***DSLR/Photography MegaThread***

As far as lenses are concerned, figure out what you want and make ebay your friend. You can get great deals on good lenses if you're willing to go used. Lenses are not like camera bodies which are now almost like commodities - a great lens today will still be a great lens 10 years from now when your camera is hopelessly out of date.

If you're shooting kids/sports, the ability to auto focus quickly/accurately will be extremely important, so pay special attention to comparisons on that basis.

I would recommend that you take a close look at Sony and Pentax cameras. Both offer in-body image stabilization, which means that every lens that you buy will be image-stabilized, a capability which Nikon and Canon build into the lenses themselves. The in-lens stabilization is supposed to perform a little better than in-body, but the image-stabilized lenses are damn expensive.

Image stabilization will give you the ability to take sharper pictures of fast action and in low light. If you're going to be shooting kids/sports, especially indoors and especially hockey (which is commonly known as one of the toughest sports to shoot because of the fast action and the white ice), image stabilization would be a very important feature.
 
I dont want to get in the habit of spending what ValleyFan does on a lens.
Click to expand...

Hey! I don't have a problem, I can stop any time I want! Besides, FBJ spends more than me (at least that is what I tell myself to make me feel better) ;)

santiclaws said:
Image stabilization will give you the ability to take sharper pictures of fast action and in low light. If you're going to be shooting kids/sports, especially indoors and especially hockey (which is commonly known as one of the toughest sports to shoot because of the fast action and the white ice), image stabilization would be a very important feature.
Click to expand...

Image stabilization will help in low light, but not much for fast action as the players will still be blurred. Shutter speed is your only friend here, so you want fast lenses, for sports f/2.8 is going to be the slowest you are really going to want to go.

For those who don't know, the lower the f number, the faster the lens. f numbers are also logarithmic, so a lens that is one f stop faster lets in twice the amount of light, so:

f/1.0
f/1.4 (half as much light as f/1.0)
f/2.0 (half as much light as f/1.4)
f/2.8 (half as much light as f/2.0)
f/4.0 (half as much light as f/2.8)
f/5.6 (half as much light as f/4.0)
etc.

Another thing to stuff in the mind hole, lenses with the same aperture (f stop) may not let in the same amount of light, as the f stop measurement is simply the focal length of the lens divided by the lens aperture. The transmission efficiency of the lens is measured in T stops (which you won't see listed on most still photo lenses, but it is very common in high tolerance settings like motion picture). So if you have a prime lens and a zoom, and they are both an f/2.8, the prime will actually meeter a little brighter because there is less glass for the light to go through (not much, maybe a 1/3rd of a stop, but it is something). Just something to think about if you are trying to eek out every last bit of light for the cost.
 
Last edited:
ValleyFan said:
Besides, FBJ spends more than me (at least that is what I tell myself to make me feel better) ;)
Click to expand...


QUIET, YOU!!! Don't you know my wife reads the boards??

(Hi, sweetheart! I'm glad you like the earrings and bracelet I bought you last week!)
 
ValleyFan said:
Hey! I don't have a problem, I can stop any time I want! Besides, FBJ spends more than me (at least that is what I tell myself to make me feel better) ;)
<snip>
Click to expand...
The rest of that post looked like algebra, and quite frankly I got lost.

Stuff like that is scaring me away from looking at what I probably should be looking at.

Indimidation factor: 10.
 
Unruely35 said:
The rest of that post looked like algebra, and quite frankly I got lost.

Stuff like that is scaring me away from looking at what I probably should be looking at.

Indimidation factor: 10.
Click to expand...

What I was trying to say is if you are coming down to it, and your main goal is shooting sports, if you are trying to decide between a fast prime lens, a slower prime with IS, or a zoom (which is slower than the prime), go for the fastest lens if sport shooting (or just fast moving kids) is your main goal.

Zooms are great in that they are sort of the jack of all trades, but they often also suffer from being the jack of all trades in that they are the master of none, as they tend not to be super fast or super sharp, and the ones that are will be super expensive.

Ideally, you might want to try a few lenses out before you buy (rent or borrow) to give you an idea of what you are interested in.
 
Unruely35 said:
I think I might need someone to come with me. LOL


Ruely has teh fears.
Click to expand...

I'd suggest doing some online research to narrow down your choices to 2-3 cameras on price/features and then go down to a store and fondle the candidates. They have to fit comfortably in your hand.

The good news is that I'm not aware of a bad entry-level DSLR out there - they're all pretty good these days, so you can't really go wrong.
 
I have already publically fondled the cameras of choice and the Canon and the Nikon were the finalists.

My questions really leaned on the peripherals.
 
Unruely35 said:
I have already publically fondled the cameras of choice and the Canon and the Nikon were the finalists.

My questions really leaned on the peripherals.
Click to expand...

It came down to these for me too...

I suppose it comes down to these two for most as well.

Sammy's gave me a deal on my Nikon D40x.... they gave me the Camera + 18-55mm + 55-200mm + tripod + camera bag all for $615.00 +tax.

My dad was the one who said to go there... they'll deal with you.
 
ValleyFan said:
I have also been a little interested in trying the RAW +JPG to render faster in Lightroom, has anyone done it? It would be nice if it stacked the two (with the JPG at the top of the stack), but I haven't had a chance to play with it.
Click to expand...

OK, so I have finally had a chance to try it (shows you how much time I have had as of late if I am finally getting around to importing any photos), and it doesn't really work like I would prefer it to. The default in Lightroom is for it just to ignore the jpgs and import the RAWs. If you override that so it does import the jpegs, it doesn't stack them with their respective raws. If you autostack, it stacks the jpeg under the raw (for the Canon at least, I have a feeling it is because the RAW is written first, then the jpeg), so it doesn't really help you. It seems that the most effective so far is to just take the one time hit, when importing have it render the 1:1 preview, and go get a cup of something while you wait.

Also, on a side note, USB 2 reader vs. Firewire 800 reader, holy cow what a difference. I tried to limp by on a USB 2 reader for a while, and I just got the FW 800 reader back, so uber fast.
 
I don't know... I just don't know...

[ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=3hjBv9wYOEE]YouTube - Nikon D3 Overload Test[/ame]

[ame="http://youtube.com/watch?v=a_Yf3MlqpVw"]YouTube - Nikon D3 Drop Test[/ame]
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: FBJ
Trying to get a few pregnancy pics in:
SamPage_20080318_7312.jpg
 
The guy's vids are "embedding disabled."

Here's his stuff....

YouTube - Lilkiwiguy87's Channel

I didn't know the D3 had an in-camera HDR feature!?!?

WOOT!!

He's also got a website.

Welcome to Phozoid 4D

It's supposed to be his professional website, but it is absolutely FULL of bad grammar and spelling mistakes. Looks professional, reads like a third-grader's work, sad to say. Still, he's got some good stuff on youtube and a relatively useful tutorial on remote flash technique up there.
 
Last edited:
HOLY ****!!!

D3 WAITING FOR ME AT HOOPER RIGHT NOW!!!

I GO PICK UP!!!!

/Speed Racer Mode ON
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Now Chirping

Share this page

Back
Top