Digital SLRs?

[Pavlov's Bell]

I've got a Nikon D40 at home w/ the stock lens, was thinking about picking up a 50mm f/1.4 AF. Good move?

[chantheman]

if you shoot a lot of low light its worth it. theres prob a 50 1.8 that is cheaper and could be just as useful.

50mm is pretty versatile

[joelz]

You'd have to get the 50 1.4G (not D) if you want it to autofocus

There's also a 50 1.8G that'll autofocus

[Pavlov's Bell]

You'd have to get the 50 1.4G (not D) if you want it to autofocus

There's also a 50 1.8G that'll autofocus

Ughhh. So this guy (http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-50mm-Nikkor-Digital-Cameras/dp/B00005LENO/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1316627964&sr=8-2)

wont autofocus? Shit man.

[Pavlov's Bell]

What are the advantages of:

50mm 1.4

vs

50mm 1.8

vs

35mm 1.8

?? This is all kinda new to me, sorry for my newbishness.

[fallen angels]

in a nutshell

1.4 = larger aperture, better build than 1.8

1.8 = cheaper

35mm = wider angle than 50mm

[chantheman]

simple breakdown

the mm is going to be how wide your lens is and how much you can get into the frame. i dont know if your camera is on a crop sensor or not but assuming that it is, a 35mm will look close to a 50mm on a full frame camera so if you can afford the 35mm i personally would go that route.

the difference between 1.4 and 1.8 is the amount of light that enters into the sensor. both are going to be better than the kit lens and the amount of light that enters the sensor allows for faster shutter speeds which allows for less of a chance of a blurry picture since the shutter shoots faster.

thats the simple breakdown. hope it helps.

i read this book when i first got my camera and it is pretty good. the author has pictures giving an example of what hes talking about.

Understanding Exposure, 3rd Edition: How to Shoot Great Photographs with Any Camera

http://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Exposure-3rd-Photographs-Camera/dp/0817439390

[joelz]

Ughhh. So this guy (http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-50mm-Nikkor-Digital-Cameras/dp/B00005LENO/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1316627964&sr=8-2)

wont autofocus? Shit man.

yep, the d40, d60, d3000, and a few others in the lower first number (anything below 7) don't have an autofocus motor in the camera so you need to defer to the lens to do autofocus for you.

to add to the difference conversation:

50mm 1.4 has better (metal) construction over the 1.8 (which is plastic), it can let a little more light in

The 35mm 1.8 has the benefit of basically being a 1:1 match to what you see because your camera has a crop factor (it has to do with the size of the sensor, it's fine), so if you want that, then it's awesome. If you want to zoom in on things, then it may not make sense. The 50mm will zoom in a little due to the crop factor.

[Pavlov's Bell]

So a 35mm 1.8 would be better than a 50mm 1.8, yes? I'd prob have to do a little more cropping, but the pics would most likely come out better?

[chantheman]

i think this is a good example of a 50 vs 35. not sure if either picture is cropped. just did a simple google search

50 on top 35 on bottom. wider angle gets more in the picture. thats the only difference outside the 35mm is probably built better

[joelz]

see http://vimeo.com/videoschool/lesson/113/behind-the-glass-part-2-focal-length and http://vimeo.com/videoschool/lesson/114/behind-the-glass-part-1-an-introduction-to-lenses for way more info

[Pavlov's Bell]

i see. how much of a diff will i prob see b/t 1.8 and 1.4? Is it a night a day kinda thing (assuming so since it's 2x the price)

[daphneYOUfindME]

i imagine it won't be an earth-shattering difference in IQ. the 1.4 is brighter and will do low-light photography better, as well as a shallower DoF.

i'd suggest renting the lenses so you can see how well each suits your needs.

[joelz]

Honestly ... not that much of a difference.

I've got a bunch of shots from the 1.8 here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/joelzimmer/sets/72157622214742827/

and from the 1.4 here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/joelzimmer/sets/72157626645207880/

keep in my cameras changed over time in there.

Truthfully tho - figure out your needs - how often are you going to take pictures/how often do you take pictures? if it's going to sit around and gather dust, spend less and get either the 1.8 or 35mm

if you're going to shoot a lot and take it seriously, then go for the 1.4, but if you're going to do snapshots, it's probably not worth it to get the 'best'

[Ryan]

So a 35mm 1.8 would be better than a 50mm 1.8, yes? I'd prob have to do a little more cropping, but the pics would most likely come out better?

i have a d40 that I use still with the 35 1.8 af-s. I think its a better combination than the 50mm especially indoors. im actually selling off my 50 1.8 right now on ebay because i just havent been using it as much as I do the 35.

youre right that the 1.8 af will NOT autofocus with the d40 as the camera relies on the lenses motor to do the focusing.

with the d40 you need to look at lenses that have af-s.

[wayoutwest]

if I had a d40, I would get this lens. I wish I had a nikon body for this lens. Such a ridiculous deal.

[daphneYOUfindME]

i used that lens with my d80, really good.

e: one of my favorite pics i've taken with it:

[Solix]

Shameless plug for a gripped T2i and Tamron 17-50 non-vc.

http://www.superfuture.com/supertalk/showthread.php?t=305842

[Pavlov's Bell]

So I got the 1.8... played around and I'm liking the results. I imagine it'll be my default lens.

Anyway it came with a big ring of plastic to snap onto the front of the lens. What's this for? Any issues in using the lens without it?

[joelz]

It's a lens hood, I've never used mine, but it's for reducing the sun's glare (or other light sourced), get a uv filter instead and put it somewhere where you won't lose it

[kawsneffect]

can anyone recommend me one with a video recording function? I looked into canon eso t2i and t3i but reviews aren't that great. I want one i can use for 5+years without any sort of upgrading.

[chantheman]

t2i works well. 60D too

[kawsneffect]

do you mean the D90? ^

are those the only 2 well known SLR camera with video capabilities?

[chantheman]

no i mean the canon 60D

[laxlife1234]

If you want to save $100 get the T3i, otherwise spend the extra $100 on the 60D. But there really isn't a HUGE difference between the two.

If you are doing video though and will be keeping the camera for 5 or so years just spend the money on a 5DMKII cause it is probably the best camera around for video.

[wayoutwest]

can anyone recommend me one with a video recording function? I looked into canon eso t2i and t3i but reviews aren't that great. I want one i can use for 5+years without any sort of upgrading.

the reviews aren't so great? Which reviews did you read?

[Solix]

Word. The T2i is consistently heralded for great performance at a very reasonable price.

I'd also suggest the 60D as Lax mentioned. IQ wise it'll be a bit inferior compared to the 5DMk2, but it's nearly half the price, still features manual audio controls, and has the nifty swivel screen that the 5D won't.

[kawsneffect]

i am checking all the cameras suggested on cnet.com.

also, how would the video portion of the camera affect the camera as a whole? would it function much slower? This is what i am afraid of. If so, would you recommend i get just a camera for taking photos and another device for filming videos?

thank you guys for your input.

[laxlife1234]

Well to be honest don't go by Cnet. For Canon the ones we posted (T3i, 60D, or 5D MK II, oh and the 7D) are the only ones that will give the best video for Canon. I mean T2i is good, but it is somewhat old technology.

T3i and 60Ds video are the same, 7D I think is better in terms of quality, and the 5D MK IIs video is the best of the best. If you really want to shoot video just get a video camera...

[koala]

i disagree when people say if you're going to shoot video just get a video camera. for the price, getting a dslr with a nice fast lens can give you cinematic quality. on top of the great video, at the end of the day you have a really great camera too.