First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next  Last
Photographer's Union
73745 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Japan
Offline
Posted 5/10/08

geeene_16 wrote:

I bought the Nikon D-60 about 3 weeks. ago. Truly awesome for a compact SLR. I made a transition between my Canon Digital Rebel XTi to a Nikon. And I don't regret it. Nikon has way better warranties and they really do support their buyers. I'm planning on buying a new set of lens, a Nikon AF 70-300mm 70-300 G, but I'm ot so sure if I should buy that or a Sigma 70-300mm 70-300 f4-5.6 APO. Any suggestions as to which lens is better? Or any lens for that matter?
When I get better at photography, I'd like to buy a Nikon D300.I read some rave reviews about it. (T.T")


Are you sure you're comparing the right lenses? the Nikon 70-300mm f/4-5.6 G is a relatively old lens, and sells for around $150... and you're comparing this with the Sigma 70-300mm APO (I'm assuming this is the DG Macro version), which is about $300. Given the two, you're better off going for the Sigma, given that it has SLD (ED in Nikon terms) elements, while the Nikkor doesn't.

I think the appropriate lens to compare this Sigma lens with is the Nikon 70-300mm VR. This lens goes for roughly double the price of the Sigma, but it has much better glass, and sports VR, which is very useful in low light and telephoto situations.


If you're on a budget, go for the cheaper Nikon 70-300mm G. If you have extra money to spare, stick with the Sigma. But if you want to invest in a good beginner-amateur telephoto zoom, upgrade to the Nikon 70-300 VR.
6598 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / F / Colorado
Offline
Posted 5/10/08

edsamac wrote:


geeene_16 wrote:

I bought the Nikon D-60 about 3 weeks. ago. Truly awesome for a compact SLR. I made a transition between my Canon Digital Rebel XTi to a Nikon. And I don't regret it. Nikon has way better warranties and they really do support their buyers. I'm planning on buying a new set of lens, a Nikon AF 70-300mm 70-300 G, but I'm ot so sure if I should buy that or a Sigma 70-300mm 70-300 f4-5.6 APO. Any suggestions as to which lens is better? Or any lens for that matter?
When I get better at photography, I'd like to buy a Nikon D300.I read some rave reviews about it. (T.T")


Are you sure you're comparing the right lenses? the Nikon 70-300mm f/4-5.6 G is a relatively old lens, and sells for around $150... and you're comparing this with the Sigma 70-300mm APO (I'm assuming this is the DG Macro version), which is about $300. Given the two, you're better off going for the Sigma, given that it has SLD (ED in Nikon terms) elements, while the Nikkor doesn't.

I think the appropriate lens to compare this Sigma lens with is the Nikon 70-300mm VR. This lens goes for roughly double the price of the Sigma, but it has much better glass, and sports VR, which is very useful in low light and telephoto situations.


If you're on a budget, go for the cheaper Nikon 70-300mm G. If you have extra money to spare, stick with the Sigma. But if you want to invest in a good beginner-amateur telephoto zoom, upgrade to the Nikon 70-300 VR.


Yeah, I'm comparing the right lenses, because I had a Nikon 70-300mm f/4-5.6 G before, and I broke it, and I was really comfortable with that, so I'm comparing if I should buy a new one of that same lens or a Sigma. But honestly the lens that I really would like is a Reflex-Nikkor 500mm f/8.0s, but I'd like to have more experience in field photography first before I buy that I guess. Price really doesn't matter for me though.So you think I would really be well off with a Sigma?
73745 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Japan
Offline
Posted 5/10/08

geeene_16 wrote:

Yeah, I'm comparing the right lenses, because I had a Nikon 70-300mm f/4-5.6 G before, and I broke it, and I was really comfortable with that, so I'm comparing if I should buy a new one of that same lens or a Sigma. But honestly the lens that I really would like is a Reflex-Nikkor 500mm f/8.0s, but I'd like to have more experience in field photography first before I buy that I guess. Price really doesn't matter for me though.So you think I would really be well off with a Sigma?


