• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

Digital SLR / DSLR Camera Question / DSLR Thread 2

TTL = Through The Lens

It means you can affix it (or a cord attached to it) to your camera's hot shoe and take better flash images (because the unit talks with your DSLR to get the approximate exposure, so to speak (but you have control to override)).

That unit specs says it's "compatible" with Nikon DSLRS and provides "up to 200 flashes at full power." It uses 2 AA batteries. Cycling between shots, and esp. if you are taking sports or other fast action, might be kinda slow but I'm just guessing.

If you get it, carrying extra AA batteries and at least one fully charged spare camera battery is always a smart thing to do.
 
VeloceMoto said:
Thanks guys. What about those macro filters?

And while I'm on it, what do you all think about those Gary Fong light diffusers? The results look amazing!

I was looking at a $100 on-camera flash unit, but maybe all I need is this little $20 thing, then down the road get a real flash like an SB-400/600/800.

2eowvx3.gif


Sure seems like it would work. The results don't look as good as, say, the bigger LightSphere unit with a real flash unit.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...


I actually started with that gary foong doohicky before I bought my external flash. It's not perfect, but it's a good start. At the very least, you will appreciate the difference much more when you upgrade to an external flash setup. Unless you're made of money, I would just start with the built-in unit and upgrade to an external unit when you get pissed off at the quality of pics you're getting.

The biggest advantage to the external unit is power. I found that I used the flash more for daytime fill flash more than anything else. The built in unit was not nearly strong enough to fill in the shadows in the day time.

I'm now at a point where I'm ready to go multiple strobes and possibly a wireless unit.
 
masameet said:
TTL = Through The Lens

It means you can affix it (or a cord attached to it) to your camera's hot shoe and take better flash images (because the unit talks with your DSLR to get the approximate exposure, so to speak (but you have control to override)).

That unit specs says it's "compatible" with Nikon DSLRS and provides "up to 200 flashes at full power." It uses 2 AA batteries. Cycling between shots, and esp. if you are taking sports or other fast action, might be kinda slow but I'm just guessing.

If you get it, carrying extra AA batteries and at least one fully charged spare camera battery is always a smart thing to do.
Click to expand...

So it sounds like it will do the trick?

The SB-400 seems to get good praise from Ken Rockwell, http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/sb400.htm


My SB-400 is a very simple, very high quality flash with all the features I actually use. Other flash features are gimmicks that get in the way of taking pictures.

The SB-400 is a tiny, featherweight flash for use with modern (2004 and newer) digital SLRs. It's small, but not cheap. It works extremely well and is built like a jewel. I paid full price for mine; $129.

I have a ton of information below, but the answer is yes, buy one of these. I use it all the time and no longer bother with my clumsy SB-600.
Click to expand...



2czvsrl.jpg




EDIT: from another page on Ken Rockwell's site:


New as of fall 2006, the SB-400 is smaller, and also now does what I need. I usually carry my SB-400 instead, unless I know I need a lot more power for shooting all day with flash.
Click to expand...

That sounds exactly like what I need! I certainly won't be "shooting all day with a flash". I just want better indoor/portrait pictures and this sounds like it will be great.


.
 
Last edited:
wannabe said:
I'm now at a point where I'm ready to go multiple strobes and possibly a wireless unit.
Click to expand...

Welcome to the dark side :devil

Wait, maybe not. whatever.

Check out Strobist if you haven't already. :thumbup

pitslave said:
I always thought the SB-400 was cool. It would be good on trips when you want to pack light. Or use it for that little extra fill light
Click to expand...

It's definitely better than the built-in flash. It has more power, and can bounce off the ceiling. You'll find it limiting if you ever want to start using manual control, or off-camera flash, but I'd strongly recommend it over the third-party one.
 
cycle61 said:
Welcome to the dark side :devil

Wait, maybe not. whatever.

Check out Strobist if you haven't already. :thumbup
Click to expand...



thanks. Strobist is probably the reason I ended up where I am now. I also got to the point where I realized that life is so much easier if I bring my own light with me instead of waiting for nature to give me good light.

I see so much potential with multiple strobes. I just wish that they didn't cost so much. :(
 
I just picked up a new 40D with the kit lens from Best Buy yesterday. I got a good deal from them... I told them I was going to buy the extended warranty/accidental drop insurance from them (like I did for my Xti) and that I would buy the kit if they could match Costco's price ($1050 yesterday lunch hour.) The extended warranty was on the pricey side though ($250 compared to $150 or so I paid for Xti a year and a half ago)... so I talked with him a bit more and he was able to drop the price of the kit to $1000.... i.e. $50 less than costco's price! (Later last night I checked Costco and they had dropped their price to $1k too... but I was still very happy.)

I looked at switching from Canon to Nikon and getting the D90... since I seemed to like the colors that my friend's D80 puts out more than I liked my Canon's output... after doing some reading here and there though, it seems like D90 has gone with less saturation and contrast settings as default compared to D80. I know I can change those settings on Canon, just never tried it. Anyhow, after doing a bit of reading here and there, it became clear that 40D was the best choice for me.

