darius.tulbure

Sigma 50-150mm is a very interesting lens. The 80-200mm is very bulky and I actually don't plan to shoot sports or wildlife to need the f/2.8.

 

The 55-200mm has plastic mount, the lens rotates during zoom/focus, you can't actually manual focus with it, it feels plasticy... I don't know - I heard too many bad reviews.

Wouldn't be great if they would offer us a truly good, inexpensive telephoto

zoom lens for DX format?

 

Something like:

50-200mm f/4-5.6G ED AF-S VR for DX cameras at around $500.

 

Today we, the novice budget-limited photographers, don't have too much choices

for a good telephoto from Nikkor.

 

The 70-300mm VR seems the best choice, but still it's too much for a DX camera:

it's big and heavy and the long end (450mm equiv. on a 35mm camera) is not that

useful all the time - not for everybody (plus it's too soft I heard). Then the

aperture, starting from f/4.5, is not that impressive either.

 

Then comes the 55-200mm f/4.5-5.6 which ain't worth talking about for a lot of

reasons the numbers above say nothing.

 

Much better lenses are the 70-200mm f/2.8, the 80-200mm f/2.8 and others like

that but are very expensive.

 

I kind of feel Nikkor should market more good DX lenses in general.

Hello!

 

Does the factor of crop influence the magnification of a given lens?

 

Let's say I have the 60mm 2.8 Micro with its 1:1 magnification. On a DX format

(1.5x FOV crop) shouldn't it be a 90mm 2.8 Micro lens with a 1.5:1 --> 1:0.66

magnification ratio? I heard many times about the factor of crop on DX sensored

digitals, but I've never heard anything about what's happening to the

magnification ratio...

Yup. I put my vote on this too. And I have noticed another thing: the photos elected are rather old. The funny thing is that there are hundreds of extraordinary photos uploaded every week.

I am not allowed to take photos in the local mall. I didn't bother checking if I actually can take photos there, but however that's absurd (and not much to shoot anyway).

Hello, Tim!<br>

We (I?) would like to see the picture in question. It's good to hear such good news about one of PN's members :)

John, thank you for your kind words. I know it wasn't your intention to shame me. Maybe it was just the feeling of frustration when I realised that for many I made quite a cartoon of myself. It wasn't my intention, but I guess sometimes I have a sharp tongue. I'm really glad you like my photo :)

<p>

Fred, I see your point. You're talking about a sub-community which is a cool idea as long as it does not imply mate-rating. Maybe the idea of entering a mate rating circle has kept me away from a unified group of photographers, but of course, critiquing and commenting sincerely is quite a different thing. I should try that.

<p>

Josh, some parts of the site need more help than others and all the parts of the site share their importance. Moreover, not everybody likes the same things. I can't not to agree with you on this. But let's not forget photography is not always a philosophy, it's seldom a theory and never can and will be considered a technology. So my point is, as long as this site is a photography site, naturally the photographs and people who love taking and viewing photos should be regarded as being a very important part of photo.net.

<p>

Rand, a year or two ago somebody said something like this: "The digital technology got good and cheap enough so it doesn't imply too many problems anymore. Therefore, let's just take photos!"

John, if anybody else have started this forum thread this all "complaining" discussion wouldn't exist. I'm not the only one who criticize or debates some aspects of the site. But you know, it's my name on it and that's enough. The most amusing part of this story is that this forum thread isn't really about a complaint. But is regarded as one.

<p>

I'm partly ashamed by what you said, but I can't blame you. I wish I was so notorious because of my pictures, not the 2% of vehement complaints. But that's it. People you in a box without knowing who you really are - that's Internet and I should know better.

<p>

Don, I meant that we should have more interest in the Critique Forum. All other forums are just fine as they are.

Now surely I made myself misunderstood. I see a great part of community, a great part of the forums that work great! Including this one, or the Nikon forum. But as David said, I'm in the wrong forum with this thread. I should post it in the critique forum of course.

<p>

Mike, let me put you up to the ropes: you are looking in the wrong place. The "complaints" you are talking about are just a small fraction of what I post, i.e.: photographs, comments and there, in the 3rd place, the forum postings of which some are the "complaints" you talk about. But of course, you seem not to see anything beyond these posts and you gladly put me into a category.

<p>

Lex, I guess you are right, I should get into the living room, or maybe into the dining room? :) The only downside is that except the No Words forum, they are "photoless". <p>

 

And that's my point here: viewing great pictures inspires me (and not only me), not words. And I wanted to know if you agree with that or not. That's all with my "big complaint".

