All newbie/starter entry level DSLR information

Status
Not open for further replies.
Everyone who uses video knows that you use manual focus when shooting videos.

Not sure why people need AF in videos.
 
^Hardly any consumers use manual focus in videos ,in consumer camcorders its a pain to use manual focus.
If the AF is really good why would you use manual focus.
Adjusting the zoom and manual focusing in video is tricky even with camcorders like the NEX-VG10.
 
@aces : I like the canon 550d, AF is not a prob,we use MF, did my research before buying a camera, have multiple reasons for buying this one, its good for movies, and photos at the same time , i said videos are a priority right now, thats all.

@bluefox: dunno abt evry1 but I agree with u, I like MF, its more useful than AF I feel.

@adder: We don't always need to zoom and focus at the same time, thats difficult agreed, but for shots without zoom a focus ring we realized over the past year of making videos is essential one way or another. also I dont think the best AF can match a well done Manually focused shot

Also I went to photocircle and bought the 50mm lens, a 16gb mem card and an extra battery,
still need to buy a ND filter and a zoom/tele lens, the canon 50-250mm was 10.5k with IS and a tamron without IS for little more then 8k, how important is IS/VR for tele shots?
And are there any other third party options for this?
 
IS is pretty much important at higher focal lengths...I would say stick with Canon 55-250mm lens....don't buy Tamron as I have seen many Tamron 70-300mm failing these days... Google it...you will find...another option is Sigma 70-300mm which is also good but people say it's soft and not as much as sharp as Canon.
 
Is it advisable to use 18-55 without IS..??

I was thinking to exchange my Non-Is 18-55 for IS by paying some extra cash..!!

Since I never used 18-55 IS I cant figure out the difference..
 
Canon 18-55mm has a different story altogether...the IS version not only provides image stabilization, but also better optics. So I think getting IS version by paying some extra cash is worth. This has been discussed in this thread only. Just go through it :)
 
Hey i saw this Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 200mm F2.8 M42 thread mount in the local market in its clean too how much should i bargain ? I dont mind the manual focus lol
 
should I ask my friend who is visiting Hongkong to get Nikon D3100 with 18-55 kit or it's better to buy it locally ?

how much it should @ HK & here in India , any one ?
 
Hi!!

Planning to buy a DSLR. Budget will be max 35k..although would prefer to get it within 30k.

From various reviews, i've shortlisted Nikon D3100 and Canon 500D. Can u guys suggest which one is better?

Also, i've read that the D3100 requires lenses with AF capabilities to use AF. So, pls shed a light on future lens costs as well...
 
^^ I would say get a cheap decent body and good lenses. But yeah for the price Nikon D90 is clearly the best, I would suggest to skip the D3xxx and D5xxx if you are planning to get a cheap prime lens. My suggestion is to get a cheap body (wait for Canon 1100D availability, should be available in April) use it with kit lens for a while, get a grip of the controls, and then start investing in lenses. Once you start feeling hampered by the body, upgrade to a semi-pro. I have been using a 1000D since a year, and apart from the occasional case when high ISO is needed (compensated by the fast lens I have bought), have not been hampered by the body. However I would love an articulated screen with AF on live view, which 1100D is capable of.

Canon 500D has a good sensor, some say better then 550D at lower ISOs..
 
^^ i did consider the 1100D...the price point will be close to 30k...and mp they'll bundle the non-IS lens similiar to the 1000D

Canon EOS Rebel T3 Digital Camera Kit 5157B002 B&H Photo Video

i might as well get the D3100 kit with the VR lens in that case...and going by reviews, the D3100 is almost as good as 500D..so good VFM i guess...

Also, I dont plan to upgrade in the near future...dont have that much money :(

so best bang for the buck...and something that will scale with my skill (hopefully :P)...will it be the D3100?
 
guys..how this lens?

Tamron AF 70-300mm Di f/4-5.6 MACRO 1:2 ..saw the price at JJM...8k..

i know its a macro..

but i had some doubts..

what does 1:2 mean? how is the IQ on this lens?

a macro lens cant be used for normal landscapes/portraits?
 
ragzdiablo said:
guys..how this lens?

Tamron AF 70-300mm Di f/4-5.6 MACRO 1:2 ..saw the price at JJM...8k..

i know its a macro..

but i had some doubts..

what does 1:2 mean? how is the IQ on this lens?

a macro lens cant be used for normal landscapes/portraits?
Click to expand...
a true macro lens has a magnification of 1:1 , which means that an object, say 1cm in size, will produce an image 1cm tall on the sensor. 1:2 means it will be half the magnification of a true macro lens.

The sigma 70-300 APO is the best one in this range, for around 11k ( sigma has 2, the APO version costs a bit more but is better). It also does the same 1:2 magnification.

By comparison, the kit lenses usually do around 1:3 or 1:3.5 , so it gives you an idea of how close you can get to the object.
 
_pappu_ said:
^^ if you plan to own more than 3 lenses, dont get anything under the nikon d90.
canon ... is ok throught the range.
Click to expand...
Aces170 said:
^^ I would say get a cheap decent body and good lenses. But yeah for the price Nikon D90 is clearly the best, I would suggest to skip the D3xxx and D5xxx if you are planning to get a cheap prime lens. My suggestion is to get a cheap body (wait for Canon 1100D availability, should be available in April) use it with kit lens for a while, get a grip of the controls, and then start investing in lenses. Once you start feeling hampered by the body, upgrade to a semi-pro. I have been using a 1000D since a year, and apart from the occasional case when high ISO is needed (compensated by the fast lens I have bought), have not been hampered by the body. However I would love an articulated screen with AF on live view, which 1100D is capable of.

Canon 500D has a good sensor, some say better then 550D at lower ISOs..
Click to expand...

I know D90 is a class act but what is really wrong with D3100? For 28.5K with Kit lense (less for just body) its image quality, going by the reviews, is as good as any mid-range DSLR including 550D that costs nearly 42K.

Of course, I am not too familiar with DSLRs, so I might be wrong. But in my use so far, the only thing that I miss in D3100 is exposure bracketing. I would have liked in-body AF or IS but then neither Canon nor Nikon offer it in their entry level cameras. And in any case, with AF and IS a sort of mandatory feature in almost all new lenses, I don't think it's really required.
 
^ If you can live without AF motor(i.e manual focusing on some lens) and exposure bracketing(its a boon in some conditions), then D3100 is a very good entry level DSLR.
 
Source? Link? Or just hearsay? Because from what I have gathered, its quite the opposite.
Click to expand...

From a lot of people who know their stuff :) I mean really know their stuff. Brendon can maybe elaborate further here..

Of course, I am not too familiar with DSLRs, so I might be wrong. But in my use so far, the only thing that I miss in D3100 is exposure bracketing. I would have liked in-body AF or IS but then neither Canon nor Nikon offer it in their entry level cameras. And in any case, with AF and IS a sort of mandatory feature in almost all new lenses, I don't think it's really required.
Click to expand...

None of Canon body's have in-body focus motor, hence all lenses have them :) The issue is for Nikon mount, you will have 2 lenses made, one with motor, and one without motor. The one with motor will always be priced higher, and also you will not a 5k prime lens for Nikon with an in-lens focus motor. Same with third party lens makers, they will make two versions of lens with in-lens motor and without in-lens motor, the former will always be more expensive. Regarding IQ, there is no visible difference between the cameras, if any one says he/she is clearly bluffing. Yep high ISO performance might make a difference, but at lower ISO's on a kit lens you will not see any difference between cameras. Dont get me wrong, the D3100 is a very good camera for the price, its just that to learn photography, its essential to use the cheaper primes initially. The fixed focal length, and the shallow DOF will actually make you work to compose a good image.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom