Digital SLRs?

[airfrogusmc]

Thanks, that was the one I got.

How do you like the M8?

[polishmike]

How do you like the M8?

It wasn't for me, I was purchasing it for a client. I had it for about a week and if I could afford it I would definitely get one. At first I thought it would be too much since I'm not really into photography but it was easy to use and took excellent pictures. When you're holding it it feels like the best camera in the world, it's build like a tank.

[airfrogusmc]

It wasn't for me, I was purchasing it for a client. I had it for about a week and if I could afford it I would definitely get one. At first I thought it would be too much since I'm not really into photography but it was easy to use and took excellent pictures. When you're holding it it feels like the best camera in the world, it's build like a tank.

Nothin like a Leica range finder. They are built to last. The reason I asked is I have a good friend that bought a couple when they first came out and he had some trouble with both. I've heard that Leice has sorted it out. I love the fact that you can still use old manual focus lenses on the new M series.

[polishmike]

I did some research before I got it and ordered it with the upgraded software so I'm hoping there won't be any problems. I also got an M7 like two days later so people at the camera store loved me

[totally epic]

I've decided I'm not happy with (1) the image quality of my zoom lenses and (2) their f/4 aperatures (I have the Canons 17-40 and 24-105). So I think I'd like to sell those and buy some decent non-L primes. I'm also annoyed with having to switch lenses often, so I'm considering a second body. Here's the break down:

selling

17-40 - $600ish

24-105 - $950ish

buying

24 f/2.8 - $280

50 f/1.4 - $290

100 f/2.8 macro - $435

XT body - $395

This "upgrade" shouldn't cost me a dime out of pocket. Are there other lenses I should consider instead?

[Yardsale]

I've decided I'm not happy with (1) the image quality of my zoom lenses and (2) their f/4 aperatures (I have the Canons 17-40 and 24-105). So I think I'd like to sell those and buy some decent non-L primes. I'm also annoyed with having to switch lenses often, so I'm considering a second body. Here's the break down:

selling

17-40 - $600ish

24-105 - $950ish

buying

24 f/2.8 - $280

50 f/1.4 - $290

100 f/2.8 macro - $435

XT body - $395

This "upgrade" shouldn't cost me a dime out of pocket. Are there other lenses I should consider instead?

since the 24 isn't terribly fast, shouldn't you not buy that and the 50 and instead get the 24-70 f2.8 instead?

[airfrogusmc]

I say go L prime.

[ThugLife]

i just ordered a nikon D40 from ebay.

it should be in in about a week.

[Carl]

that 24 2.8 is horrible

spend a few extra dollars and get the 28 1.8 or the 20 2.8

as far as L prime...of course...if you've got the money...some of us are still in college airfrog

[airfrogusmc]

Yeah but thats just temporary..

You'll be make'n enough to support top shelf gear soon...

[VuONG]

whats the advantage to using a L prime lense compared to lets say, a 17-40 L lense?

[weirdnjfan1]

I just got my DSLR for Christmas and was wondering about something. My Pentax K100D Super has a switch that I can choose between Full Automatic and Full Manual, so I was wondering what mode do a majority of the users use when shooting? I'm just curious about this.

[Comma H]

whats the advantage to using a L prime lense compared to lets say, a 17-40 L lense?

They are typically faster, sharper and create better bokeh. They work better in low light, are less obtrusive and the image quality is usually better. Fast primes are especially great for instances when you dont have a lot of time to think about your shots...ie...taking pictures of people walking in the streets.

The real draw of any prime lens in my opinion is it makes you work to get a great shot. If you have a subject framed in your head but you are too far away, you walk, run, climb...whatever to get closer...you dont just zoom in.. Every shot has more "value" and each shot has more of a story behind it.

I cant go out taking art photographs with a zoom any more. Even if they are technically good shots they just dont feel credible to me. What I have been using for street stuff lately is a Voigtlander R3A with a fantastic 40mm f/1.4.

There are fantasic zooms available, and they too have benefits...most notably in fashion shoots, product, studio environments, landscape, weddings...where "getting into the shot" isnt important as "getting the shot".

It depends on what you want to do. My favourite Canon lenses for street and art photography are: 50 f/1.2L, 50 f/1.4 (I dont use it but it is a great cheap lens) and the 35 f/1.4L.

My favourite lens for studio, controlled environments is the 70-200 f/2.8 L (without IS if using a tripod, its sharper!)

weirdnjfan1: Id set it to full manual and get used to shooting that. Look at it this way, you have an SLR so you can control everything! You can leave the lense to auto focus for you but you should try to get into controlling the aperture, shutter, exposure, focus points and ISO yourself.

