jwb
Footballguy
I have this lens - I love it. Was originally going to go w/ the 35mm 1.8, but figured 50mm is a little more versatile (and it is), and the 1.4 is nice too. Great lens.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
DSLR Camera Guys (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter sho nuff
- Start date
CrossEyed
Footballguy
I think it's a fair bit sharper for inside shots than the 18-55. But I doubt that I'd spend $364 on it. If I were on a limited budget I think I'd use that money toward the 18-200. I recently bought that lens and have been extremely happy with the limited number of shots I've taken with it so far. Although I think the price on that lens has surged recently also. I got it for $650 but now I think it's going for around $800-850. But from what I've taken with it so far, it will probably be on my camera 90+% of the time.Yeah, I saw Amazon had a few in stock, but was hoping to avoid paying $364 for it. Maybe I will check out the other merchant, or just put in a back order for it at Adorama or B&H (although their price is still much higher than the suggested price of $199 too). I guess I should have bought last year when it was selling at that price.ETA: BTW, do you like the lens, and think it's still worth getting at a ~$280 price? The reviews that I read of it were pretty good, but a lot of comments were that it's a great lens for the price (presumably referring to the $200 price). I'm fairly new to DSLRs, so just have the 18-55 kit and a 55-200, and, based on reviews, it seemed like a good one to get.I bought one of these last June from Amazon for $197. They have 4 available through Amazon right now, but they are $364.ETA: There is one merchant on Amazon selling them for $299.
CrossEyed
Footballguy
Just remember the crop factor. I went back and forth and decided on the 35. Sometimes 50 is just too close to get your shot.
Jefferson the Caregiver
Rebel Without A Pause
I have this lens, it's the best lens I have in terms of picture quality.
CrossEyed
Footballguy
Hope you get some great shots. Have fun!!
Don Quixote
Footballguy
Thanks. I went back to Amazon's web site and just noticed that they have a $199 option under "more buying choices," when you click to see price in cart. It is probably on back order for a lengthy period of time, but probably worth waiting it out, since I can't find it in stock anywhere for under $300.I'd like to do the 18-200 at some point too. Went with the separate 55-200 due to cost, but would be nice to have one less lens to carry around with me.I think it's a fair bit sharper for inside shots than the 18-55. But I doubt that I'd spend $364 on it. If I were on a limited budget I think I'd use that money toward the 18-200. I recently bought that lens and have been extremely happy with the limited number of shots I've taken with it so far. Although I think the price on that lens has surged recently also. I got it for $650 but now I think it's going for around $800-850. But from what I've taken with it so far, it will probably be on my camera 90+% of the time.Yeah, I saw Amazon had a few in stock, but was hoping to avoid paying $364 for it. Maybe I will check out the other merchant, or just put in a back order for it at Adorama or B&H (although their price is still much higher than the suggested price of $199 too). I guess I should have bought last year when it was selling at that price.ETA: BTW, do you like the lens, and think it's still worth getting at a ~$280 price? The reviews that I read of it were pretty good, but a lot of comments were that it's a great lens for the price (presumably referring to the $200 price). I'm fairly new to DSLRs, so just have the 18-55 kit and a 55-200, and, based on reviews, it seemed like a good one to get.I bought one of these last June from Amazon for $197. They have 4 available through Amazon right now, but they are $364.
jwb
Footballguy
Yea, I could see that. I use it for closeups mostly. It does a great job - just some amazing shots.
gonzobill5
Footballguy
Hey guys, I'm looking for a little help with a gift. The wife wants a "AF-S DX NIKKOR 35mm f/1.8G" for Mother's day. I have no clue what that means. I tried a couple websites and couldn't find any in stock. I pulled up this thread and I see others were looking for the same thing (the FFA is awesome) and were having trouble. Were any of you able to find it? If not, can you point me in the direction of a similar quality lens?
gonzobill5
Footballguy
Yikes. The camera I bought her last year was around $400. Now $400 for a lens? I should have just kept shelling out for the photographer.
HellToupee
Footballguy
Why not buy her the 50mm 1.8 instead? If she doesn't have it of course. It runs about $150
HellToupee
Footballguy
although if you bought her the d40 the 50mm won't autofocus and she would want the 35mm
CrossEyed
Footballguy
Won't be an AF-S G at that price.
