andrew_vera

<p>L had the LX5 with the VF. The older VF was ok and used only in bright conditions. The new VF for the LX7 is much improved, huge difference. I highly recommend the LX7 w/VF. However I do not have any experience with the other cameras and now used exclusively the Panasonic GX1 and Olympus EM-1. I would rate the GX1 (which can be acquire very cheaply) superior to the LX7 (same essential layout, better sensor and interchangeable lenses) and not much bigger physically especially with the 20mm f1.8 lens or the small pancake zoom. Got rid of my Nikon and Canon DSLR and all of the heavy lenses. Note: the VF for the GX-1 is the same as for the LX7</p>

<p>I have made two transitions in my life: film -> DSLR and now -> M4/3. Film to digital was easy: same lenses no film/chemicals, instant feedback. Only downside is that workflow becomes more complicated and the factor of images taken has increased by over 100x.<br>

Now that I am much older, I use my camera primarily for traveling; still taking quality images not just family snaps. The 20lbs of equipment I used to carry in a medium size backpack is now a small bag weighing around 5-6 lbs and covering the full range from 18 - 600mm and with two fast primes. <br>

It is the weight and compactness that converted me. Cost is about the same and quality is even with the APS-C cameras and a bit below the FF. However it is more than good enough for me and few could tell the difference with normal size images up to 16x20. The other benefits are I don't stand out to thieves, it is convenient to carry around, not really as noticeable as a large camera body with a large lens and you can use manual lenses from any make. It also allows you to get more intimate with your subject. <br>

In a nutshell, it is a better tool for my purpose.</p>

 

<p>Just recently made the switch to M4/3. The Panasonic GX-1 (bought body only) is a great camera and with that I sold my Canon 180 Macro that was not getting any use and picked up the Olympus 9-18mm zoom, 45 f1.8 prime, and the Panasonic 45-150 zoom. Those three lenses are my lightweight traveling kit. I may pick up the 14 or 20 prime for low light conditions, since it is so small and light. Along with the kit I have a CF monopod and a small ballhead. Also using the LFV-2 viewfinder. All of that plus RRS plate, spare batteries, filters, etc. probably weigh around 5 lbs and carries in a small camera bag.</p>

<p>The 9-18 ($700) and the 45-150 ($200) should cover your needs based on your question and would cost around $900 for both. I was pleasantly surprised by the quality of the images on the 45-150. Both lens uses a 52mm filter. The 45-150 also uses close up filters very well (Nikon 3T or 4T).</p>

<p>PS: I also have the Lumix LX-5 as a backup. For traveling, you may not need anything more than that. Fast lens, 24-90 zoom range, good quality pictures, looks of control features and excellent build.</p>

<p>I am in that same process; looking for a lightweight ballhead for traveling. I have an Arca-Swiss B-1 for my DSLR, but it is relatively heavy for lightweight traveling and monopod usage with the Panasonic GX-1. My GX-1 is mated to a RRS plate, which is why I need a RRS plate compatible head.<br>

<br />My thoughts are with either with a RRS BH-25, a Sirui G10 or G20. I have read good reviews on them, the BH-25 is the most expensive at around $145, the other two just under $100. There is also the Benro B00, a copy of the Arca-Swiss B-1, but smaller, lighter and even cheaper then the three above. I have not yet decided on which one.</p>

<p>Again thanks, I really appreciate the advice.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I appreciate all of the advice given. Film cameras are pretty much out, I really don't care to do that anymore. I'll take a look at the 5D again. I have the adapter and have used the lens on a 10D and 30D without any problems. It works pretty well. Manual focusing is not an issue (I have a Nikon D40 with a split image focusing screen that I use a modified 75-150 lens on it (It has a chip installed to operated the AE) so that is not an issue either. I am just trying to pin down which camera offers the best solution for the money. I don't buy cameras often anymore (don't see the need). Whatever I buy, I will hold on to it for 5 years or more.</p>

<p>Here is my dilemma, I have a Nikon 17-35mm lens and want to fully use the lens. I have used it in my Canon and NIkon DSLRs, but the crop factor kills the wide end. I just can't afford to spend the big $$$ for a newer full frame body nor do I want to give up this lens (IMHO - nothing else comes close). So I am looking for a used alternative.<br>

I was considering on getting a used 1Ds (approx $900 in excellent condition) to use for landscapes and general wide angle photography. Speed is not a question, but good image and use of the 17-21mm end is. At $900 for a full frame sensor camera sounds like a good deal as compared to $1500 for the Mark 5 or much higher for a Nikon full frame body.<br>

