«

i'd like to get a digital slr to shoot my artwork. that is all the
camera will EVER be used for. i want a lens that will suit my needs. i
believe 50mm is slightly wide, is it not? so i need 55mm, and for
convenience anything up to 85mm, maybe. most important is the lens have
as little distortion as possible

should i get ,,,
1...50mm only
2...85mm only
3...55mm-200mm zoom
4...24mm - 85mm zoom
5...18mm - 55mm zoom

these are the lenses available for the canon. the problem: 50mm might
be wide, yes? and because i have limited space to go back in my setup,
i am worried that an 85mm will give me problems on larger paintings.
and the zoom gives me my 55mm, but it is a zoom and i am concerned
about distortion.

the nikon lenses have roughly the same.

if i am worried about distortion, BUT settle on a zoom(because of the
55mm) would a 55-200 be better than a 28-80. i'm not too cozy with the
idea of a wide to telephoto format like the 28-80. btw,,,i will have
absolutely ZERO need for a wide. i wish there were a 55-85.

thanks

wrote:
: i'd like to get a digital slr to shoot my artwork. that is all the
: camera will EVER be used for. i want a lens that will suit my needs. i
: believe 50mm is slightly wide, is it not? so i need 55mm, and for
: convenience anything up to 85mm, maybe. most important is the lens have
: as little distortion as possible

A few problems with your simple question that you may not realize. Digital
SLRs have a sensor that is not (except for a very few very high priced
units) the same dimension as a frame of 35mm film. So the digital image is
cropped from what a 35mm film image would be with the same lens. This crop
is generally (and somewhat erroneously) called a magnification factor. I
don't know what this factor would be for your particular target camera but
with my Pentax camera the factor is 1.5x. This means that a 50mm lens on
my camera would give the angle of view of a 75mm lens on a 35mm film
camera. Thus if you recognize that the "standard" 50mm lens as the
dividing line between wide and tele, to get the same image with my DSLR
would require a 33 1/3mm lens. This will definately effect the next part
of your question. As to 50mm being a tiny bit wide, there is no hard and
fast number that is THE divider. If there is one it may be 50.12696 or
some such number that isn't real practical. The difference is so slight
that outside of extreme scientific useage, it makes no noticable
difference.

: should i get ,,,
: 1...50mm only
: 2...85mm only
: 3...55mm-200mm zoom
: 4...24mm - 85mm zoom
: 5...18mm - 55mm zoom

: these are the lenses available for the canon. the problem: 50mm might
: be wide, yes? and because i have limited space to go back in my setup,
: i am worried that an 85mm will give me problems on larger paintings.
: and the zoom gives me my 55mm, but it is a zoom and i am concerned
: about distortion.

: the nikon lenses have roughly the same.

: if i am worried about distortion, BUT settle on a zoom(because of the
: 55mm) would a 55-200 be better than a 28-80. i'm not too cozy with the
: idea of a wide to telephoto format like the 28-80. btw,,,i will have
: absolutely ZERO need for a wide. i wish there were a 55-85.

: thanks

Due to the crop factor I would suggest that you try the the 18-55mm zoom.
This lens would include the approximate correct lens length. In general
if the horizontal field of view is 40 degrees (rounded to the nearest
full degree) this should be the correct lens.

Hope this info helps.

