Settled on a Nikon D60..

13»

Comments

  • shack
    shack Posts: 11,154
    edited April 2009
    ckphoto wrote:
    but if you compare the Sigma 18-200 F/3.5-6.3 to the Nikon 80-200 F/2.8 there is a HUGE difference in the image you will capture and there will be images that you will be able to capture that the 18-200 never can.

    In some cases yes...some cases no. Granted the Nikon is a better lens and will do many things better...it should. It's faster and I'm sure has better glass. But a HUGE difference is not a given.
    ckphoto wrote:
    I am by no means a "photography snob" but I do have 20 years in the photo business owning a photo lab and being a professional photographer full time.

    The difference between pro quality glass and consumer quality glass is getting norrower every year. While not a pro, I've been shooting for at least 35 years (not as long as audio) and the quality that can be had for not much money today is really huge compared to when I started. The photo pros I know say the same thing. One of their complaints is that it is too easy for amateurs to take good photos on the cheap because the gear is so good and so affordable. (of course there is still that skill and experience thing to consider ;) )

    I'm not arguing the point either. If I could fill my bag with L lenses, I would. It's just that even the affordable stuff is pretty good these days.
    "Just because you’re offended doesn’t mean you’re right." - Ricky Gervais

    "For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't believe, no proof is possible." - Stuart Chase

    "Consistency requires you to be as ignorant today as you were a year ago." - Bernard Berenson
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Early B.
    Early B. Posts: 7,900
    edited April 2009
    shack wrote: »
    The difference between pro quality glass and consumer quality glass is getting norrower every year. While not a pro, I've been shooting for at least 35 years (not as long as audio) and the quality that can be had for not much money today is really huge compared to when I started. The photo pros I know say the same thing. One of their complaints is that it is too easy for amateurs to take good photos on the cheap because the gear is so good and so affordable. (of course there is still that skill and experience thing to consider ;) )

    Agreed.

    I recently "upgraded" from a Nikon 70-300mm "consumer" lens to a Sigma 70-200mm 2.8 "pro" lens. The differences in image quality are not discernible until you get into low light situations. However, the build quality of the Sigma is quite impressive.
    HT/2-channel Rig: Sony 50” LCD TV; Toshiba HD-A2 DVD player; Emotiva LMC-1 pre/pro; Rogue Audio M-120 monoblocks (modded); Placette RVC; Emotiva LPA-1 amp; Bada HD-22 tube CDP (modded); VMPS Tower II SE (fronts); DIY Clearwave Dynamic 4CC (center); Wharfedale Opus Tri-Surrounds (rear); and VMPS 215 sub

    "God grooves with tubes."
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Intel92
    Intel92 Posts: 146
    edited April 2009
    I wasn't born here when this thread started but must say you made a wise choice imo. I own a D70 and use a Canon 10D at work so I have experience with both and absolutely prefer the Nikon. Not because it is necessarily a better camera. I just like the feel much more and believe it is easier to use. Unfortunately I don't have the equipment at home that I do at work. I have a 200-400mm lense (plus a doubler) for the Canon that is ridiculous.
    Theater rig:
    Pio Elite Pro 111-FD
    Pio Elite VSX-01TXH
    Mains: RTi12s
    Center: CSi5
    Surrounds: FXi3s, RTi6s
    Sub: Velodyne V-1012-B
    Amp: Carver TFM-35
    Harmony 890
    PS3

    2-channel rig in progress:
    LSi15s
    .........

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • shack
    shack Posts: 11,154
    edited April 2009
    jcaut wrote:
    Not trying to hijack, but Shack: The 10-17 you have, is that a Tokina? And not to ask a dumb question, but you'll know what I mean- Is it a "true" fisheye on APS-C? Assuming that it is, say, at 10mm, what happens when you zoom to 17? Still fishy? I'd like to see an example sometime if possible.

    Here are 5 shots of the front of my house. All photos were take from the same spot on a tripod. I'm about 35' from the closest wall and my house is 65' wide. All were on a crop body.

    10mm

    3473668585_eeb305bced_o.jpg

    12mm

    3473668833_9937dc0004_o.jpg

    14mm

    3473669109_753c7c0cae_o.jpg

    16mm

    3474477746_0de3868b7c_o.jpg

    17mm

    3473669639_7c59b63c56_o.jpg
    "Just because you’re offended doesn’t mean you’re right." - Ricky Gervais

    "For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't believe, no proof is possible." - Stuart Chase

    "Consistency requires you to be as ignorant today as you were a year ago." - Bernard Berenson
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • polkatese
    polkatese Posts: 6,767
    edited May 2009
    Took it yesterday at the Aquarium of the Pacific..
    fish.jpg 503.5K
    I am sorry, I have no opinion on the matter. I am sure you do. So, don't mind me, I just want to talk audio and pie.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Early B.
    Early B. Posts: 7,900
    edited May 2009
    Early B. wrote: »
    Just "upgraded" from the D80 to the D200. ...

    At some point I'll start taking pictures...

    Upgraded again to the D300. Dammit!!! Does this madness ever stop?
    HT/2-channel Rig: Sony 50” LCD TV; Toshiba HD-A2 DVD player; Emotiva LMC-1 pre/pro; Rogue Audio M-120 monoblocks (modded); Placette RVC; Emotiva LPA-1 amp; Bada HD-22 tube CDP (modded); VMPS Tower II SE (fronts); DIY Clearwave Dynamic 4CC (center); Wharfedale Opus Tri-Surrounds (rear); and VMPS 215 sub

    "God grooves with tubes."
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • polkatese
    polkatese Posts: 6,767
    edited May 2009
    Brad, when you said upgraded, you meant to say you add a new D300 body? how many do you have now? :)
    I am sorry, I have no opinion on the matter. I am sure you do. So, don't mind me, I just want to talk audio and pie.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Early B.
    Early B. Posts: 7,900
    edited May 2009
    polkatese wrote: »
    Brad, when you said upgraded, you meant to say you add a new D300 body? how many do you have now? :)

    Only one.
    HT/2-channel Rig: Sony 50” LCD TV; Toshiba HD-A2 DVD player; Emotiva LMC-1 pre/pro; Rogue Audio M-120 monoblocks (modded); Placette RVC; Emotiva LPA-1 amp; Bada HD-22 tube CDP (modded); VMPS Tower II SE (fronts); DIY Clearwave Dynamic 4CC (center); Wharfedale Opus Tri-Surrounds (rear); and VMPS 215 sub

    "God grooves with tubes."
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • ward91
    ward91 Posts: 338
    edited May 2009
    Haven’t read much of this but;
    Im thinking of either a d60 or a pentax k20 , my mate has a d40 and i like using that.
    ELECTRONICS
    arcam cd93
    linn wakonda
    MC2 MC450
    Teac ud h01 DAC


    SPEAKERS
    Tannoy DC6 t se .
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Hillbilly61
    Hillbilly61 Posts: 702
    edited May 2009
    ward91 wrote: »
    Haven’t read much of this but;
    Im thinking of either a d60 or a pentax k20 , my mate has a d40 and i like using that.

    IMO, its mostly a question of electronic capabilities. The lens rule. With a good lens, decent CCD and full manual control over shutter speed & apature, I am good to go! If I need to trade off priorities, I prefer shutter control over apature, but that is where my preference lay. Mistakes in settings are, more or less, free with filmless cameras.

    Its like dogfighting. The more skillful pilot in a less performing plane will almost always win over a less skillful one in a better performing airplane.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter