The Camera Thread

Fed up talking videogames? Why?
User avatar
Harry Bizzle
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The Camera Thread
by Harry Bizzle » Mon Jan 07, 2013 8:02 pm

Knoyleo wrote:
Harry Bizzle wrote:Ken Rockwell

:dread:

Image



Think whatever you like of him, his knowledge of camera lenses isn't something you can think badly of, and he tests them well.

In fact just about every website you check which reviews lenses will say it's a good lens. Besides the 17-55mm Nikkor, which is something like £1000, it's the most versatile lens you can get for a DX camera.

Tamron does a fast version in a 17-50mm but apparently the one with IS is quite soft and no good for anything other than video.

instagram: @habiz
User avatar
ignition
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The Camera Thread
by ignition » Mon Jan 07, 2013 9:31 pm

Like you Harry, my main photographic interests lie with landscapes and nature shots. I can appreciate that a wider angle lens would be better suited for this; however could the 10-22mm lens potentially be considered too wide for this (in terms of necessity)? Given that the focal length of your average kit lens goes down to around 18mm, would this not be wide enough for what I primarily want the camera for? What do you find you use most for these kinds of images?

If this is the case then I cannot see myself needing the wide angle lens (at least not immediately, while I'm testing the waters with this hobby!). At the very least it could dramatically reduce the cost of the package he's offering, or alternatively I may just be better off just getting a newer model (e.g. 600D) with a decent kit lens for less monies for the time being.

I think I'll see if my mate is available sometime soon to head out somewhere for the day so I can try out all the gear and gauge what my preferences are and then go from there. It's a lot of money and I don't want to splurge 650 shmoolies on kit that is either not needed or not fit for (my) purpose.

Image
User avatar
Harry Bizzle
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The Camera Thread
by Harry Bizzle » Mon Jan 07, 2013 10:14 pm

The problem with crop sensor cameras is that they multiply the focal length by 1.5 or 1.6 if you're a Canon user.

This means that an 18mm lens gives you the same focal length as a 27mm one on a 35mm or full frame camera. So if you want ultrawide photos, you really need a full frame body. Luckily, the price of them is coming down and should actually be reasonable withing a few years.



Ask him if you can have a look at his camera and mess around with the lens (or try one in Jessops or something) and you'll be able to see the kind of field of view you'll get with an 18mm lens. For me I constantly find myself frustrated with it when shooting landscapes, so I often just take 2 photos and stitch them together, then make the crop I need. It's not perfect but it works most of the time. Obviously moving subjects can cause problems.


Here's a couple I've shot like that, recently:

One which came out okay:

Image


One which ended up quite distorted:

Image

instagram: @habiz
User avatar
$ilva $hadow
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The Camera Thread
by $ilva $hadow » Tue Jan 08, 2013 12:27 am

Harry Bizzle wrote:As usual, you're wrong. Ken Rockwell has a decent write up on at least the Nikon kit lens. You can read it, if you like but I doubt it'll change your opinion.

The Nikon one is particularly good. The only thing wrong with them is that they're slow lenses and made of cheap plastic.


We were talking about the Canon stock lens.

The nikon stock lens are way better than the canon 18-55 stock lens.

User avatar
plasticcoated
Member
Joined in 2009

PostRe: The Camera Thread
by plasticcoated » Tue Jan 15, 2013 6:40 pm

Having loads of lenses is a waste of space and money.

I have a stock 18-55mm Nikkor AF VR lens (on a D5100) that has yet to provide me with any issues (unless something's far away) when capturing subjects. For distance shots I got a TamronAF 70-300mm Tele-Macro lens (as a Christmas present) which I find is tremendous given it was a quarter of the price of the equivalent Nikkor one.

I'm always dead paranoid about swapping lenses and getting dust in them and the body during the change-over.

User avatar
Green Gecko
Treasurer
Joined in 2008
Location: Sussex
Contact:

PostRe: The Camera Thread
by Green Gecko » Tue Jan 15, 2013 7:16 pm

But most times the dust doesn't even show up in the image. You will always have some dust on the mirror / inner focusing lens. Just use a lint free cloth or compressed air... Especially outside where the air is cleaner, unless you're in a sand storm, just point the camera down when switching.

♥ gaems | t: @GRcade | FB: GRcadeUK | YT: GRcadeVideo | Twitch: GRcadeUK
Image
User avatar
Knoyleo
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The Camera Thread
by Knoyleo » Tue Jan 15, 2013 11:18 pm

plasticcoated wrote:Having loads of lenses is a waste of space and money.

I have a stock 18-55mm Nikkor AF VR lens (on a D5100) that has yet to provide me with any issues (unless something's far away) when capturing subjects. For distance shots I got a TamronAF 70-300mm Tele-Macro lens (as a Christmas present) which I find is tremendous given it was a quarter of the price of the equivalent Nikkor one.

I'm always dead paranoid about swapping lenses and getting dust in them and the body during the change-over.

You don't do much low light shooting, do you.

User avatar
Green Gecko
Treasurer
Joined in 2008
Location: Sussex
Contact:

PostRe: The Camera Thread
by Green Gecko » Wed Jan 16, 2013 2:11 pm

High aperture or no aperture am I right.

♥ gaems | t: @GRcade | FB: GRcadeUK | YT: GRcadeVideo | Twitch: GRcadeUK
Image
User avatar
Knoyleo
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The Camera Thread
by Knoyleo » Wed Jan 16, 2013 2:15 pm

I'm not saying a massive aperture is the be all and end all of a lens, but I like being able to shoot in low light situations without having to rely on flash.

User avatar
$ilva $hadow
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The Camera Thread
by $ilva $hadow » Wed Jan 16, 2013 2:19 pm

Knoyleo wrote:
plasticcoated wrote:Having loads of lenses is a waste of space and money.

I have a stock 18-55mm Nikkor AF VR lens (on a D5100) that has yet to provide me with any issues (unless something's far away) when capturing subjects. For distance shots I got a TamronAF 70-300mm Tele-Macro lens (as a Christmas present) which I find is tremendous given it was a quarter of the price of the equivalent Nikkor one.

I'm always dead paranoid about swapping lenses and getting dust in them and the body during the change-over.

You don't do much low light shooting, do you.



Dude, you're talking to folks on grcade, with the exception of a few people who actually know something about lenses, versatility of them and have experience, the rest are just hipsters who are so insecure that they can't even spoiler their pictures in case no one sees them. You think they'd know anything about lenses other than 18-300 hurrr durrr is best?

User avatar
Ad7
Member
Joined in 2009

PostRe: The Camera Thread
by Ad7 » Wed Jan 16, 2013 2:22 pm

Image

Hexx wrote:Ad7 is older and balder than I thought.
User avatar
plasticcoated
Member
Joined in 2009

PostRe: The Camera Thread
by plasticcoated » Thu Jan 17, 2013 12:41 am

SimonM_89 wrote:Got me a Remote Clicker & a 50mm Prime lens for Xmas, can't wait to start experimenting with them both also & getting me some of Dat Bokeh in the next few weeks :datass:.


I dream of a prime lens.

User avatar
Knoyleo
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The Camera Thread
by Knoyleo » Thu Jan 17, 2013 11:59 am

Really? I thought lots of lenses were a waste of space and money? Surely you've got everything covered with your two zooms?

Nah, just kidding you. Primes are where it's at. And why dream of a prime? A nifty fifty is about as cheap as lenses get, or a 35mm to give you as close to a 50mm equivalent on a crop sensor at about the same price. There's literally no reason not to have at least one fast prime like that.

User avatar
Dual
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: Stool Bloke

PostRe: The Camera Thread
by Dual » Thu Jan 17, 2013 12:06 pm

Don't get a portrait lense plasticcoated. Unless you're taking photos of all the females in your large extended Asian family there is no need.

User avatar
Knoyleo
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The Camera Thread
by Knoyleo » Thu Jan 17, 2013 12:09 pm

You can use primes for anything, not just portraits.

Example: Pictures of cats.

User avatar
Steve
Proprietor
Joined in 2008
Location: Bedfordshire

PostRe: The Camera Thread
by Steve » Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:26 pm

My Nikon D5200 was delivered today along with this bad boy:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Nikon-AF-S-NIKK ... 903&sr=8-1

User avatar
Harry Bizzle
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The Camera Thread
by Harry Bizzle » Fri Jan 18, 2013 10:02 pm

How much did you pay for the D5200 if you don't mind me asking?


Because if it's anywhere in the same region as this, I would return it immediately and get that instead.

(tbh, I'd probably send the lens back as well).


I've just ordered this bad boy:

Image

Purchases need to be made by Monday to take advantage of the Nikon cashback offer.

instagram: @habiz
User avatar
Exxy
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: Dodems

PostRe: The Camera Thread
by Exxy » Thu Jan 24, 2013 5:54 pm

Hasselblad are visiting my Uni for a day of photography sessions with their cameras. Terrified I'll break one. £16,000 of camera, even more if they bring their new H5D :dread:

User avatar
Steve
Proprietor
Joined in 2008
Location: Bedfordshire

PostRe: The Camera Thread
by Steve » Fri Jan 25, 2013 8:32 pm

Harry Bizzle wrote:I've just ordered this bad boy:

Image


Funnily enough I just ordered one of those too. It's too late to qualify for the cashback offer but I will be getting £60 cashback for my 18-200mm lens :)

User avatar
$ilva $hadow
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The Camera Thread
by $ilva $hadow » Mon Mar 18, 2013 4:14 pm

If you're in london, I can give you free lessons dude. I like the company of other photographers when I'm going around taking photos and I could teach everything and more that they teach in 'beginners' classes for photography.

Almost all of those photography classes are a waste imo.


Return to “Stuff”