I wish I knew what I was doing - DPChallenge Forums

Olympus 8mm f/1.8 M.Zuiko Digital ED Fisheye PRO Lens

05/12/2007 06:54:33 PM · #26

As far as glass is concerned, any suggestions for an easy to manage system? I'm used to the lens on the Panasonic FZ5, so I would want something that would cover a decent range without having to carry around several lenses, as my hands aren't the only part of me that is small. (An acquaintance of mine who has a Canon 300D won't use it unless her husband is available to carry it for her and keeps wasting money on P&S cameras hoping to match the quality. I won't have the luxury of someone to carry mine for me.) I was thinking along the lines of Sigma 18-200 or 28-300 for a general use lens. Eventually I would like a 10-20 as well, but that's not urgent. And I know that the 50mm 1.8 is regarded as THE lens to buy. One of the things pushing me away from Nikon D40x.

05/12/2007 06:55:25 PM · #27

hmmm all this time and no one's mentioned Pentax.... well I will! the K100 and K110 are great for people with small hands, they have terriffic image quality and are much lower in price than the Canons and Nikons.

Olympus 8mm f/1.8 M.Zuiko Digital ED Fisheye PRO Lens

05/12/2007 06:57:34 PM · #28

Originally posted by RainMotorsports:

WHat prices are you getting the D50 kit at? The 350D goes for like 600 bucks with the lense. I hope ur not looking at original MSRP prices its an older camera now lol.

I'm in South Africa, so converting dollar prices generally makes equipment here seem pretty expensive. But the D50 I saw is about half the price of a 400D. Tempting, but I'm not sure it's tempting enough when the size is taken into account.

Olympus 8mm f/1.8 M.Zuiko Digital ED Fisheye PRO Lens

05/12/2007 06:59:30 PM · #29

Originally posted by Jewellian:

One of the things that's put me off K100 is the batteries. I've had a terrible time with AA batteries in the past and I really don't want to get involved with those again. Also, I'd prefer more than 6mp.

05/12/2007 07:00:06 PM · #30

Originally posted by Jewellian:

ALl this time you have not read. I mentioned the K10D already lol.

Olympus 8mm f/1.8 M.Zuiko Digital ED Fisheye PRO Lens

05/12/2007 07:03:53 PM · #31

Thanks for all the help. I'm off to bed now. So if I don't answer your useful hints, I'm not being rude. I'll be back late tomorrow.

05/12/2007 07:03:54 PM · #32

hahaha yeah I can't read sometimes, although the K10D is a bit bigger than the K100, plus it's much heavier. So I don't know if I'd reccommend it for someone concerned with size.

05/12/2007 07:05:58 PM · #33

Originally posted by GinaRothfels:

Originally posted by Jewellian:
hmmm all this time and no one's mentioned Pentax.... well I will! the K100 and K110 are great for people with small hands, they have terriffic image quality and are much lower in price than the Canons and Nikons.

One of the things that's put me off K100 is the batteries. I've had a terrible time with AA batteries in the past and I really don't want to get involved with those again. Also, I'd prefer more than 6mp.

I have the *ist DL and it can use either AA's or CRV-3's and the CRV-3's last MUCH longer and have much more power, I believe the K100 can use them as well. As for the 6mp.... can't help ya there. If you want more, I'd say go with the D40x... from what I've seen, it's a REALLY nice little cam.

05/12/2007 07:08:35 PM · #34

Jewellian what capacity CRV-3's have you? Ive jsut always wondered ive seen 1300 and 1800 and so on mah batteries. But with Rechargable AA's @ 2500 to 3000 Mah Per single battery. It just seems like a rechargable NiMH AA has more available power capacity then the entire double battery pack that CRV-3 was made of.

05/12/2007 07:12:11 PM · #35

I have no idea what capacity they are.... they don't say on the battery themselves, and I'm too lazy to go to my car and get the others I have in my bag..... but I know that the ones I have in my camera now have been in there for at least 3 months and are still reading at full capacity. I never got more than a few days with rechargeable AA's... might have been the brand I was using, but they just did not last anywhere near as long. Granted, I don't shoot every day, but I do get a fair amount of use in.

05/12/2007 07:16:01 PM · #36

Originally posted by Jewellian:

Complaining about a few days of use wow.

Varies between camera's DOnt have my K10D yet so im still on point and shotos coupled with AA's.

- The olympus on 2 2500 Mah AA's I got 574 images on 2 512 mb memory cards on a single set of batteries. Now with flash 50-75.

- The Canon Uses 4 2500 Mah AA's - Have never been able to fill the 2GB memory card in a single day and probly changed the batteries once. DOnt use the flash enough to know. But i cycled off 30 continous drive with flash pn pictures and then farted around flash off for a week.

On a dSLR that uses 4 AA's getting a days worth of shots out of two sets would seem More then 100% acceptable to me.

Mind you i use a 15 minute charger.

05/12/2007 07:20:38 PM · #37

I always seemed to have pretty good battery life... hmmm on my old Fuji S3000, I could get at least a week out of the 4 AA's.... now that it's getting older the battery usage is geting more and more, but that's pretty normal. ( my wife uses it now). even when I do shoot every day, like on vacations and stuff, the CR-v3's last quite a while..... been to long since I've gone on vacation to remember if I had to change them during the week I took.... I usually used the regular rayovac AA's, not even the rechargeable ones and of course I can't fine the pack I have around the house to see what capacity those are either... I'm so organized....

oh, by the way, I now hate you.... nah not really, I'm just jealous of your K10D.... ;)

Message edited by author 2007-05-12 19:21:56.

Olympus 40-150mm f/2.8 PRO M.Zuiko

05/12/2007 07:25:02 PM · #38

Most regular AA's wont say. Out of non rechargable's the Lithium E2 do pack the most punch wether u want to believe it or not. Take a multimeter to them They hold more than 4 amps or 4000 mah.

But their quite expensive. If you want to know which batterys have more juice a multimeter will give u a better idea dont pay attention to packaging.

Then again ur out of juice grab what u can. Its also nice being able to use AA's on the road no charger access AA"s will save your butt.

Brad

Olympus OM-D E-M1

05/12/2007 07:32:17 PM · #39

Originally posted by GinaRothfels:

I'm in South Africa, so converting dollar prices generally makes equipment here seem pretty expensive.

"Seem expensive" is an understatement.

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM:
Here in the US, approx. $1,200 USD
In S. Africa, approx. R14,000 ($2,000USD)

05/12/2007 07:32:48 PM · #40

wow.... that sucks.

05/12/2007 07:44:32 PM · #41

Originally posted by RainMotorsports:

YEah, the CR-V3's I use are Energizer Lithium, so.....

05/12/2007 07:52:51 PM · #42

Originally posted by Jewellian:

Originally posted by RainMotorsports:
Most regular AA's wont say. Out of non rechargable's the Lithium E2 do pack the most punch wether u want to believe it or not. Take a multimeter to them They hold more than 4 amps or 4000 mah.

But their quite expensive. If you want to know which batterys have more juice a multimeter will give u a better idea dont pay attention to packaging.

Then again ur out of juice grab what u can. Its also nice being able to use AA's on the road no charger access AA"s will save your butt.

YEah, the CR-V3's I use are Energizer Lithium, so.....

Yup those are the ****.

05/12/2007 07:57:29 PM · #43

and all this time I thought it was my electrifying personality..... ok you can go ahead and roll your eyes... I know you want to.

Olympus 8mm f/1.8 M.Zuiko Digital ED Fisheye PRO Lens

05/13/2007 01:11:54 PM · #44

Originally posted by GinaRothfels:

Originally posted by RainMotorsports:
WHat prices are you getting the D50 kit at? The 350D goes for like 600 bucks with the lense. I hope ur not looking at original MSRP prices its an older camera now lol.

I'm in South Africa, so converting dollar prices generally makes equipment here seem pretty expensive. But the D50 I saw is about half the price of a 400D. Tempting, but I'm not sure it's tempting enough when the size is taken into account.

I know I'm changing my mind far too often, but at the moment I'm thinking that that price is very tempting indeed. It means I can try out a dSLR without making a major investment and if I really hate it (as a few members here seem to) I won't have lost a 'fortune' as I would with some of the newer models. If I'm happy with it, it would allow me to build up a small collection of lenses and then look towards the model which replaces the D80 when the time is right. Worst case scenario, I would just settle for using it for set up stock photos (at home using a tripod) if the size really bothers me. But I dug out an old film camera I used years ago and that thing (with built in 35-135 zoom) weighed 875g without batteries. So if I could handle that, I should be able to manage the D50 after all.

Olympus 8mm f/1.8 M.Zuiko Digital ED Fisheye PRO Lens

05/13/2007 09:14:05 PM · #45

After searching seemingly forever, I finally think I've found something that makes sense with the Canon 400D - virtually identical portraits, one taken in Portrait picture style, the other in Landscape picture style. The latter is much sharper and I certainly think I could live with that. I presume then that all I would have to do is see that sharpness is set fairly high for all my photos. I'm curious to know how people who own this camera are setting theirs.

I was planning to go have another look at the Nikon D50 tomorrow. Now I'm not so sure. Sorry if I'm making a nuisance of myself, but the uncertainty is driving me crazy.

surfdabbler

Canon EOS-5D

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 II

05/14/2007 09:19:22 AM · #46

Hi Gina,

I've recently got a 400D with the 18-55 kit lens, after loving my FZ5 for a few years. Certainly the 400D produces very clean images straight out of the camera. It is less sharpened than straight out of the FZ5, but you can push it up in the 400D to improve things. But, I've come from an FZ5, and the 400D certainly doesn't lose anything in sharpness from my point of view. Particularly if you are pixel peeping, the 400D images are so far beyond the FZ5 in cleanliness, with no compression artifacts and far less noise. I was amazed that under ideal conditions, a 100% crop image from the 400D can look as sharp and as noise free as the full size images!

The FZ5 does have an amazing lens on it. I was also looking at an 18-200 to try to match the FZ5 range, but it's biggest problem is focus at the long end can be difficult. However, I can tell you that 200mm on a 10Mpix sensor 400D gives you roughly the same final detail resolution as the FZ5 (I recently did a side-by-side comparison between my FZ5 and the 400D with a 70-200). At the wide end, 18mm gives a wider shot, so 18-200 really covers the FZ5 lens and more. A more standard setup is an 18-55, and then a 70-300, which gives you more at both ends, but does require changing lenses.

Whatever SLR you get, it will take some getting used to, and you'll long for the FZ5 for a little while, but once you are used to the SLR, you'll not look back.

Good luck with whatever you choose!

Olympus 8mm f/1.8 M.Zuiko Digital ED Fisheye PRO Lens

05/14/2007 08:21:31 PM · #47

Originally posted by surfdabbler:

Hi David,

Thanks for your detailed reply. Having finally seen some decent samples from the 400D, I'm pretty sure that's what I'm going to buy. It's just a question of choosing lenses. The Sigma 10-20 is definitely one I will want at some stage (but not urgent) but I'm not totally sure what I'll do on the other end of the scale. I was thinking of buying it with the kit lens and getting used to the camera that way before deciding on extra expenses.

I will be keeping my FZ5 because I cannot see myself carrying around the 400D all the time, so I will have the longer lens when needed anyway, but the picture quality at 100% really bothers me, so I would prefer not to use it for photos that really matter.

surfdabbler

Canon EOS-5D

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 II

05/15/2007 05:50:04 AM · #48

Lens choice is always difficult. I just have the kit lens at the moment. I also semi-own a Sigma 70-200, but it's in the shop, and I will only keep it if they can fix it. The kit lens is really surprising me with it's quality. I've read recommendations about upgrading the kit lens as soon as you can, but I'm actually finding it to be very good. I haven't used the 70-200 lens a lot yet, but I will see whether I appreciate the huge quality difference between the two before upgrading the kit lens.

The Sigma 10-20 looks like a great lens too. I had a semi-fish-eye attachment on the FZ5, and really enjoyed it. Moving to the 18mm wide angle was really nice, and much better quality. Eventually, I also hope to get a really wide lens, but I'm still getting used to the kit, so I'll leave it a while.

I know what you mean about the FZ5 quality at full crop! You'll love the SLR!