Randy

==========
Randy Berbaum
Champaign, IL

Randy Berbaum wrote:
> wrote:
>> i'd like to get a digital slr to shoot my artwork. that is all the
>> camera will EVER be used for. i want a lens that will suit my needs.
>> i believe 50mm is slightly wide, is it not? so i need 55mm, and for
>> convenience anything up to 85mm, maybe. most important is the lens
>> have as little distortion as possible
>
> A few problems with your simple question that you may not realize.
> Digital SLRs have a sensor that is not (except for a very few very
> high priced units) the same dimension as a frame of 35mm film. So the
> digital image is cropped from what a 35mm film image would be with
> the same lens. This crop is generally (and somewhat erroneously)
> called a magnification factor. I don't know what this factor would be
> for your particular target camera but with my Pentax camera the
> factor is 1.5x. This means that a 50mm lens on my camera would give
> the angle of view of a 75mm lens on a 35mm film camera. Thus if you
> recognize that the "standard" 50mm lens as the dividing line between
> wide and tele, to get the same image with my DSLR would require a 33
> 1/3mm lens. This will definately effect the next part of your
> question. As to 50mm being a tiny bit wide, there is no hard and fast
> number that is THE divider. If there is one it may be 50.12696 or
> some such number that isn't real practical. The difference is so
> slight that outside of extreme scientific useage, it makes no
> noticable difference.
>
>> should i get ,,,
>> 1...50mm only
>> 2...85mm only
>> 3...55mm-200mm zoom
>> 4...24mm - 85mm zoom
>> 5...18mm - 55mm zoom
>
>> these are the lenses available for the canon. the problem: 50mm might
>> be wide, yes? and because i have limited space to go back in my
>> setup, i am worried that an 85mm will give me problems on larger
>> paintings. and the zoom gives me my 55mm, but it is a zoom and i am
>> concerned about distortion.
>
>> the nikon lenses have roughly the same.
>
>> if i am worried about distortion, BUT settle on a zoom(because of the
>> 55mm) would a 55-200 be better than a 28-80. i'm not too cozy with
>> the idea of a wide to telephoto format like the 28-80. btw,,,i will
>> have absolutely ZERO need for a wide. i wish there were a 55-85.
>
>> thanks
>
> Due to the crop factor I would suggest that you try the the 18-55mm
> zoom. This lens would include the approximate correct lens length. In
> general if the horizontal field of view is 40 degrees (rounded to the
> nearest full degree) this should be the correct lens.
>
> Hope this info helps.
>
> Randy
>
> ==========
> Randy Berbaum
> Champaign, IL

To buy a digital SLR just to shoot artwork would be like throwing money down
the drain.

Buy a zoom-lens digital with all the bells and whistles, such as the
Panasonic FZ30, and it won't matter what focal length you decide to shoot
at.

Dennis Pogson wrote:
> Randy Berbaum wrote:
>> wrote:
>>> i'd like to get a digital slr to shoot my artwork. that is all the
>>> camera will EVER be used for. i want a lens that will suit my needs.
>>> i believe 50mm is slightly wide, is it not? so i need 55mm, and for
>>> convenience anything up to 85mm, maybe. most important is the lens
>>> have as little distortion as possible
>> A few problems with your simple question that you may not realize.
>> Digital SLRs have a sensor that is not (except for a very few very
>> high priced units) the same dimension as a frame of 35mm film. So the
>> digital image is cropped from what a 35mm film image would be with
>> the same lens. This crop is generally (and somewhat erroneously)
>> called a magnification factor. I don't know what this factor would be
>> for your particular target camera but with my Pentax camera the
>> factor is 1.5x. This means that a 50mm lens on my camera would give
>> the angle of view of a 75mm lens on a 35mm film camera. Thus if you
>> recognize that the "standard" 50mm lens as the dividing line between
>> wide and tele, to get the same image with my DSLR would require a 33
>> 1/3mm lens. This will definately effect the next part of your
>> question. As to 50mm being a tiny bit wide, there is no hard and fast
>> number that is THE divider. If there is one it may be 50.12696 or
>> some such number that isn't real practical. The difference is so
>> slight that outside of extreme scientific useage, it makes no
>> noticable difference.
>>
>>> should i get ,,,
>>> 1...50mm only
>>> 2...85mm only
>>> 3...55mm-200mm zoom
>>> 4...24mm - 85mm zoom
>>> 5...18mm - 55mm zoom
>>> these are the lenses available for the canon. the problem: 50mm might
>>> be wide, yes? and because i have limited space to go back in my
>>> setup, i am worried that an 85mm will give me problems on larger
>>> paintings. and the zoom gives me my 55mm, but it is a zoom and i am
>>> concerned about distortion.
>>> the nikon lenses have roughly the same.
>>> if i am worried about distortion, BUT settle on a zoom(because of the
>>> 55mm) would a 55-200 be better than a 28-80. i'm not too cozy with
>>> the idea of a wide to telephoto format like the 28-80. btw,,,i will
>>> have absolutely ZERO need for a wide. i wish there were a 55-85.
>>> thanks
>> Due to the crop factor I would suggest that you try the the 18-55mm
>> zoom. This lens would include the approximate correct lens length. In
>> general if the horizontal field of view is 40 degrees (rounded to the
>> nearest full degree) this should be the correct lens.
>>
>> Hope this info helps.
>>
>> Randy
>>
>> ==========
>> Randy Berbaum
>> Champaign, IL
>
> To buy a digital SLR just to shoot artwork would be like throwing money down
> the drain.
>
> Buy a zoom-lens digital with all the bells and whistles, such as the
> Panasonic FZ30, and it won't matter what focal length you decide to shoot
> at.
>
>
I sort of agree. If the pixel-level sharpness of a dslr - and extremely
low distortion when using the right lens (such as an expensive macro
lens or a cheap $99 50mm f1.8 af-d nikkor) isn't needed, then a compact
camera would be fine.
Download PTlens, and check that the camera is supported. The FZ30 is -
it has a lot of distortion at both ends of the zoom range, very little
mid-range - all correctable with one click and a $10 "freeware" donation.

wrote:
>
> if i am worried about distortion, BUT settle on a zoom(because of the
> 55mm) would a 55-200 be better than a 28-80. i'm not too cozy with the
> idea of a wide to telephoto format like the 28-80. btw,,,i will have
> absolutely ZERO need for a wide. i wish there were a 55-85.

No need to worry about distortion; in the modern
age of cheap, powerful computers, it is moderately
simple to calibrate and correct, either
with free or commercial software.

BugBear

What type of artwork? How big? What distance from the artwork will
you need to be?
Are you talking matchboxes or street sculptures?

--
Joan
http://www.flickr.com/photos/joan-in-manly

<> wrote in message
news: oups.com...
: i'd like to get a digital slr to shoot my artwork. that is all the
: camera will EVER be used for. i want a lens that will suit my needs.
i
: believe 50mm is slightly wide, is it not? so i need 55mm, and for
: convenience anything up to 85mm, maybe. most important is the lens
have
: as little distortion as possible
:
: should i get ,,,
: 1...50mm only
: 2...85mm only
: 3...55mm-200mm zoom
: 4...24mm - 85mm zoom
: 5...18mm - 55mm zoom
:
: these are the lenses available for the canon. the problem: 50mm
might
: be wide, yes? and because i have limited space to go back in my
setup,
: i am worried that an 85mm will give me problems on larger paintings.
: and the zoom gives me my 55mm, but it is a zoom and i am concerned
: about distortion.
:
: the nikon lenses have roughly the same.
:
: if i am worried about distortion, BUT settle on a zoom(because of
the
: 55mm) would a 55-200 be better than a 28-80. i'm not too cozy with
the
: idea of a wide to telephoto format like the 28-80. btw,,,i will have
: absolutely ZERO need for a wide. i wish there were a 55-85.
:
: thanks
:

wrote:
> i'd like to get a digital slr to shoot my artwork. that is all the
> camera will EVER be used for. i want a lens that will suit my needs. i
> believe 50mm is slightly wide, is it not? so i need 55mm, and for
> convenience anything up to 85mm, maybe. most important is the lens
> have as little distortion as possible
>
> should i get ,,,
> 1...50mm only
> 2...85mm only
> 3...55mm-200mm zoom
> 4...24mm - 85mm zoom
> 5...18mm - 55mm zoom
>
> these are the lenses available for the canon. the problem: 50mm might
> be wide, yes? and because i have limited space to go back in my setup,
> i am worried that an 85mm will give me problems on larger paintings.
> and the zoom gives me my 55mm, but it is a zoom and i am concerned
> about distortion.
>
> the nikon lenses have roughly the same.
>
> if i am worried about distortion, BUT settle on a zoom(because of the
> 55mm) would a 55-200 be better than a 28-80. i'm not too cozy with the
> idea of a wide to telephoto format like the 28-80. btw,,,i will have
> absolutely ZERO need for a wide. i wish there were a 55-85.
>
> thanks

Not enough information. Artwork can me a lot of different things.
Access to the work may vary greatly as well as lighting etc.

Since we would have to guess each of us may be making suggestions based
on our own idea of what artwork means.

Tell us some more about your subjects, lighting and access.

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia duit

Randy Berbaum wrote:
> wrote:
>> i'd like to get a digital slr to shoot my artwork. that is all the
>> camera will EVER be used for. i want a lens that will suit my needs.
>> i believe 50mm is slightly wide, is it not? so i need 55mm, and for
>> convenience anything up to 85mm, maybe. most important is the lens
>> have as little distortion as possible
>
> A few problems with your simple question that you may not realize.
> Digital SLRs have a sensor that is not (except for a very few very
> high priced units) the same dimension as a frame of 35mm film. So the
> digital image is cropped from what a 35mm film image would be with
> the same lens. This crop is generally (and somewhat erroneously)
> called a magnification factor. I don't know what this factor would be
> for your particular target camera but with my Pentax camera the
> factor is 1.5x. This means that a 50mm lens on my camera would give
> the angle of view of a 75mm lens on a 35mm film camera. Thus if you
> recognize that the "standard" 50mm lens as the dividing line between
> wide and tele, to get the same image with my DSLR would require a 33
> 1/3mm lens. This will definately effect the next part of your
> question. As to 50mm being a tiny bit wide, there is no hard and fast
> number that is THE divider. If there is one it may be 50.12696 or
> some such number that isn't real practical. The difference is so
> slight that outside of extreme scientific useage, it makes no
> noticable difference.
>
>> should i get ,,,
>> 1...50mm only
>> 2...85mm only
>> 3...55mm-200mm zoom
>> 4...24mm - 85mm zoom
>> 5...18mm - 55mm zoom
>
>> these are the lenses available for the canon. the problem: 50mm might
>> be wide, yes? and because i have limited space to go back in my
>> setup, i am worried that an 85mm will give me problems on larger
>> paintings. and the zoom gives me my 55mm, but it is a zoom and i am
>> concerned about distortion.
>
>> the nikon lenses have roughly the same.
>
>> if i am worried about distortion, BUT settle on a zoom(because of the
>> 55mm) would a 55-200 be better than a 28-80. i'm not too cozy with
>> the idea of a wide to telephoto format like the 28-80. btw,,,i will
>> have absolutely ZERO need for a wide. i wish there were a 55-85.
>
>> thanks
>
> Due to the crop factor I would suggest that you try the the 18-55mm
> zoom. This lens would include the approximate correct lens length. In
> general if the horizontal field of view is 40 degrees (rounded to the
> nearest full degree) this should be the correct lens.
>
> Hope this info helps.
>
> Randy
>
> ==========
> Randy Berbaum
> Champaign, IL

I failed to add also tell us about what kind of results you want. Are
you interested in trying to print out results that look as much like the
original as possible to hang on your wall, or are you looking for something
to help you remember what you saw. How about details? If there is some
smaller portion of the art that you may want to get a close up of, you may
want more telephoto and/or macro capability. How about lighting? Tripod
use?

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia duit

to be more specific about the artwork.....

they are oils. i use lamp and camera polarizers with
zero glare. the oils range from small(8x to 40x50. i HAVE TO shoot
in my studio, which is about 12x17. most of my artwork is no bigger
than about 23x27, but i do an occasional 30x40. i can get back
approximately 5 or 6 feet with my camera to shoot. this will accomodate
a 23x27 or there abouts, no problem. i can only shoot my artwork on the
width of the room. if i were to try setting up along it's length, the
lamps would be too close and not at a great angle.

i have been using a canon g3. at 300dpi, i can get a 5" width image. up
until now, i have been using those images for my galleries to print
invites,,,,,,a perfect size. but i have recently faced situations
where clearly it's time to move up to the 8mp range camera(8 in fact
barely gets what i need). the printers are starting to ask for 350dpi,
and the magazines are asking for larger images for full page spreads.
this makes my 4mp obsolete.

i want a dslr because i have always felt my images were lacking in
really good sharpness. manual focus on the g3 is pathetic...i would
also like a split screen focus because my eyes see the focus much
better with a split screen than than a prism.

i'm looking at the rebel xt because of the price, which is great for
the next step up.

randy: you're saying a 35mm on a digital is equivalent to a 50mm
standard slr. so then my concern about image distortion on a 50mm dslr
is erroneous....that there will be no distortion. i can get a
rebel/18-55mm. that would cover the 35mm-55mm range.

dennis/frederick: i think also part of the reason is simply my desire
for the manual focus. as i stated, i feel my images have been lacking
sharpness, maybe on an insignificant level, but it has always bothered
me nonetheless. do you think maybe the lens on the g3 was lacking, and
that the zeiss or leica lenses will make up it?

bugbear: what kind of software are you talking about that'll correct
distortion?

after what you all have said, i started looking around, and the sony
and panasonic look ok too. same price as the rebel, and the sony offers
a 10mp, but the panasonic offers 8.

How do you fit something 40x50 into a studio that is 12x17?

--
Joan
http://www.flickr.com/photos/joan-in-manly

<> wrote in message
news: oups.com...
: to be more specific about the artwork.....
:
: they are oils. i use lamp and camera polarizers with
: zero glare. the oils range from small(8x to 40x50. i HAVE TO shoot
: in my studio, which is about 12x17. most of my artwork is no bigger
: than about 23x27, but i do an occasional 30x40. i can get back
: approximately 5 or 6 feet with my camera to shoot. this will
accomodate
: a 23x27 or there abouts, no problem. i can only shoot my artwork on
the
: width of the room. if i were to try setting up along it's length,
the
: lamps would be too close and not at a great angle.
:
: i have been using a canon g3. at 300dpi, i can get a 5" width image.
up
: until now, i have been using those images for my galleries to print
: invites,,,,,,a perfect size. but i have recently faced situations
: where clearly it's time to move up to the 8mp range camera(8 in fact
: barely gets what i need). the printers are starting to ask for
350dpi,
: and the magazines are asking for larger images for full page
spreads.
: this makes my 4mp obsolete.
:
: i want a dslr because i have always felt my images were lacking in
: really good sharpness. manual focus on the g3 is pathetic...i would
: also like a split screen focus because my eyes see the focus much
: better with a split screen than than a prism.
:
: i'm looking at the rebel xt because of the price, which is great for
: the next step up.
:
: randy: you're saying a 35mm on a digital is equivalent to a 50mm
: standard slr. so then my concern about image distortion on a 50mm
dslr
: is erroneous....that there will be no distortion. i can get a
: rebel/18-55mm. that would cover the 35mm-55mm range.
:
: dennis/frederick: i think also part of the reason is simply my
desire
: for the manual focus. as i stated, i feel my images have been
lacking
: sharpness, maybe on an insignificant level, but it has always
bothered
: me nonetheless. do you think maybe the lens on the g3 was lacking,
and
: that the zeiss or leica lenses will make up it?
:
: bugbear: what kind of software are you talking about that'll correct
: distortion?
:
: after what you all have said, i started looking around, and the sony
: and panasonic look ok too. same price as the rebel, and the sony
offers
: a 10mp, but the panasonic offers 8.
: