The BEST DSLR

On 28 Jul 2006 20:41:38 -0700, "Matt" wrote:

My cameras are a mess, both my point-and-shoot (which I think the best
way to do this is post a message (about camera shopping) here...to
people with experience with DSLR cameras.

So to help me can you answer this question...
If you could have any DSLR camera in the world, which one would you
get?

http://digitalartphotographyfordummies.blogspot.com
http://bookofsigns.blogspot.com


I'm partial to the Jovian Master Blaster 2000, with the digital conveyer data
port and the 12 gigapixal 128 bit organic photon sensor, powered by the 2 liter
cat brain processor and nuclear peptide battery pack. Don't forget the 4
dimensional zoom lens that can look back into time and refocus those blurry
shots you might take... I prefer the 1mm to 10 kilometer super zoom, F0,02 with
the light speed shutter.

Oh, they don't take American Express, except maybe on Mars on the weekend.

B.

According to My View no spam :
"John McWilliams" wrote in message

[ ... ]

A number of folks won't touch a tinyurl from someone not known to them.
This one is safe.

http://www.phaseone.com/Content/p1digitalbacks/P%2045.aspx

If you put brackets around it as I have done, even a three liner won't
break in all the finer News clients.

learn something every day (ie brackets)

Don't bother -- it is not universally correct, and many of us
consider the "finer News clients" to be those which don't do *anything*
with HTML, including the brackets. It is a lot safer using those, even
with boxes which are *not* Windows-based, and thus not the targets of
every virus writer out there. :-)

The same applies to e-mail clients.

Enjoy,
DoN.
--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

m II wrote:
wrote:

Something else to consider are the new DSLR's with vibration reduction
built into the cmaera body instead of lenses.

...which is why I will be getting a Pentax k100 very soon. I have plenty
of excellent old Takumar glass, so the cost of a new 'shake reduction'
body is only a very small portion of the bigger picture.

Technologically, it seems difficult to make camera
based anti-vibration work for the big range of
DSLR lenses. The amount of movement needed on
the vibration reduction of a 20mm lens is
quite different than that needed to compensate
for a 500 mm lens: a factor of 25. The lens based
system is optimized for each lens, and that is why
both nikon and canon have done so well with it.

Roger

george wrote:

That's a no-brainer...I've been a Nikon customer for 33 years...I have a ton
of Nikon lenses and accessories...without any doubt or hesitation
whatsoever, the camera would be the Canon 1DS MkII. If I could afford that,
my Nikon stuff would be on eBay so fast their (Nikon's) ostrich heads would
spin.

While I agree with you on the 1DS Mark II if you are doing still
subjects, it would do poorly on action subjects relative
to other cameras. The top choice for wildlife action and sports
is the 1D Mark IIn: it is the fastest DSLR on the market.

Roger

"Matt" wrote in message
ups.com...

My cameras are a mess, both my point-and-shoot (which I think the best
way to do this is post a message (about camera shopping) here...to
people with experience with DSLR cameras.

So to help me can you answer this question...
If you could have any DSLR camera in the world, which one would you
get?

http://digitalartphotographyfordummies.blogspot.com
http://bookofsigns.blogspot.com

wrote in message
news
On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 22:59:36 -0400, "george" wrote:


wrote in message
. ..
On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 17:10:09 -0400, "george"
wrote:

That's a no-brainer...I've been a Nikon customer for 33 years...I have a
ton
of Nikon lenses and accessories...without any doubt or hesitation
whatsoever, the camera would be the Canon 1DS MkII. If I could afford
that,
my Nikon stuff would be on eBay so fast their (Nikon's) ostrich heads
would
spin.


Curious... what do you think of the 30D?


I've handled it and it seemed OK to me (not quite as intuitive as a Nikon
(to me anyway), but still quite easy to figure out). Since it was only in
a
store and without seeing any output, I cannot comment on image quality. I
do have a D200 and the 30D build quality didn't look or feel as good to me
(remember that this was just a brief, casual inspection in a store...I

I got to play with a 30D in the store as well, but couldn't take a
picture... it
did seem a bit 'cheap' but hey, that's only the feel of the case... it's
like
getting Vodka in a plastic bottle...

wasn't seriously considering the camera as it solves none of the problems
I
have with Nikon offerings). I would like to try a 5D some time. That
seems
like a real winner that Nikon would be wise to emulate. As far as I am
concerned, I'd rather see no more emphasis on resolution, only on price,
sensor size, and noise.

I agree. I thought that Nikon would bring out a full size, quiet sensor,
but it
doesn't seem so... they want to stick with the small ones. Saves on glass
I
guess... bigger profits!


The attraction of a 1DS MkII to me is the sensor size and quality. I
shoot
some portraits (out of my home) and the problem is the APS sensor size in
conjunction with the room size I have to work with...between having to use
a
bit shorter focal length lens due to APS-FOV factor AND the resulting
increase in depth of field (undesirable), it seems that there really isn't
any inexpensive way around this (i.e., either remodel my house, rent a
good
size studio, or switch systems)...I REALLY wish Nikon would at least ACT
like they understand this and EVER intend to DO anything about it. If
they
are serious about APS sensors, then give me a 60mm f/1.0 portrait lens and
if their spiel about APS lenses isn't just BS, then it should be priced
like
the FF equivalent, an 85mm f/1.4. Or, better yet, don't...I'd really
rather
use the lenses I already own and not just for economic reasons...more so
because they don't make equivalents and many that I like aren't even made
for 35mm cameras any more.


I originally bought the 50mm 1.8 to do product shots, but it becomes a
75mm and
that's a bit too long... so I bought a 28mm 1.8 but that cost $500 and is
not
exactly what I want... Nikon should have brought out a 34mm 1.8 lens at
the $150
mark to replace the 50 on digital cameras.


