Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Nikon Digital SLR guidance

Reply
Thread Tools

Nikon Digital SLR guidance

 
 
PeterN
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-29-2011
On 7/29/2011 1:21 AM, nospam wrote:
> In article<(E-Mail Removed)>, Paul Furman
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>>>> If I want closer focus I use extension tubes.
>>>>
>>>> that also degrades things, since the lens was probably not designed for
>>>> an extension (some lenses might be though).
>>>
>>> It should have little noticeable effect on the resolution. ...

>>
>> Extension tubes might work to overcome the described problem with
>> softness at closest focus at 200mm because the lens wouldn't be in the
>> closest focus arrangement. You would lose AF-S though except maybe with
>> a third party extension tube. BTW I have used my 70-200 VR with a 500D
>> closeup lens ($150) for chasing butterflies and such, it's nice to have
>> the VR, zoom and AF-S for that task. It's still not a 200mm f/4 Micro
>> but works OK. The closeup lens does degrade things some.

>
> the 500d is an excellent multi-element closeup lens. there is very
> little degradation with it.
>
> also, some zooms don't work with extension tubes at all. they won't be
> able to focus at *any* distance because the closest focus point is
> inside the lens


If you overdo anything it can have a harmful result. Water is good for
you. Too much, not properly dealt with, can kill you.

BTW
If you are snipping, snip with integrity so we know who said what.



--
Peter
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
David Dyer-Bennet
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-29-2011
On Jul 29, 1:21*am, Apteryx <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On 28/07/2011 5:36 p.m., Neil Jones wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 7/26/2011 11:43 PM, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
> >> On Jul 26, 2:35 pm, Neil Jones<(E-Mail Removed)> *wrote:

>
> >>> I am a very very amateurish photographer. *Before the digital cameras, I
> >>> invested in some Nikon Lenses for the Nikon AF 6006 camera. *In the
> >>> digital camera arena, the most advanced version of the camera that I
> >>> have dealt with are the telezoom cameras (Lumix FZ28/FZ100 type).
> >>> However, sometimes I do want to own a DSLR but do not want to break the
> >>> bank either. *The best Nikor lens I have is the AF ED 80-200 F/2.8 and
> >>> the other lenses are about average. *It is sad to see the lenses
> >>> accumulating dust. *Which DSLR would give some life to these lenses
> >>> and some fun for me (again without breaking the bank)?

>
> >> The short rule is, any Nikon lens that will mount on the
> >> 6006 will mount and work usefully (but not necessarilly
> >> with all the frills) on any Nikon DSLR body. *However,
> >> there are some bodies that will not AF with older AF lenses
> >> (the D40 and friends AF with AF-S lenses only), and some
> >> bodies that will not meter with non-chipped lenses (which
> >> is not that big a deal in most cases, I used one for a few
> >> years myself).

>
> >> Depending on what kind of photography you do, and personal
> >> preference, the lack of AF is somewhere between fatal and
> >> irrelevant . *Up to you!

>
> >> That 80-200/2.8 is a first-rate lens according to all
> >> reports. *Optically equal to my much-more-expensive
> >> 70-200/2.8 AF-S VR, though it will focus slower, and
> >> doesn't have VR (I'm not much impressed with VR in the
> >> 70-200 anyway).

>
> >> I found the 80-200 length VERY useful on an APS-C (DX in
> >> Nikon terms) body (Fuji S2, and then Nikon D200). *(You
> >> understand that the field of view depends on the sensor
> >> size, right? *So 200mm on a DX body gives the same field of
> >> view as 300mm on an FX body?) *You'll probably find
> >> yourself having to replace your widest lens to be happy,
> >> and maybe your walkaround lens as well.

>
> >> *From what you say about price, I'm assuming the FX bodies,
> >> D700 and D3s and D3x, are out of the question. It does
> >> sound like a D90, maybe used or refurb, might be a good fit
> >> for you.

>
> >> Good luck!

>
> > Thank you! *The advice is very practical for me.

>
> > I think a used D90 would be good camera to own for the moment.

