![]() | |
Originally Posted by shajufx
(Post 1758965)
Good points there buddy ! I agree that upgrading to a DSLR will not make you a professional overnite. It is a journey with lot of hard work, reading, discussions, experiments and correcting lot of myths that sleep in our minds about photography. This is one field nobody achieves an instant stardom. I have been shooting since 10 years and Olympus IS 500 (film camera) was my first camera Olympus IS-500 Review - PhotographyBLOG I moved to a Point & Shoot Canon IXUS 800 IS Canon PowerShot SD700 IS Digital ELPH: Digital Photography Review Again I moved to Nikon D60 mid of 2009 Nikon D60 Review: 1. Introduction: Digital Photography Review My 9 years were spent in just clicks and nothing of a learning curve. Although I had the learning desire right from childhood (1970 onwards my father had an Agfa camera), I never started the learning until I got hold of the D60. Its an expensive affair to seriously get into DSLR world. I have already sold my 18-55 VR and 55-200 VR lenses. Got a Nikon 35mm f1.8 G, waiting for a Sigma 17-70 f2.8 MACRO HSM and a 70-300 or 150-500. Decision is very difficult (about the 150-500) considering the price range, lack of enough compatability and result reviews. Sigma 18-250 DC OS HSM seems to be a good lens as an all-rounder. I have got very good feed-backs on 150-500 from canon users, but not a convincing feeback from Nikon guys. Right now I consider my D60 days are learning time and like a babyhood stage. There are plenty of clubs and groups within various forums based on different cities that can help a lot in the learning stage. Few interactions itself are helping me a lot. To summarise: You are your own master in a way, you hear lectures, you attend group meets, you read many books, you see lot of works by others, BUT.....if your DSLR is mostly in its bag, then its a 'sleeping hobby', not going to improve anytime. Thats what I am trying to fight out within myself. :) Sorry for the long post, I hope I havent gone OT here ! Note: If anyone is using a 17-70 2.8 or 150-500 or 18-250 sigmas, please comment, it would be a good help.:thumbs up |
Originally Posted by fatboyslim
(Post 1769365)
1. Camera Body: D-90 expected to purchased from e-bay. Asking price ebay 44,000 INR Did not want to go for the kit lens 18-105 mm VR. No offense, but I feel its a bit short for my passion for wildlife. So the lenses are as follows: a. 18mm-55mm DX VR Nikkor (From India) b. 70m-300mm VR (From USA): 1. Nikon D-90 + 18-105 DX VR mm+ 70-300 mm VR+ NIkon carry bag for Us $ 1580. Total 73000 INR. Does any one think it is a good idea? I could potentially ask my colleague? Could there issue with customs? |
Originally Posted by Live To Jive
(Post 1769572)
Is that a good enough reason to opt for the Canon over the Nikon? |
Originally Posted by navin
(Post 1770427)
IQ, handling, and lens sets are all better reasons. 1. what will you photograph 2. which system has better lenses for what you will photograph etc... these are more pertinent than a CCD vs CMOS debate. |
Originally Posted by DieselAddikt
(Post 1768207)
@ Live To Jive Neither of them have live view. |
Originally Posted by MileCruncher
(Post 1739350)
IS Lens are one swhich have inbuilt image stabilisers (in the lens and not body). So in case of camera shake, the lens takes care of it and helps in images not getting blurried. On the warranty front, what are the chances of something going wrong in the Camera Body. Does Nikon have international warranty? |
Originally Posted by Sankar
(Post 1740000)
Jango, Apart from what MC have said, the IS lens is said to be optically superior to its non IS counterpart. This is another good reason to opt for the 18-55 IS lens. |
Originally Posted by anshurao
(Post 1741804)
jango, with an IS lens you also can shoot at slightly slower shutter speeds in low light conditions without having to worry about camera shake. |
Originally Posted by Live To Jive
(Post 1770449)
I don't know whether CCD or CMOS will make any difference to me? |
Originally Posted by Live To Jive
(Post 1770627)
As per this review, the Canon 1000D has Live View. The Nikon D3000 does not have it. |
Originally Posted by Live To Jive
(Post 1769572)
Between the Canon 1000D and Nikon D3000, the Canon 1000D comes with a CMOS sensor whereas the Nikon D3000 comes with a CCD sensor. Is that a good enough reason to opt for the Canon over the Nikon? |
Originally Posted by navin
(Post 1770828)
For most parts, It wont. Live View is not very useful unless the camera has a tilting LCD screen. Live view is what all P&S's have. Most DSLRs however do not. BTW I have a camera that has LiveView but not a tilting screen so I know how useful or rather useless liveview is. |
Originally Posted by clevermax
(Post 1770840)
I don't think you should be worrying too much about whether it is a CCD or a CMOS sensor. Compare the other aspects which are of importance to you. |
All times are GMT +5.5. The time now is 01:23. | |