The Official Camera Equipment Megathread

Status
Not open for further replies.
I've got a D70s and a Nikon 18-200 VR, bought it last summer to take to Australia. Now that the D80 is out I'm looking at trading up models, reckon it's worth it?
 
Dazzla said:
I've got a D70s and a Nikon 18-200 VR, bought it last summer to take to Australia. Now that the D80 is out I'm looking at trading up models, reckon it's worth it?
Click to expand...

There's tons of comparisons out there. Is there anything you wish you could do that you can't with your D70s? I'd personally say no, unless you simply have a pile of cash laying around. I can't see anything that would dramatically change your ability to take pictures.

Mind posting any 18-200VR pics? As said before, I'm really wondering about real world, un-corrected demonstrations of the distortion at the extreme ends. It's the only thing keeping me from leaping into that glorious tube of glass. =|
 
RAW files were a tad big, I've saved the RAW files as JPGs, I think it shows what you're after anyway.

http://homepage.mac.com/dponting/.Pictures/JPGSample/Australia002.jpg
http://homepage.mac.com/dponting/.Pictures/JPGSample/Australia044.jpg
http://homepage.mac.com/dponting/.Pictures/JPGSample/Australia096.jpg
http://homepage.mac.com/dponting/.Pictures/JPGSample/Australia147.jpg
http://homepage.mac.com/dponting/.Pictures/JPGSample/Australia191.jpg

044 is a good example of vignetting at the long end, better example than 096 anyway, not too much there although it's at 200MM as well. 147 you can see the barrel distortion at 18MM by looking at the monorail track (or whatever it is). 002 is at at 28MM, still slight vignetting. 191 is at 55MM, not too bad (blue chelsea top is the subject).

All easily sorted of course but hopefully that's what you were after.
 
SnakeXs said:
There's tons of comparisons out there. Is there anything you wish you could do that you can't with your D70s? I'd personally say no, unless you simply have a pile of cash laying around. I can't see anything that would dramatically change your ability to take pictures.

Mind posting any 18-200VR pics? As said before, I'm really wondering about real world, un-corrected demonstrations of the distortion at the extreme ends. It's the only thing keeping me from leaping into that glorious tube of glass. =|
Click to expand...

I've heard great things about the 18-200 VR. A great range at the least. Just keep in mind, you can be a self-professed 'pixel-peeper', like me - constantly looking at 100% crops for sharpness, worry about colour fringing, distortion and the like. Most of the time, though, it matters not for real photos. I can nearly guarantee that the distortion won't bother you unelss you intend on taking brick walls a lot. Even then, most wide angles will show a certain degree of distortion. You may even grow to appreciate the effect!
 
Dazzla said:
I've got a D70s and a Nikon 18-200 VR, bought it last summer to take to Australia. Now that the D80 is out I'm looking at trading up models, reckon it's worth it?
Click to expand...
thom hogan keeps a nice feature grid

http://www.bythom.com/currentdslr.htm

i have read that the d70s has the better meter. the d40/d80 meter needs constant babysitting. unless making poster size prints is your bread and butter i would refrain.
 
What's a good tripod, that can withstand say....being in a riverbed? I'm taking a class that says I really should have a good one because we'll be doing that. I'm looking for something under 200, but hopefully 130 and below. I was looking at this one slik model but I don't know...
 
Wish I could help you, Crab, but I'm having tripod choice issues of my own.

Alas, tomorrow should be a grand, wallet killing day.

I've roughly decided upon the Manfrotto 190XPROB tripod, with 3265 Grip Action Ballhead. Along with that are a bunch of odds and ends. A case, a strap that I can quick remove, the little Nikon remote, a polarizer, a step up ring, a close up lens kit...

Wallet am cry. Ah well, I'm pretty excited.

Wish me luck, guys. :lol

Edit: I almost forgot. Dazzla, thanks a bunch for the images. ALthough I still worry a tiny bit about barrelling at the wide end, it's something I'll have to live with, and I'm sure is much more in my head/the head's of the TEST FREAKS than anything else. It'll allow me so much more that the small concession is a much. Your (great) images helped a ton, honestly. Thanks again. :D
 
No probs, I really do love the lens. In real world situations issues like what I highlighted above are only noticeable 10% of the time and it's an easy fix. There's some better real world examples here, they're not full size but still a good indication of what the lens spits out. The versatility of it allows you to have a lot of fun.
 
about wide range/angle lenses. When you buy them, what specifications should you look at? I read very little about them in a magazine in the library yesterday, and they measure them in milimeters, and smaller is wider? They talked about 23mm and things. Can somebody explain it to me? My biggest problem has allways been that the cameras I have used sucked in that regard.
 
Shompola said:
about wide range/angle lenses. When you buy them, what specifications should you look at? I read very little about them in a magazine in the library yesterday, and they measure them in milimeters, and smaller is wider? They talked about 23mm and things. Can somebody explain it to me? My biggest problem has allways been that the cameras I have used sucked in that regard.
Click to expand...

In short you're correct. Lenses are measured by their focal distance, or the distance from the "lens" to the sensor.

Here's a quick image to help:
focal_length.gif


So, imagine you moved the lens closer to the sensor (or film), it would "widen" the field of view (lines) and they'd end up being larger than just the subject.

Now the opposite. Move the lens closer to the subject, and the field of view would close, thus cutting off some of the subject.

A few things to keep in mind are that focal lengths increase exponentially. 2mm isn't always the same. For example, a noticable difference in a wide angle lens can be just a few mm. 16 and 12mm are very different. But go to the telephoto range of things, and changes are measured in tens, if not hundreds of mms.

To throw another wrench in this system is digical SLR cameras. Most (not all) have sensor that are, as displayed in the photo, smaller than classic 35mm film. Because of how optics work, this causes what's called a crop factor. The focal distances are always measured in 35mm standards, but need to be multiplied by a certaina mount to be the equivilent. In short, Nikon's crop factor is 1.5, and Canon's is 1.6.

A small example is my 50mm prime lens. On a 35mm camera it's 50mm, so it will always be called a 50mm lens, but when put on my Nikon D80 body, it has the same field of view as 50mm x 1.5, which is 75mm. This is the same field of view as putting a 75mm lens of a 35mm camera. Capiche?

Also, there are some digital cameras (in the higher end) which have "full frame" sensors, which are, as it sounds, the same size as 35mm. Thus, things work there just as they would on a 35mm camera, no crop factor.

Now a quick breakdown of lens distances. 50mm is considered "normal". It's seen as closest to what the human eye sees. Smaller than 35 or so is considered wide angle, with more extremes being even smaller. 70 to around 140 are considered medium telephoto or portrait lenses. Beyond 140 is telephoto. These numbers aren't really st in stone, from what I can tell, they're just rough generalizations.

As far as buying them? Well, camera specific stores work, as does online. Looking for lenses is a crazy beast, so it's hard to even begin to explain. As a green shutterbug, lenses are simply daunting. There's so many, and so many distances, so much great quality, and so many little problems. And the cost, that never helps. :lol
 
SnakeXs said:
I was gonna head into B&H today before work, but the tripod I was gonna get/check out, the 190PROB, is sold out.

So, any comments on that tripod? What's a good head to match with it?
Click to expand...
Sorry if I'm late, but I got a 190XB about a month ago and it's fantastic. I'm not sure what the differences are between mine and the PROB - maybe that one is carbon fiber? I got a 488RC2 ball head to go with it. No complaints!
 
Crab Shaker said:
What's a good tripod, that can withstand say....being in a riverbed? I'm taking a class that says I really should have a good one because we'll be doing that. I'm looking for something under 200, but hopefully 130 and below. I was looking at this one slik model but I don't know...
Click to expand...
I've had the Bogen (aka Manfrotto) 3021 legs with a pan-tilt head for over ten years, and I've taken it on lots of hikes and had it in the water plenty of times, and it's in great shape.

These are the legs only at B&H for $157...

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/con...s&Q=&sku=217262&is=REG&addedTroughType=search

...just add whatever head you want.

Protip: If you are going to be doing a lot of hiking with your tripod, put foam pipe insulation (like you get at a home improvement store) over the top section of the legs, and secure with duct tape. The padding makes it easier to carry slung over your shoulder, and your hands don't get frozen handling the bare metal when it's cold out.
 
Ok guys, I'm looking to get a nice film camera.

-Nikon or Canon
-I want all manual options, but also a decent amount of auto stuff because I'm just starting to use film with this purchase.
-I know could easily get a Canon Rebel G2 for a reasonable price, but I want something with solid metal construction.
-I was thinking along the lines of a Canon AE-1 or a Nikon F100 but my friend says the AE-1 only uses old lenses and the F100 is a bit out of my price range.
-I want to get the camera and a decent prime lens for no more than $300.

What do you suggest?
 
I wish I could help you here. I have a Nikon N/F50 I've never used. It seems straightforward enough for an AF camera, but was apparently a bit of a black sheep in the Nikon SLR line.

For a decent cheap prime lens, assuming you get an AF body, the 50mm f/1.8 lenses we've been talking about here run about 100$ brand new, and are pretty much the same things you would be putting on a newer AF SLR.

IMO, if I were to choose a film SLR to play around with today as a second body (the N50 was inherited), I would pick up a well-loved Pentax K1000 with a 50mm 1.4 Takumar (note, MF). Lenses are cheap are highly compatible, and the bodies are bulletproof -- my mom used a pentax spotmatic for 20 years (and note that that is NOT the camera i was allowed to inherit). Also, you should be able to find one exceedingly cheap, well below your 300$ cap for sure.
 
Man, I'm trying to get a Best Buy card so I can get the Canon 400D :lol . I was denied though ;_; (lack of Active Accounts?) I think its some sign from up above. TIME TO SAVE UP, AWWW
 
This thread is certainly chock full of data! Though its only hit upon the one point that matters most to me...

My hands shake like crazy, so which camera offers the best image stabilization? From what I gather, the Casios seem to be the best.

Also, how are the HP cameras? I was at Best Buy checking stuff out, and got pestered by the HP rep, but I will admit that what I saw did impress me. And I can't recall seeing it mentioned around here.
 
FortNinety said:
My hands shake like crazy, so which camera offers the best image stabilization? From what I gather, the Casios seem to be the best.
Click to expand...

I've never seen that suggested before... from what I can gather, their cameras typically use "ISO boost" as stabilization, which is the worst possible solution... actually IMO it's not even really a solution. It's marketing speak.

Their long-zoom camera seems to use CCD shift, which is OK (sensor moves to reduce shake), but then I read this:
"CCD-shift image stabilization almost totally ineffective"
at http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/casioexv7/page12.asp

...that's not the case with CCD shift across the spectrum, but if you are looking for IS, you're still going to get the best results with a stabilized lens...

That will probably put Panasonic and Canon nearer the top of your list (the options open up if you're looking for a "super-zoom" style camera -- a larger camera with 6-10X zoom). Panasonic has a rep for having noisy higher ISO images, but everything they produce comes with IS now, whereas Canon only has a handful of models that aren't in the higher zoom ranges.

Also, how are the HP cameras? I was at Best Buy checking stuff out, and got pestered by the HP rep, but I will admit that what I saw did impress me. And I can't recall seeing it mentioned around here.
Click to expand...

I haven't seen any of HP's newer stuff, but everything I've seen of theirs in the past has been a shadow of what other companies produce -- poorer results and also sometimes poor UI.
 
i just ordered a Fuji F20. it's got the same optics as the legendary Fuji F30/31 but is less adjustable, which is fine for me. i still got my olympus c-770 ultrazoom for use outdoors. my new Fuji will strictly be used as an indoor/night cam. the F20 even has a "dual mode" where with one button press it will take 2 pics, one with natural light and one with flash, then display them together side by side.

edit: oh, the F20 only costs $138 shipped and i strongly suggest it for those looking for a great indoor/night camera.
 
so i got the F20 yesterday and tried it out last night. this camera is a low light beast. it will turn nearly every dark situation bright, with or without flash. as expected, you lose sharpness and detail at the higher ISOs but the cam's ability to focus in low light is f'n impressive. this is exactly what i was looking for; a pocketable cam that takes great pics indoors, at parties, bars, and clubs.
 
SickBoy said:
That will probably put Panasonic and Canon nearer the top of your list (the options open up if you're looking for a "super-zoom" style camera -- a larger camera with 6-10X zoom). Panasonic has a rep for having noisy higher ISO images, but everything they produce comes with IS now, whereas Canon only has a handful of models that aren't in the higher zoom ranges.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the advice. Though I guess I should have also mentioned that I'm looking for something that's also portable. And zoom isn't at all necessary; I'm going to Japan and want something I can easily carry around, then pull out for a quick shot in a heartbeat.
 
FortNinety said:
Thanks for the advice. Though I guess I should have also mentioned that I'm looking for something that's also portable. And zoom isn't at all necessary; I'm going to Japan and want something I can easily carry around, then pull out for a quick shot in a heartbeat.
Click to expand...

Both Canon and Panasonic have IS-equipped cameras in the compact/subcompact range:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Canon/canon_a570is.asp
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Canon/canon_sd700is.asp
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Panasonic/panasonic_dmcfx30.asp
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Panasonic/panasonic_dmctz3.asp

I would say that generally speaking the Canons will probably be a better bet in terms of image quality, although they'll probably cost more. But all Panasonics have stabilized lenses... and while you might not think it's a big deal, something like one of the TZ models might wow you a bit with its zoom range (I've considered one as a carry-around despite the camera's other apparent shortcomings)...

Best bet is to try some cameras in the store, though (even better if you can bring your own SD card and actually look at the pictures somewhere other than the LCD)... as well, it's quite possible that your shake problems aren't as bad as you think.
 
So does anyone have a good suggestion for cameras recently?

I would like a pocket camera, as I don't do anything professional or anything. I just want something that takes good pictures and is affordable.

Per White Man's suggestion, I'm looking at the http://www.amazon.com/Canon-PowerShot-Digital-Image-Stabilized-Optical/dp/B000HATNH4/sr=1-1/qid=1172786296/ref=pd_bbs_1/002-1653380-0439200?ie=UTF8&s=photo

but I'm wondering if there's anything that's come out since he made his suggestion that would be a better option.

My price range is 200-300 dollars.
 
So I got a Canon AE-1 Program and the viewfinder isn't completely nice to be using with my glasses. Does anyone know where I could get a special eye piece for it?
 
Dice said:
So I got a Canon AE-1 Program and the viewfinder isn't completely nice to be using with my glasses. Does anyone know where I could get a special eye piece for it?
Click to expand...


if its old, then check ebay or specialist camera stores. Canon are usually good at having a range of diopter eye pieces for their SLRs, you just might need to dig around to find one for your camera.
 
Darko said:
now thats just sexy.
Click to expand...
my brother has that and I was wondering what the hell it was. At first glance I thought it looked like a sex toy of some sort. Playing around with it, it's really damn strong and sturdy.
 
GONZO said:
This thread actually got me interested in upgrading my digital camera. My previous point and shoot digi-cam served me well. It was a kodak v570 but I wanted something with a little bit more control. I started looking into digital slr's but I don't think i'm quite ready to carry that kind of equipment around. And the general consensus is that you could have the best camera in the world but if your not willing to carry it with you cause it's too bulky then there's no point. So with that in mind I decided to go with a Canon powershot G7. Holy Crap this camera is incredible. The amount of control given is awesome. I little later today I'll post some test shots i took with it the first hour i had the camera.The fit and finish of it is really nice as well. Holding the camera it feels nice and thick with a good amount of weight to it. I can't recommend this camera enough. truly awesome.


canonG7_frontback.jpg
Click to expand...

Does anyone have this camera?
Because I'm really considering buying it!!!

