DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Tips, Tricks, and Q&A >> lenses?
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 15 of 15, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 11/13/2003 07:04:49 PM · #1
Can anyone explain lenses to me? Need to get some for Nikon D100, will ahve around £500 to spend (after selling the E20) I think I will go for a macro, but have noooo idea what anything means. f2.8100mm etc etc.

I would like to get close wnough to get some Pitsman esc bee shots - so the bee etc fills the whole frame.

Also for telephoto lenses what does 70-300mm mean in terms of zoom power? Like my E20 will go 4x, is 300mm a lot more?

As for makes, well I don't want crap - I at least know a bad lense on a good camera is pointless, but is Sigma etc any good with Nikon body?

Nikon seems very steap!

Thanks thanks thanks for any guidance to a noob.
11/13/2003 07:07:28 PM · #2
That is the right way,I like it,first you buy a car and then you worry about how to drive and licence! :-)
 11/13/2003 07:20:45 PM · #3
Originally posted by pitsaman:
That is the right way,I like it,first you buy a car and then you worry about how to drive and licence! :-)


Well, I believe that JP is getting his D100 as a prize in a photo contest. Ironically, he won with a photo that was entered in a challenge and DQ'ed.


11/13/2003 07:27:23 PM · #4
Originally posted by jonpink:
Can anyone explain lenses to me? Need to get some for Nikon D100, will ahve around £500 to spend (after selling the E20) I think I will go for a macro, but have noooo idea what anything means. f2.8100mm etc etc.

I also have a D100, and own a 18-35 ED AF Nikkor, a 28-100 Nikkor and a 70-180 ED Micro Nikkor. The f number before the lens length is the maximum aperture available (wider aperture corresponds to a faster lens because it lets in more light and you can use a higher shutter speed than a 'slower' lens). The 'x'mm is the maximum focual length for a prime (fixed) lens, or the focal length range for a zoom lens. On a film SLR, 50mm is equivalent to what you see with the naked eye, so anything less then 50mm is a wide angle and anything more is a telephoto.

Originally posted by jonpink:
I would like to get close wnough to get some Pitsman esc bee shots - so the bee etc fills the whole frame.

I have a 70-180 micro Nikkor (essentially a macro lens), but that was about $1000 used so outside your price range. I hear that the 50mm macro Nikkor is also a good lens. [BTW Nikkor are original manufacturer Nikon lenses). A true macro/micro lens will give 1:1 reproduction (I think that my 70-180 is about 1.1 or so).

Originally posted by jonpink:
Also for telephoto lenses what does 70-300mm mean in terms of zoom power? Like my E20 will go 4x, is 300mm a lot more?

Again, remembering that 50mm is standard, a 300mm is about 6x. In addition, because there's a 1.5x focal plane magnification factor (because the D100 CCD is 1.5x smaller than a standard 35mm frame and therefore shows less - just like a zoom), a 300mm equates to a 450mm, which is therefore 9x.

Originally posted by jonpink:
As for makes, well I don't want crap - I at least know a bad lense on a good camera is pointless, but is Sigma etc any good with Nikon body?

As a rule, buy the best lens you can afford. 3rd party lenses aren't drastically different, but the cheaper ones won't have the same level of sharpness or color rendition amongst other things, and probably won't be manufactured to the same standards.

Originally posted by jonpink:
Nikon seems very steap!

You get what you pay for. You don't have to go for their top of the line range, but my 18-35 ED AF Nikkor was about $600 new, and is an excellent lens. The top of the line in that zoom range is the 17-35 (closer to $1000 or more I believe).

Originally posted by jonpink:
Thanks thanks thanks for any guidance to a noob.

All the shots in my gallery were taken with the D100 and 18-35 lens, to give you an idea.

If I can answer any more questions for you, feel free to get in touch.

Cheers,

Ron.
 11/13/2003 07:29:14 PM · #5
Good for you JP! A 200mm is equivalent to an X7. So a 300mm is equivalent to approx X10 which is great just be steady and have lots of light on subject when zoomed all the way or camera shake will introduce some blur. A 70 to 300 would be a great choice. I for one feel that the cart should be in front of the horse! Kudos
 11/13/2003 07:33:34 PM · #6
Ronners got it I know nothing! Except for carts and horses
 11/13/2003 07:53:54 PM · #7
Originally posted by Dim7:
Ronners got it I know nothing! Except for carts and horses


I may be wrong, but my assumption is that the magnfication factor is based on 50mm being standard. However, when you're talking about digicams with tiny CCDs then the focal length magnification factor is much larger. Or to put it another way...

normal SLR - 50mm lens - 1 x 1x = 1x
normal SLR - 200mm lens - 4 x 1x = 4x
D100 (1.5x) - 200mm lens - 4 x 1.5x = 6x
digicam (1.75x) - 200mm lens - 4 x 1.75x = 7x
digicam (1.75x) - 300mm lens - 6 x 1.75x = 10.5x

Well, that's my understanding of it all anyway...

Ron.

Message edited by author 2003-11-13 19:54:40.
 11/13/2003 08:15:50 PM · #8
Thanks Ron
This is good info for me!
 11/13/2003 08:52:29 PM · #9
Ronners gave you some very good info...and explained it well. My favorite lenses that I have for my D100 are my 80-200 2.8..can get expesive, but look for a good used bargain if you can. They seem to be available now, because people are buying the 70-200 VR (vibration reduction) and trading in the 80-200. It is an incredibly sharp lens. Also my newest find is a Tamron 28-75 2.8 lens, amazingly sharp and a 2.8 troughout to boot. It also sells for under $350. A great deal for the money.
 11/13/2003 10:21:27 PM · #10
I have a slightly different take on some of this information, but does not mean I'm correct. My understanding has long been that 28mm was equal to the view of one eye. This, I thought, was why the definition of wide angle changed from 38mm to 28mm, over the last several years, with major manufacturers offering standard zooms starting at 28mm. As in 28-70, 28-85, 28-200, 28-300, etc. The wide angles, then became defined as those (wider than 28) with the potential for distortion or more of a "fish eye" effect.

As mentioned above, digital changes the the effective number and essentially multiplies it by 1.5. So a 75-300 on a film slr becomes a 112.5-450 on a digital slr body. A 28-70 becomes a 42-105 and so forth.

This is why so many digital users (me particularly) are waiting for the development of 2 things. (1)for Nikon to make a wide angle zoom that replicates my 28-70 and (2) the size to become a 1-1 ratio instead of the current 1.5/1.6 (hopefully only a couple of years away).

It is true that a 16-24 or 17-30 when used on a DSLR will give you nearly a 28mm view, but I'm not satisfied with the range, effectively being 25.5-45. I want more from a single lense.

Regarding lense manufacturers. There are some awesome, award winning photos with non-propietary lenses (Sigma, Tamron etc), however I felt so strongly about buying Nikkor lenses for my Nikon, that it took me 3 years (christmasses) to get my stable. My decision was based simply on months of reviewing photography magazines, choosing which pictures I liked the best, and then seeing what equipment was used. In my case, for my taste, Nikon's w/ Nikkor lenses was the overwhelming selection, time after time.

Good luck and congradulations on your recent acquisition. The major photography houses have used lenses. Just a thought.

Also, I have been on record as saying publicly how impressed I am by "Ronners" portfolio. He definately has an "eye" and the skill to go with it. As a D-100 user, look at his portfolio and see what his pictures are like with Nikkor lenses.
 11/13/2003 10:35:12 PM · #11
Actually it is a whole lot more complicated than a simple 1.3, 1.6 or so on. It has to do with the effective film plane size in a mathmatic function relative to lens FL in more simple terms.

It is the same reason for example my Mamiya 6x7 film with a 90mm FL lens is just about the same as a 50mm FL lens in 35mm film; hence a smaller film planes' size = a smaller lens' FL to be the same field of view across the ranges.

Here is a link you can paste that will explain to nth degree just about everything you wanted to 'ever' know about the technical side of camera's, film, lens, and visible light as it affects photography, both film and digital--->

//www.normankoren.com/Tutorials/MTF7.html

its a wealth of tech info and understanding!

11/13/2003 10:39:16 PM · #12
forgot to mention that the Canon 1Ds has the same sensor plane size as a 35mm film camera and it has the same field of view as 35mm cameras - so its a 1:1... where as my 10D has a 1.6x smaller sensor than the 1Ds or the 35mm film camera hence its 1.6x ratio.

11/19/2003 01:45:46 AM · #13
most digicams are 34mm (effective) at 1x zoom.
therefor, yours is probably equivelent to 136mm

xZoom is pretty much useless, as I was told, and now I have an understanding, is a pointless way of mesuring focal length..
for example, you can have a 1.5x zoom lens, 200-300mm, but that doesn;t mean a 5x zoom (17-85mm) has more "zoomage", but it has more "zoom"

ok.. to explain more..

the f value.. theres some good tutorials explaining apature, read that ;)
the mm of zoom, remember that the d100 has 1.5x crop factor.
meaning.
a 100mm lens, will be an effective 150mm.

I was using a d100 a week ago, and was using a 28-120mm f3.5 AF Nikor lens.
That was a pretty useful lens, but it does severly lack wide angle.
for example, wide angle is usually considered 28mm, and 17mm very wide angle.
all you get with that lens is 42mm, which is almost "normal" aspect.

I use the included 17-55mm lens on my canon, for wide angle I reccomend a 17mm length.


as for macro lens, the main difference, is, it can be focused closer, the same focal length applies, and means no difference.

I don;t knwo you camera, but look at its focal length (effective) and compare what it can do.
now, when getting a macro lens, it may say focus 2 inches away at 200mm.
you may get 8 inches at 100mm...
so to compare, crop it to 1/4 the width and height in photoshop, and thats what you'll be getting.

remember, distance, focal length, how close you can focus all matter.
AF is nice, larger apature is important.
f2.8 100mm is good, specially if u have close focus.

remember you can always add an extension tube to focus closer (also applies to making tele-photo lens macro like lens)
 11/19/2003 02:11:50 AM · #14
The zoom power expressed as 10x or 5x has absolutely nothing to do with the absolute magnification of the lens; it's simply representing the ratio of the minimum and maximum focal lengths of the lens. For example, a Canon 600mm F4L is a 1x zoom as it doesn't zoom at all. 600/600 = 1. Conversely, the 35-350 is a 10x zoom as 350/35 = 10. The 600 has close to double the magnifying power of the 35-350, however. To try and use this zoom ratio (which was originally used to describe camcorder lenses) to predict the magnification of SLR lenses is utterly useless.

Originally posted by jonpink:
Can anyone explain lenses to me? Need to get some for Nikon D100, will ahve around £500 to spend (after selling the E20) I think I will go for a macro, but have noooo idea what anything means. f2.8100mm etc etc.

I would like to get close wnough to get some Pitsman esc bee shots - so the bee etc fills the whole frame.

Also for telephoto lenses what does 70-300mm mean in terms of zoom power? Like my E20 will go 4x, is 300mm a lot more?

As for makes, well I don't want crap - I at least know a bad lense on a good camera is pointless, but is Sigma etc any good with Nikon body?

Nikon seems very steap!

Thanks thanks thanks for any guidance to a noob.


Message edited by author 2003-11-19 02:13:23.
 11/19/2003 03:17:01 AM · #15
Originally posted by jonpink:


As for makes, well I don't want crap - I at least know a bad lense on a good camera is pointless, but is Sigma etc any good with Nikon body?

Thanks thanks thanks for any guidance to a noob.


Do be sure to look at third party lenses. Sigma's EX series lenses are of an excellent quality, and may be a little more affordable than equivalent Nikkors. Yes, sigma will make a lens for any Nikon AF mount (as you have) but if you shop for one online, do be aware that you have to specify the Sigma lens for a Nikon (you will find the same lens for Canon, Minolta, etc).
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 08/29/2025 10:42:22 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/29/2025 10:42:22 AM EDT.