dSLR: something big about to happen?

[Mr.Noisy]

Buying a DSLR is crazy now with so many to choose from, having said that, ive always used Nikon, now using a D200 + 70-200 f2.8 lens, but i had to start somewhere with Digital SLRs and i found the D70 was great, if i had to start again, would i buy a D40?, yes it's good ?? Maybe but check the Lens, the 18-55 isn't great, see what it would take to upgrade the glass to the 18-70 that comes in the D70/D70s kit, it's a great lens, but consider a good second hand D70/D70s there are plenty about & it will last years, buy and enjoy but try a few out in your hands first, no 2 are the same to handle.
In my experience The Nikon sensor produces some of the sharpest, cleanest images out there, not the cheapest kit, but might just be the best.

 

[job]

So look at Nikon's lens line up and see if you can live with the reduced set of lenses offered.

If one is willing to use other lenses by other manufacturers, it can open up a whole new world of possibilities.

Sigma, in particular, appears to be making great strides in making "made for digital" lenses. In particular, their 30mm 1.4 appears to be a perfect, modern, fast prime for digital crop bodies.

To each their own though...

 

[miloblithe]

If one is willing to use other lenses by other manufacturers, it can open up a whole new world of possibilities.

Sigma, in particular, appears to be making great strides in making "made for digital" lenses. In particular, their 30mm 1.4 appears to be a perfect, modern, fast prime for digital crop bodies.

To each their own though...

This review seems to think that Sigma's 30mm f/1.4 is far from perfect:

http://photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/sigma_30_14/index.htm

In particular, distortion, border resolution, vignetting, and CAs aren't all that impressive.

Of course, for the price, there's no other competition if the f/1.4 is appealing.

 

[job]

This review seems to think that Sigma's 30mm f/1.4 is far from perfect:

http://photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/sigma_30_14/index.htm

In particular, distortion, border resolution, vignetting, and CAs aren't all that impressive.

Of course, for the price, there's no other competition if the f/1.4 is appealing.

I can definitely understand where this is coming from. Sigma had some serious QC issues when the 30mm was first released. In fact, I don't think I would have recommended the lens two years ago when it first came out.

But since then, enough users have complained and Sigma got their act together for the later batches of lenses. I've read about a number of forums users on dpreview and other sites returning their previous copies of the lens to Sigma and receiving a much improved replacement.

In particular, pay attention to the dates of this review:

http://www.popphoto.com/cameralenses/4269/lens-test-sigma-30mm-f14-ex-dc-hsm-af.html

It was originally published in 2005, but was updated in 2007. Coincidence? I think not, especially with the PopPhoto review mentioning few issues in the way of distortion.

Also, check this review out:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-30mm-f-1.4-EX-DC-HSM-Lens-Review.aspx

As much as I respect photozone.de, it almost seems like they expected this lens to be the second coming and hammered it for minor, albeit, present issues that the lens has.

Certainly, if you stop the lens down to 2.8, the IQ improves.

 

[miloblithe]

Well that's all great to know! Thanks. It's definitely an attractive lens, although I personally like the idea of having all full-frame lenses just in case the next camera I buy (hopefully some time around 2016) is full-frame. On the other hand, Canon's 35mm f/1.4 is not something I would ever pay for, probably even if I won the lottery!

 

[jayb2000]

Yeah, been drooling at that site. I am talking about taking photos of sunny parties,
where subject will be in center focus and tracked in center of image through series shooting... so I could crop out a good portion, re-compositioning for better appearance.
For example, this photo at the boardwalk of a surfer 100 yards out (5 mp Kodak 10x zoom, sport mode, heavy post-p) and getting a usable large poster size print of the actual subject with fair detail. I know I'll need a high quality 200 mm or 300 mm zoom lens but I think the chances of saving more shots lies in the extra megapixels. It's been the case with my Lumix fz 50 with a 10 mp sensor... but noise is really a drawback of the Panasonic. Excellent p+s. but I hate fudging good shots because of my camera's limitations!

Thanks again for all your input. All I need now is my wife's permission!

Ahh, just get a D2Xs and this:

five, 12mp frames per second @ 800mmxx1.5 should let you get some real tight surf shots!

 

[M@lew]

Holy crap That's massive....I don't I'd ever need a lens like that.

 

[andiwm2003]

Holy crap That's massive....I don't I'd ever need a lens like that.

hey, of course you need it. with the rent so crazy high in boston i consider buying one and living in it. it has weatherseals, has it?

 

[jpfisher]

So, I'm price shopping and comparing specs again, reading reviews, I really like the Nikon D40x due to the compact body, large sensor, low noise, and availability of a zillion excellent lenses, plus I already have mega gigabytes of SD memory so I chose Nikon over Canon.

The major downside to the D40x is that you don't have full Nikkor lens compatibility -- it will only use autofocus lenses that have internal drive motors.

You might want to look into getting a second-hand D50... or consider the Pentax K100D -- it's at a similar price point and gives you in-body anti-shake and dust removal... and it takes SD.

 

[Lovesong]

hey, of course you need it. with the rent so crazy high in boston i consider buying one and living in it. it has weatherseals, has it?

Now, now... he who lives in a glass house...

 

[srf4real]

five, 12mp frames per second @ 800mmxx1.5 should let you get some real tight surf shots!

Definately never get any candids if I was swinging that thing around.
Well I told my wife to get an expensive hobby like sewing the other day...

 

[compuwar]

Definately never get any candids if I was swinging that thing around.
Well I told my wife to get an expensive hobby like sewing the other day...

You'd be surprised at the candids you can get even at 400mm with a 400/2.8. The trick is to be off in the background.

 

[compuwar]

Ahh, just get a D2Xs and this:

five, 12mp frames per second @ 800mmxx1.5 should let you get some real tight surf shots!

The 800 prime looks to be a tad sharper. It's on my long-term wish list (though I'll probably try the TC20E-II on my 400 first and see if I can find some way to compare,) though I'm really waiting to see what the 200-500/2.8 will be priced at.

 

[tracktionmonkey]

Save money on the body.

Get a D50.
Wonderful camera.
13" x 19" prints have proved no problem with a D50 for me.
Many reviews state it has better iso performance/noise handling than a D200.
If not the D80 is getting cheaper (even a refurbished one with a guarantee).
And why limit your choice of lens in future as with the D40.

 

[OreoCookie]

Ahh, just get a D2Xs and this:

five, 12mp frames per second @ 800mmxx1.5 should let you get some real tight surf shots!

Even weight and size aren't a problem, if you can afford this lens, then you can also pay an assistant who luggs it around all day.

I wouldn't want to get caught with one at US customs either, I'm sure I'd spend a few days in solitary confinement until they are convinced it's not a ray gun

 

[srf4real]

You'd be surprised at the candids you can get even at 400mm with a 400/2.8. The trick is to be off in the background.

Oh yeah, my FZ50 goes up to 420mm @ F4... so I'm getting around... but not at 5fps and not suitable for poster size prints.

Even weight and size aren't a problem, if you can afford this lens, then you can also pay an assistant who luggs it around all day.

I wouldn't want to get caught with one at US customs either, I'm sure I'd spend a few days in solitary confinement until they are convinced it's not a ray gun

That is surely not a travel lens. Gotta buy a semi truck to get it around.

I ended up getting a Panasonic L1. Mainly because I got a brand new one for $500. The Leica 14-50mm F2.8-3.5 lens will satisfy me long after I outgrow the body, but I am locked into the four/thirds line of lenses for now, of which there aren't very many.

I'm looking forward to Olympus and their forecasted Zuiko 70-300mm F4-5.6 this fall. And of course the 50-200mm F2.8-3.5 later when my wife calms down...

 

[zagato27]

Regarding the Nikon D40. I too am considering this as a first DSLR for my son a high school senior. I'm currently looking at an eBay auction for ~ $504 (new/sealed w/warranty and 18-55 kit lens and shipping is an additional $30) that I believe is a good price. I am aware of the "auto focus" lens issue in that the Nikon glass has to be AF-S to be auto focus which will limit choices. I haven't investigated other lens makers yet but I would imagine that they are producing glass that has internal motors for auto focus. So this may not be a huge issue. Additionally I'm not "locked" into Nikon glass just because it's Nikon and probably excellent quality. Price is an issue. Speaking of price. I was also considering the Canon Rebel XT, XTI but the price is more expensive and reviews of the kit lens are not as good as the D40. I haven't been able to determine if the Canon has the same issue as the D40 regarding auto-focus lens.......motor in the body or have to buy glass with motors. Lastly, whats the problem with getting a non-autofocus lens? Cheers

 

[srf4real]

Lastly, whats the problem with getting a non-autofocus lens? Cheers

I was dissappointed to learn about the need for AFS lenses in low-end Nikons, helped me rule it out unless I wanted to spend real $$ on the D80 or D200. I actually prefer manual focus myself... however nothing works like a quick AF motor when the shot is totally spontaneous! I'd have missed a zillion pics without it.

 

[OreoCookie]

I ended up getting a Panasonic L1. Mainly because I got a brand new one for $500.

Wow, that's really a bargain! I probably couldn't have resisted that deal a few months ago either.
Was the lens included?

The Leica 14-50mm F2.8-3.5 lens will satisfy me long after I outgrow the body, but I am locked into the four/thirds line of lenses for now, of which there aren't very many.

Fortunately for you, the Olympus lens line-up (the more expensive variety) has outstanding optical quality, is well-built and light-weight.

 

[srf4real]

Wow, that's really a bargain! I probably couldn't have resisted that deal a few months ago either.
Was the lens included?

Fortunately for you, the Olympus lens line-up (the more expensive variety) has outstanding optical quality, is well-built and light-weight.

Yes, the deal was for a new L1 kit in unopened box. The guy's wife got it as a gift and they weren't the least bit interested in learning how to use it.
Found it on craigslist and took a short drive to pick it up!

I'm glad to hear that Oly has a good reputation for glass... I need a tele-zoom fer sure.

 

[OreoCookie]

Yes, the deal was for a new L1 kit in unopened box. The guy's wife got it as a gift and they weren't the least bit interested in learning how to use it.
Found it on craigslist and took a short drive to pick it up!

Are these guys crazy??! Great find, congrats!

I'm glad to hear that Oly has a good reputation for glass... I need a tele-zoom fer sure.

Yes, they do.
There is no equivalent for the 50-200 zoom either (which corresponds to 100-400 mm at 2.8-3.5!).
If you want to invest just a tad more (hopefully not at the cost of your wife's temper), the 35-100 lens (corresponds to 70-200 on 35 mm) should do the trick. The review of Germany's most prominent photo magazine reads something like: `best lens ever tested with our BAS digital test, enough reserves for sensors with significantly higher resolution …' The reviews of other Olympus lenses are also excellent.

 

[-hh]

I wouldn't want to get caught with one at US customs either, I'm sure I'd spend a few days in solitary confinement until they are convinced it's not a ray gun

Just tell them that ray guns look like this:

...well, at least OUR ray guns do


-hh

 

[ChrisA]

.... I really like the Nikon D40x due to the compact body, large sensor, low noise, and availability of a zillion excellent lenses,

You are going at it backwards. All beginners do this -- they think the most important part of the dSLR system is the camera body. The body matters the least. Take a photo with a D200 and a D40 and post both to the web and absolutely no one will be able to tell which is which by just looking at the image on the screen.

But the above can't be said about lenses. a 50mm f/1.4 lens will make strikingly different photographs then a 80-200 f/2.8 zoom the two are very different

Now, after I said "bodies don't matter" I'll modify that. The body can place a limit on what lens you can use. The D40 has a severe limitation that to me is a deal killer. It can only focus AF-S type lenses. This means you can'r use some of Nikon's best optics and shuts off most of the used lens market. The robust used lens market is one of the best reason to choose the Nikon brand

So, after you choose what lenses you like and which you may want to buy in a year or two only then select a body that will work. In my case I see a real deal in the used 80-200. You can pick them up for $600. but that lens will not fit the D40. Also none of the Nikon primes fit the D40 and the 50 and 85 are twoof the most usful lenses I have.

I'd much rather have a used D100, D70 or D50 than a new D40 and all are about the same price

 

[ChrisA]

I was also considering the Canon Rebel XT, XTI but the price is more expensive and reviews of the kit lens are not as good as the D40. I haven't been able to determine if the Canon has the same issue as the D40 regarding auto-focus lens.......motor in the body or have to buy glass with motors. Lastly, whats the problem with getting a non-autofocus lens? Cheers

All Canon lenses have the motor inside the lens. Canon changed their lens mount some years ago and obsoleted all their old lenses. All lenses sense the change (20+ years ago) use the new EOS electronic mount. Nikon never changed their lens mount system and it's the same old "F mount" that dates from the 1960's but they keep adding new features to it. the latest new feature was in-len focus motor.

In theory you can use the D40 with non-AF-S lenses. It works if yu are willing to rotate a focus ring. The problem is that the focus rings on the AF lenses are not so good and have a loose "sloppy" feel to them compared to a true manual focus lens with it's solid brass internal helix. Also the viewfinder lacks a split prism or other optical focus aids so you have to have good eyes. But yes it works.

The other thing is that people who want a D40 are likely never going to a professional level lens and they's likey never buy a prime. And all of Nikon's lw end f/5.6 zoom lenses will work with the D40. For most D40 buys the AF-S issue is not a big deal. For long time Nikon shooters this is a deal killer.

 

[zagato27]

All Canon lenses have the motor inside the lens. Canon changed their lens mount some years ago and obsoleted all their old lenses. All lenses sense the change (20+ years ago) use the new EOS electronic mount. Nikon never changed their lens mount system and it's the same old "F mount" that dates from the 1960's but they keep adding new features to it. the latest new feature was in-len focus motor.

Ahhhh, thank you for the info. The Nikon with the kit lens is cheaper but this autofocus lens issue makes a difference. Think I'll start looking for a Canon XT. Sadly, $ is still an issue so the so it's the XT instead of the XTI. Besides, I do think that the info screen on the back of the XT is valuable though it does reduce the size of the LCD compared to the XTI. So, maybe an XT body and then look for an all purpose lens. Any suggestions?