I know I loose focusing (and step down metering), but I grew up with split image finders and would simply replace the focusing screen.<br>

I would appreciate anyone who has used this camera to give me their opinion.<br>

Thanks in advance,<br>

Andrew</p>

I have and use both systems. My Canon 10D, A540 and Nikon 40D and FA were bought for different purposes. All of this hoopla about features and MP is a waste of time; when my 10D stops working, than perhaps I'll upgrade. They both take superb images and 6 MP is all I need (I have blown images up to 20x30 with excellent results); it?s the lens and technique that counts. A better hammer is not going to make me a master craftsman, just poorer if I constantly replace it every time a new one comes out.

 

The Nikon 40D was bought simply for traveling (small, lightweight, and color histogram) plus I have two Nikon lenses that I was using on the Canon 10D; a 17-35 (I know its heavy, but it is sooo good!) and a Series E 75-150 (CPU installed to allow it to function), another superb lens. The Canon 10D is used for nature and A540 underwater.

 

I am glad there is competition because it brings about innovation and better prices, but like computers, it is always more cost effective to buy second tier products and avoid buying the latest, much more expensive item which will just dramatically depreciate within 6 months unless there is a feature that will save you time and save or make money. We just need to stop beating ourselves over buying decisions.

 

Just my two cents.

Thanks for the reply

Hi,

 

I have read the threads and it seems that because of the CPU, the

Nikon 75-150 AIS lens does not meter on the D50. However, if I set

the camera on aperture priority, select a f-stop on the lens, will

the camera then select the appropriate shutter speed? I do that

with Nikon 17-35 ASF on a Canon 10D. Currently I also used a FA,

but was thinking of buying the D50 so I can use the AF on the 17-35

and not have to stopped down when using the Canon 10D.

 

Thanks

Thanks for the reply. I don't need it that bad.

 

Andrew

I also have a FA and was wondering if the E3 screen have a split image in the center as the E2 does not? I am looking for a grid screen that also has a split image.

Michael,

 

First, I don't mean to be insulting, but to me asking that question appears that you don't have a photographic objective in mind. That could be troublesome as you will most likely be led down the "buy stuff for the stake of owning stuff" road. You have several issues to consider. First are the old chromes and slides. What do you want to do with them? Scann them yourself or have someone else do it for you. Do you still want to shoot film and for what purpose? Wide angle capabilities, archiving, enjoy viewing slides, etc..?

 

Secondly, the FG is okay, but parts and service is getting limited. Film will most likely still be around, but as others have said, purchase and processing will be harder to accomplish. Digital is the direction for the majority of shooters and where many of the manufacturers appear to be heading. Either major brand is great. I have used both and still do. However, that may change in the future, depending on my photographic needs.

 

IMHO, this is how I project myself: Currently I am using a Canon 10D with an assortment of Canon lenses (50, 85, 28-135, 100-400, 180 macro) for portraits, travel, wildlife and action. A Nikon FA with a Nikon 17-35mm f2.8 (the best wide angle zoom period) for landscapes and nature. I also have a converter to use the Nikon lens on the Canon body (which works well for the intended purpose, but limited by the 1.6 crop factor) Since I don't foresee Nikon going to a full size sensor, I expect to switch to large format (4x5) for landscapes (shoot slides then scan - extremely high resolution that a dedicated film camera can't match) or a full sensor Canon body once the price comes down to $1500 and sell the FA and maybe the 17-35 in a year, two, or three.

 

Originally I was a full film Nikon shooter (F100 plus a lot of Nikon lenses), but switch when the 10D came out. I don't see myself switching back. While I think the Nikon makes slightly better lenses, with the exception of the 17-35, Canon's lineup is pretty darn good, especially their IS lenses.

 

Figure out what it is you want to accomplish with your photography then buy the corresponding tools. Most pros could not and would not recommend a single lens or camera body unless you told them what kind of image you wanted to capture. Think of it this way. If I said I had $2500 to spend on tools, would it matter if I was a carpenter or auto mechanic?

 

Andrew

I currently use a Canon 10D with a Canon 550EX flash and several

Canon lenses. I also use a Nikon 17-35mm lens on the Canon body as

well with good results. However, I miss the ultra wide capabilities

of the 17-35mm lens (I won't be trading/selling it for any Canon

lens, its too good). Since I predominately use that lens for

landscape, I recently decided to go back and shoot film with a Nikon

FA and that lens (at least until a full frame Canon digital camera

becomes reasonably priced or I switch to 4x5 for landscapes). I was

wondering if it is possible to use the Canon flash for fill (manual

of course) on the FA without damaging either. Any ideas?

I too am one of those who has gone somewhat back to film. I originally had all Nikon film stuff then switched to Canon when the 10D came out along with reasonably priced IS lenses. The only thing I kept from Nikon was my 17-35mm lens. Canon doesn't have anything close and neither does anyone else. Although I used it on my Canon 10D (works quite well although manual focus), it is only a 27mm lens. I missed my ultra wide angle. That is until I went back to film and got a FA since I prefer to use manual focus with a split image screen for landscapes. Now I take both cameras and use the FA with the 17-35 when I need wide angle. Just have to scan the film and take more time selecting my shots instead of blasting away. When I am ready, I'll switch to 4x5 cameras for landscapes.

 

Andrew

Thanks for all your comments and suggestions. I do have the 550EX flash and depending on the light will use it using either a cord or the ST-E2 along with a tripod as necessary. The use of the image will most likely be for a PowerPoint presentation and handouts. Most likely I will not be shooting at a high magnification as I am looking mainly for general part identification. My concern, since I have never use tubes, which (tubes or filter) would be easier to use and give me the sharpest result while allowing me to photograph a range of sizes and magnification (from the whole body, down to an eye) while filling the entire frame. The 28-135 is flexible, but not as sharp as the 85 or 50. A 50mm on the 10D requires a bit of space to photograph the whole body horizontally. Although, I could use my Nikon 17-35 on the 10D (it works great with an adapter), something I didn't consider until now.

I will taking a human anatomy lab in Janaury and wanted to take

closeup images of the specimens for instructional purposes (high

school bio teacher). I currently have a Canon 10D, Canon: 50 f1.8,

85 f1.8, 28-135, and 180 macro. While the 180 would do, I have to

get closer due to limited lab space. I'm considering using the 50mm

lens with either a tube extension or a 250D filter. I could buy the

Canon 50 macro or the sigma 28 macro. I don't need to get that high

of magnification, only enough to ID parts (plus sharp images), given

my space limitation. Any suggestions?

I recently had to make the same decision and choose the A75 primarily for the brighter, sharper and larger LCD screen, lower chromatic aberration than the A80 as some of the digital reviewers have stated. (P&S cameras with high megapixels have an inherent problem due to the phyisical limitation of the small lens. At around 4 - 5 megapixel chromatic problems begin to show, especially when the image is enlarged)

 

THe other reason was for the live histogram. Upon shooting, the image is immediately displayed for 2 - 8 seconds along with its histogram. This is a feature I use all the time, especially with my 10D. I was under the impression that the A80 does not have this feature. You have to switch out of the shooting mode in order to see the histogram; at least that was what I had to do with the A80 I tried in the store. Perhaps someone else can correct me on that.

 

Anyway, to me the 3.2 vs 4 megipixel is not that critical and neither is the image size. The A75 takes great shots, particuraly at ISO 50 and 100, which is really 100/200 respectively given the way this camera exposes, so does the A80.

 

Now, I have heard that an A85 is coming out this fall.

 

Take at look at these images. All but the last one was taken with the A75:

 

http://www.photo.net/photodb/presentation.tcl?presentation_id=254995<div></div>

A lot depends on your settings and on your image composition. The camera may be inadvertantly selecting the wrong focus point and coupled that a wide aperture and or slow shutter speeds, blurry images could easily result. I use a A75 in addition to my 10D and prefer to utilize the center focusing point (I can select this vs. allow the camera to select from any or all of the nine large focus points) with aperture mode understanding the issues with shutter speed in low light situations. I lock down the focus (partially holding down the shutter) then recompose and shoot the shot.

 

I would go back and review my technique before pinning any problems with the camera.

I came across the same problem when I was deciding between the two cameras. I ultimately decided on the A75 for a variety of reasons:

 

1) The LCD screen is considerably larger, sharper and brighter; that was very importmant to me.

2) It is one of the few cameras that displays a histogram during the 2 - 8 second review; another critical issue.

3) According to several reviews I read, the A80 has more chromatic aberation problems than the A70 (The A75 was not compared, but should be similar to the A70 in this regard). The reasons cited was that most point and shoot cameras have an inherent optical limitation (small lens) that becomes pronounced at higher megapixels 4 - 5. The A80 was not alone in that respect, many other brands of cameras with similar megapixel counts where showing the same problems.

 

As a special use camera (underwater), the A75 was perfect for my needs. The difference between 3 and 4 megapixels or the between the size of the pixel with this type of entry level camera (I also have the 10D) is probably moot. You really need to go, handle the camera and see if it works for you. and don't get caught up with minor technical issues. My goal is to produce great images for web applications. Technigue is more important. A 2 meg camera can do that, given the right conditions. I have used the A40 was great results, but when the A75 came out with the better LCD screen and histogram I bought it immediately after a physical comparison with the A80. The A75, for my needs, won.

I currently use the camera quest (well made) adapter with a Nikon 17-35 AFS zoom without any problems on my 10D. Only auto focus is not functional. The camera's exposure system is independent of the lens and only works in either aperture or manual modes. For aperture mode it requires that you to set the aperture manually and the camera will then select the corresponding shutter speed. Note, you should first focus with the lens wide open then step down the lens prior to taking the picture otherwise at f8 for example, it might be difficult to focus due to the lens being stopped down.

 

I suspect that a Contax lens will behave the same way as long as you can set the aperture manually. The new G-lens from Nikon no longer carry an aperture ring and can't be used. There is no electrical contact between the lens and the camera when used in this configuration.

I have bought several tripods and heads in the past 10 years and finally settled on the B1 and Gitzo CF 1228. It is not cheap, but it performs better than anything else I tried (Bogen) and it is light yet strong and stable and good for traveling although I wouldn't use anything heavier than a 300 f2.8 or 100-400 f5.6. Large heavy lenses require the Wimbley head and the heavier CF Gitzo. I wasted money trying to find the best cheap ball head, they don't exist. If where you shoot there isn't any wind, then almost any lightweight tripod leg will do, depending on the weight of the lens, of course. But if the conditions vary I suggest that you bite the bullet and invest in a good tripod now. It will last you a lifetime with proper care.

 

Never had a problem with the B1.

There is no reputable camera store downtown that I would buy from (I have lived and worked in the area for over 20 years). The closest is Pittman Photo about 15 miles south on US 1. They generally have good prices and a decent selection. They have a web site: http://www.pitmanphotosupply.com/company.html As said above, buy from B&H.

I am caught in a dilemma. I want to switch to all digital (ease of

on the spot adjustments, edit, storage, etc..), but I am having

trouble deciding. Currently I shoot wide angle (landscapes - travel)

with my Nikon F100 using the 17-35 AFS lens then scan the results.

The lens is absolutely wonderful; probably the best there is for a

super wide angle zoom. For everything else, I use the Canon 10D with

the 28-135, 180 Macro, and the 100-400.

 

My options for digital wide angle is limited: Canon 14mm ($$$) and

15mm ($$) primes, Sigma 15-30mm or the new 12-24mm, or a Canon 16

($$$)/17 ($$) -35/40mm zooms. I don't see Nikon coming out with a

full frame sensor and to switch to the D100 doesn't solve my problem,

as the 17-35 becomes 26 - 53mm. The same problem with the 16/17 -

35/40 Canon zooms.

 

I would like to have the equivalent of at least a 20/24mm. With the

Sigma I could get the lens and a second 10D or perhaps 300D, which

would be used exclusively for, landscape (there is another question

regarding the use of the 300D vs 10D for landscapes/travel).

 

Another option is to find a good P&S camera with a 28mm lens.

Olympus is coming out with one. However, this too has its drawbacks.

 

What to do? I want a sharp, contrasty lens center to corner, minimal

to no flare, and little to no barrel/pin distortion. While no lens

can truly give you all that, the Nikon 17-35 comes very close, but I

have to use film. Any opinions?

While I have the 100-400, I never tested the 70-200, but in order to get the reach of the 100-400, you will need a 2X TC. Even with the better 70-200 f2.8, the TC 2 stops and lower image quality may not give you any better results than the 100-400, plus you add another element into the lens/camera combination. You say that 1600 speed is not enough at f5.6, so to get a faster shutter speed, you give up 192mm of range(400 x 1.6 cropping factor) - (200 x 1.6 x 1.4). That is 30% reduction from the 100-400. You will need to get much closer or enlarge a bit.

 

A side note, did you change the minimum focusing distance to the larger number? It speeds up focusing for distant shots.