And is it too bulky? or Does it fit perfectly in your pocket???
Any advice?
Thank you!
 
hey guys! sorry to bother you!
but i´m planning to buy the canon G7... and I wanna be sure that´s the right choice!

and also... do you guys know if it´s possible to buy the camera from amzon UK and send it to france?

thanks!
 
mercury said:
hey guys! sorry to bother you!
but i´m planning to buy the canon G7... and I wanna be sure that´s the right choice!
Click to expand...
Well, you haven't told us what you're going to do with it, so it's a bit hard to make that judgment.

I will say this, from what I've read it's a fine point and shoot camera with a some nifty advanced features that most casual users won't care about but will be handy if you get more serious about photography.

As someone with a Canon DSLR, I've considered it, the G9, and the S5 as a secondary always-with-me camera. I'd probably lean toward the G9 for compactness and more up to date tech (although it's pretty damned close to the G7.)
 
johnsenclan said:
I have one. It failed once when hanging onto a metal bar, so now it makes me nervous to use it over surfaces I know will kill my XTi if it falls.
Click to expand...
Do you have the Gorillapod GP2 or GP3? The GP3 is the newest version and is advertised as being able to hold 6.6lbs (versus 1.75lbs for the GP2).
 
Darko said:
now thats just sexy.
Click to expand...

I was in the market for a small tabletop tripod (for my GF), and we tried the gorillapod in the store. It feels strong and sturdy, but after pushing the shutter button, we noticed it had residual vibration for a little while after release.
 
mrkgoo said:
I was in the market for a small tabletop tripod (for my GF), and we tried the gorillapod in the store. It feels strong and sturdy, but after pushing the shutter button, we noticed it had residual vibration for a little while after release.
Click to expand...
Thats the same reason I bought one for and had the same problem. I needed a shutter release able any way. =p
I wouldn't trust this to hold my camera around a tree or pole. My current lens makes my camera feel like a hefty 5+lbs. hmmm I should weigh it when I get to work tomorrow.
 
Squirrel Killer said:
Well, you haven't told us what you're going to do with it, so it's a bit hard to make that judgment.

I will say this, from what I've read it's a fine point and shoot camera with a some nifty advanced features that most casual users won't care about but will be handy if you get more serious about photography.

As someone with a Canon DSLR, I've considered it, the G9, and the S5 as a secondary always-with-me camera. I'd probably lean toward the G9 for compactness and more up to date tech (although it's pretty damned close to the G7.)
Click to expand...

hey thanks man!
yeah what I want it's a point and shoot camera, because I dont want to be carrying a bag with a camera.. I just want a camera that I can carry in my pocket but at the same time... one that will let me take decent pictures!!!

But well I cand fint it right now in france... so I guess I would have to buy it from ebay!
 
Mercury, I have a G7 that I use when I don't feel like lugging my 20D around. It has great quality and almost all of the features you'd find on a DSLR. It's a little bit big and heavy to be considered a "shirt pocket" camera, but it's great as a "jacket pocket" camera, if that makes sense. :)

Here's a shot I took with my G7 for one of our photography assignment threads, my 20D was busy posing:

RSZ_0980ps.jpg
 
portrait lens question (40D owner): I have a 24-105L for my walkabout lens, a 70-200f4L IS for zoomy stuff and a 60mm 2.8 macro for macro and part use for portraits.

What would you recommend for shorter/longer portrait stuff? I had a 30mm 1.4 sigma for a while but sold it to pay for the 70-200, maybe thats worth getting again for indoor/short range portraits? Then perhaps an 85mm or 135?

some suggestions and perhaps example shots welcomed :)
 
mrklaw said:
portrait lens question (40D owner): I have a 24-105L for my walkabout lens, a 70-200f4L IS for zoomy stuff and a 60mm 2.8 macro for macro and part use for portraits.

What would you recommend for shorter/longer portrait stuff? I had a 30mm 1.4 sigma for a while but sold it to pay for the 70-200, maybe thats worth getting again for indoor/short range portraits? Then perhaps an 85mm or 135?

some suggestions and perhaps example shots welcomed :)
Click to expand...
I use my 30 1.4 almost exclusively for indoor shots. Take note that you will get perspective distortion if you're too close to a model.

A 50mm 1.4 might work but it can be limiting in tighter situations. I wouldn't use an 85/135 for indoors on a 1.6 crop--far too long imo.
 
mrklaw said:
portrait lens question (40D owner): ............ Then perhaps an 85mm or 135?

some suggestions and perhaps example shots welcomed :)
Click to expand...
I have the 85mm 1.2L, here's one of my favorite portraits:

RSZ_5807ps.jpg


This one shows what it can do opened up in low light...I was able to hand hold this:

RSZ_8041ps.jpg
 
not sure I was thinking the 1.2L, but nice shots. I could afford it, but it would be my most expensive lens and I don't know I'll use it enough to justify that. Was thinking more the 1.8 for now and see how I get on with the length. Also still considering the 135 which gets rave reviews.

I'll try shooting some 85 and 135 with my 70-200 to see how I like the reach.
 
mrklaw said:
not sure I was thinking the 1.2L, but nice shots. I could afford it, but it would be my most expensive lens and I don't know I'll use it enough to justify that. Was thinking more the 1.8 for now and see how I get on with the length. Also still considering the 135 which gets rave reviews.

I'll try shooting some 85 and 135 with my 70-200 to see how I like the reach.
Click to expand...

would that be the 135L? I would choose the 85 1.8 just because it's a lot cheaper. plus, on your 40d, I would think that the 135 would limit you to close-up portrait work unless you have a lot of room to work.

otoh, I've read about people choosing the 135L instead of the 70-200, just because it's faster and more discreet. I personally prefer the convenience of zoom over the image quality, but the pictures I see from primes sure makes me think.

your idea of shooting at those focal lengths with your 70-200 is a good place to start.
 
i just got a canon digital rebel xsi / 450d for my birthday. naturally, i immediately want to start saving up for new lenses right away :)

i'm looking for lens recommendations now. i take mostly landscape/architecture shots, nature shots, and animal photography.

what is my best bet? wide-angle? telephoto?

i was at the zoo yesterday with the kit lens and i wasn't happy with the zoom at all, i felt like i couldn't compose the shot if the animals are far away.

i'd like to dabble in portraits a little more too, but that's less of a priority for me. someone suggested to me that since i'm a beginner i should get this lens: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00007E7JU/?tag=neogaf0e-20
for $90 and play around with it first, since it's cheap. however i am concerned about the build quality. anyone have it?

thanks for any help you can give!
 
Congrats on the new camera. Enjoy it, and pop in the photography thread if you ever wanna share your stuff. ;)

That said, and I'll speak generally as I don't know Canon lenses well, you're looking for 2 different things.

Landscape and architecture you'll need something wide. With the 1.6 factoring of your XSi, I'd say at least 18mm. More if you really wanna get a huge field of view.

As for animals and portraits, those you'll want something with some reach. 200mm at the far end should be good. Nature is a large area of photography and the needs of it could range anywhere in there, so it's hard to say unless you say more of what you tend to/want to shoot.

And, yes the 50mm F/1.8 is great. It's cheap because it's a dead simple lens to manufacture, and has been evolving for decades, and with crazy zooms many people don't bother with primes. It's guaranteed to be sharp, and 1.8 is plenty fast.

As far as being a beginner, it depends. Some people, myself included, enjoy being "limited" by a prime lens like that, it makes you move, compose differently, think a lot. Others will scoff and will wish they could be zooming. It depends what group you fall into. It's as good a lens as they get optically, though. I'd say for the price you should, I love mine and loved when I had it and only it.
 
Lucky Forward said:
Mercury, I have a G7 that I use when I don't feel like lugging my 20D around. It has great quality and almost all of the features you'd find on a DSLR. It's a little bit big and heavy to be considered a "shirt pocket" camera, but it's great as a "jacket pocket" camera, if that makes sense. :)

Here's a shot I took with my G7 for one of our photography assignment threads, my 20D was busy posing:
Click to expand...

Well thanks for the advice.. I didn't realise it was that big
So at the end decided to go for the Canon Digital Ixus 860 IS!
Because I really want a camera that can fit in my jeans pockets!

Maybe in the future I will buy a G series!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom