Camera & Lens suggestions

[Platinum]

I know this topic has been covered numerous times, so apologies (I have searched btw)

Here goes...

I have almost made my mind up about a d50; (lower price than the 350d does have something to do with it & that it takes SD cards of which I have quite a few) the difficult bit is choosing the lenses.

60% of the time, I will be taking photos in my lighttentboxthingy; and the rest will be landscapes & days out.

Do I go for the d50 with the kit lens, or go for the body and buy (2?) seperate lenses?

£500 or thereabouts.

Is there a decent bit of reading anywhere, that explains lenses and what the numbers mean (with pictures)?

Thanks.

edit: ...can you manual focus with all lenses by 'twisting' them, as I read on one site that the kit lens is AF only??

Edited by Platinum on Saturday 8th July 18:24

Edited by Platinum on Saturday 8th July 18:39

[GetCarter]

First up... I bought the D50 for Mrs Get with the 18-55 as a 'kit' and that lens has a manual focus ability.

As for which lens and what the numbers mean ... well I'll get shot down for being innacurate (and forgive me if you know all this), but generally the lower mm number the more scene you'll get in. A 10 mm lens (for example)will get a huge field of view, a 400 mm (for example) will get really close on a subject far away.

This also has a big effect on depth of field. The 10 mm will be much easier to get the foreground and the background in focus, but the 400 will take great portrait pics with only the subject in focus.

you wanted pic examples... so here is a 300mm at about 8 metres:
www.stevecarter.com/2005/ng10.jpg

and here is a 17mm as wide as it'll get:
www.stevecarter.com/2005/ran1.jpg

THIS IS ALL VERY GENERAL - and there are ways of doing either with both.

Macro lenses will work as general short telephoto lenses and also as close up lenses... they are good, but tricky to use in macro mode as your depth of field will be very 'narrow' - see here:
www.stevecarter.com/macro/eyes.jpg

Then there is the f number. Basically the lower the number the more light the lens can let in and the sharper the images can be in any given light. (amongst ather things) 1.4 is fab... 2.8 is good, 4 is ok etc

Then there is the most important number... the £ number. Generally you get what you pay for.

Hope that's of some help.

D50 is a great camera. Been using it a lot recently as it's so much smaller than the D2X and the results are - most of the time - almost as good.

Steve

Edited by GetCarter on Saturday 8th July 20:28

[Platinum]

If I was to get the 18-55mm kit lens the package would cost around £400; would I get a reasonable macro lens for <£100?

[GetCarter]

Platinum said:

If I was to get the 18-55mm kit lens the package would cost around £400; would I get a reasonable macro lens for <£100?

unlikely... maybe second hand. My 105 Nikkor cost just shy of a grand... the best I can see new for the 60 (a good lens) is here: www.microglobe.co.uk/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=143_164&products_id=180

You might find one of them second hans... or go the Sigma route (which will be cheaper still).

Steve

[Platinum]

Is this one not very good?

[GetCarter]

Platinum said:

Is this one not very good?

I don't know the lens but actually the specs look pretty good. Minimum focus distance 7.4" (is that OK for you?). The 1:1 bit is the most important in a macro (and it has it).

That and the 18-55 would cover your lightbox stuff and your landscapes. (Well it's a good start point anyway )

[GetCarter]

PS- You might want to hang on here for a while in case someone jumps in and says 'That lens is crap'

IMHO - there are very few crap lenses around these days... things have moved on!

[Platinum]

GetCarter said:

Platinum said:

Is this one not very good?

I don't know the lens but actually the specs look pretty good. Minimum focus distance 7.4" (is that OK for you?). The 1:1 bit is the most important in a macro (and it has it).

That and the 18-55 would cover your lightbox stuff and your landscapes. (Well it's a good start point anyway )

Doh; I didn't see that.

<4" would be better, else i'll have to crop and loose MP.

I could just go for the body & a good macro lens, but that would mean using my point and shoot for scenes.

[Gemm]

GetCarter said:

IMHO - there are very few crap lenses around these days... things have moved on!

That's quite true! It's usually the photographers who are crap and they blame the lens.

[GetCarter]

I have to say 7.4" is pretty good.

I may well be wrong here but 4" for a macro might cost the same as a decent car.

...don't worry, I'm often wrong... and the rest of the photography forum will be back at work tomorrow and will surely put me right.

[Gemm]

Only problem I can see with 7.4" is that it may be too close for insects shots (that's if you are planning to photograph them). It means you will be extremely close to the subject (about 5-6cm?), and any shy insects will probably fly (or crawl) away. It may also cast a shadow on them.

Edited by Gemm on Sunday 9th July 12:35

[Platinum]

Gemm said:

Only problem I can see with 7.4" is that it may be too close for insects shots (that's if you are planning to photograph them). It means you will be extremely close to the subject (about 5-6cm?), and any shy insects will probably fly (or crawl) away. It may also cast a shadow on them.

