Home Photography Corner

DSLR Recommendations

2

Replies

  • BatemasterBatemaster Posts: 1,701 Captain
    Just got her. Nikon D90 with 18-105mm lens. I'm very happy with the $600 price!

    42cdda6d.jpg
  • FlashFlash Posts: 11,193 AG
    Batemaster wrote: »
    Just a heads up. I found a D90 with 18-105mm lens on CL for $700. I offered $600 and am going to check it out in a bit. Anything I should be looking out for when buying used?

    Find out how many actuations on the shutter
    Take some shots with it....which of course, means hands on. You start getting in the high 8K to over 10K shots, it has been used pretty good.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

    Never seem more learned than the people you are with. Wear your learning like a pocket watch and keep it hidden. Do not pull it out to count the hours, but give the time when you are asked. --- Lord Chesterfield
  • BatemasterBatemaster Posts: 1,701 Captain
    How would I find that out Flash?
  • BatemasterBatemaster Posts: 1,701 Captain
    I picked up this book too:

    2fdb8cd4.jpg
  • ChuckcChuckc Posts: 4,398 Captain
    Post a pic here and we can probably tell you. The D90 is quite a capable camera, you should be quite pleased with it.
  • WaterEngineerWaterEngineer Posts: 24,415 AG
    Baitmaster:

    Congrats, I am glad it worked out.

    Flash:

    I don't understand your comment about 8k to 10k actuations.

    This statistical model says the shutter should easily last well past 100K. http://www.olegkikin.com/shutterlife/nikon_d90.htm

    I have right around 40K on my D90 with no issues.
  • GuidenetGuidenet Posts: 239 Officer
    Cane Pole wrote: »
    We have two new Cannon 60Ds with 18-135s on them here at my office. I've used them a bunch, and the 18-135 seems like a decent lens. Definitely good enough for a walk-arounder. The reader reviews on B&H suggest shooting at f8 or better for best results. Is it a pro lens, no. But quite workable.

    I didn't mean it was a total dog. It's not. I meant that I think Canon dumbed it down as far as optics on purpose and could have been a whole lot better. I think Canon tends to untweak and tweak lenses as needed to fit price points. When I look at a similar design like Canon's 15-85 and see a great performance, I kinda wonder what's going on.

    And, it's not the user reviews. I'm talking about the various tests on the test sites. Who knows, maybe they're all wrong. I just see a lot of 2 star lackluster performance is all and know that Canon ought to be better than that. The have world class optical designers down there at both Canon and Nikon and everything is some type of compromise.
    Flash Wow!!! It makes things look like a painting.

    HDR on Steroids! :)
    Nikon D800, D3S, D700, D300, Canon G1X, Sigma 15 f/2.8 Fisheye, Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6, Nikon 16-35 f/4 VR, Nikon 28 f/1.8G AFS, Tamron 17-50 f/2.8, Nikon 35-70 f/2.8 AFD, Nikon 80-200 f/2.8 AFD, Nikon 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 VR, Nikon 80-400 f/4.5-5.6 AFS VR, Nikon 35 f/2, Nikon 50 f/1.8 G, Nikon 60 f/2.8 G Micro, Nikon 85 f/1.4 AFS G, Nikon 105 f/2.5 AI, Sigma 150 f/2.8 APO Macro, Nikon 300 f/2.8 AFS VR, Nikon 500 f/4 -P, Interfit Stellar X complete six light studio
  • GuidenetGuidenet Posts: 239 Officer
    Batemaster;361204]Just got her. Nikon D90 with 18-105mm lens. I'm very happy with the $600 price!

    Wow, you got a great camera and lens there. I love the D90. I just didn't figure you could be in that range, and you have one of my favorite lenses to boot. Darn that's nice. I'm really happy for you.

    Here are some of the main things you got over a D5100 or less camera.
    • You got a real optical glass pentaprism instead of a cheap pentamirror arrangement for a viewfinder
    • You got a top mounted informational LCD
    • You got twin command dials for aperture and shutter instead of one for both on cheaper cameras
    • You got a real aluminum sub frame inside instead of all plastic
    • You got many exterior controls instead of digging through menus to get at things.
    • You got Nikon's Creative Lighting System with Commander Mode wireless triggering


    Those are serious semi-pro type features I didn't expect you could have, especially that pentaprism viewfinder. Really cool. It's something I would not do without. You know, what you just bought was $1299 a couple of years ago.

    As flash said, 10k might mean its been used, but doesn't mean by anywhere near much. You have to look at the EXIF data on an unaltered JPEG, one that hasn't been through an editing software. In Windows 7 just right click on it and choose properties then details. Scroll down looking for shutter actuations. You might need an EXIF viewer. It doesn't really matter though. You got a great deal.
    Nikon D800, D3S, D700, D300, Canon G1X, Sigma 15 f/2.8 Fisheye, Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6, Nikon 16-35 f/4 VR, Nikon 28 f/1.8G AFS, Tamron 17-50 f/2.8, Nikon 35-70 f/2.8 AFD, Nikon 80-200 f/2.8 AFD, Nikon 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 VR, Nikon 80-400 f/4.5-5.6 AFS VR, Nikon 35 f/2, Nikon 50 f/1.8 G, Nikon 60 f/2.8 G Micro, Nikon 85 f/1.4 AFS G, Nikon 105 f/2.5 AI, Sigma 150 f/2.8 APO Macro, Nikon 300 f/2.8 AFS VR, Nikon 500 f/4 -P, Interfit Stellar X complete six light studio
  • mississippi macmississippi mac Posts: 4,222 Captain
    Craig...
    Tim, that comment was written specifically for you....LOL. Where ya been....I figured you would have jumped on that long ago! LOL.

    yeah...after i posted i realized you were baiting me....lol.....
    i'm getting too easy to bite....

    Craig T.
    i have read some pretty good reviews at dprview about some of the revamped ef-s glass...
    they even have metal couplers now instead of plastic...

    my favorite "walk around" is my 28-135 ef is usm....
    great images from it...
    another great piece of canon glass is there ef 70-300 is usm....
    i have read write-ups on saying that it rivals the ef-l 70-200 is usm, just not as fast through it's zoom range...

    right now my GAS is on hold....
    it was time to pull the sail boat out on the yard for a bottom job...
    da bote yawd ain't a cheap place to be....
    so it goes...

    batemaster....
    congratulations on your new purchase....
    we'll be waiting to see what ya got...
    post 'em when you can.....

    tim
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    The Real White Dog

    if you can't catch a fish...catch a buzz....
    #12976, joined 8-17-2002
  • FlashFlash Posts: 11,193 AG
    Baitmaster:

    Congrats, I am glad it worked out.

    Flash:

    I don't understand your comment about 8k to 10k actuations.

    This statistical model says the shutter should easily last well past 100K. http://www.olegkikin.com/shutterlife/nikon_d90.htm

    I have right around 40K on my D90 with no issues.

    Oh I know they can do many shots, just saying it is nice when buying a used camera to have lower actuations. When I picked up my used D200 it only had around 3580 shots on that. Pretty sweet deal.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

    Never seem more learned than the people you are with. Wear your learning like a pocket watch and keep it hidden. Do not pull it out to count the hours, but give the time when you are asked. --- Lord Chesterfield
  • BatemasterBatemaster Posts: 1,701 Captain
    I headed out to Dinner Island WMA on Saturday. Sure enough as I am pulling in I got a flat. I repaired the flat and headed back home. I'll be back friday. What I did notice was that the 18-105mm was barely enough to reach a gator in detail at 25 yards. I definitely need a better zoom lens.
  • ChuckcChuckc Posts: 4,398 Captain
    And so it starts. ;)

    Cheapest reasonable way to 300mm in Nikkor is the 55-300vr which currently has a $150 rebate bringing the price down to about $250. The next lens up the line is the 70-300vr which is larger, heavier, focuses faster and offers features that most find worth the extra cost, it's $589.00 new. You can find a 70-300 VR for $350-$400 used without too much effort. Tamron's latest 70-300 is supposed to be optically quite good and runs in the $400.00 range after rebate. Be careful though, there are many inexpensive 70-300 zooms from Nikon, Sigma, Tamron, etc. that don't offer great optics.

    Your body has a focus motor so something like the 300 F4 AF-D will autofocus on it. It's more costly and doesn't focus as quickly but is supposedly optically a gem.
  • BatemasterBatemaster Posts: 1,701 Captain
    I was looking at the Nikon AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED like you mentioned. Although its $500+ I want to know that's the best lens for the money that I can get to reach out to get the pics, or if I can get by with the cheaper 55-300. I'll look into the Tamron lens as well.
  • GuidenetGuidenet Posts: 239 Officer
    Batemaster wrote: »

    I've owned three of the 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 AFS VR lenses like that one at KEH and loved them all. I bought the second because Jan kept grabbing it in the field. I bought the third because my daughter took off with the second, claiming it as a birthday present. That was was stolen. So, a month ago, I went to replace it and bought the new Tamron 70-300 f/4-5.6 VC PZ instead.

    The jury is still out but so far it seems just as sharp and a little more contrasty at 300mm. That extra third of a stop at 70mm, f/4 instead of f/4.5, so far hasn't made a hill of beans difference. I find the new PZ motor in the Tamron just a smidgin faster and the VC lockup seems quite a bit faster than Nikon's VR, but this all might be imagination. The VR or AFS motor, one, seem to studder a lot when it locked down, whereas the new Tamron is totally silent. The problem is I wonder if it's working. LOL

    These aren't nearly as good as Flash does, but I occasionally go to my buddy's son's Little League to take some pictures. I took the Tamron and here's four. The outfield shots are crops.

    blue_big_hit_9-24-11.jpg

    colincatch_9-24-11.jpg

    blue_team-7_9-24-11.jpg

    blue_team-4_9-24-11.jpg

    Everytime Dave (Flash) does Little League, I learn a little more. He makes magic from that old D200 and 80-200 f/2.8. Captures the most amazing expressions. I tried.
    Nikon D800, D3S, D700, D300, Canon G1X, Sigma 15 f/2.8 Fisheye, Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6, Nikon 16-35 f/4 VR, Nikon 28 f/1.8G AFS, Tamron 17-50 f/2.8, Nikon 35-70 f/2.8 AFD, Nikon 80-200 f/2.8 AFD, Nikon 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 VR, Nikon 80-400 f/4.5-5.6 AFS VR, Nikon 35 f/2, Nikon 50 f/1.8 G, Nikon 60 f/2.8 G Micro, Nikon 85 f/1.4 AFS G, Nikon 105 f/2.5 AI, Sigma 150 f/2.8 APO Macro, Nikon 300 f/2.8 AFS VR, Nikon 500 f/4 -P, Interfit Stellar X complete six light studio
  • BatemasterBatemaster Posts: 1,701 Captain
    Does Nikon or Tamron make a 100-300 or a 100-400? I may be better suited with a 100+ since I already have up to 105 with my 18-105.
  • ChuckcChuckc Posts: 4,398 Captain
    I would like to give the Tamron a try compared to my Nikkor. If I were buying new today I would probably take a really hard look at the Tamron, especially given the price compared to the Nikkor if buying new.
  • BatemasterBatemaster Posts: 1,701 Captain
    Could you link me to the Tamron? The one I am seeing is around $200 cheaper than the Nikon. Is this the same one?
  • Cane PoleCane Pole Stuart, FLAPosts: 9,906 Admiral
    Get the Nikon 70-200 2.8. That's all you need!
    Live music 7 nights a week: http://www.terrafermata.com/_events
  • ChuckcChuckc Posts: 4,398 Captain
    Make sure you buy from a licensed retailer. B&H has it for $409 with free shipping and you can get $50 back via a rebate. They do well with the rebates, no complaints from my experience with them.

    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/728343-REG/Tamron_AFA005NII700_SP_70_300mm_f_4_5_6_Di.html
  • ChuckcChuckc Posts: 4,398 Captain
    Also, if you end up buying the Nikkor you need to know that Nikon won't repair or warranty a non U.S. lens in the U.S. even if you wanted to pay them. I didn't know that but thankfully ended up with a U.S. lens I bought used, I had to send it in to Nikon and they fixed it under warranty.
  • BatemasterBatemaster Posts: 1,701 Captain
    Tamron makes a cheaper 70-300 right? Just wondering.
  • ChuckcChuckc Posts: 4,398 Captain
    Yes they do but they along with the prior version of the Nikkor 70-300 and the Sigma 70-300 consumer lenses are not considered to be very good. If it's 70-300 and under $200 you are expected to be unhappy with it. If you want to get a bit more reach on the cheap watch Craigslist for a 55-200 VR, you should be able to pick one up in the $125-$150 range, you'll be able to sell it for most of what you have in it when you decide to move up.
  • BatemasterBatemaster Posts: 1,701 Captain
    I don't want to go cheap that's why I asked. :) I think I'd rather spend a little extra and stick with the Nikon 70-300.
  • BatemasterBatemaster Posts: 1,701 Captain
    The $379 comes with the hood and lens caps and it's 9/10 condition according to KEH.
  • ChuckcChuckc Posts: 4,398 Captain
    They do appear to be the same product, some are used, one is a refurb. I bought a refirb myself when I had to replace mine. I don't know the answer to this but it would good to know I think: A refirb comes with a 6 month warranty from Nikon I think, if you buy a used U.S. lens would you be covered by the remainder of the 5 year warranty or not?
  • GuidenetGuidenet Posts: 239 Officer
    I believe that Nikon does not transfer warranties. They only cover the original buyer.

    All Nikon 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 AFS VR lenses are the same. One way to know this lens is that it's the only 70-300 to start at f/4.5. All the rest Nikon has ever made start at f/4. The Tamron also starts at f/4. So, if a Nikon says 70-300 f/4-f/5.6 then it is the cheaper non VR model and doesn't have the same optical formula. The good one reads 70-300 f/4.5-f/5.6 and is always VR and AFS. The VR is always VRII as well. It is the only way it is made. Nikon has had two others but weren't AFS nor VR and started at f/4.

    All the cheaper versions of 70-300 lenses by everyone tend to be cheap optically. The lastest ED model by Nikon wasn't too bad. No 75-300 by Nikon or Canon were much above door stops.

    Really, the two decent ones are the Nikon 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 AFS VR and the Tamron 70-300 f/4-5.6 Di VC USD. Both are full frame or DX and both are about the same optically, IMO. For Nikon, I don't think there's a better zoom that ends at 300mm than these two.

    If you want to go above 300 in a zoom for Nikon, there are two Nikon choices and one kind of sucks. The good one cost around $6000 and is the 200-400 f/4. The suckier one is the 80-400 f/4.5-5.6 VR. This one is the oldest VR lens made by Nikon and has a slow screwdriver AF system. The optics are truly outdated and it's soon due for replacement or upgrade. I'd wait.

    Sigma has a 50-500 and a 150-500. The first isn't too bad and costs around $1500. It's a more modern equivalent to Nikon's 80-400 optically. The 150-500 has been problem prone and is not as good optically. It sells for around $1000. All these have OS which is Sigma's word for VR. Tamron has a very nice light weight 200-500 which is optically superior to all the above Sigmas and the Nikon 80-400, but it has not stabilization. It costs around $800 or so.

    None of these are as optically sound as the 70-300 VR or VC, well except the Nikon 200-400 f/4 of course. What this means is that if you want a longer zoom of higher optical quality, you either pay a fotune or wait for the 80-400 upgrade. Some think it will be a 100-500.

    The only other reasonable way to exceed 300mm with good optical quality is to go prime, starting with the 300 f/4 AFS and a Nikon 1.4 or 1.7 teleconverter. That would get you a 500 f/6.3 with the 1.7. This is extremely sharp and contrasty. It will cost around $2000 for the lens and converter combined. There are also some reasonable used manual focus primes.

    I went the more crazy way. LOL this is over $9000 counting the camera. Jan never said a word, God bless her soul.

    D700-300mm.jpg
    Nikon D800, D3S, D700, D300, Canon G1X, Sigma 15 f/2.8 Fisheye, Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6, Nikon 16-35 f/4 VR, Nikon 28 f/1.8G AFS, Tamron 17-50 f/2.8, Nikon 35-70 f/2.8 AFD, Nikon 80-200 f/2.8 AFD, Nikon 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 VR, Nikon 80-400 f/4.5-5.6 AFS VR, Nikon 35 f/2, Nikon 50 f/1.8 G, Nikon 60 f/2.8 G Micro, Nikon 85 f/1.4 AFS G, Nikon 105 f/2.5 AI, Sigma 150 f/2.8 APO Macro, Nikon 300 f/2.8 AFS VR, Nikon 500 f/4 -P, Interfit Stellar X complete six light studio
  • GuidenetGuidenet Posts: 239 Officer
    Batemaster wrote: »
    Does Nikon or Tamron make a 100-300 or a 100-400? I may be better suited with a 100+ since I already have up to 105 with my 18-105.

    One thing. Never try to mate up focal lengths close like that. You want plenty of overlap. If you had a 18-105 and a 100-500, you'd be covered, but which would you use at 105mm. You'd be forever changing lenses anywhere around that. It's better to have some overlap.

    On the other hand, there are a lot of ranges nobody uses as much. For examle, you could have a 17-55 f/2.8 then a 70-200 f/2.8 and never miss the 55-70 range in a million years. It's just how it seems to work.
    Nikon D800, D3S, D700, D300, Canon G1X, Sigma 15 f/2.8 Fisheye, Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6, Nikon 16-35 f/4 VR, Nikon 28 f/1.8G AFS, Tamron 17-50 f/2.8, Nikon 35-70 f/2.8 AFD, Nikon 80-200 f/2.8 AFD, Nikon 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 VR, Nikon 80-400 f/4.5-5.6 AFS VR, Nikon 35 f/2, Nikon 50 f/1.8 G, Nikon 60 f/2.8 G Micro, Nikon 85 f/1.4 AFS G, Nikon 105 f/2.5 AI, Sigma 150 f/2.8 APO Macro, Nikon 300 f/2.8 AFS VR, Nikon 500 f/4 -P, Interfit Stellar X complete six light studio
Sign In or Register to comment.