You better check if the Reflex-Nikkor is compatible with your D60. That's an old AI lens, and if I'm not mistaken, many of those makes aren't compatible with the new AF motor systems in the newer models of the Nikon dSLR line up. I'm pretty sure that lens won't work on the D40X, but I'm not all too sure about it working in the D60. Refer to your manual for information on compatible lenses.

If you can repair your old lens, that would be the more sensible option. No point in buying the same lens twice. I'm assuming you're more into telephoto photography? Why don't you consider a lens in the 70-200 range?

The Nikkor 70-200 f/2.8 VR is an excellent lens, albeit rather expensive. A cheaper alternative would be the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8. These are dedicated telephoto lenses, and provide far better results than any of the lenses you've just mentioned ~ not to mention, they are "fast" lenses, at an aperture opening of f/2.8. The Sigma goes for around $800, while the Nikkor goes for about $1200.
6598 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / F / Colorado
Offline
Posted 5/10/08

edsamac wrote:


geeene_16 wrote:

Yeah, I'm comparing the right lenses, because I had a Nikon 70-300mm f/4-5.6 G before, and I broke it, and I was really comfortable with that, so I'm comparing if I should buy a new one of that same lens or a Sigma. But honestly the lens that I really would like is a Reflex-Nikkor 500mm f/8.0s, but I'd like to have more experience in field photography first before I buy that I guess. Price really doesn't matter for me though.So you think I would really be well off with a Sigma?


You better check if the Reflex-Nikkor is compatible with your D60. That's an old AI lens, and if I'm not mistaken, many of those makes aren't compatible with the new AF motor systems in the newer models of the Nikon dSLR line up. I'm pretty sure that lens won't work on the D40X, but I'm not all too sure about it working in the D60. Refer to your manual for information on compatible lenses.

If you can repair your old lens, that would be the more sensible option. No point in buying the same lens twice. I'm assuming you're more into telephoto photography? Why don't you consider a lens in the 70-200 range?

The Nikkor 70-200 f/2.8 VR is an excellent lens, albeit rather expensive. A cheaper alternative would be the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8. These are dedicated telephoto lenses, and provide far better results than any of the lenses you've just mentioned ~ not to mention, they are "fast" lenses, at an aperture opening of f/2.8. The Sigma goes for around $800, while the Nikkor goes for about $1200.


The lens I had are irreparable. The inside is completely mashed up as well as the outside. Well I'm hoping it would be compatible to my camera. But I think it is with the D300. I'm not sure. Yeah, I'm more into telephoto photography.
Nikkor 70-200 f/2.8 VR, I heard rave reviews about it, and I probably would purchase one in the coming future. I just want to have a wide variation of my lenses. Thanks for the very useful information by the way. It truly enlightened me.
73745 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Japan
Offline
Posted 5/10/08

geeene_16 wrote:

The lens I had are irreparable. The inside is completely mashed up as well as the outside. Well I'm hoping it would be compatible to my camera. But I think it is with the D300. I'm not sure. Yeah, I'm more into telephoto photography.
Nikkor 70-200 f/2.8 VR, I heard rave reviews about it, and I probably would purchase one in the coming future. I just want to have a wide variation of my lenses. Thanks for the very useful information by the way. It truly enlightened me.


If I were you, I'd leave out purchasing the Reflex-Nikkor. More than anything, it's an antiquated lens, and is good for collecting, rather than actual use on the field. It has a small aperture, too, and was optimized for film use, not digital.

That said, save your money for a better lens, or better yet, the D300.
6598 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / F / Colorado
Offline
Posted 5/10/08

edsamac wrote:


geeene_16 wrote:

The lens I had are irreparable. The inside is completely mashed up as well as the outside. Well I'm hoping it would be compatible to my camera. But I think it is with the D300. I'm not sure. Yeah, I'm more into telephoto photography.
Nikkor 70-200 f/2.8 VR, I heard rave reviews about it, and I probably would purchase one in the coming future. I just want to have a wide variation of my lenses. Thanks for the very useful information by the way. It truly enlightened me.


If I were you, I'd leave out purchasing the Reflex-Nikkor. More than anything, it's an antiquated lens, and is good for collecting, rather than actual use on the field. It has a small aperture, too, and was optimized for film use, not digital.

That said, save your money for a better lens, or better yet, the D300.