>
> You mentioned that the 80-200mm AF was your best lens, but did not say
> what other lenses you had and might want to still use. Note that if you
> have manual focus AI lenses, the D90 will not meter with them. To meter
> with those MF AI lenses without going to the expense of a full frame
> camera, you need either a D7000, D300s, D300, or D200.


I did mention that in my big post. But really, metering is nearly
irrelevant in the digital age -- guess, shoot a test shot, adjust,
and you're better off than your meter would have managed. There
are a very few cases where the light is changing so fast you
really have to depend on AF; but very few.

And, if you have time, you will mostly do better than AE if
the light is at all difficult.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Robert Coe
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-29-2011
On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 09:00:23 +1200, Me <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
: On 29/07/2011 6:35 a.m., Bruce wrote:
: > David Dyer-Bennet<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
: >>
: >> That 80-200/2.8 is a first-rate lens according to all
: >> reports. Optically equal to my much-more-expensive
: >> 70-200/2.8 AF-S VR, though it will focus slower, and
: >> doesn't have VR (I'm not much impressed with VR in the
: >> 70-200 anyway).
: >
: >
: > I agree with all of the above. Plus, if the 80-200mm f/2.8 is the
: > last AF-S version, it focuses just as fast as the later 70-200mm.
: >
: > Nikon Europe apparently has hundreds of these 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-S
: > lenses in stock but for some reason won't release them to dealers.
: > We have a list price, we know they have them, but we cannot order
: > them. No-one knows (or will tell us) why not. Very disappointing,
: > because they are excellent lenses, and particularly good value for
: > money.
: >
: There are issues with premature AF-s motor failure on these lenses,
: an expensive exercise to fix under warranty. Perhaps it was better
: economics to not sell them, and sell the more reliable 70-200.

As you describe the situation, they seem doomed to let the lenses go to waste.
Might not the best economics be to set aside enough lenses to replace those
likely to fail and sell the rest?

Bob
 
Reply With Quote
 
PeterN
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-30-2011
On 7/29/2011 2:19 PM, Robert Coe wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 09:00:23 +1200, Me<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> : On 29/07/2011 6:35 a.m., Bruce wrote:
> :> David Dyer-Bennet<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> :>>
> :>> That 80-200/2.8 is a first-rate lens according to all
> :>> reports. Optically equal to my much-more-expensive
> :>> 70-200/2.8 AF-S VR, though it will focus slower, and
> :>> doesn't have VR (I'm not much impressed with VR in the
> :>> 70-200 anyway).
> :>
> :>
> :> I agree with all of the above. Plus, if the 80-200mm f/2.8 is the
> :> last AF-S version, it focuses just as fast as the later 70-200mm.
> :>
> :> Nikon Europe apparently has hundreds of these 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-S
> :> lenses in stock but for some reason won't release them to dealers.
> :> We have a list price, we know they have them, but we cannot order
> :> them. No-one knows (or will tell us) why not. Very disappointing,
> :> because they are excellent lenses, and particularly good value for
> :> money.
> :>
> : There are issues with premature AF-s motor failure on these lenses,
> : an expensive exercise to fix under warranty. Perhaps it was better
> : economics to not sell them, and sell the more reliable 70-200.
>
> As you describe the situation, they seem doomed to let the lenses go to waste.
> Might not the best economics be to set aside enough lenses to replace those
> likely to fail and sell the rest?
>


From a short term economic situation you are right. However, in the
long term it could hurt their reputation, even if the lenses were sold
as seconds.


--
Peter
 
Reply With Quote
 
Me
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-31-2011
On 30/07/2011 12:58 a.m., Neil Harrington wrote:
> nospam wrote:
>> In article<BJidnVjWwNnRfazTnZ2dnUVZ_sednZ2d@giganews. com>, Neil
>> Harrington<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>> In chronological order of their appearance (and more or less
>>> ascending order of desirability and probable price), the D70, D70s,
>>> D50 (a later but lower priced version of the D70s),

>>
>> d50 and d70s came out at the same time.

>
> I stand corrected. I was almost sure I had my D70s before the D50 appeared,
> but according to a Nikon timeline I just looked at you're right.
>
>> they were similar but the d50
>> was not just a subset of the d70s. it did a few things the d70s
>> didn't, although it's been too long to remember what those were.

