I have been using a Nikon D200 for some time now (picked it up used a little over a year ago for a good deal), and I like it a lot. However, as GS said it is an older sensor and does great in plenty of light, but I try not to go above 400ISO because of the noise handling. I slightly prefer the focus ability/flexibility of the D200 over my Canon 40D, but they are pretty close to equal on that point. The D200 is a great camera and was highly lauded when it first came out, but it is now "older technology", which happens pretty quickly nowadays. I would also suggest going for the better sensors that are available now, plus the extra features that have been incorporated of late as well.
[Sticky] Digital Camera FAQ
226,906 Views |
3079 Replies |
Last: 11 yr ago by Ag CPA
Ouch - the D300 is about double the price of a D200. I think I might rent a D200 and take it for a spin at an event and see how well it does. I will, however, strongly lean toward the D300 based on the recommendations here. If Guitarsoup says I need to go with the D300, that's good enough for me, but I have to deal with a finite budget for new equipment next year, which will probably be in the ~$2,500 range.
[This message has been edited by Ryan the Temp (edited 10/31/2008 2:47a).]
[This message has been edited by Ryan the Temp (edited 10/31/2008 2:47a).]
The D300 is an amazing camera and the D200 is very good, but has very pronounced noise. While people like Labs wont shoot it above 400ISO, shooting a D300 at 6400ISO is not unheard of. (that is 16 times as much light.)
Guitar, what camera would you recommend to a beginner that wants to shoot wildlife and sports mainly, with the usual stills as well?
Depends what your budget is. A wildlife photographer, a sports photographer and a stills photographer all use very different lenses.
$1K for now.
new or used?
20 or 30d used and a 70-300 f4-5.6 IS lens could be had in that price range. You could always pick up a 18-55 kit lens, or a 50mm f1.8 lens as a shorter walk around type lens.
The rebel XS is also sitting at 599$ with a kit lens. That would put you 100$-200$ over price range with a 70-300mm IS lens. There are certainly better lenses than that but most cost close to your entire budget.
On the nikon side, the d80 is the way to go as a cheap body imo, unless your only sticking to the d40. The 80 is only about 100$ more than a d60 at this point, and has a whole host of very affordable older glass available for it, where the 40/60 series does not(while there are a multitude of cheap lenses for the nikon af-s system, there not as nice or as fast as the older lenses are, at least aperture wise).
Nikons 70-300 VR lens is sitting at 550$ or so(No idea online, that's what we sell it for....) and is a pretty nice lens.
[This message has been edited by Ag_of_08 (edited 11/1/2008 1:01a).]
20 or 30d used and a 70-300 f4-5.6 IS lens could be had in that price range. You could always pick up a 18-55 kit lens, or a 50mm f1.8 lens as a shorter walk around type lens.
The rebel XS is also sitting at 599$ with a kit lens. That would put you 100$-200$ over price range with a 70-300mm IS lens. There are certainly better lenses than that but most cost close to your entire budget.
On the nikon side, the d80 is the way to go as a cheap body imo, unless your only sticking to the d40. The 80 is only about 100$ more than a d60 at this point, and has a whole host of very affordable older glass available for it, where the 40/60 series does not(while there are a multitude of cheap lenses for the nikon af-s system, there not as nice or as fast as the older lenses are, at least aperture wise).
Nikons 70-300 VR lens is sitting at 550$ or so(No idea online, that's what we sell it for....) and is a pretty nice lens.
[This message has been edited by Ag_of_08 (edited 11/1/2008 1:01a).]
I would probably get a used Canon 20D and a Sigma (Bigma) 50-500mm lens. You won't be able to do night time sports, but in your budget, that really isn't much of an option. You will have plenty of range to shoot football and baseball from the stands in college.
quote:
while there are a multitude of cheap lenses for the nikon af-s system, there not as nice or as fast as the older lenses are, at least aperture wise
Not necessarily true. Sigma has quite a few now with the HSM for the AF-S mount, and Tamron's getting there. Still not the variety of lenses available to a Canon (which was your point), granted, but they are getting better.
Oh yeah, there's definitely MORE of a selection than now, but not if you compare to stepping up to the d80 that will use AF. AF-s will settle in, but right now there are some good deals to be had going with an af capable camera.
about to buy my first slr + lenses and am looking for filters just for protection.
The main article only says to get one but doesn't go into any specifics or brands.
The basic Tiffen UV filter pushed by Amazon seems to not be very good because it isn't multi-coated. Is that something I should look for?
The main article only says to get one but doesn't go into any specifics or brands.
The basic Tiffen UV filter pushed by Amazon seems to not be very good because it isn't multi-coated. Is that something I should look for?
quote:
Ouch - the D300 is about double the price of a D200
Get a D90 instead.
Comparison You'll have to decide if it's worth the extra $500 or so for the D300.
If you're not a semi-pro or very advanced amateur, I'd say the D90 will fit your needs.
For the Nikon Folks.
This is the best site for Nikon info. I've found. He does use only Nikon, but he certainly is not afraid to criticize them where they deserve it.
[url]http://www.bythom.com/nikon.htm
[This message has been edited by agracer (edited 11/4/2008 1:00p).]
don't worry about fancy coatings for your uv filters. it is just a protective layer so you don't nick or scratch your lens. just grab whatever hoya or tiffen you find.
Thanks... unfortunately I just bought fancier filters. lol... wasn't too much money at least!
Camera comes in Friday. Can't wait!
Camera comes in Friday. Can't wait!
Holy crap Nikon is pushing the d80's out for next to nothing. 619$ for the body, 699$ with a lens.
I'm a die hard canon guy and it's hard for me not to pitch em at this point...
I'm a die hard canon guy and it's hard for me not to pitch em at this point...
The D80 has not been quite the success that the D50/70 or D40 have been. From memory, it has some meter issues and noise issues that the earlier cameras (D50/70) did not have. It was kind of a 'yeah, so' release from Nikon.
Racer- Funny, most of what I see coming out of d80's looks better noise wise than out of the '70, and we see ALOT of prints off a d80.
Regardless of who's right, a d80 for the cost of a d60 is a helluva deal...
Regardless of who's right, a d80 for the cost of a d60 is a helluva deal...
quote:
Regardless of who's right, a d80 for the cost of a d60 is a helluva deal...
Yeah, **** you too, Nikon...
LOL.
I feel bad cause we never thought there would be another price drop and all of a sudden they dropped WAY down.
I feel bad cause we never thought there would be another price drop and all of a sudden they dropped WAY down.
Well, it's just the nature of the consumer electronics market, DSLR's included. I knew when I got my D60 that a better deal was waiting...a few months down the road. I wanted a DSLR then, and that's part of the compromise of life.
BTW, I just had a bunch of shots from the weekend get goofed up because I forgot to adjust my white balance settings back from the last time I'd used it. D'oh!
BTW, I just had a bunch of shots from the weekend get goofed up because I forgot to adjust my white balance settings back from the last time I'd used it. D'oh!
IF you shot in RAW, it wouldn't matter. 
Well, thankfully, most of them are. But a lot of moving pics were jpegs because I was rapid firing a bunch of old cars going around Texas World Speedway. I think I can photoshop 'em into submission, it's just a little irritating. Something to remember for next time, I suppose.
With a program like lightroom 2, you can adjust the white balance of a large set of pics like that really easily. I do it all the time. I generally shoot RAW at work (sports being an exception) and use lightroom all the time.
lightroom and raw have saved me many times. our shop setup uses 2300k light bulbs, so i idiotically leave it on the tungsten setting more often than not.
I shot 24gig of pics today. 8mp raw.
shot 1300pics yesterday.
have a homecoming parade and a football game tomorrow.
anyone wanna buy me a massage? I am effing sore.
shot 1300pics yesterday.
have a homecoming parade and a football game tomorrow.
anyone wanna buy me a massage? I am effing sore.
I just got Lightroom yesterday. I love getting an educational discount.
I wish I was still in school so I could get the education discount. Okay, no I don't. But I am jealous because I need to upgrade from Elements 4 since it doesn't support my 40D RAW files. I have been spoiled by my Lightroom and CS3 free trials, I want them now. The education discount would be nice!
Guitarsoup, do you know anything about the Canon 35mm 2? I'm thinking about selling my Tamron and getting a wider prime because I use the Tamron at 28mm 99% of the time. A friend of mine got the 28mm 1.8 and wasn't happy with it, so I was looking at the 35mm. Just wondering if you knew anything about the wide primes and how well they perform. I've heard the Sigma 30mm is really sharp but after not being really happy with my Tamron I don't know if I want to do another non-Canon lens.
But I am jealous because I need to upgrade from Elements 4 since it doesn't support my 40D RAW files. I have been spoiled by my Lightroom and CS3 free trials, I want them now. The education discount would be nice!Guitarsoup, do you know anything about the Canon 35mm 2? I'm thinking about selling my Tamron and getting a wider prime because I use the Tamron at 28mm 99% of the time. A friend of mine got the 28mm 1.8 and wasn't happy with it, so I was looking at the 35mm. Just wondering if you knew anything about the wide primes and how well they perform. I've heard the Sigma 30mm is really sharp but after not being really happy with my Tamron I don't know if I want to do another non-Canon lens.
I wouldn't sell the Tamron, because that is a pretty necessary focal range for lots of stuff.
I have heard great things about Tokina's 17mm 3.5 prime, which can be had for under $200.
I have heard great things about Tokina's 17mm 3.5 prime, which can be had for under $200.
quote:I haven't been in school since 1993. I work at A&M so I get the discount. Best of both worlds.
I wish I was still in school so I could get the education discount.
Well at least I'll qualify in 2 years when my son enters kindergarten
Thanks Guitarsoup, I'll check that one out. I was trying to go for a wider aperture since I mostly do indoors. If I don't sell my Tamron I need to have it calibrated because I'm just not as happy with it as I am my primes. And I tend to like to zoom with my feet anyway. Habit I guess from having my 50mm on my camera for the first couple months!
Thanks Guitarsoup, I'll check that one out. I was trying to go for a wider aperture since I mostly do indoors. If I don't sell my Tamron I need to have it calibrated because I'm just not as happy with it as I am my primes. And I tend to like to zoom with my feet anyway. Habit I guess from having my 50mm on my camera for the first couple months!
The wider the lens, the easier it is to hand hold a lens in dark light. To get a 20 1.8 or something like that would be too expensive for what you want to spend.
I'm asking for a DSLR for Christmas from my wife. The main goal is to be able to "capture the moment" with our family as it's growing (we have an 18 month old now, and hopefully another on the way soon). We currently have a Canon PnS and have been happy with it - but it's frustrating to miss some great moment because of the slow response time of the camera.
I also really like the artistic quality associated with the DSLR cameras - the depth of the pictures.
I know literally nothing, other than what I've read here over the past couple of months. Question one - what's a good starter setup as far as body and lenses (plus other accessories I may need) without blowing the budget ($1000 or so, maybe as high as $1200)? I like the idea of investing in a "system", then being able to upgrade the body down the road as I become more comfortable and want more out of the camera without replacing all of the equipment.
Question two - any ideas on a good way to start learning how to use it effectively? Is there a particular website that has tutorials, should I get a book, or is it just practice makes perfect?
Thanks in advance!
I also really like the artistic quality associated with the DSLR cameras - the depth of the pictures.
I know literally nothing, other than what I've read here over the past couple of months. Question one - what's a good starter setup as far as body and lenses (plus other accessories I may need) without blowing the budget ($1000 or so, maybe as high as $1200)? I like the idea of investing in a "system", then being able to upgrade the body down the road as I become more comfortable and want more out of the camera without replacing all of the equipment.
Question two - any ideas on a good way to start learning how to use it effectively? Is there a particular website that has tutorials, should I get a book, or is it just practice makes perfect?
Thanks in advance!
I didn't know that about wider lenses! That's a good thing to know. I definitely wasn't looking at anything expensive...the Canon 28mm 2.8 and the 35mm 2.0 are in the $200 range I think. I'm still trying to decide on my Tamron, though...I think I'll send it in for calibration before I give up on it. I just like my 50mm and 85mm so much more.
Scan- start by reading through this thread. You'll learn a lot just from that.
Probably an Xti or Xsi would be a good start.
Probably an Xti or Xsi would be a good start.
quote:
Canon 28mm 2.8
That lens doesn't give you anything you don't have already. Your Tamron has 28mm at 2.8. The 30 2.0 is twice as fast, but isn't at wide.
The rule of thumb is that your shutter speed needs to be at least the same as your focal length to keep from having camera shake. (Of course, IS negates this.)
So you can hand hold a 17mm lens at 1/20th of a sec. At 28mm, you are gonna want at least 1/30th of a sec. That is a half stop extra. Plus, you are going to be a ton wider.
TPS_Report
Football Explained gives it's rundown on A&M's prospects 2026 season
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
33
gkharmon98
Interesting graphic on our offensive producers pre/post portal
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
28