Maybe if I buy the Reflex-Nikkor, I could sell it ten years from now and get big money. But it's such a magnificent piece of work...remarkable lens.
3929 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / F / My body lives in...
Offline
Posted 6/30/08
nice thread

from scratch what advice should i take to produce a 20" tv monitor size portrait and landscape?
73745 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Japan
Offline
Posted 7/7/08
^ Your question makes no sense. If you're asking for what would be the minimum requirements to print out a picture with a diagonal measurement of 20" at reasonable resolution, then you'll need something along the lines of a 12 megapixel camera. You can do the same with a 6 megapixel camera, but digital noise might be a little more apparent.



On a brighter note, this camera is just heaven on earth:




However, it's far to expensive to be bought liberally... Looks like I'll stick with the D300 on this one.
3929 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / F / My body lives in...
Offline
Posted 7/7/08 , edited 7/9/08
^ I searched and the d700 will be out this July at $3,000 US.The D700 is designed for the future without ignoring the past. As Nikon celebrates the 75th anniversary of the very first NIKKOR lens, and with well over 40 million sold, intelligent image processing technologies to control peripheral illumination (Vignette) and chromatic aberration enable photographers to rediscover the creative possibilities of their existing NIKKOR F mount lenses.



The D200 (review) was a big step forward for Nikon, the 'baby D2X' certainly gave the competition a thing or two to think about. Its big problem was the fact that Canon was still a generation ahead in the noise stakes, managing to consistently deliver clean images despite megapixel jumps. With the advent of the D300 however Nikon has conclusively removed this disparity and if anything stepped ahead of Canon (mostly thanks to its chroma based noise reduction delivering more film-like grain rather than color blotches).

But that's just one aspect of the D300 story, almost everything else about this camera has been improved. Starting on the outside there's that stunning high resolution three inch LCD monitor, the usefulness of which shouldn't be underestimated (you'll find you get enough detail without magnifying as far), there's perhaps the best implementation of Live View to date with both contrast detect (like a compact camera, although not particularly fast) and passive auto-focus options, and there's HDMI output; a boon no doubt to studio photographers who can now provide live high resolution previews of a shot. And of course we can't talk about the D300 without giving Nikon credit for the superb build quality and robust 'go anywhere' feel the body has.

On the inside Nikon has worked hard to deliver both better image quality and better performance; you get usable images up to ISO 3200, extended image parameter control, improved dynamic range, automatic CA removal (which immediately improves the performance of all your lenses), six frames per second continuous shooting (eight with the grip / battery combo), a new AF sensor, AF tracking by color and scene recognition. There are also an almost infinite range of customization options available, everything from how many AF areas are used to the size of the center-weighted metering circle to what happens when you hold the FUNC button and turn the command dial.

The D300's weak points. The usefulness of Live View would certainly be improved with an articulating LCD monitor (although I'm sure Nikon would argue that this could compromise the integrity of the body), auto white-balance is poor in artificial light (although this isn't anything unique to the D300) and there's still no true mirror lock-up feature. But really, these few niggles are really the only things we could pick out as criticism.

There is price, but sometimes the best products demand a premium and the D300 is no exception. Nikon's biggest problem now will be bettering the D300; it raises the bar to a new high, and represents the state of the art despite strong competition from the likes of Canon, Sony and Olympus. There's simply no better semi-professional digital SLR on the market.
6607 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / F / at the happiest p...
Offline
Posted 7/7/08
i like taking pics but i just can't take them

my hands move too much so the pictures turn out blurry
1542 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20
Offline
Posted 7/8/08
I like the camera but it is expensive yet

Nikon D700 Key Features

* 12.1 megapixel full-frame sensor (8.45µm pixel pitch)
* Image Sensor Cleaning (vibration) *
* ISO 200 - 6400 (with boost up to ISO 25600 and down to ISO 100)
* Also supports DX lenses, viewfinder automatically masks (5.1 megapixels with DX lens)
* 14-bit A/D conversion, 12 channel readout
* Same ultra-fast startup and shutter lag as D3
* Nikon EXPEED image processor (Capture NX processing and NR algorithms, lower power)
* New Kevlar / carbon fibre composite shutter with 150,000 exposure durability *
* Multi-CAM3500FX Auto Focus sensor (51-point, 15 cross-type, more vertical coverage)
* Auto-focus tracking by color (using information from 1005-pixel AE sensor)
* 95% coverage, 0.72x magnification viewfinder *
* Auto-focus calibration (fine-tuning), fixed body or up to 20 separate lens settings
* Scene Recognition System (uses AE sensor, AF sensor)
* Picture Control image parameter presets
* 5 frames per second continuous with auto-focus tracking*
* Optional MB-D10 Battery Pack (same as D300), increases burst rate to 8 fps *
* UDMA compatible single CF card slot *
* 3.0" 922,000 pixel LCD monitor
* Live View with either phase detect (mirror up/down) or contrast detect Auto Focus
* Virtual horizon indicates if camera is level (like an aircraft cockpit display)
* HDMI HD video output
* 'Active D-Lighting' (adjusts metering as well as applying D-Lighting curve)
* Detailed 'Control Panel' type display on LCD monitor, changes color in darkness
* Magnesium alloy body with connections and buttons sealed against moisture
* Improved Info display on main screen *

* Different to D3
73745 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Japan
Offline
Posted 7/8/08
Why are you guys pointing out the otherwise obvious regarding the D700?

I looked over the D700, and it's pretty much a D3 in a D300 body. The main differences are a 95% frame coverage through the viewfinder, compared to the 100% of the D3, the FX film sensor over the D300, and a larger pentaprism (hence the heightened eyepiece housing) in the D700 over the D300 to make up for the larger digital sensor.

I find these features rather minimal, and I might opt to getting a D700 ONLY if it were for the prospect of having an FX camera... otherwise, the decreased maximum fps, expensive price, and bulkier frame will make me pick the D300 over the D700, simply because I probably won't be able to make up for the expenses used in purchasing such an expensive camera.

And to set the grounds, the D700 is classified as a professional camera, while the D300 still enters as an entry-level semi-professional camera. Either way, I'm with the D300 on this one, even if I admit the superiority of the D700 ~ it's simply out of my reach. O_o
1165 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / F
Offline
Posted 7/10/08
I've been taking pics since i was a child ... but now I am really interested in photography.. I want to take a photography course
my camera is canon 400D.. I prefer Nikon cameras though =) they are better in my point of view!
73745 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Japan
Offline
Posted 7/10/08 , edited 7/10/08

CaptainE wrote:

I've been taking pics since i was a child ... but now I am really interested in photography.. I want to take a photography course
my camera is canon 400D.. I prefer Nikon cameras though =) they are better in my point of view!


Your camera is actually rather competent, and can serve you well as an amateur camera for any future courses in photography you'd like to take.

I'm just curious, why exactly do you prefer Nikon cameras, and how do you say that they're "better" in your point of view?


kikyo_135 wrote:

i like taking pics but i just can't take them

my hands move too much so the pictures turn out blurry


Quite a number of cameras these days feature optical stabilization systems that help reduce the effects of handshake on blurring the image. Each brand may have their own term for the system, but just look out for acronyms like OIS (optical image stabilization), OS (optical stabilization), VR (Vibration Reduction), IS (image stabilization), etc...

Also, you can always use a flash to eliminate handshake ~ but this is at the expense of flooding the image with horrible looking fill flash. However, not all people are very sensitive about these things, so on the practical level, using flash is the best way to go.
1165 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / F
Offline
Posted 7/10/08 , edited 7/10/08

edsamac wrote:


CaptainE wrote:

I've been taking pics since i was a child ... but now I am really interested in photography.. I want to take a photography course
my camera is canon 400D.. I prefer Nikon cameras though =) they are better in my point of view!


Your camera is actually rather competent, and can serve you well as an amateur camera for any future courses in photography you'd like to take.

I'm just curious, why exactly do you prefer Nikon cameras, and how do you say that they're "better" in your point of view?



Well I like my camera =) and I won't change it.. but I just think Nikon cameras are good=) my sis has a Nikon camera...
its just my point of view =) it may be not true.. Plus, the photographer plays an important role on how the pics comes out...
But I really like my cam and I can't live without it... so I don't really have a specific reason


First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.