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-714.html)

How is the magnification of lenses calculated? I mean on binoculars and stuff they clearly state it like 8X, 10X etc. But what about DSLR lenses?
They only mention focal length as 55-250 mm, 18-55 mm etc. Please help.

I wish I was in US. I could have picked up this combo. Here in India you pay almost as much for the D7000 with 18-105 :( Not fair. The 18-200 here costs about 55k INR.

Its so easy. Magnification for 55-250 = 250/55 ~ 5x! For 18-55 it is 55/18 ~ 3x :)

But then how come a 55-250 lens took a closer picture of a subject than the 18-135 lens when i tried them at a store? (Both used on same camera and on full zoom)

The 55-250 will take a closer picture of the subject as its nearer to the subject when at full zoom. 250mm will be closer to the subject than 135mm. Apart from the zoom factor, you have to take into account the focal length of the lens as well. Zoom factor is relative to the focal length and hence a higher zoom factor need not mean that it will take closer pictures of the subject. Hope this helps

Hello Guys,

I am travelling to Australia next month and considering jumping to the DSLR segment before going or buy from there. I looked around for deals of various DSLRs.

I checked out Canon 550d, 600d, Nikon d3200 & Nikon d90. I know not all are from same segment. But i checked what i liked or rather what suited my budget I some how did not like the hold and feel of the canon models. I am not saying they are bad in any way. But that "WOW" "NICE" thing didnt happen. So i shortlisted D3200 & D90. I know D90 is a league above and expensive too and i am in double minds IF i want to spend that much on a camera now or spend that extra savings on the holiday.

So after all thought process and various discussions with cousins / friends I have come to a conclusion.

1. D3200
or
2. D90 after a couple of months. But then holiday will be done so the whole fun factor of using the new DSLR will be gone.

I want to know if there are any D3200 users here. Also i checked up prices across a few sites here as well as in Australia

Nikon D3200 / 18-55mm Kit

Rs. 36812 at FK
AUS$ 500 i.e. approx 27,000/-.

Should i buy from here or buy it once there? Also, a friend is suggesting to buy

Nikon D3200 / 18-105mm Kit sold @ AUS $700. i.e. INR 37000/-.

So technically For the price of 18-55 kit here i can get 18-105 in Australia.

Also, some online stores in Australia are selling Nikon D90 / 18-105 VR Kit Lens at $750-800. I dont take videos at all. so HD videos and all is not at all important for me.

Source : http://www.shoppingsquare.com.au/p_5...R_Camera_With_

What i need to know from the gurus is :

1. How good or bad is the D3200?
2. Which lens combo is suggested?
3. I am currently using Fuji HS10 30x zoom. But i do feel it lacks on many things. Lets not get into that here. So is D3200 a good leap for me.

I do enjoy photography. Not that knowledgeable but i use the M mode quite a bit rather the Auto mode always. I have a habit of taking one nice shot in Auto mode and then playing around with the Manual modes at ease and try and capture it the way i like it.

Thanks a lot to all in advance.

Regards,

Harshol
If you have not handled a DSLR so far then buy one asap and practice before going on your vacation. Depending on a new camera on an expensive vacation is risky.

You just missed on a great deal on the D3200 on homeshop18 superdeals. It was available for 31.5k with the 18-55 lens.

I'd say buy camera body in India only else you won't get warranty benefits. You can buy lenses in Australia.

Australia has a GST (or its equivalent), so the prices will be more than say in Singapore (here you get a GST refund). So do compare the prices in India, Australia and Singapore before deciding.

Unfortunately my return flight was on 10th, and I am already back in India. I was not really planning to buy anything, I just wanted to look around.

Meanwhile, I am getting out 4/3rd system. I have managed to sell 50-200mm lens for 27k via jjmehta, the 50mm lens for $350 on Amazon, both were 6 years old. I have also put up the 12-60mm and the E-3 on Amazon. Kinda feeling sad about giving up the best set of dSLR and lenses I owned. But dSLRs are no more relevant for me considering the more manageable and lighter mirrorless systems. So I am bidding the dSLR world bye bye. Well, I still have the E-500 & 14-54mm + 40-150mm lens, which I won't sell. That remains my backup set since 2008.