Don Quixote
Footballguy
I was looking for this lens a couple of weeks ago and you can see discussion up earlier this page. I ended up placing on back order through Amazon for $200. I have not heard anything back from Amazon about it though, so I don't know how long it will take to get.If you go to the bottom of the Amazon page, you can see a bunch of discussions about the lens with customers offering tips on finding it.
AcerFC
Footballguy
gonzobill5
Footballguy
Yeah, I called around and it is no longer in stock anywhere within 100 miles of me. I don't understand why I can't buy from the Nikon site, since they advertise it for $199 too. Amazon was the cheapest I've found - $329 - and I'm have zero ideas other than this, so I just forked over the $$.
CrossEyed
Footballguy
OK, can someone with a little more expertise give me a specific recommendation on a filter(s) for my 18-200 (72mm filters)? Now that I made this purchase, I imagine it will be on my camera 90%+ of the time, and I'm thinking that I should probably add a filter or two. First, just for some added protection, but also to enhance my shots.
I think I recall Hoya being recommended, but even they seem to have several levels of CP filters. What's necessary? What's best? And should I buy a UV filter that stays on all the time and put the CP on for outside shots, or just get a really good CP and leave that on all the time?
I really need some edumacation when it comes to filters.
I think I recall Hoya being recommended, but even they seem to have several levels of CP filters. What's necessary? What's best? And should I buy a UV filter that stays on all the time and put the CP on for outside shots, or just get a really good CP and leave that on all the time?
I really need some edumacation when it comes to filters.
AcerFC
Footballguy
I dont know if anyone jotted this down in their notebook but my wife got me the sb400 and 700 for the holidays. She picked up the 400 only because the 700 was not in yet. Well I have used the 400 a total of 2 times and then the 700 came in and the 400 is just sitting there.
If anyone has interest in it, PM me. Not looking to make any money, and obviously wont charge full since its used but it is in perfect condition. Im sure we can work something out if anyone has interest
If anyone has interest in it, PM me. Not looking to make any money, and obviously wont charge full since its used but it is in perfect condition. Im sure we can work something out if anyone has interest
Card Trader
Footballguy
Just got a Nikon D3100. Costco special!
AcerFC
Footballguy
ODoyleRules
Footballguy
I recently bought this polarizer from Sunpak for my 18-200mm. I wasn't that impressed - either the brand is a dud or polarizers in general only make a marginal difference on photos. I mostly use my camera for the kids so this filter stuff doesn't do much for me. I keep a basic UV filter on there all the time just for protection.
CrossEyed
Footballguy
Thanks guys.Any other thoughts? Hoya seems to have several different levels of filters. I don't want to go too cheap, but I'm also not a pro, so I don't need to get the best filters out there.
I thought I remember someone specifically recommending Hoya in one of the photography threads.
Card Trader
Footballguy
I bought some Tiffen UV filters, just to protect the lenses.For anyone looking at a cheap way to get into DSLR:http://www.costco.com/Browse/Product.aspx?Prodid=11622027&search=Nikon&Mo=5&cm_re=1_en-_-Top_Left_Nav-_-Top_search〈=en-US&Nr=P_CatalogName:BC&Sp=S&N=5000043&whse=BC&Dx=mode+matchallpartial&Ntk=Text_Search&Dr=P_CatalogName:BC&Ne=4000000&D=Nikon&Ntt=Nikon&No=5&Ntx=mode+matchallpartial&Nty=1&topnav=&s=1I have the D3100 as well with just the kit lens. Should I have a filter of some sort on there?
CrossEyed
Footballguy
I'm asking for 2 reasons, first protection, and second outdoor photo quality. The lens I bought was $650, so a filter serves as a bit of an insurance policy. I've seen filters take the impact of a dropped camera and save the lens. I've also used CP filters for outdoor shots in the past and they can definitely be helpful. Can make skies pop a bit more as well and reducing some glare on things like water, glass, etc.I have the D3100 as well with just the kit lens. Should I have a filter of some sort on there?
Don Quixote
Footballguy
It is past Mother's Day now, but if you are still looking for this lens, the supply is starting to increase on it. I ordered from Amazon for $199 in April and just got it delivered yesterday. Best Buy has it stock now at that price too. So, the shortage appears to be over.
