[Sam Kapasi]

Sigh! What kind of bokeh Sam, round, hexagonal or creamy bokeh?

I'm not fussy, but I like a soft, rounded bokeh. Don't laugh Samu, even people with small budgets have big dreams.

Originally Posted by Rudra Sen

Go for a 100 mm or Nikon equivalent macro lens. You'll be happy.

Rudra, I can only use AF-S with my D40. There is a 105mm micro with VR, this one

It will cost me about $860 - the equivalent length will be in excess of 150mm. I do not have a full frame like you.

The other option is a 60mm micro nikkor without VR but still AF-S so safe to use with the D40. Equivalent length will be about 90mm.


Cost will be about $540.

Good thing is that both those lenses are 2.8. Nice and open, lots of light and very shallow DOF. I like that.

Now here is a surprise package. A zoom tele from 70-200mm, with macro, works with the D40 and aperture is 2.8 throughout!! It has everything, quite simply put. Only thing is, it's a Tammie.



It is surprisingly well priced for that size at $680. What is your opinion on this glass, experts?

Originally Posted by absynthguzzler

Guru's Why isnt the 18-200 in Sam's shortlist if he's looking for a do it all lens considering he travels a lot

Good question. There is an AF-S 18-200 with VR as well.

I am guessing this is the kit lens with the D300. Only thing is, no macro and it's a 4/5.6.
Still, the lens is a little under 700 dollars. I'll be paying that simply to get convenience, considering that the 55-200 starts off exactly where my kit lens stops and costs one fourth of that amount for the same aperture.
So I'm thinking no.

Originally Posted by absynthguzzler

Also why not the 12-24 if he's interested in macro,landscape and portraits as the second lens to carry about?

The 12-24 is not macro. It would work well for wide landscaping.

How can I make portraits with that? It is a good lens, but I have many other things to do with 900 dollars!


Coming back to Macro lenses. So now you guys suggest I use my kit 18-55 lens for landscape, a 60 or 105mm for macro and portraits and a 70-300 for tele. Great. So now I am thinking of carrying THREE lenses.

[NomadVagabond]

Read all that jargon...hehe. Seems you guys are having fun. Anyway, I ordered my Macro lens. Getting the EF Canon 100mm f/2.8. Will get it in my hands by the end of next week or so. Can't wait for it to come.

Regards,

Anirban.

[bharanidharang]

Originally Posted by Sam Kapasi

Friends, Bourbons and infantrymen,
I do not come to praise Caeser but to gently caress his inner thighs with my mustache...

I have a D40. I want a telephoto. I have a 70-300, 4/5.6 Nikkor, but that damn thing only autofocuses on the D70.

So now I want a telephoto zoom that will autofocus on my D40. Why do I want a Telephoto? For my various travels of course. Why do I need autofocus - it's a right royal PITA to manually focus at anything above 200mm.

Now keep in mind that my camera costs 25K with the kit lens before you advise me some $1500 lens.

I originally thought of this
Attachment 133505
Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S VR. I can get this for about $530. Costs more than my darn camera.

Then I got very very tempted by this.

Attachment 133507

Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 DG MACRO for Nikon. It works with D40 and costs about $160.

Please tell me it's a good lens so I can have a telephoto for $160. YAY!

Sam,

Just my thought. Would it not be better for you to get a D200 ($600 odd from the US) and continue using your old lens

[jaibir]

Sam, what sort of macro photography are you planning to do? That would have a great deal of impact on the focal length for the macro lens.

The Tamron is supposed to have good image quality (provided you get a good copy). autofocus speed is so-so. The main issue I see for your purposes is weight - its 1.3 kgs (~2.5-3x the weight of the D40!). a lighter weight option might be the Sigma 50-150 II f2.8. Its 'only' 800 grams or so. Costs Rs.31k in India. The US prices went up recently to $700 or so, however you should be able to find one for $650 if you look (usually on one of the larger dealers' ebay store).

[Sam Kapasi]

Originally Posted by jaibir

Sam, what sort of macro photography are you planning to do? That would have a great deal of impact on the focal length for the macro lens.

I don't have a plan/agenda. If I did, it wouldn't be Yeti-like. I don't intend to run around getting inches away from cockroaches and beetles. I'll probably get a little botanical.

The macro is not really a fixed requisite. Having a shallow DOF and a bright lens is. That's why I found the Tamron tempting, for its 2.8.

The Tamron is supposed to have good image quality (provided you get a good copy)

Please elaborate. What do you mean by good copy?

The main issue I see for your purposes is weight - its 1.3 kgs (~2.5-3x the weight of the D40!).

I just ran to the kitchen scale. My D40, with the pro-battery-grip and kit lens weighs 996gms.
Apart from this, in my bag, I intend to carry my SB600, a few knick-knacks, the 70-300 (Not if I get the tamron 70-200, but if I get the 60mm/105mm macro) and my tripod or my monopod
This is beginning to look like a back breaker.

I need to think for a while. Meanwhile any user opinions on that Tamron lens?

Just my thought. Would it not be better for you to get a D200 ($600 odd from the US) and continue using your old lens

Get a D200 body? Will my existing 70-300 AF and my 18-55 D40 kit lens both work on this?

Hasn't the D200 been discontinued and replaced by the D300?

I did not think about this angle, the D40 was always a constant in my thinking.

[Samurai]

Sam, in the dSLR world, bodies come and go, only lenses are constant. Get the best lenses you can afford, they last longer, hold their value, you can always sell them at good price. The body gets obsolete fast, lose value even faster.

D200 is obsolete, but still is way superior to D40. If you can get a good used D200, nothing like it.

[srishiva]

Even if it costs higher, as Samurai says buy lenses that would be compatible with full frame bodies later. It might cost a little extra than those made for digital only cameras.

[jaibir]

Originally Posted by Sam Kapasi

Please elaborate. What do you mean by good copy?

Tamron and Sigma lenses have somewhat inconsistent quality control. Occasionally, you will find improperly adjusted autofocus or somewhat inferior image quality in a new lens. As such, you need to test the particular piece you are buying to ensure it doesnt have any problems. This varies by manufacturer and by lens. I havent heard of too many QC issues on the Tamron 70-200 but there are some.

In the US and Europe, the good online stores have generous return policies. This allows you to buy the lens and test it at leisure. If there's something wrong with it, send it back for another one. Unfortunately, you dont have quite the same luxury while buying in India. I have an understanding with my grey market dealer and he lets me test the lens for a day or two. However, not everyone is as kind.

[navin]

Originally Posted by Sam Kapasi

I'm not fussy, but I like a soft, rounded bokeh.
Rudra, I can only use AF-S with my D40. Coming back to Macro lenses. So now you guys suggest I use my kit 18-55 lens for landscape, a 60 or 105mm for macro and portraits and a 70-300 for tele. Great. So now I am thinking of carrying THREE lenses.

1. Most zooms that also incorporate Macro do not do 1:1 Macro. Sam you are asking too much just get the damn 55-250. It will do what you want it to do. Yes it is a bit soft off center but hey the 18-55 is supposed to be a bit soft off center too and your photos are fantastic - it shows that you have learnt to work with it's limitations and compose accordingly. The same skill if transferred to the 55-250 will get the same ressults.

2. If you want to do simple close ups the 18-55/55-250 combo can work in a pinch. You wont get 1:1 macro but hey few zooms offer that anyway. If you are willing to carry the extra weight the 70-300 is a better lens. BTW not being a Nikonian I dont know if the 18-55 and 55-250 have metal mounts. Do they?

In short Sam do not procastinate. You are not The Cute One.

Originally Posted by Sam Kapasi

I don't have a plan/agenda.
The macro is not really a fixed requisite.

That's why I found the Tamron tempting, for its 2.8.
Please elaborate. What do you mean by good copy?

Apart from this, in my bag, I intend to carry my SB600, a few knick-knacks, the 70-300 (Not if I get the tamron 70-200, but if I get the 60mm/105mm macro) and my tripod or my monopod.

1. If Macro is not a pre-req drop it. Trust me you will use it a few times a year and be carrying a 500gm lens (60mm macro) just for macro.

2. Tamron/Sigma are a no no in my book if you want to go 3rd party think Tokina esp since the core Tokina team are ex-Nikon. Tokina is farily well distributed in Germany (atleast in Frankfurt and Cologne). From Tokina I'd look at only the Pro series but I am not sure if they are AF-S compatible. I have had soft focus (back focus) issues with Sigma and soft focus with Tamron on Canon. Their copy to copy variation is more than Canon or Nikon.

3. I use a Kata H-14 to carry a DSLR with battery pack attached, flash, tele-zoom, and knick knacks (filters, instruction book, 6 spare batteries - 2 Li-on and 4 AA, memory cars and a blower). It is compact. Today I'd get the H-16 as it would accomdate faster (read as f/2.8) lenses if I had the same need. The H-14 was slightly modified to accodate the body with battery pack and 17-55/2.8 lens attached, the H-16 would not need that.
Video bags camera bags Kata - Manufacturer of camera bags

However for your use I'd get a sling bag or a convertible like the Tamrac Aero 75/85, LowePro Fastpack 250-/350 or Kata 3N1-30. All expect the last one have room for a laptop, allow easy access to the camera while on the move (no need to put the bag down) and convert to a bakcpack for long walks. The 3N1-30 is the most compact but will only accomdate a 9-12" (Sony P series - Thinkpad X series) notebook (might even accomodate the MacBook 13") and require you to remove the body-lens combo to get the laptop out for airport security. Of the 3 I like the Kata becuase it has an add-on tripod holder that is often sold with the bag and can be left behind if not required (besides a 12" laptop is most I need when travelling anyway). Besides I am small built (almost like a lizard on a tree). On a big boy like you the Tamrac 85 or LowePro 350 would look fine.

[RufRoc]

Originally Posted by navin

. I use a Kata H-14 to carry a DSLR with battery pack attached, flash, tele-zoom, and knick knacks (filters, instruction book, 6 spare batteries - 2 Li-on and 4 AA, memory cars and a blower). It is compact. Today I'd get the H-16 as it would accomdate faster (read as f/2.8) lenses if I had the same need. Video bags camera bags Kata - Manufacturer of camera bags

Navin, checked that link and it's quite an impressive product. Where do you pick them (Kata) up from? Do they have an outlet in Bangalore?

[Sam Kapasi]

Originally Posted by navin

However for your use I'd get a sling bag or a convertible like the Tamrac Aero 75/85, LowePro Fastpack 250-/350 or Kata 3N1-30.

Sir, you clearly seem to have forgotten that I'm a Crumpler boy. Carrying space is really not a problem.



Everyone thank you for your wonderful inputs. I am grateful. I will let you know what happens next.

[jkdas]

you can ask steer to sell you his D200 and buy the latest toy.

[NomadVagabond]

@ Sam. That's an excellent bag. A friend of mine is using that and is very happy with it.

@ Everyone. If someone is selling off a Canon xxxD series DSLR please let me know. A friend of mine is needing a second body and needs another cam. It can be a 350D or a 400D. Just in good condition and properly functional will do.

Regards,

Anirban.

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by jkdas

you can ask steer to sell you his D200 and buy the latest toy.

Steeroid already has the latest toy, the D300.

[navin]

Originally Posted by Sam Kapasi

Sir, you clearly seem to have forgotten that I'm a Crumpler boy.

I did not forget but the Crumpler does not give you access to the camera while on the move without putting the bag down.

Yes, there are two paths you can go by
But in the long run
Theres still time to change the road youre on.
And it makes me wonder
- no guesses please

Path 1: Get the 55-250 to go with the D40+18-55 combo and worry about FF later.

Path 2: Get the 70-300 VR so that atleast you have decent FF lens when you go FF. Supplement the 70-300 VR with a 24-85/2.8-4.

Sam in a few years you will have kids. Having a portable camera (D40 kit) kit along with a nice HD memory stick camera (Canon HFS20, Sony CX12, etc..) will be what you'll need. a FF DSLR with bigger lenses might be fun and take great photos but wont see as much use then. If you win the lottery then by all means get a 24-70/2.8, 70-200/2.8 VR, 105/2.8 VR and 200-400/4 VR combo for your D7.

Disclimer: I use Crumpler too. Only bag I trust to have room for multiple laptops and be strong enough not to break.