<i>Photo.net is an online community for photographers to connect and discuss

photography, explore galleries, share photographs, and learn more about the art

of photography.</i>

 

Well, I think it really doesn't reflect the reality, as we discuss more about

equipment and technique and less about photography itself.

 

That's sad.

I guess I'll use only the other forums which to say - they rock.

 

However I think that the best way to get inspired is to view very good

photographs and to follow interesting debates about them. But they rarefy - even

if some will get strangely offended by this remark of mine.

 

I don't know what's your opinion, but surely I won't be emailing PN's members

asking for advice as some suggested.

Hmm, interesting points... Thank you! So it all depends on what your intends and style are. Surely I don't want my camera to save my life, nor I need to shoot at -30?C...

 

Anyways, today I've just ordered the D80 with the tiny 50mm f/1.8 to start.

...besides the weight? I mean, surely I love the way it sounds: "magnesium alloy

body". It sounds so solid, so sturdy and... sensational. But does it actually

matter? I mean, if you hit your camera on a blunt surface in a way the plastic

breaks, well I guess the metal body camera would be kaput as well if it were in

the plastic body one's place, isn't that correct?

 

So I guess it's not about sturdiness...

Anyways, I don't want to start a polemic like plastic vs. metal, but I'd like to

see what are the advantages of a metal body. Thank you for your time!

Oh well, the 18-70mm and a good tripod I guess outperforms the 16-85mm (of course, taking the price into account).

Maybe it's a bit off-topic, but what does a stereo camera? Besides taking two images at a time which basically look the same; the paralax "error" is obvious only when you shoot at close distances from the subject.

 

So what's the big idea with those cameras?

Pete, when was the last time you read an ad on photo.net? As the traffic on the site grows the conversion rate leans towards 0. PN and advertisers should know that...

The answer is simple: we don't critique and rate enough. That's simple enough and I have this sin too. Try to give each day 10 thoughtful comments and as many ratings as you can and in a week or two you will see a change. Note that rating anonymously is rather a "civic" duty while rating directly can help you gather some more attention towards your work.

 

You know, we are inclined to critique only the moment we have our picture visible in the critique forum, but the truth is, this is a community and we all should put a shoulder to the wheel to work fine.

If you look at the details, there stands written: Lajatico, Italy.

Thank you guys. I guess you are right. It's not a smart option to make compromises when you buy a camera body. At least not for me as I want to keep it at least for 4-5 years. The 50mm f/1.8 is just a momentary economical solution. I want to buy myself the 18-70mm within a few months and meanwhile play with the 50mm f/1.8, a lens every photographer should own.

Oh, I forgot to mention a very important aspect: the second offer is second hand.

Which one offer should I buy:<p>

 

Nikon D80 + 50mm f/1.8 + 2Gb SD card<p>

 

or<p>

 

Nikon D70s + 18-70mm with Nikon HB-32 sunshade + 50mm f/1.8 + Hahnel HL-EL3

battery grip + 4 batteries + Hoya UV-G 67mm + 2Gb SD card.<p>

 

Both offers share the same price.<p>

 

What do you think?

Ryan, I think it is a crisis. Not a big or irreversible one, but still a crisis. That is: the lack of motivation, something related to disappointment, idleness, discouragement. I too critique much more rarely now. Unfortunately. I guess the only way to reverse this is to comment, critique and rate as much as you can. Involve as much people you can. Start interesting discussions. But masses should be involved too, not only 5 persons or so. I guess, there can be some levers by which PN could stimulate its members, but are hard to find and/or implement. Yes, it's a community, however a community needs to be exposed to ideas from time to time.

These are some good points, Jeff. Since it is the casual conversations forum, why is the question so much necessary?

Thanks Lisa. I will surely try that!

Well Sam, even my bad photographs (those from the beginning) used to take 15 ratings and a few comments. Now? We are lucky if all the top rated photos get to have this chance.

I understand what do you mean and I agree in part with you. <p>

However, I have a few remarks. When I say interest in the critique forum I mean critiquing and rating as well, not only posting photos and waiting for feedback. There are hundreds (thousands?) of images posted every day and very few of them get to be commented. That's a pity...<p>

 

Jeff, your point is something every artist should keep in mind: you don't have to care about the mass oppinion. Because as original and unique your photography will get, as less people will really appreciate it. Average is good for average people and average people are - look at a Gaussian curve - many. But. You can and must hear and watch for advised comments. They might address some technical aspects of your photographs. And advice on technical aspects are - IMHO - always welcome, because they tend to be less subjective. For instance: "when you take long exposures at night using a tripod, use the smallest ISO setting to avoid the noise".