I dont know much about you camera but I suggest shooting in Aperture Priority mode, setting it to f/8 (in good daylight) and letting the camera choose the shutter value. As you get more comfortable you can open your aperture up (ie, a lower f stop number for instance f/2.8) and take note of what your camera is doing with the shutter under different light.

After a while you will get used to what aperture and shutter you will need for any given lighting situation and you can set your camera to full manual.

Good luck and have fun

[jackierose]

I've got a nikon D70 myself,

my mom's boyfriend just picked up a D300 with a nikkor 18-200 lense.

It's absolutely amazing. I know how to use it, and he doesn't really. But the pictures it takes are really great.

[DEPHT]

I know its been said over and over again...but lens before body. I got a 40D because I know I won't be getting a new body anytime soon, but if you have the cash flow/interest in photography to be able to upgrade when needed....can't stress lens > body more enough.

I'm stuck using a cheapo 50mm f/1.8 and the kit lens (28-135)....decent lenses, especially for the price, but if you know you're going to upgrade as you get better, grab L lenses as soon as you can. It will be in your kit far far longer than any body, and as you can see from airfrog/others shots you can really see how great the lenses are.

The exception is, of course, if you shoot sports/need a fast fps. Other than that, for people new to SLR's, a xti will be more than enough.

[i-Street]

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=140194384660&ssPageName=STRK:MEWA:IT&ih=004

do u guys think this is a good deal.

i think this is a great package for a beginner like me, although i lost the bid

[home]

quick question:

d40x or 400d?

(or something else - roughly same price bracket. also considering second-hand/ebay d80..)

never used a digital SLR before (only film)

complete photography n00b

upgrading from 4mp point-and-shoot compact (lol)

[swooc]

in terms of specs and features my choice would be,

d80 > 400d> d40

i personally prefer the canon cause im used to the canon interface (i hate trying to learn new user interface).

[mutt225]

in terms of specs and features my choice would be,

d80 > 400d> d40

i personally prefer the canon cause im used to the canon interface (i hate trying to learn new user interface).

Yeah I feel the same way if I pick up a Canon, I was trying to help a lady at a zoo the other day and teach her a few things but I had no clue how to work the damn camera, Stick to my nikon.

[bchhun]

i would get the d80. if you get the chance, go to a store and try them all out. the d40/x feels too small and so does the 400d. it seems to me that with a bigger camera, you'll be more confident as a photographer.

[mutt225]

D40x is very dinky, though after a while my D200 with the grip feels pretty dinky I need me some hasselblad

[Comma H]

If you feel more confident that a big camera makes you look "professional", yes.

Most times I find an SLR is more of a hindrance than a help. You can get equal or better quality images from a 35mm rangefinder and a good lens, but best of all you wont scare people away when you pull it out.

People are intimidated by SLRs. But if you are using an SLR, I agree that the bigger bodies do feel better in your hands.

[mutt225]

I do agree sometimes doing street photography its a bitch but i remember scoring gigs back when i had a D50 feeling like an asshole in front of the other photographers them giving me that eye. but i also remember getting the shot they didnt and getting it published so cant complain

[VuONG]

so i finally ordered my setup. canon xt - with a Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0 L

im excited!

[powerviolence]

^^^ sweet dude

[theamapros]

i love all this nikon talk, b/c i don't think nikon gets enough credit these days.

I've got a nikon D70 myself,

my mom's boyfriend just picked up a D300 with a nikkor 18-200 lense.

It's absolutely amazing. I know how to use it, and he doesn't really. But the pictures it takes are really great.

i feel your pain.

[Franklin]

any recommendations on getting the SB-800 flash for a D40x? and how does the i-TTL feature work?

[masuerte]

oh man just go for the sb600... or a used older flash with no ittl for less than a hundred bucks. Wait till you have a D80 for use with Sb800 or even SB600. You gotta read up on commander modes and such... and off camera lighting. I suggest you read strobist.com for a bit.

[Franklin]

thanks for the info mauerte. just thought the light bounce effect off walls is pretty neat.

[VuONG]

been playing wit my 350d with my 17- 40 f4 L lens non stop.... haha love it! i guess the only down is the 350d is pretty small and my hands rub on my face sometimes. but lets see how quick i out grow the 350d then ill upgrade.

im look for a good portait/night/bokeh lens... i've been thinking about the 50mm 1.8.

any suggestion for primes?