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-49.html)

I tried out an old Nikon mirror lens once. It was pathetic. I'm sure if you use it carefully enough, you can get some decent images out of it. However, that can be said about the crappiest P&S as well.

From what I remember, a 300mm on a 4/3rd camera gives the same field of view as a 600mm on full frame. I dont think you are too badly off ;).

The only really long lens I have is a Sigma 400mm f5.6. Its surprisingly good in IQ and from what I've seen on forums etc, it outperforms the xx-400 zooms on this front. Slow focusing and heavy with no IS/VR though. I'm not sure if they made a 4/3rd version. I picked up mine used for a very decent price (under 20k if I remember correctly).

I know, but it will make me poorer by $6000, so no thanks. Actually, using my 1.4x TC I can achieve 560mm EFL at F/4.9, 200x1.4 * 2.

The Sigma 135-400mm and 500mm are available for 4/3, one of the member Sreeraj has a Bigma for his Olympus E-500.

Quoting your source "From a noise and noise reduction point of view, all four cameras do pretty well up to ISO 400 with the Sony and Canon rendering the fine detail slightly better. From ISO 800 upwards the Canon pulls ahead, though. There is a little more chroma noise in the gray panel but the level of detail being retained, particularly at ISO 1600 makes it a class leader and, as we see on the next page, chroma noise can be turned down without any great detriment to image quality."
Whats wrong here???

So if someone who wants to start from a 50D is incapable of handling the camera??? Why such an assumption?

Please dont bring in esoteric comparisons with Jets in here. Every camera basically does the same thing, some do it better thats all.



Point me to a single post where I said its just the equipment that matters? I want to start from a L series lens because I know that I want quality, does that makes me incapable of handling an normal consumer lens?

Oh well I was just adding to your perogative and that was making the best use of your equipment.

NV and ET, cool it guys!

We all know - both skills and equipment is important for photography!
And if one has best of both, undoubtly he will be a great photographer!

Now, a question for SLR experts:
For a newbie in a dSLR world (like me), what lens would you suggest to start with?
Assuming I'll be getting a Nikon D90 body, the kit lens options are: 18-55 VR, 18-105 VR and 18-200 VR.

Fortunately advanced dSLR is not like a Nunchaku. The dSLR will still let a novice take decent shots, while with the Nunchaku he will beat himself black and blue.:D

So, even if you start with a D90, you should be good. Go for 18-200mm VR which is a good walkaround lens for beginners.

finneyp, if you are starting out then I suggest get the kit lens i.e. 18-105VR. According to another Internet expert (albeit a real pro photographer) - Thom Hogan - the kit lens can't be beat for value:
18-105mm AF-S DX Lens Review by Thom Hogan

The 18-200 is pricey. You can always upgrade to it if you feel the need. These super-zooms are all slow lenses and perhaps you can supplement the kit lens with the new $150 35/1.8 DX, both for less than the 18-200.

Knowledge battering has become a common sight on T-bhp off late purely because the info is right here.One just has to read through all the threads and make himself enlightened.

And once this happens we end up in a situation where its best described "wrestling with a pig in mud".After sometime we realize that while we are getting dirty, the pig is actually enjoying it.Now it all depends if we wanna represent the pig or the enlightened human and walk away from the wrestle.

finneyp dude , Would be nice to know how much your getting the D90 for. for reference in HYd , the prices are

Grey :
Body only = 42,400
with 18-105mm = 15,000 extra

Retail:
Body only = 57k
18-200mm VR lens only = 43k

Dear Camera Gurus,

I wish to buy a black-and-white digital camera. Please guide me. Most cameras are black-and-black and the one black-and-white camera I saw was very expensive.

Here is the black-and-white camera.



Thanks for your help and lighten up, it's just cameras. Arguing endlessly about this is like writers arguing about what pen is better to write with. I hope you understand.

Sam.

Thanks Sam:uncontrol, that was a much needed breath of fresh air. It was getting to a point when I thought that E_T & NV would take their pistols out to shoot instead of their cameras:D

OT: News bit: our old man is bored with this black and white combo and planning for a bigger number in maybe a shade of orange?
:uncontrol:

I am sorry, you are missing the point. Lot of learning happens because of these arguments, so thank the pigs. As long as arguments are kept civil, as long as only subject at hand is being discussed, I see nothing wrong in arguments. In fact we do that a lot in my office, we call it brainstorming.

Sumurai san , what im trying to imply(not instigate :)) is there's a lot of learning that can be done purely by reading through whats already on T-bhp. When arguments arise due to lack of efforts or under utilization of this site, that's when we have the "enlightened" versus "i'm good at googling" kinda arguments.

Apologies though for the wrestle in mud description.

Thanks Samurai, StarScream for the suggestions!
Awaiting inputs from other experts too.

Absynth, retail price in India is very high!
I am trying to get it from US.

@Extremetorque
Buddy,
I just happened to attend a meeting of the Amateur documentary photogs of San Francisco just a couple of days ago. The main speaker was Mr.Colin Finlay, famous National Geographic photographer well known for his work world over. I was reperesenting the team from my university, and since my good freind Unni works for Mr. Finlay I had a chance to extract a small interview for my school magazine, One of my many questions, was "How far does equipment really matter in photography?"
This his reply - "Well It depends on what you are looking for, In my case I use different equipment for different requirements. I seldom use very long lens since I like to be in the action, better compositions and moments comes with me sharing the energy space with my subject. I know that you youngsters put a lot of emphasis on equipment, hence your question. But you know what, _______ equipment. After 20 years of experience in the industry, the biggest lesson I learnt is that...photography is about telling stories and If you can tell a story with your pinhole camera, a film camera or a digital camera...then what is the common factor there? Its you and only you. Just stop worrying about your equipment and reach a point where you can adapt within minutes to any camera, its all about knowing the strengths and weaknesses of a device and using it in the circumstances that its abilities suit you best, and then using that experience to extract the best out of it. You can crib about what your gear can't do, or max it at where it does best."

He was being very general I suppose, and a when a national geographic photographer with 20 years of experience shooting world over says this, maybe there is something to it.

Regards,
TG.

Well I think the discussion is going nowhere now and all we are doing is repeating things. I rest my case.

@torqueguru.... have a look at his gear here Microsoft Professional Photography: Icon of Imaging Colin Finlay

For one last time.... gear alone wont make you a good photographer but with right gear you will end up doing it much better. One shouldnt bother about his gear when clicking and it is absolutely true but you should have the right gear at the first place. As I said earlier, pro's never talk about gear, they let their pictures do the talking but that doesnt means they dont care about gear but they care more about the pictures they are taking.