• 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

Gawd it's good to be back. I'm dusting off my blog, and gearing up for wedding season. With the real job on an overtime moratorium, I've finally got time to start running my business again.
 
NOTE: THIS IS NOT MY PICTURE

TRID_2985.jpg


But I'm definitely going to have to try something like this in the near future. Very cool.
 
What's the name of that lens rental place everyone recommends?

I just read a review about the Sigma 70-200mm and, while I can't afford the $700+ now, it would be fun to try out, and it's certainly more of a future option than a $1600 Nikkor 70-200mm f2.8 VR that everyone seems to lust after.

What I don't understand, a Nikkor 80-200mm f2.8 (non-VR, apples to apples) is about the same at $800. What gives? I always thought third-party manufactured stuff was always quite a bit cheaper.

Thoughts?

Rental prices appear to be the same, too.
 
Last edited:
Borrowlenses.com

And if you're interested, I have a Sigma 150/2.8 for sale right now.

The Sigma's been good, but I'm gonna try to step up to an 80-200 or a 70-200 if possible.

Regarding pricing, the 80-200 is an older design, at least ten years or so now. I don't know if they're still in production. Additionally, there are a couple of different versions. There's an older screw-drive model and a newer ultrasonic one. Don't know which you're looking at.
 
Last edited:
Question for y'all. I'm about to succumb to the recent 35mm DX offering from Nikkor, this will be my first lens purchase outside of the kit lenses, also my first prime. :party

I want to purchase a uv filter with it, as well as a UV filter for my kit lens, do filter brands matter much or are they all pretty much the same?

Thanks!
Steve

P.S. Did somebody say 70-200 2.8? :drool
 
Question for y'all....I want to purchase a uv filter with it, as well as a UV filter for my kit lens...

Don't.

Seriously. Why are you buying a UV filter? Protection? The front element of the lens is designed to be out in the open. It's far tougher than most people give it credit for, and anything that hits it hard enough to damage the glass would certainly break your UV filter, which would then simply serve as so much broken glass to grind in.

UV filters are almost invariably made from much cheaper glass than your lens, so all you're doing is paying $20-$50 to degrade your image quality.

Congrats on the 35/1.8 though. I've heard they're very good, and if I had a DX camera I''d certainly buy one. It's the prime that Nikon's been missing for several years now.
 
Really? Yeah, I was buying it for protection. Hmm, maybe I'll have to rethink that. Yeah, I'm stoked about an AFFORDABLE prime in that focal range. I'd love a nifty fifty, but I've got a D40 and I've only been at this for 6 months or so. Not sure my manual focus skills are up for that. :toothless

Steve
 
there is the newer 50mm 1.4 that will autofocus with the D40, but its over 2x the cost of the 35mm.

Anyone else notice how all new Nikon prices have gone up? That's lame...
 
Speaking of Nikon, looks like they announced a new DSLR (D5000, seems like it's a D90 in a smaller D40 sized body) and a new lens (10-24mm DX 3.5-4.5)
 
Speaking of Nikon, looks like they announced a new DSLR (D5000, seems like it's a D90 in a smaller D40 sized body) and a new lens (10-24mm DX 3.5-4.5)

Ooh, cool!

I wonder how the 10-24 will do on full frame. The 12-24 covers down to 18mm, if this goes wider with good quality it might be an interesting possibility.

D5000.jpg


From Thom Hogan's website

D90 Gets a Mini-Me
April 14--As expected, Nikon has released a new consumer-level DSLR, this one positioned between the D60 and D90 and called the D5000. Think D60 with some D90 parts. The big differences between the D60 (for which I just posted my review) and the D5000 are:

* The D5000 gets the D90's 12mp sensor and supports the D90 video capability (720P, 24 fps).
* The D5000 gets the D90's CAM1000 autofocus sensor, but, like the D60, doesn't have an internal autofocus motor to drive older lenses.
* The D5000 gets a positionable color LCD, though it is a 2.7", 233k dot one (smaller and lower resolution than the D90's).
* The D5000 adds GP-1 GPS support the D60 doesn't have.
* A few additional wrinkles: 19 scene exposure modes, some new post processing wrinkles in the RETOUCH menu, exposure bracketing added.

10-24.jpg


DX Goes Wider
April 14--Along with the D5000 announcement comes a curious lens announcement, the 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5G AF-S DX Nikkor. At US$899, it's the same price as the 12-24mm f/4g AF-S DX Nikkor, so it's not entirely clear whether the older lens will continue in the lineup. If you want the specs for the lens, they're in my Nikkor DB.
 
Where can I get cheap light stands? I want something to hold my speedlight and perhaps an umbrella. What should I expect to pay?

i got some bogen light stand...i told myself why not spend this much and only do it once than spend on this thing and replace it later on...

i paid $50+ per stand...
 
Well my Tokina 11-16 2.8 works on full frame at 15-16mm and its a few hundred cheaper than that nikon 10-24, so i won't be in a hurry to get it :p
 
Keeble and Schuchat photography (http://www.kspphoto.com/) will rent Nikon and Canon DSLRs, they have professional outfits. Not that cheap.

KEH is a good place to buy. Photo.net has a classified section that is quite good. I wouldn't buy used from Adorama.
 
Question for y'all. I'm about to succumb to the recent 35mm DX offering from Nikkor, this will be my first lens purchase outside of the kit lenses, also my first prime. :party

I want to purchase a uv filter with it, as well as a UV filter for my kit lens, do filter brands matter much or are they all pretty much the same?

Thanks!
Steve

P.S. Did somebody say 70-200 2.8? :drool
It's a reasonable lens, quite good for the price. Don't bother with a UV filter.
 
UV filters for protection? I do it and paid the dollars for the B/W et al. filters. On a cheap lens, I'm willing to go cheaper (but still not cheap). I just consider it a standard additional cost when buying a new lens.

I agree with the "it's not worth it and it gets in your way" philosophy but take the other approach because I'm abusive toward my equipment. I've had a couple of cases where an UV or Skylight filter saved the lens when a friend -- even a photographer friend -- dropped the camera. Also in my moto crash in the city one of my UV filters bit it. In that case I don't know that I got anything out of it but glass dust everywhere though.

The other sort of case where it's useful is when something gets on the filter: kids' fingers, dogs' noses, mist, road grime... I'm more than willing to stick my camera where it's going to get stuff on it and when it does, I can pop the filter off and keep shooting. 'Course that means that after the fact I have two things to clean, but I don't have to stop shooting at the time.

Anyway, I'm abusive and pay for it. If you're going to use UV filters for physical protection -- or any filters, for that matter -- get the best you can afford.
 
Last edited:
Yea if you had to get a UV filter, a nice one is a must. I bought a cheapo one and had to deal with lots of weird ghosting problems when in low light. Maybe a nicer UV filter that had some good coating would fix that problem.

I try and protect my lenses by just wearing the lens hood
 
Well my Tokina 11-16 2.8 works on full frame at 15-16mm and its a few hundred cheaper than that nikon 10-24, so i won't be in a hurry to get it :p

You gotta let me try that out sometime. I want wider, but I'm not $$$$$ enough for a 14-24. I'm thinking 17-35/2.8, but looking at other options.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top