[M35]

Originally Posted by condor

@M35, but Canon's lenses look more homogenous.

No Canon body comes with an inbuilt focus motor and that all canon lenses have the internal focus motor?

Originally Posted by condor

@M35, but Canon's lenses look more homogenous. With Nikon, you have lenses with & with-out in-built motors. This does cause some discomfort when choosing lenses.

I see it as an advantage actually.
With high end Nikon bodies, one has an option to go in for relatively much cheaper “D” lenses.

[condor]

M35 : I see it as an advantage actually.

So, with Canon- you dont have a confusion about which lens type. With Nikon, you need keep an eye out for the lens motor. The advantage you see is only for specific cases. In all other instances, it would be seen as a disadvantage.

M35 : With high end Nikon bodies, one has an option to go in for relatively much cheaper “D” lenses.

These D-lenses have a disadvantage - they are noisy. AF-S lenses are quieter and also quicker by that fraction of a second.

So if you say there is one advantage, then there are disadvantages too. And that's where Canon has an advantage.

(btw, I am a Nikon user )

[ampere]

Originally Posted by M35

With high end Nikon bodies, one has an option to go in for relatively much cheaper “D” lenses.

This is exactly what I have been wanting to point out. Once I lock on my lens, I can use it pretty much on every body. So that way I have decoupled the zone of lenses that I may have to look out for when I look for a body or an upgrade.

(Of course not wanting to make it a Canon vs Nikon). Some how I found chosing lens a much more easier task in Nikon than Nikon. May be it may not be that difficult. But I do think the choices can confuse the non-serious buyer.

Originally Posted by adimicra

I have used that lens...It's an awesome lens but it is very restricted at the wide angle for cropped sensor cameras like 600D. The effective focal length starts at 36 for 600D which is not usable for any kind of landscape. It is very good for full frame cameras.That's why I was inclined to 15-85 or 18-135 etc

I would still suggest the 24-105. I do understand that 36mm is not wide enough but the image quality you get with a 24-105 would be way better than the rest you are consider. In fact I tend to use 70-200 more for landscapes than 10-22! I put on the 10-22 for some time, and I find myself removing it very soon and getting back to 70-200.

The kind of subject isolation you get with a mid-range telephoto is very good. Also 24-105 is an ideal range for indoor portraits as well. Couple the two together, and I think you have a perfect all rounder. 15-85 range is definitely good, but I would still vote for 24-105.

[Divya Sharan]

Originally Posted by Aroy

I would suggest the following course of action
1. Install View NX-II which came with the camera. If you do not have it download it from Nikon site.
2. Use View NX-II to convert RAW to other formats.
3. If you are interested, then download Capture NX-D, a free RAW processor from Nikon. Carry out most of your edits and picture controls and then export to 16bit TIFF for image manipulations.

As a good practice, I save my RAW images to two external USB disks, so that in case of any problems with those in the desktop, I can use the backup copy.

Thanks a lot! NX 2 worked like a charm.

And yes, I store all my to-be-edited pics in an external HDD for the very same reasons as you explained above.

[DerAlte]

If I were to buy now, which would be the better bet amongst Nikon D7000 / 7100 / 7200? I am primarily looking at low-light capabilities with a zoom. Don't want to go to D90 from my current D40.

[M35]

Originally Posted by DerAlte

If I were to buy now, which would be the better bet amongst Nikon D7000 / 7100 / 7200? I am primarily looking at low-light capabilities with a zoom. Don't want to go to D90 from my current D40.

If I have fast f/1.8 or f2.8 lenses that are compatible with FX, I would try and stretch my budget a bit and get an entry level FX body.



If not, I would get a D7000 and spend the reminder for a fast lens.

[anjan_c2007]

Any idea about the Nikon D5200 and its competition (DSLR's) ? Was just seeing offers for around Rs 35 K for the D 5200 on flipkart and also on snapdeal.

There is a review featured on this link :

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d5200

[architect]

Originally Posted by DerAlte

If I were to buy now, which would be the better bet amongst Nikon D7000 / 7100 / 7200? I am primarily looking at low-light capabilities with a zoom. Don't want to go to D90 from my current D40.

Don't two out of three of your choices have the same sensors (at least D7100 and D7200 seem to have the same, if I am not wrong). "Low-light capabilities with a zoom" means you are asking for really good sensors with large DR (so that you can 'lift' from shadows / dark areas) because with a telephoto you will be shooting at fast speeds (assuming you're shooting hand-held). I would suggest FX bodies and fast lenses, but you are getting into expensive territory, then.

My suggestion with a DX (crop sensor) body is that you get fast lenses with VR (a 'fast' telephoto with VR will also cost a bomb, by my standards at least) and shoot RAW. It will help you in obtaining sharp exposures by keeping fast shutter speeds and you can 'increase' exposure slightly in software like Lightroom by losing some quality. Works if you're an amateur. Unless, you are already doing all of this.

[M35]

Originally Posted by DerAlte

If I were to buy now, which would be the better bet amongst Nikon D7000 / 7100 / 7200?

Originally Posted by architect

(at least D7100 and D7200 seem to have the same, if I am not wrong).

AFAIK, there is NO Nikon D7200 as of now.

[condor]

1) Will a Nikkor FF lens work on a DX body with full compatibility ?
2) Does anyone here have a Nikkor 24-85mm ?

[RaguHolla]

Originally Posted by condor

1) Will a Nikkor FF lens work on a DX body with full compatibility ?

Yes. They work. Some of the FF lens may not have motor. In such cases you should have body with motor to auto focus. Otherwise auto focus is not possible. I assume you are not talking about older AI lenses here. At any case you can check camera lens compatibility with links such as this


There are three versions of 24-85mm, which version you are talking about?

[Alfa Romeo]

Hey guys,

i am in need for two lenses. One for widlife (good zoom) and one for landscape photography. Currently am having only canon 18 - 135 lens.

i was reading reviews on Sigma Lens 150-500/f5-6.3 APO DG OS HSM. Is anyone owning this in the forum and is such big fical length really required? yes i would want close ups of animals during the widlife trips but need suggestions on the clarity/noise etc when fully zoomed. i think the canon lenses are really costly.

also is 18 - 135 good enough for landscapes?

Thanks

[amitk26]

Originally Posted by Alfa Romeo

Hey guys,

i am in need for two lenses. One for widlife (good zoom) and one for landscape photography. Currently am having only canon 18 - 135 lens.

i was reading reviews on Sigma Lens 150-500/f5-6.3 APO DG OS HSM. Is anyone owning this in the forum and is such big fical length really required? yes i would want close ups of animals during the widlife trips but need suggestions on the clarity/noise etc when fully zoomed. i think the canon lenses are really costly.

also is 18 - 135 good enough for landscapes?

Thanks

What is the budget ? and by wildlife do you mean bird photography ?

150 - 500 is good but heavy and if you are interested in birding this is best choice in budget.

However for mammals and larger animals you can choose a smaller focal length even Canon 55-250 will do which is lightweight and far far cheaper then Sigma 150-500.

[condor]

Originally Posted by RaguHolla

There are three versions of 24-85mm, which version you are talking about?

Thanks, Ragu

I am aware of the AF-S / AF-D lenses. Regarding the 24-85, I should have been clearer. I was refering to the AF-S

[tasuray]

Originally Posted by Alfa Romeo

Hey guys,

i am in need for two lenses. One for widlife (good zoom) and one for landscape photography. Currently am having only canon 18 - 135 lens.

i was reading reviews on Sigma Lens 150-500/f5-6.3 APO DG OS HSM. Is anyone owning this in the forum and is such big fical length really required? yes i would want close ups of animals during the widlife trips but need suggestions on the clarity/noise etc when fully zoomed. i think the canon lenses are really costly.

also is 18 - 135 good enough for landscapes?

Thanks

You can think about Tamron 150-600mm f/5 6.3, it is indeed a good lens. For landscape 10-24mm is the one of the best lens.