Currently Nex and m4/3 are the only serious choices in EVIL world. But the NEX system had very little lens choice, leaving m4/3 as the only real choice.

Edit: Just now the 12-60mm got sold for $500. :)

Samurai - does the EVIL system / universe match up in terms of quality in your eyes?

Well, it depends on your definition of quality.

My dSLR journey started with Olympus E-500 & 14-54mm F/2.8-3.5 back in early 2006. That had 4/3 format sensor. Later in 2008 I upgraded to much better and weather sealed Olympus E-3 & 12-60mm F/2.8-4 lens, and a much improved 4/3 format sensor. Now I might mostly go for weather sealed Olympus OMD-EM5 with m4/3 sensor, which is the same size and much improved CMOS sensor from Sony.

The Olympus OMD-EM5 is a huge upgrade over Olympus E-3. So there is no downside when it comes to body. I can live with EVF over OVF. Also, now there is decent enough lens collection, although expensive. That pretty much covers it for me. My main reason to switch is size, I prefer to carry much smaller camera than dSLRs. My experience with E-PL1 since 20 months has convinced me of that.

But, this may not cover for others. A person looking at entry level Nikon or Canon camera might think dSLR is lot more superior in quality than 4/3 because of the slightly bigger sensor. Now, if that person is capable of exploiting the difference between 4/3 and APS-C sensors, then may be they are right. But then most of them stick with kit lens, making it all a moot point.

Any EVIL camera can easily satisfy the needs of 90% of the dSLR buyers here. And I feel I am in that 90%, hence the move to mirrorless where I can get the size advantage.

The OMD-E5 is a game changer (an expensive game changer at that) for sure. Noise in low light is apparently amazing and the retro looks are a plus.

But one look at the price brings a question up in my mind - why wouldn't I save up a bit and go full frame?

Yes I shoot with Alpha but I do not consider the A99 - Not mainly because of the affordability factor but then why?

They have not provided a mirror lock up feature in it while could have. A mirror lock up would be a good thing as it will let all the light in, for manual focus shooters and for astro photographers. A99 has an on-chip phase detection so I guess come level of AF will even work if there is no T-Mirror at all.

Why did they keep the mirror without even a lock up feature - Sony wants to keep the SLT range as it is, and want to draw a line between the MLIC and SLT. This is not a good thing for the new gen SLT users as they are forced to always have that T-Mirror in the light path when there are technologies by which it can be taken away, if not for full time but for some shooting needs at least.

Astro photographers would not like the T-Mirror because it is accused of causing some ghost-reflections while shooting. I have personally never seen this but they say it can be an issue. This is a night shot I took yesterday with my alpha and I didn't see any ghost reflections induced by the T-Mirror.

Size and Weight is a big issue.
You need to ask yourself if you are ok to lug around a kilo of kit when you move out. I won't. If you want a small camera you can carry everywhere and still get the DSLR quality? Apparently lot of people will make the switch then. And that is what is happening.

Experts a very Noob question here.

How do exposure compensation and metering work? What I actually want to know is, if I shoot in complete manual mode with even the ISO set manually, will the metering mode have any effect on the outcome? I have been trying to look up this on net, but getting lost. Some people say it does effect, but I fail to understand how would it effect the exposure, when all settings are manually set by us.

I am in Australia and from that perspective, you will end up paying quite a bit more for a DSLR here than back in india. GST. Doesn't apply to you, as when you will be going back to india, you can claim it back on everything you bought in last 30days.

Here we pay Australia tax, which simply means if an item is imported in aus, its price gets inflated by 20-50% just because of local retailers. Even locals had stopped buying from big names and go for grey importers like dwi.

Metering will still keep telling you whether you are under/over exposing but final image solely depends on your settings if your in m mode.