[humyum]

Originally Posted by ariendj

got a nikon 35mm prime lens and planning to get a reversing ring to try macro shots!!
anyone have prior experience in using such techniques!

I have a reversal ring which I used for the 18-55 Canon Kit Lens. Its useless as the depth of field is too much which makes even photographs of a pin look ugly. Don't waste money on reversal rings

[chaudhrysan]

If you are not using IS/VR lenses, just make sure that your shutter speed does not go slower than 1/(focal length) that you are using (1/(focal length*crop factor), in case of a non full frame body), and you should be fine.

If that is not possible, use a tripod or flash.

If you can work to improve your hand holding technique, you can shoot at lower shutter speeds also, depending on your skills.

I don't think VR is that important for smaller focal lengths. In fact, IMO, it tends to allow flaws to creep into your shooting habits. Slow lenses (like the usual kit ones) are inherently not good for low light. VR may help to some extent but I would not bank on it to give me guaranteed good results. I would prefer to use the flash or a tripod/monopod, depending on the scene.

@khadoos boy

Could you please clarify camera stabilization setup for nikon bodies.

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by chaudhrysan

I don't think VR is that important for smaller focal lengths. In fact, IMO, it tends to allow flaws to creep into your shooting habits.

Isn't that a little old fashioned thinking? I remember hearing such comments when VR/IS was introduced in the last decade. But VR/IS is here to stay, one might as well use it to the full extent.

People complained a lot about power steering when Tata Sierra/Estate introduced it 20+ years back. Even said it tends to allow flaws to creep into your driving habits. Many accidents were blamed on it.

I can often shoot handheld slower than 1/10 sec in my camera thanks to IS. See this: http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/shifti...ml#post2938596

I have shot handheld at 1/8 and 1/5 seconds without shake at 24mm effective FL.

[clevermax]

^ exactly. I had made some blur free picture even at 1/8s in my camera having sensor stabilization.

[Imran.Syed]

Originally Posted by amitk26

Forget about Nikon or Canon part just focus on what you are going to shoot and work out on total cost of ownership. For some usage Nikon system may work cheaper and for others Canon may workout to be cheaper to own.
Consider what lenses you will need and work out total system cost.

Also I would suggest Canon 600D over 550D if you are interested in flash photography ( for the reason of mastermode flash and atriculated LCD)

I am not going to work on any particular kind of photography. will focus on every area. plus the 600D is over my budget by 6-7k.
I read about lenses almost an hour daily. I think the nikon 18-55mm kit lens will be enough for the beginning process right?

Originally Posted by khadoos baby

Both canon 550d and Nikon 5100 are VFM. Both priced at aprox 30k . One suggestion that ll give u is to exchange ur kit lens (18-55) with 18-135mm or buy only body and buy 18-135 mm separately. Trust me, it makes sense. Then buy a prime lense- 50mm f/1.8 and you are good for couple of years atleast. The entire thing ll cost you less than 50k which is fantastic deal IMO.

About one brand being better than other, it's totally on personal choice. Please please don't get influenced by sites and forums on net. Only a super expert can make out difference between histograms of two cameras. Also, it's all in the lens and your skills in setup which makes the difference.

How am I sure about it, because I have both the above cameras.

I agree with you. I have personally used both the cameras for days, and found nikon suiting me much more than the canon. I would've almost bought the nikon, if the lenses price thing would'nt had struck me.
And I personally think that it video shoots better too. My personal opinion though.

And that 18-135mm lens makes one hell of a good suggestion. i think I am gonna go with it. I have a vacation coming up, so that extra mm will be awesome.

A bit help. How much do you think a body only nikon d5100 will cost? i am thinking of buying second hand but I dont think anybody would sell body only. maybe I will source it from uk from a friend who will be visiting me shortly. do you recommend second hand body and lens?

Originally Posted by mobike008

After a week or two of research I too came to same conclusion that D5100 is indeed VFM and definetly better than the Canon 550D. I placed my order already and my D5100 should arrive in next 2-3 days

Only downside is buying AF-S or I lens which have in-built motor to support autofocus on a D5100 body. These lens in general are expensive

But, i still would recommend and buy the D5100 and buy the following lens

Prime Lens : Nikkor 35mm or 50mm both at 13K. I chose the 35mm

And, along with Kit lens of 18mm-55mm you should be good atleast for the first one year to practice before graduating to tele-photo, wide angle and macro lens which you can build in coming years

Yeah that autofocus thing is the only keeping downside keeping me away from the nikon. it indeed is the only downside the nikon has IMO.

I dont think I will be going prime lens straightaway. I like khadoosbaby's suggestion. what do you think? Will buying a d5100 body only and 18-135mm lens.

Originally Posted by Behemoth

Actually the Canon also does not have a motor in the body. By default, all their lenses have a built in motor. That is how Canon evolved their design. Nikon however had both designs - motor in body and motor in lens. The motor in body are the semi pro and higher series starting from the D90, while the motor in lens are the entry level cameras. That said the D5100 is very good value for money at this time at around 32k market price. It is much better than the Canon 550d. Go for it!

Okay. I did not know about that. I indeed am going for the nikon.

Guys, according to khadoosbaby's suggestion, I have decided to buy a body only d5100, and a 18-135mm lens. used or new, not yet decided. Any better suggestion as I think its the best one in my budget.

[StarScream]

Originally Posted by joslicx

Both Canon and Nikon have refrained from adding IS to camera body so far. Greedy that they are, they want you to buy the more expensive lenses with IS(or VR as Nikon calls the same thing). For example, just check the prices of Nikkor's popular 70-300 zoom lens with and without VR!!!

That's a little misleading joslicx. The Nikon 70-300G is an all out budget lens with mediocre performance and designed to compete with third-party lens manufacturers.
The 70-300 ED VR is a much better lens with much better performance. It is better built, has a metal mount and ED glass elements. It's not just VR.
You do get $150-200 performance from the 70-300G and $500 performance from the 70-300 ED VR.

Originally Posted by chaudhrysan

If you are not using IS/VR lenses, just make sure that your shutter speed does not go slower than 1/(focal length) that you are using (1/(focal length*crop factor), in case of a non full frame body), and you should be fine.

If that is not possible, use a tripod or flash.

If you can work to improve your hand holding technique, you can shoot at lower shutter speeds also, depending on your skills.

I don't think VR is that important for smaller focal lengths. In fact, IMO, it tends to allow flaws to creep into your shooting habits. Slow lenses (like the usual kit ones) are inherently not good for low light. VR may help to some extent but I would not bank on it to give me guaranteed good results. I would prefer to use the flash or a tripod/monopod, depending on the scene.

Originally Posted by Samurai

Isn't that a little old fashioned thinking? I remember hearing such comments when VR/IS was introduced in the last decade. But VR/IS is here to stay, one might as well use it to the full extent.

The truth lies somewhere in the middle. VR/IS is most useful at longer focal lengths but lenses like the 18-200 VR use it throughout the range, so you you don't switch it off at smaller focal lengths.

However, there isn't a substitute for good technique and steady hands. I have taken shots, without VR at 1/10th of a second with a 24-85 at close to the top end. The weight of the lens and the balance of the camera/lens setup also make a huge difference. If it sits well in your hands, it shoots steadier.

[joslicx]

Originally Posted by StarScream

That's a little misleading joslicx. The Nikon 70-300G is an all out budget lens with mediocre performance and designed to compete with third-party lens manufacturers.
The 70-300 ED VR is a much better lens with much better performance. It is better built, has a metal mount and ED glass elements. It's not just VR.
You do get $150-200 performance from the 70-300G and $500 performance from the 70-300 ED VR.

well StarScream, the technical talk and the stats are for the pros.
The argument here is, if the Nikon bodies had image stabilization, then the 70-300 non-VR for 6000 odd rupees would still satisfy needs of lot of amateurs/hobbyists etc. The 70-300 VR costs at least 5 times more at about 30k (prices from Flipkart) I agree if you want the best then the vr one is to go for, but the non-vr is not 5 times worse really.

If the likes of Sony can give IS in their DSLRs (or SLTs as they are called) what stops Canon and Nikon to offer it as well?

[R2D2]

Originally Posted by joslicx

If the likes of Sony can give IS in their DSLRs (or SLTs as they are called) what stops Canon and Nikon to offer it as well?

I do differ with your view that tech specs are only for pros. Not really! Amateurs and pros alike differentiate equipment based on features and tech specs alike whilst selecting cameras lenses and other accessories. Folks that don't bother with specs mostly confine themselves to PNS systems. :-)

This may provide you with some insights into in-lens vs in body image stabilisation.

http://photographylife.com/lens-stab...-stabilization

[khadoos baby]

Originally Posted by Samurai

Nikon has in-body IS now? Which body?

Sorry for that goof up. Those were 2 separate lines but i was using Iphone application and so got couple of things tangled.
Nope, Canon or Nikon do not have In-camera Stabilization .

My point was, 135mm lens (18-135) without IS can be used effectively. But again, like other posts have mentioned, just zoom doesnt matter. There are just too many parameters involved.

One day I was not on Tbhp and discussion has moved ahead by some 30 posts.

Welcome to crazy world of DSLRs. Nikon has stopped manufacture of 18-135 and has replaced it by 18-105 which is better lens than the former one. You should be able to get the package around 46k or so which is fantastic buy and you ll not regret your decision.

Guys, according to khadoosbaby's suggestion, I have decided to buy a body only d5100, and a 18-135mm lens. used or new, not yet decided. Any better suggestion as I think its the best one in my budget.

Note from the Team-BHP Support: Please use the EDIT or MULTI-QUOTE buttons instead of typing one post after another on the same thread.

[JMaruru]

Checkout, Nikon D5100 w/ 18-55mm lens is available just for $449/- today on 1saleaday!

[skandyhere]

Originally Posted by JMaruru

Checkout, Nikon D5100 w/ 18-55mm lens is available just for $449/- today on 1saleaday!

Don't forget to add the cost of international warranty ($100 or whereabouts, usually) to that.

[chevelle]

Originally Posted by JMaruru

Checkout, Nikon D5100 w/ 18-55mm lens is available just for $449/- today on 1saleaday!

It is a factory refurb. The new one can be had for <$100 more.

[joslicx]

Originally Posted by R2D2

I do differ with your view that tech specs are only for pros. Not really! Amateurs and pros alike differentiate equipment based on features and tech specs alike whilst selecting cameras lenses and other accessories. Folks that don't bother with specs mostly confine themselves to PNS systems. :-)

This may provide you with some insights into in-lens vs in body image stabilisation.

http://photographylife.com/lens-stab...-stabilization

well ok not just pros, my bad. Some enthusiasts also delve into these details But I'd still maintain you can find lot of DSLR owners who arent bothered with these murky details or who bought their cameras just to look cool and all or also people (like students etc) who cannot afford higher priced lenses etc.

I frequent mansurov's site and had read that article earlier. In fact I was just reiterating what he has concluded in his article - that Canikon have shown no inclination to provide in body IS so as to milk customers into paying more for lenses with IS. heres quoting him

The bad news is that I do not see Canon or Nikon jumping on in-camera stabilization anytime soon, even with their mirrorless cameras like Nikon 1 V1. Why? Because they enjoy their profits every time a lens is updated. If they enable in-camera stabilization, interest in adding IS/VR to wide-angle and prime lenses would pretty much fade away, which is definitely not what they want. It is painful to see that some lenses that really need image stabilization are not getting them, simply because Canon/Nikon think that it is not needed, or they are planning to add it to a future version to make money. There are a number of great lenses from Nikon such as Nikon 300mm f/4 AF-S, Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8G, Nikon 50mm f/1.4G/f/1.8G, Nikon 85mm f/1.4G/f/1.8G that desperately need image stabilization. And yet Nikon is not planning to update those lenses with IS anytime soon. The same is true with Canon, which has recently updated its Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L II lens and still did not care to add image stabilization to it. They know that they can update these lenses with IS in the future and make even more money from them. As long as the competitor does not have a big lead, innovation will continue to halt.

[R2D2]

Originally Posted by joslicx

well ok not just pros, my bad. Some enthusiasts also delve into these details But I'd still maintain you can find lot of DSLR owners who arent bothered with these murky details or who bought their cameras just to look cool and all or also people (like students etc) who cannot afford higher priced lenses etc.

I frequent mansurov's site and had read that article earlier. In fact I was just reiterating what he has concluded in his article - that Canikon have shown no inclination to provide in body IS so as to milk customers into paying more for lenses with IS. heres quoting him

There's no doubt that Canikon are milking customers into paying more. I'd be happy if they had in lens + in camera stabilisation that work give best of both worlds. I am sure that Nikon will make in camera stabilisation (if and when it comes) backward compatible with older lenses. With Canon I am not so sure. The former has been maintaining backward compatibility for most of their product range.

The new Canon 24-70 is brilliant optically but disappointing from the price and no IS point of view. The Nikon equivalent may get a refresh next year. I am not expecting VR in the new version. (Come on Nikon, surprise me!)

I'm the meantime I leverage higher ISO and shutter speeds to help overcome camera shake with my non VR lenses whilst shooting in low light.

PS - the coolness factor of owning a DSLR, while present for some noobs, is not the only reason why students or beginners buy them without comparing specs. Specs and price are the key differentiators. Hardly anybody would pop Rs 30k+ for a DSLR kit without doing some homework.

[khadoos baby]

I agree with joslicx point here. I dont wish to comment on which lens one should buy but you can certainly choose a body to your liking. For example, just because you got the budget it makes no sense to buy Canon 60D over 1100 D (or 550D) unless your use is highly specific, high-end and you need all sensors to be cross sensors etc. For general photography, you can do very well with a good DSLR ( that includes entry-level 1100d which is really underrated DSLR) with good lens.

Example:
1) Canon 1100 + 18-55 + 55-250 = 38k + Prime f/1.4 50mm = 63K. A full kit for most enthusiasts and professionals too actually. Check f/1.4, click some snaps and I promise ,you ll never go back to zoom lens for clicking portraits. The difference between F/1.8 and F/1.4 is huge.

2) Canon 60D + 18-55 = 58K. what will you do with a basic lens apart from clicking in weddings and parties? Soon you ll start to Google about lens. Will try to go over 18-200 or 18-250 etc.Because Canon lens are crazy expensive, you ll settle for Sigma or Tamron. We all know that third party lens are slower and nosier. So the advantage of 60D is totally lost.
In a nutshell, dont get influenced by forums all across net. Go to the shop, look at each camera and lens. Try to use it. Go over the entire process for 2-3 times over few days.Make up your mind and then take a plunge.