Edited by Gemm on Sunday 9th July 12:35

The kit lens looks to have a minimum focus distance of 11.4", would this be good enough for stock photography in a light tent?

[Gemm]

Platinum said:

The kit lens looks to have a minimum focus distance of 11.4", would this be good enough for stock photography in a light tent?

But what magnification? This is where macro lenses are different from other lenses. I don't think the minimum focusing distance of the kit lens really matters in this case then. Will you be photographing lots of tiny items that require 1:1 magnification?

[Platinum]

Gemm said:

Platinum said:

The kit lens looks to have a minimum focus distance of 11.4", would this be good enough for stock photography in a light tent?

But what magnification? This is where macro lenses are different from other lenses. I don't think the minimum focusing distance of the kit lens really matters in this case then. Will you be photographing lots of tiny items that require 1:1 magnification?

Fruit & veg items for example.

Will the maximum f/5.6 be suitable for my needs?

edit:

My list so far:
*D50 with kit lens
*High speed SD card
*Case

Anything else that is essential?

Edited by Platinum on Sunday 9th July 15:57

Edited by Platinum on Sunday 9th July 15:58

[Platinum]

Anyone?

[beano500]

Platinum said:

Fruit & veg items for example.

Will the maximum f/5.6 be suitable for my needs?

There might be times when you can't get your depth of field limited enough....

...and the other thing that's often forgotten is that the Nikon "average" range don't have particularly bright viewfinders. I wear glasses and find that every stop helps to actually see in many conditions.

Lastly your ultimate quality is often/usually/sometimes (depending on who you listen to) at about two stops down. So my guestimate would be that at f/11 you'd get best quality with that lens.

That's not to say the f/5.6 won't do the job. But you will find yourself working within the compromises it offers. For example, get a good tripod.

(There again, Nikon in its infinite wisdom felt fit not to bother with a mirror lock up on the D70 - I assume the same is true with the '50. It's a right pain when you're over camera shake at a low-ish speed on close ups because of this omission )

[Gemm]

Platinum said:

Fruit & veg items for example.

Will the maximum f/5.6 be suitable for my needs?

edit:

My list so far:
*D50 with kit lens
*High speed SD card
*Case

Anything else that is essential?

Then you probably wouldn't need 1:1 (unless you want to do a extreme close-up of f&v!)

f5.6 should be ok unless you want to get a real shallow DoF. You probably want to stop down anyway, as already suggested, to get the best quality and good DoF for product photos. But fast prime lenses tend to have superior image quality (especially wide open) and brighter viewfinder, so that's also something to consider.

[Captain Beaky]

Platinum said:

Anything else that is essential?

Get a tripod if you haven't already. That way you won't have to worry about long exposures in the light tent so you'll get a lot more flexiblilty with depth of field.

[Platinum]

Thank you for the replies.

I do have a tripod Beaky, presumably the screw fitting is a universal size?

Does anyone have a close-up shot taken with the 18-55mm lens, just so I can see how it compares with the super macro setting on my camera.

If the results are better than my point & shoot using the s. macro function then I may just buy the kit with lens, and add other lenses when I need them.

Thanks.

Edited by Platinum on Tuesday 11th July 18:59

[imperialism2024]

Platinum said:

Gemm said:

Platinum said:

The kit lens looks to have a minimum focus distance of 11.4", would this be good enough for stock photography in a light tent?

But what magnification? This is where macro lenses are different from other lenses. I don't think the minimum focusing distance of the kit lens really matters in this case then. Will you be photographing lots of tiny items that require 1:1 magnification?

Fruit & veg items for example.

Will the maximum f/5.6 be suitable for my needs?

edit:

My list so far:
*D50 with kit lens
*High speed SD card
*Case

Anything else that is essential?

Edited by Platinum on Sunday 9th July 15:57

Edited by Platinum on Sunday 9th July 15:58

Get an extra battery up front. I went through the battle of working with just one battery last summer... you'll thank yourself for having an extra due to the convenience. $40.

Also get the remote for the D50. IIRC it is the same as that for the D70, and should cost around $20... it's great for longer exposures and macro work... essentially any time you use a tripod, you'll probably want to use a remote. And for $20, you can't beat it.

I'd also strongly recommend a UV/Haze filter for the lens, IIRC it is a 55mm thread size. Aside from the UV/Haze functionality, it's cheap insurance against scratches. These can be had for $12 up to $30 for a very good one.

If you don't have an SD card reader for your computer, you can pick one up for about $10-$15. Makes things faster and a lot more convenient.

An air blower is also a good idea, used both to clean the lens(es) and the sensor cover. As long as you're careful, it's the easiest way to get rid of dust. If you're not careful... then you should get a D70 in case you need Nikon to fix your scratched sensor The blowers run about $10-$15.