well as the 1.7X TC when ever funds permit.

@kkr2k2 : But why only a Leica to begin your photography? Get any of the fully mechanical bodies such as the FM3 and some manual primes and you will learn your photography equally well. You can sell these back again to recover your investment with no loss and you have saved some bucks as well. Ofcourse the rich beginners can start with a Leica too.

[kkr2k2]

Originally Posted by SPARKled

Yes thats my main area of photography. Birding mostly. The 2X I had used degraded image quality quite a bit wheres the 1.4X is almost transparent on my 300F4 AFS. Yes I agree with you, thats the most economical way to to a quality 600 but in birding, even a 600 + 1.4 TC + 1.5X crop of the APS sensor body is limiting most of the times. You just cant have enough reach. But yes I am planning to get the 2X as well as the 1.7X TC when ever funds permit.

I guess you wanted to say 300.
You already have other cameras but for someone who is about to purchase a DSLR for wild-life photography, I think a four-thrids cameras is a good option. I think Oly E410 is a VFM purchase.
300 x 2X crop x 1.4TC is around 800mm, while on the 1.5X crop DSLR it is around 600mm.

@kkr2k2 : But why only a Leica to begin your photography? Get any of the fully mechanical bodies such as the FM3 and some manual primes and you will learn your photography equally well. You can sell these back again to recover your investment with no loss and you have saved some bucks as well. Ofcourse the rich beginners can start with a Leica too.

Since Leica was mentioned, I just put up the link. Its not my point of view. But it was an interesting read.

BTW, I purchased a Canonet QL19 for $35 including S&H from ebay USA.. Surprisingly I can recover my money if I wish to sell it without much set back. The camera is in near mint condition, only thing is the cocking lever has play in it. It also came with the original leather case. But for the sake of classic camera, I would not want to sell it. I think mine is a 1965 make.

Here is a pic of it:

[SPARKled]

Originally Posted by kkr2k2

I guess you wanted to say 300.
You already have other cameras but for someone who is about to purchase a DSLR for wild-life photography, I think a four-thrids cameras is a good option. I think Oly E410 is a VFM purchase.
300 x 2X crop x 1.4TC is around 800mm, while on the 1.5X crop DSLR it is around 600mm.

Since Leica was mentioned, I just put up the link. Its not my point of view. But it was an interesting read.

BTW, I purchased a Canonet QL19 for $35 including S&H from ebay USA.. Surprisingly I can recover my money if I wish to sell it without much set back. The camera is in near mint condition, only thing is the cocking lever has play in it. It also came with the original leather case. But for the sake of classic camera, I would not want to sell it. I think mine is a 1965 make.

Actually I meant the 600 and not the 300. The point I was trying to make was that in wild life photography there is nothing like too much reach. I know I will be asking for more even after 1260 mm I can reach with the 1.4TC and the 1.5X crop on the 600 F4. Olympus is a good option agreed, but shooting in dark canopies and forests will require good high ISO performance and they do not have anything beyond 300 2.8 in the kind of glass I am looking for. For wild life you need excellent AF performance too. Only the E3 has acceptable AF performance that can come close to the D300.

Wow you sure snagged a gem for that price. Congrats on your purchase.

[janitha]

Originally Posted by kkr2k2

BTW, I purchased a Canonet QL19 for $35 including S&H from ebay USA.

I started photography in 1972 with a Canonet QL25 which had a f 2.5 lens while yours have f 1.9 one!

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by SPARKled

Olympus is a good option agreed, but shooting in dark canopies and forests will require good high ISO performance

E3, E30, E620 don't suffer from high ISO handicaps.

Originally Posted by SPARKled

and they do not have anything beyond 300 2.8 in the kind of glass I am looking for.

Bigma is available for 4/3 system. Checkout BHPian Sreeraj's bird shots using E500+Bigma: India Nature Watch

Originally Posted by SPARKled

For wild life you need excellent AF performance too. Only the E3 has acceptable AF performance that can come close to the D300.

E3's AF is just outstanding, it is practically instanteneous with SWD lenses. But no so fast with non-SWD lenses. I use E3 + 12-60mm combo for all my offroad photography. I rarely use the 50-200mm these days.

[SPARKled]

Originally Posted by Samurai

E3, E30, E620 don't suffer from high ISO handicaps.

Bigma is available for 4/3 system. Checkout BHPian Sreeraj's bird shots using E500+Bigma: India Nature Watch

E3's AF is just outstanding, it is practically instanteneous with SWD lenses. But no so fast with non-SWD lenses. I use E3 + 12-60mm combo for all my offroad photography. I rarely use the 50-200mm these days.

Wow!!! Sreeraj is definitely using the Bigma to its fullest capability. Congratulations to on your fine camera. I was seriously thinking of adding the E3 and 150-500 OS for my hand held wild life photography before I get the Nikon heavy guns, as this would be a pretty cheap and robust way to get to 1000mm without much money. But now I am waiting to see how micro 4/3 develops and of course saving for my dream.. the 600F4.