>
> Me too.
>

You'll be struggling...
I think it might have added russian language to the display, perhaps
more dummy modes, but all other differences were typical "defeatures" of
lower ranked models, no DOF preview, no on-demand gridlines, no
speedlight commander mode, etc etc. But if this doesn't matter to the
user, then it doesn't matter... The D70/s lacked some pretty important
features too IMO, with no MLU or shutter delay mode top of the list for me.
But the D50 had a better matched AA filter (D70/s suffered from
aliasing/moire), and if not a slightly improved version of the same Sony
derived CCD sensor, then better in-camera processing of raw and jpeg
files, giving less noise/better high ISO performance. Still not as good
(sensor performance) as what Canon offered at the time.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Bruce
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-03-2011
"Neil Harrington" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>All that is true. But the D50 reportedly had some improvements over the
>D70/D70s in other areas, though I think they were minor. AF was touched up a
>little I think, and some other things.



They weren't so minor.

The D50 had an in-body AF drive motor so could focus all AF Nikkors;
with the D70(s) you needed to focus non-AF-S Nikkors manually. The
D50 offered uncompressed raw (NEF) files, wider flash coverage, USB
2.0, a better viewfinder and was smaller and lighter than the D70(s).

Against that, the D50 also lost some useful features compared with the
D70(s). It also launched the optically very poor 18-55mm kit lens
whereas the D70(s) came with the 18-70mm, some examples of which were
quite good, although there was a lot of sample variation. The early
18-55mm lenses are best avoided.

A comparison is given here:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond50/

 
Reply With Quote
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-03-2011
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Bruce
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> >All that is true. But the D50 reportedly had some improvements over the
> >D70/D70s in other areas, though I think they were minor. AF was touched up a
> >little I think, and some other things.

>
> They weren't so minor.


yes they were

> The D50 had an in-body AF drive motor so could focus all AF Nikkors;
> with the D70(s) you needed to focus non-AF-S Nikkors manually.


absolutely false. where the hell did you get that idea?
 
Reply With Quote
 
David J Taylor
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-03-2011
"nospam" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:030820110708477033%(E-Mail Removed)...
> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Bruce
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> >All that is true. But the D50 reportedly had some improvements over
>> >the
>> >D70/D70s in other areas, though I think they were minor. AF was
>> >touched up a
>> >little I think, and some other things.

>>
>> They weren't so minor.

>
> yes they were
>
>> The D50 had an in-body AF drive motor so could focus all AF Nikkors;
>> with the D70(s) you needed to focus non-AF-S Nikkors manually.

>
> absolutely false. where the hell did you get that idea?


Bruce has his Nikons confused.

Can't check on DP Review right now as it seems to either not working or
extremely slow.

Cheers,
David

 
Reply With Quote
 
Bruce
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-03-2011
Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>
>Regarding lens compatibility for the D70 & D50 (they are the same);



Last week I sold a used D70s. It certainly did not offer autofocus
with non-AF-S lenses. So you are telling me that this was a fault and
not a feature?

Oops. <g>

 
Reply With Quote
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-03-2011
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Bruce
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> >Regarding lens compatibility for the D70 & D50 (they are the same);

>
> Last week I sold a used D70s. It certainly did not offer autofocus
> with non-AF-S lenses. So you are telling me that this was a fault and
> not a feature?


i don't know what you sold or if any part of it was defective, but a
nikon d70s will focus with all nikon autofocus lenses. period.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
January 2007 - The Nikon D80 digital slr is still Nikon's most popular camera george@dpmac.com Digital Photography 1 01-08-2007 10:06 AM
Film SLR Flash unit on a Digital SLR - Possible? alex Digital Photography 12 06-24-2006 09:51 PM
Kodak DCS Pro SLR/n and DCS Pro SLR/c digital SLRs have been discontinued... Newsgroups Digital Photography 2 06-01-2005 03:08 PM
Digital Photography RFD: rec.photo.digital.slr vs rec.photo.digital.slr-systems? Lionel Digital Photography 16 09-17-2004 12:48 PM
Prosumer Digital SLR from Nikon ??? Raj Digital Photography 2 09-09-2003 10:59 PM



Advertisments