Shutterbug
Try Not To Stare
Last edited by a moderator:
bigbottom
Footballguy
I have the Hoya HD UV filter that I leave on all the time, and the Hoya HD Cir-Pl filter that I absolutely love. Both are pricy, but I rolled the dice and paid half price for them from one of the less reputable on-line outfits.
Last edited by a moderator:
bigbottom
Footballguy
BoltBacker
Footballguy
Does anyone in this thread have strong opinions on monopods? I'm about to upgrade to this...
http://www.amazon.com/Opteka-CFM300-Section-Carbon-Monopod/dp/B003U7NLKG/ref=pd_sim_sbs_p_1
... because I like the height(sometimes I shoot on uneven ground). The Gitzo Traveler is 6-section instead of 5 which I would appreciate but it's shorter and I doubt it's worth 4x or 5x the price. Anyone have especially BAD experience with an Opteka monopod or tripod?
http://www.amazon.com/Opteka-CFM300-Section-Carbon-Monopod/dp/B003U7NLKG/ref=pd_sim_sbs_p_1
... because I like the height(sometimes I shoot on uneven ground). The Gitzo Traveler is 6-section instead of 5 which I would appreciate but it's shorter and I doubt it's worth 4x or 5x the price. Anyone have especially BAD experience with an Opteka monopod or tripod?
CrossEyed
Footballguy
For anyone trying to decide on the 18-200 Nikkor, I absolutely love this lens. I don't ever take it off of my camera and I never miss a shot because I have the wrong lens with me or because I have to change lenses. Best money I've spent on any photography equipment. $650 is a fair size investment for a lens, but this thing is great.
Black Sunday
Footballguy
I was looking at the 18-200, but elected for the Tamron 18-270. I'm no expert, but the quality is good, imo, and the big selling point for me was the compact size. It's only slightly larger than the kit 18-55 lens. Tamron 18-270 pzd lens
CrossEyed
Footballguy
I guess it depends on what you are looking for in a lens. Personally, I want the best glass I can afford. I don't think the 18-200 is that bulky. And I'd rather have sharper images than the extra zoom at the upper end.
Nick Vermeil
Footballguy
I'll pile in here with loads of questions as soon as I catch up.
Nick Vermeil
Footballguy
Ok kids. I think I've decided on the Cannon Rebel T2i body. I'm looking for a camera to take good pictures of the new baby. There is a package that comes with a stock 18-55mm zoom, but I can also get just the body and a nicer lens. Since this will be primarily for the kid and indoors for a while, what lens would you recommend? I don't' think I need a zoom that goes to 200mm just yet. I'd like to get the best glass/length/price ratio for people shots right now and I can upgrade later when the kid is running away from me.
Thoughts?
Thoughts?
ODoyleRules
Footballguy
If you were to get 1 lens for shooting pictures of a new baby, I'd go with the 50mm f/1.8mm lens. You'll be hard pressed to find a lens of better value or a lens with better reviews. It will take great pictures. The one drawback is that it's a fixed lens so you can't zoom in/out, which will seem like a downgrade if you spent this $ on a fancy new camera and you're stuck with one zoom capacity. Once your kid is moving a lot (12 mos or older), you may want another lens with zoom capacity. Here's an example picture with the 50 mm:
Baby Jane
Nick Vermeil
Footballguy
Thanks. I actually prefer a fixed over a zoom but how is that 50 for adults? The wife is going to want some good shots of her and the belly. What zoom would you reccomend at 12 months? That 50mm is inexpensive enough that I could probably do both.Nice shots by the way!
Last edited by a moderator:
MasterofOrion
Footballguy
You are right you can not get a better lens for the price. I want that lens. I have the 85 mm 1.8 and I love it. It is great for taking portraits, but it also good for indoor photography where you can't use flash. I took pictures of my daughters volleyball games and the extra stop over my 80- 200 2.8 was essential for getting the picture. I used my friends 85 1.2 which costs $ 1600 more. What I found is that the DOF dropped so fast between 1.8 to 1.2 that it was hard to use. For example you could get the tip of someones nose in focus but nothing else. The 1.2 was very slow focusing but it did have a better bokeh and was able to focus closer. The 1.8 auto focused much faster than 1.2 and the bokeh was still great.
ODoyleRules
Footballguy
I find that the 50mm is great for portraits and you can also stand further back to get more content in the frame. I do find that when you start to get multiple people in the picture, the camera has a tendency to focus better on one person than others. This can be avoided with a setting on the camera, but I usually forget to do this.
My progression was:
18-55 starter lens with the camera
50mm f/1.8
18-200mm
For me, the 18-55mm was a huge step up from what I was doing so I wasn't aware that I wasn't supposed to like it. I got the 18-200mm once I knew I would be doing this for awhile, but also knew I would never be carrying 3 or 4 lenses with me. The 50mm with low f stop (like the 1.8) is great for babies, because you'll want to shoot indoors and you won't want to use a flash and that is where this lens rocks. I don't regret anything with how I invested in the lenses, but I recognize that everyone's needs and budget is different so what works for me may not work for you.
My progression was:
18-55 starter lens with the camera
50mm f/1.8
18-200mm
For me, the 18-55mm was a huge step up from what I was doing so I wasn't aware that I wasn't supposed to like it. I got the 18-200mm once I knew I would be doing this for awhile, but also knew I would never be carrying 3 or 4 lenses with me. The 50mm with low f stop (like the 1.8) is great for babies, because you'll want to shoot indoors and you won't want to use a flash and that is where this lens rocks. I don't regret anything with how I invested in the lenses, but I recognize that everyone's needs and budget is different so what works for me may not work for you.
CrossEyed
Footballguy
Nikon guy here, so I'm not sure about the Canon kit lens. But I know that the Nikon 18-55 kit is a pretty nice lens. And for a baby you won't need anything else for a while. If you want to get a little nicer pics you could go with a prime lens. I have a 35mm prime that takes outstanding portrait-type pictures and it's pretty fast. I tend to use that one quite a bit for indoor pictures of the kids.I do have the 18-200 also. But I primarily got that one anticipating outings where I wanted the flexibility to shoot close and far without having to worry about swapping lenses. But that's a fairly hefty investment ($650 for the Nikon, and that was a really good deal).
CrossEyed
Footballguy
For those who like to do some creative post-processing but don't want to spend the money or the time it takes to learn Photoshop, OnOne has a new suite of products coming out that is pretty affordable. Perfect Photo Suite 6. I've used some OnOne software plugins, and they've worked pretty well. And as a previous user I can get the upgrade price which is only $129, a no-brainer for me. I think it's probably still a good deal at $299. You can also purchase individual modules rather than the entire suite.
Last edited by a moderator:
bump
pantagrapher
Footballguy
Been very unhappy with my Nikon D60 lately. Lots of dead pixels at high ISO lately. Sensor dust. I know this is stuff that I can fix, but aside from that, I just haven't been happy with the quality of the images lately. I don't know if it's just stuff I never noticed before—if I'm getting pickier—or if the sensor is deteriorating. Seriously considering upgrading to a D7000 body.
17seconds
root of all aliai
Just noticed this thread, wish I had seen it earlier.
I have the following arriving today, which will be my first decent camera. Mostly for family photos and some video as well. When I have time I will do some artsy shots (beach, vacations, etc). Good choices?
Nikon D5100 with 18-55mm VR
55-300mm VR zoom lens
16GB Class 10 SD card
PLR Optics filter set (UV, Flourescent, Polarizer)
I have the following arriving today, which will be my first decent camera. Mostly for family photos and some video as well. When I have time I will do some artsy shots (beach, vacations, etc). Good choices?
Nikon D5100 with 18-55mm VR
55-300mm VR zoom lens
16GB Class 10 SD card
PLR Optics filter set (UV, Flourescent, Polarizer)
Mister CIA
Footballguy
I need a hobby, so I've decided to spend my fantasy football winnings early and buy a DSLR camera and immerse myself.
Just one question: Is buying online supposed to be *that* much cheaper than buying through my local retailer. I was prepared to spend an extra Jackson or two at my local camera shop, but when pricing out an EOS Rebl T3i, I came up with $900 vs $550. Can somebody with a good grip on the jargon tell me if I'm comparing apples to apples below. Thanks much.
B & H
Local guys
Just one question: Is buying online supposed to be *that* much cheaper than buying through my local retailer. I was prepared to spend an extra Jackson or two at my local camera shop, but when pricing out an EOS Rebl T3i, I came up with $900 vs $550. Can somebody with a good grip on the jargon tell me if I'm comparing apples to apples below. Thanks much.
B & H
Local guys