Yeah, does make the APS lens argument (price/weight advantages) sound like
nothing more than marketing-speak. Also, because you need to use a shorter
focal length lens (for same FOV), if your concern is DOF, that shorter lens
has to be about 1-stop faster too in order to really offer equivalent DOF.
So, now I also need to block out more ambient light to use studio flash w/o
being affected by the ambient lighting...I just find it a nasty combination
for the type of shooting I do. If I were taking wildlife or sports photos
outside with telephoto lenses, I'd probably be deliriously happy, but that
isn't what I want to do. (That also means that to replace what I have,
Nikon would need to make a 5.3mm f/2.0 circular fisheye as well.)

george wrote:
That's a no-brainer...I've been a Nikon customer for 33 years...I have a ton
of Nikon lenses and accessories...without any doubt or hesitation
whatsoever, the camera would be the Canon 1DS MkII. If I could afford that,
my Nikon stuff would be on eBay so fast their (Nikon's) ostrich heads would
spin.


If you want to get the most out of that Canon, you'll keep the Nikon
lenses
and buy an adapter.

Hi Matt

I would go with a MF digital camera. Most of them come as a camera plus
a separate backend, like this one:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0409/04092902mamiya_zd.asp

Of course it is not the best camera for everything. Macro for example
is a lot easier with smaller sensor formats.

Thomas

Matt wrote:
My cameras are a mess, both my point-and-shoot (which I think the best
way to do this is post a message (about camera shopping) here...to
people with experience with DSLR cameras.

So to help me can you answer this question...
If you could have any DSLR camera in the world, which one would you
get?

http://digitalartphotographyfordummies.blogspot.com
http://bookofsigns.blogspot.com

I originally bought the 50mm 1.8 to do product shots, but it becomes a 75mm and
that's a bit too long... so I bought a 28mm 1.8 but that cost $500 and is not
exactly what I want... Nikon should have brought out a 34mm 1.8 lens at the $150
mark to replace the 50 on digital cameras.

Nikon does have a 35 f2 seems fairly close, nice lens too. You'll never
get anything the least bit WA at f1.8 and $150. Sell the 28, buy the 35
if it is closer to what you want. I find the 55 f2.8 just about perfect
for product shots with a Nikon D200.

Tom

On 30 Jul 2006 10:40:48 -0700, "tomm42" wrote:


I originally bought the 50mm 1.8 to do product shots, but it becomes a 75mm and
that's a bit too long... so I bought a 28mm 1.8 but that cost $500 and is not
exactly what I want... Nikon should have brought out a 34mm 1.8 lens at the $150
mark to replace the 50 on digital cameras.

Nikon does have a 35 f2 seems fairly close, nice lens too. You'll never
get anything the least bit WA at f1.8 and $150. Sell the 28, buy the 35
if it is closer to what you want. I find the 55 f2.8 just about perfect
for product shots with a Nikon D200.

Tom

I'm going to stick with what I have, it cost's too much already! Using the 28
and the 50 that I have, I can cover everything I need.

One thing about lenses... there doesn't seem to be a big choice in the stores
around here, I would have to special order most of them, so I tend to pick
something available.

According to :
On 30 Jul 2006 10:40:48 -0700, "tomm42" wrote:


I originally bought the 50mm 1.8 to do product shots, but it becomes a 75mm and
that's a bit too long... so I bought a 28mm 1.8 but that cost $500 and is not
exactly what I want... Nikon should have brought out a 34mm 1.8 lens at the $150
mark to replace the 50 on digital cameras.

Nikon does have a 35 f2 seems fairly close, nice lens too. You'll never
get anything the least bit WA at f1.8 and $150. Sell the 28, buy the 35
if it is closer to what you want. I find the 55 f2.8 just about perfect
for product shots with a Nikon D200.

Tom

I'm going to stick with what I have, it cost's too much already! Using the 28
and the 50 that I have, I can cover everything I need.

One thing about lenses... there doesn't seem to be a big choice in the stores
around here, I would have to special order most of them, so I tend to pick
something available.

Hmm ... the local Penn Camera has a pretty good stock of *used*
lenses to add to what they have in new. That is where I got my AF 50mm
f1.4 (non-D series) for a quite reasonable price. You might look into
used lenses if you don't need the latest features in everything. You
can save quite a bit. Of the lenses which I normally use on my D70,
only two were purchased new, the 18-70mm "kit" lens, and the 28-105mm
which I had been using on the N90s before I got the D70. The others
which I semi-regularly use were purchased used. In order of
acquisition:

1) 200mm f4 Medical Nikkor -- with built-in ring flash. It is
used in manual mode, with the lens rings doing the exposure
calculation assuming that all light comes from the ring flash.

2) 500mm f8 mirror telephoto. No metering. Bought at a photo
swap meet, IIRC. I usually use the longest auto lens to meter
the area for a starting point for exposure, and then use the
histogram to guide me to better exposure. Metering through the
lens would be a nice plus here.

3) 180mm f2.8 (which had to be "chip" converted to meter with the
D-70. This was purchased at a hamfest.

4) AF 50mm f1.4 -- Purchased at the local Penn Camera.

5) AF 35-135mm f3.5-4.5 -- purchased from a friend who deals in
used cameras.


Another lens which will come back into service if I ever get a
D-200 is the 80-200mm f4 AI zoom lens (with push-pull zoom and rotate to
focus on a single control). But for the moment, it needs more time to
adjust exposure than the likely subject matter would allow me, so it is
just too heavy to carry along without the on-camera metering capability.
(The 500mm only comes along for certain things.

Enjoy,
DoN.
--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---