I like the way the camera fits in my hand... the weight, feel, everything is simply beautiful to me. Low light performance seems to be very good. I am hoping to learn a lot from you nice people as well as other info available on the web, etc.... right now, 40D in my hands is like having a ZX14 to commute to work on 101... (wait a minute? :wtf)

:teeth

I am assuming that the 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS kit lens that comes with it is pretty good for me, no? (considering the nifty-fifty is the best lens in my bag right now.) Are there any other lenses for about $300 or so that would be a good thing to get beside this one?
 
faz said:
I am assuming that the 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS kit lens that comes with it is pretty good for me, no? (considering the nifty-fifty is the best lens in my bag right now.) Are there any other lenses for about $300 or so that would be a good thing to get beside this one?
Click to expand...

Haven't shot on the 40d kit lens but it always sounded pretty decent. For 3 bills, I'd suggest either the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 or the 17-50mm f/2.8, though these do the same job as the kit lens, just a bit quicker. or save a little bit more and get a 70-200mm f/4 - they sell for $450 used, and its an epically good telephoto for the price.

For the most part, spend a few months shooting. After that time, you should start becoming aware of the shortcomings in your camera bag, and what kinda stuff you'll want to be shooting with.

Congrats!
 
^^ thanks man... I must say, looking at your pictures and the stuff you have captured using the 40D had a large impact on my decision to invest in this camera. (I know it is mostly the photographer, but if 40D can produce that kind of images in the right hands... I can be very happy with it for years to come.) :thumbup

Great work and let me just reiterate that your and cycle61 and stan's and ... all other knowledgeable people's contribution to this thread is GREATLY appreciated by newbies like me and probably those who are quietly following and learning from this thread too. :thumbup
 
Hey Tyler, or other well versed photographers...how about a group ride, or meet and photo shoot day..or something like that. Like a group ride to a particular location (beach, woods, urban setting) to shoot photos. I need more practice with my Canon, and would love to pick brains as to lenses. I'm looking for a macro lense. I have a zoom lense and my standard kit lense. a couple of filters, tripod, etc....

not ready to drop cash on an extra camera body (to not have to switch lenses) but hell, in time. anybody else have a flickr account?
 
machete said:
anybody else have a flickr account?
Click to expand...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/cycle61/

I use it intermittently, it doesn't really fit in with my other hosting solutions, and I can never really decide what to use it for. Every time I start throwing up casual pics, or stuff for the blog, I end up being really serious about it. I find it difficult to draw a line internally between the business and the hobby :laughing
 
Hey all, I just brushed through some of the previous pages and was a little overwhelmed. I'm at the point where my P&S digital camera just won't do everything I want it to, but still in the "just dabbling" stage. I really would like something to photograph the handful of races I go to, which is the main area my current camera fails in. I've read some of the other pages on this question and had been looking at finding a Nikon D40 because I'd heard they were fairly reliable and relatively user friendly. Thing is, today I was at Costco and saw a package deal on the D60 which included the body, an 18-55mm VR lens, a 55-200mm DX lens, and a 2GB card for $700.

My question is: how much of a deal is this? It seems good to me, considering the prices of each of these items independently. I don't plan on getting to the point where I feel I'll need one of the higher-end cameras like the D90, at least not for quite some time. $700 is still a big chunk of change to drop on something for me, so I'd like a little advice from people who know their stuff.
 
The D60 is the D40's successor, and a fine camera to step up out of P&S photography. The included lenses are a very good starting point, and $700 certainly seems like a reasonable deal for the package. It can be as automatic as you want or need it to be, and you can gradually take over the controls as you're ready.

ETA: If you're looking to spend a bit less, you an still find D40's around, should be $450 to $500 for a basic kit. There's also plenty of cameras to be found used, there are perfectly serviceable bodies out there for well under $500, but you'll have to know what you're looking for.
 
kross said:
Hey all, I just brushed through some of the previous pages and was a little overwhelmed. I'm at the point where my P&S digital camera just won't do everything I want it to, but still in the "just dabbling" stage. I really would like something to photograph the handful of races I go to, which is the main area my current camera fails in. I've read some of the other pages on this question and had been looking at finding a Nikon D40 because I'd heard they were fairly reliable and relatively user friendly. Thing is, today I was at Costco and saw a package deal on the D60 which included the body, an 18-55mm VR lens, a 55-200mm DX lens, and a 2GB card for $700.

My question is: how much of a deal is this? It seems good to me, considering the prices of each of these items independently. I don't plan on getting to the point where I feel I'll need one of the higher-end cameras like the D90, at least not for quite some time. $700 is still a big chunk of change to drop on something for me, so I'd like a little advice from people who know their stuff.
Click to expand...

If you listen to this guy, you'll realize what you need is a D40.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d60.htm

Save your money and get the D40 instead. The D40's faster sync speed is invaluable for use with flash outdoors, and the extra light sensitivity in normal use will help make sharper pictures. These three cameras (D40, D40x, D60) otherwise, for most users, are identical. Compare them in person and you'll see. Megapixels don't matter.

(I detail the few fine points which are new in the D60 further below.)

I had my hands on a D60 back in January 2008. The D60 is an excellent camera, but for most of the people who will buy it, it's the same thing as the $300 less expensive D40. I'd suggest getting a D40 and putting the $300 towards more lenses and/or a bouncable flash."





.
 
Thanks for the help guys! The link to the rockwell site had the kind of information I was looking for, and I think I'd be better off with the D40. He made points about the D40 actually working better for the type of pictures I plan on taking (the D60 being less light sensitive making the shutter speed slower in certain instances). I'll keep looking for a deal on a kit for the D40, there are a few out there for around $200 less than the deal I saw at Costco.

Thanks again for the help, I'm sure I'll have plenty more questions when I get my camera!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top