aruns

<p>Hi Brent,<br>

I am one of the people who recently moved from PC to Mac after using Windows for 16 years. I am from tech support background, and I complain a lot about bad computers. So I hope my feedback below is impartial and useful to you and others in future.<br>

Hardware: I have used Dell, Sony and now a Mac. Software: I have used Windows and Mac.<br>

I will try to provide my feedback succinctly, and try not to repeat the things mentioned by others.<br>

Dell:<br>

+ Onsite support. Good value for what you pay.<br>

- Telephone support sucks. They make you do stupid tests for an hour on the phone, and I hate it especially when, for ex., I know the DVD drive is NOT reading anything. Or when the Wifi card isn't connecting to ANY network. Depending on your support plan, they make you install components yourself, which you may or may not feel comfortable with. (I am from tech support background, I am from India/currently living in the US, and I hate the current Dell support based in India - I don't even think many of them have seen a disassembled laptop in their life. And yes, Dell's telephone support process sucks).</p>

<p>Sony:<br>

+ Nice design. 'Supposedly' trendy laptops.<br>

- Quite fragile actually. (They cost considerably more than other pc vendors and correspondingly more fragile. If you travel often, don't forget your thick neoprene or foam bags, etc. I had a Vaio for a few months and it started rattling all over, the trackpad failed, the hard drive started making funny noises and the system got WAY TOO HOT when running few apps at the same time).</p>

<p>Mac: (I bought a 2009 MBP 13.3 inch and upgraded the HDD to 7200 rpm drive. I bought this three weeks ago).<br>

+ Nice design. Not too hot, and Quite fast actually. Apple doesn't offer 7200 rpm on 13.3 inches, probably due to heat etc., but I upgraded to the 7200. The OS loads 50-60% faster now (18sec vs. 40 sec). Apps like Entourage, MS Word, iTunes, and Quicktime load in 3-4 seconds. On my windows Vista pc, they used to take 30-40 seconds easily. I have enabled the 64-bit booting and it is great. (There are some programs that aren't compatible with 64 bit booting, like 3G NTFS - so I reboot into 32 bit when required, by pressing 3 & 2 keys. nice.).<br>

+ I am not a pro photographer, only a passionate hobbyist. I find the screen alright, although if I were to do it again, I would have gone for 15 inch or 17 inch. I still plan on getting an external matte screen sometime for editing pics.<br>

- No blu-ray. yet (?!).<br>

- Uses little outdated processors when compared to a similar PC. Lesser configuration for same money (for ex., hard drive capacities) or more cost for same config (when compared to similarly configured pc's).<br>

- I purchased a factory refurb model to save a couple hundred bucks, and the trackpad gave out. (I went for refurb based on my experience with iPods, which were quite sturdy. Takeaway: I'd not do that again, of course).<br>

- I called Apple (US based Support, FWIW).. they wanted me to send it in for service or check with a local store. Local store doesn't stock parts, so it is on its way to Apple now. It will take 1 week. (Takeway: If you are going to have only one computer, this may be a deal breaker -- 'can you send in your computer for a week for service, although service may be free?'. If I were to do it again, I'd check the size and number of apple support stores nearby area. Fortunately, I still kept the old vista pc after switching to mac, and I as much as I hate it I am using it to type this response (and do my work, browse the web, etc).<br>

- The local shop (where I left the MBP to be shipped to Apple) called me today morning - Apparently Apple support wants the master password of the system or they would ERASE the HDD when you send it in for service. No one mentioned it before. Luckily I swapped the factory default HDD (with OS) because I was lazy to backup the new 500G drive. So I asked them to go ahead and "ERASE" it. (Takeaway - if you are like me, and keep sensitive stuff like tax return documents (which contain SSN etc.) on your computer, you may want to take frequent backups and be prepared to "erase" them or "give the master password" to Apple if you need support).<br>

(Off topic: Why the heck Apple wants to access my HDD for replacing and testing a new trackpad is beyond me. They have boot cd with utilities and they can definitely test the new trackpad with those utilities. Also, if Dell can offer on-site support at a cost, why can't Apple do the same? I don't know. May be others here can enlighten me).</p>

<p>Now, moving on to OS, I don't have a lot of new stuff here than what others have offered above.<br>

Windows:<br>

+ cheaper (this is really not the case if you value your time that is spent on maintaining the system through frequent patches, registry cleanups, virus/malware/spyware/factory-crap-ware/other-ware cleanups)<br>

- It is Windoze. Slow and filled with security holes. (I don't know about the 64 bit version though - I lost patience and switched to mac). I agree with one response where the poster suggested M$ should be penalized for pushing more copies. -- Takeaway: How many copies of external backups of your photos do you have? (I have 2). I also agree with the poster that one AV software is not going to be effective for a common user. The problem is, multiple AV software don't coexist well on a Windows system. Overall, Windows feels more and more like a patchwork of code rather than a coherent operating system. I was sick of it so I moved. YMMV.</p>

<p>Mac:<br>

+ There are no unannounced tuesday patches, and unannounced system restarts. FAST, especially when paired with a good hard drive and fast memory. I have a 13.3, but I can imagine speed gains on with higher end systems.<br>

- compatibility with 32 bit programs may breakdown your computer's speed expectations. it is not Mac OS's problem, really, but something to consider when you are moving into the platform. I can't talk about Windows 64 bit version as I don't have experience with it.</p>

<p>Hope this helps. Cheers,<br>

A.</p>

<p>the entries this week were good. thanks for sharing. the ones that captured my attention more than the others were by:<br>

Issac Sam, Gary McGhee, James Kazan, Aguinaldo de Paula, Phil Evans, Eddy Furlong, Steven van Heerden, Louis Meluso, Richard Armstrong. Esp. Isaac's lighting and the mood is great!<br>

cheers, A.</p>

<p>Hi Nikon shooters..<br>

Great pictures this week. I've been absent here for quite some time.. while work and travel had something to do with it, on most weeks I remembered about photo Wednesday only on the subsequent Thursday or later. I almost missed this week's posts too.<br>

Here's one from this week.<br>

Nikon D700, Nikon 20mm f/3.5 AI-(S?), ISO 1600, 1.6 sec, no tripod but tried to balance it with something. applied noise reduction, resize and sharpening.<br>

hope you enjoy it. cheers.</p><div></div>

<p>Hi Bob,<br>

I had a similar question a few months back.. Although I started off with D70, I had a FM2 and liked the idea of using inexpensive manual focus lenses on the full frame digital body. So I collected several MF lenses before I got the D700. The (de)motivators for me was cost and size/weight of the new pro lenses. see this thread http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00TRHc<br>

I did get the D700 this summer and most of the lenses I collected previously have been working great. I still retain the following AI/AIS lenses and have subjected them to use on field: 20mm f/3.5, 24mm f/2.8, 50mm f/1.4, 135mm f/2.8, 105mm f/4 micro. Exposure is a breeze with Manual mode, and it even seems to work in Aperture mode. But the viewfinder lcd can indicate the exposure (in spot, matrix, center weighted modes) on a scale - And so is the green dot with 2 arrows as others have indicated.<br>

In spite of the highly praised dynamic range of the D700, I find that it gives great outputs when I treat it similar to slide film and expose in according situations, especially with manual focus lenses. I have sometimes forgotten to change the non-cpu lens setting when I change lenses and have gotten mixed results - I am not sure if this is because of my failure to change the lens settings.<br>

Among these lenses I mentioned, the 20mm offers great field of view and excellent details in smaller apertures, very good contrast and sharpness on the D700. This is one of the most used wide angle lenses in my kit now. To think I paid <$100 for this, it is a great deal.<br>

The 24mm has very bad CA (at least my copy) and I am not happy with sharpness. It is great for candids and travel, but mostly I use the 20mm and not have used this much.<br>

The 50mm 1.4 is a new addition (to the 50mm 1.8 AFD) and I love it. It is hard for me to use it when taking pictures of my kids (they keep moving and I am not that great with MF), but I love the results. The camera seems to use the same exposure (in Aperture priority) as the 50mm 1.8 AF-D for this 50mm 1.4 AI, however due to the half-stop larger aperture (given the same exposure), the light fall off in larger apertures are better on the AI lens. Haven't had a chance to field test it on adults extensively, but I have good hopes on this lens. From what I have seen, it is sharp, contrasty and yummy to use (the out of focus areas are rendered great as well). One challenge I am facing right now is, the images on screen have very sharp rendering of in-focus area, whereas the 8x10 prints are of debatable quality (I sharpened them before printing). Still, it is a good lens.<br>

The 105mm f/4 micro works great too. I think it has great color rendition, good contrast etc., but my brother seems to think it lacks vibrancy. please note we are not pros, and we don't use a calibrated monitor. I post process the images to my liking on my screen and he sees it on his screen. So, the verdict is out on that part, but I like the results.<br>

The 135mm is a great lens. I used to use it for telephoto landscapes on my D70, but I haven't used it much on the D700. It is a bit short for telephoto landscape and a bit too much for portraits. It may be great for candids. It is so light that I carry it on my trips, but I seldom get the chance or motivation to use it. From what I have seen, this is a decent performer on the D700, but I haven't tested it extensively.<br>

I had a few other lenses but I had to offload them, so I can't talk about the other ones.<br>

I always read the reviews of MF lenses by Bjørn Rørslett, www.mir.com.my and other locations when available and possible. <cite></cite> This helps me avoid buying lenses with known problems (for ex., lenses reputed to have oil build-up in their blades).<br>

Hope this feedback helps you. Cheers. AS.</p>

<p>correction - sorry, i did save it as jpg a few times in Picasa resulting in little bit of lack of sharpness.</p>

<p>Hi Ian,<br>

I understand it is a late response, and I hope this helps you as well as others with future queries. I have had this lens for about a year or so, and I love this lens. I used to use it on D70 and my brother's D200, and it is a gem. Now I have a D700, but I haven't gotten a chance to use it extensively on the Fx body yet. On the D70 / D200, this is a small, lightweight tele lens (180mm equivalent). If used correctly, it is sharp. The colors are good, contrast is good, and the f/2.8 is nice. Especially as the 135 f/2 costs several times more. Attaching a sample pic for reference (if i remember correctly, this is a 100% crop. I do remember that there's no pp except cropping in Picasa).<br>

Hope this helps. Cheers, Arun.</p><div></div>

<p>Hi all,<br /> I guess I missed the wednesday party - however I would like to consider it is still Wednesday in some part of the world.. so here goes.. Wonderful pictures from everybody.. I wanted to comment on all pics - but as I am pretty much last in the queue today and as I wanted to keep the post small, I have commented on a few selected ones. thanks for sharing your pics.<br /> Jose Angel - nice n vibrant environmental portrait<br /> Rene' Villela - nice subjects :)<br /> Lil Judd - striking IR. thanks for commenting on my earlier pic too. :)<br /> Ton Mestrom - very nice bw detail, thanks for sharing about the book.<br /> Matthew Brennan - nice handheld macro<br /> Aaron Bonnici - very nice b/w<br /> Janne Kaakinen - nice macro<br /> Sjoerd Leeuwenberg - nice irfanview touch<br /> Chris Court - very nice pic of anhinga<br /> Lex (perpendicularity consultant) Jenkins - thanks for asking about the b/w conversion.<br /> Jeannean Ryman - very vibrant, good detail<br /> Thangavelu Nachimuthu - nice pic<br /> Bruce Margolis - nice mood<br /> Matt Laur - I missed the wednesday thread on wednesday, I guess I need the alarm after all.. but yes, these are better than coffee.. and very nice idea and execution on carbon emissions<br /> Dan Park - whether pp'd or not, the result is nice!<br /> tom baxter - very nice composition<br /> Dave Walsh - very good deal with the cat indeed. very nice detail too.<br /> Tim Holte - nice portrait<br /> Curt Weinhold - wow, for the choice of the subjects<br /> Paul Nance - nice detail<br /> Anand Dhupkar - yummy<br /> Susan Wolfe - very nice lighting, wish the adult's face wasn't cropped, or cropped below the neckline <br /> Randy Dawson - nice pic with good detail<br /> Waldemar Giers - Kitchener,ON,Canada - nice pic<br /> Jeffrey Aiello - nice pov and dof. good execution<br /> Don Harper - a great pic. the Capitol is kinda washed out with the sky, if you could lift it this would be very evident<br /> George Paris - great location. miss the sunsets and the colorful fishes below. :)<br /> Christopher Thompson - very creative and very nice outcome.</p>

<p>here's one from me. taken a few weeks ago in a horticultural garden near home. D700 in DX mode, 105mm f/4 AI macro, f/8, 1/125s, iso 200, manual exposure. I kept waiting for some small fish to show up, and as luck would have it one of the biggest fishes showed up! Luck favors the patient, I guess. Hope you enjoy it. Cheers. A.</p><div></div>

<p>Hi,<br>

I am sort of in the same situation. I researched this here on Photo.net forums a few days back and found references to 'Hyperdrive'. It is the portable device that has been discussed above: i.e., has a small lcd screen and one can copy images from memory cards to the hard drive. Apparently the speed is good, and the hard drive can be upgraded. I am not sure if it takes AA batteries. Am still considering the purchase, so I can't talk about my experience with it yet. hope this helps.<br>

cheers, A.</p>

<p>Hi all, as usual great pics! here's one of my first outdoor shots with the new d700, 20mm f/3.5 AIS, iso 200, tripod. It is a fantastic camera and a phenomenal upgrade from the D70. Thanks to the forum members who helped me with the decision process. Am still experimenting and learning. Hope to post better pics soon. Cheers, A.</p><div></div>

<p>Hi all, same with me too. My Wednesday is just starting, so I guess I will have time to check a bit later. Cheers! -A.</p>

<p>Wow, Matthew! :) the rain cells indeed look like eyes! great shot. cheers! -A.</p>

<p>Hi Matthew, quick question. Did you do much processing on the picture you posted..the exposure of foreground, the faces of people in the pic and the clouds are all well controlled, although the faces look a bit processed. If this is a straight, out-of-the-camera pic from the D700, I am really surprised. (the D70 would cough up with the cloud highlights and would require quite quite a bit of processing to get this result, if at all).<br>

Hi Curt, a little off-topic, but hopefully a quick question: what tripod do you use. I use a manfrotto xprob55 (aluminum) an extremely stable tripod, with a manfrotto ball head as well. But it is heavy. with the ball head it weighs close to 8-9 lbs. I have tried getting a slik (not the pro series) but after using the manfrotto the slik felt like it had noodle legs. So I returned it. Right now I am just lugging around the manfrotto combo. :)<br>

Have a great memorial day everyone.<br>

Thanks, Arun.</p>

<p>Matthew and Pedro, thanks for sharing samples too. I made up my mind! :) Cheers, Arun</p>

<p>Hello everybody,<br>

Thanks very much for each of your responses. They are very informative and useful, that I have decided to purchase a D700 to go with my current collection of lenses. If I personally find the quality not up to the levels I expect, I now know what alternatives to look for. Once again, I truly appreciate your responses, thank you - this is what makes this forum so great!<br>

Best regards, I hope to post some samples on the gallery here + the photographic forums soon. Cheers, Arun.</p>

<p>Hi Tobey, John and Matthew, thanks very much for the feedback. For all the talk we hear about D700's ability to work with older lenses, I was a bit concerned as most of the discussions on forums center around the 24-70, 70-200 and 14-24. It is good to know that many people indeed pair the D700 with their older AI/AI-S lenses.<br>

Tobey, thanks. I usually stay within f8 for DX (D70) and push the lenses to f/16 for film. It is interesting to know the sweet spot is about f11 for these wide lenses, on the D700.<br>

John, thanks for your candid response. I was looking for real world experiences and your response captures it well. I will look out for the 200/2 and 400/2.8 :)<br>

Matthew, I do have the 50 f/1.8 and 85 f/1.8, both AF-D. I have seen posts on forums that these lens are not exactly the same as their f/1.4 brothers, but definitely do very well on the D700 - which is perfectly fine with me. That's why I didn't list them here. Thank you though. I was looking for some feedback on the 20 and 24mm, so it is good to know that they work for you. If you don't mind, could you please share some samples (especially 100% crops from the edges).<br>

Thank you very much, Arun.</p>

<p>Dan, thanks. Are you suggesting that I try the Zeiss / Voightlander with D700?<br>

Thanks, A.</p>

<div></div>

<p>Hi Tobey,<br>

thanks for the response. I should have made it clear, sorry - I am for FX. I don't like the crop factor for wide lenses too. I am looking for D700 for its FX sensor so wides will be wides; but my query is about lenses.<br>

More specifically, will the AIS primes I collected so far will give good results for printing upto A3, or at 100% crop view... or must I get the 14-24, 24-70, 70-200 lenses to extract the maximum quality from the D700 FX sensor.<br>

The D300 is really a worst case option to me, if I still want to upgrade my body but don't want the D700 with its $$$$ and bulky glasses.<br>

Thanks,<br>

Arun.</p>

<p>Good day, everyone!<br /> <br /> I am a very frequent visitor (nightly :) ) to the forums here, and I have thoroughly enjoyed and gotten educated by the forum participants. It is not an understatement if I say this site is one of the best to discuss photography. Thank you, frequent posters, and Thank you, moderators for keeping the discussions civil. By the way, this is my first 'question' (I think!) although I have posted a few responses before.<br /> <br /> I have one more of the "upgrade to D700 or D300?" questions for the current users of D700 - I searched the forum archives and found somewhat similar questions/responses but not exactly what I was looking for. Kindly bear with me if this has been asked before and if you don't mind, point me to the right link. Thanks in advance.<br /> <br /> I mostly shoot landscapes with various focal lengths, although I don't really limit myself from any shooting opportunity. I seldom print the pics primarily due to the hassle of storage and maintenance, but when I did, I printed A4 - A3. However, I do pixel-peep a lot. I don't make money out of my photography, but it is a stress-reliever and thus an important part of my life. <br /> <br /> My question is about the following lenses in my collection, as I am considering a D700 or D300 upgrade from my D70. As an aside, I am not considering other bodies due to several reasons which will make this post very large. Also, I have a few other lenses, mostly AIS or AFD primes, but my post pertains to the following lenses. For the record, I have only on DX lens - the 18-70 kit zoom.<br /> <br /> - 20mm AI-S f/3.5<br /> - 24mm AI-S f/2.8<br /> - 135mm AI-S f/2.8<br /> - 180mm f/2.8 AFD<br /> <br /> Basically, I am trying to stay away from the pro zooms that are usually recommended for D700 for best IQ. Reason: weight and cost. I travel a lot, so from a air-travel/hiking/landscape shooter perspective, the pro zooms are too much for the bag/back. Also, a good set of pro-caliber Nikon trinity lenses will set me back by at least $5000. Thus, even if I spend the money on these lenses, I feel they will be left back at home when I go on my trips.<br /> <br /> From the current owners of D700 (if you are a hiker / backpacker / air-traveler, your response is all the more welcome!):<br /> - I would like to know if the primes mentioned above will help me postpone the purchase of Nikon's holy trinity lenses (i.e., 17-35/14-24mm, 24-70mm and 70-200mm) indefinitely, while still allowing me to enjoy the benefits of D700's sensor (higher resolution, higher DR, low noise, high iso, metering with AI lenses, etc.).<br>

(I know Ilkka Nissila has pointed out before, the 24mm may have CA at edges, and Bjørn Rørslett points out that 20mm f/3.5 AI-S (52mm) has significant field curvature / edge softness. But how bad is bad? I mean, is it only curable by the expensive and heavy pro zooms..? please consider this from an A3 print's point of view and a 100% crop pixel-peeper's point of view and let me know your thoughts..) <br /> <br /> If the situation is that gloomy, I may have to settle for a D300 and Sigma 10-20 or similar, and keep the rest of the money under my bed. :) <br /> <br /> Thanks in advance, have a great weekend!<br /> Arun.</p>

<p>As much as I love to have base iso for my macros, here's another example of shooting macro in dark forests when long shutter speed and tripod alone won't cut it: I was in the redwoods state park in northen California in Feb 2009 on a rainy, bleak and windy day. I tried to shoot some ferns, mushrooms and abstract macros in the redwood forests.. I was using my manfrotto 190xprob (a solid n heavy tripod) with my d70 / 105mm f/4 ais micro nikkor. I was quite disappointed with the breeze that made its way thru the trees, rain drops falling on ferns from the trees (and causing movements, which I could not control) and the less amount of ambient light on that cloudy / rainy day. Higher iso with acceptable quality (say on a d700?) would have been nice. A macro flash unit needs more space and adds to the bulk (I carry my manfrotto on my travels), especially when we travel by air frequently. (I travel for work frequently, take a medium sized camera kit with me and shoot during weekends or evenings). I am also not sure if it will create the same quality of light as we see in nature. (I don't shoot critters but mostly plants n flowers in overcast conditions).</p>

<p>I don't have much photographic experience as some of the others on this forum (I have had a D70 for about 4.5 yrs, have more than 40k shutter activations, suffered enough NAS to collect 10 different lenses (mostly AI), use a FM2 with b/w or slide film, these days use a sb800 and a sb600 with light modifiers to explore indoor portrait photography) but I agree with what Lex said above - when I got my D70, it was one of the best rated dslr cameras around for the price point I was willing to pay. (Very soon after I bought my D70, the D200 was announced at almost double the price of D70, with much better body, weather sealing, speed, etc. Still it was not in the 'the price point I was willing to pay'). Now my D70 is beat up - I get the irritating CHR errors very frequently. I mostly shoot landscapes in the golden hours, and most of the time I get back home, I curse the D70's misleading and primitive LCD display for blown out highlights. Not to mention the not so useful iso performance beyond 640. But, the D70 was once a great camera (4 yrs before!) and I got great pics out of it compared to the Pentax Optio S P&S... It is just that technology moves so quickly and we have several generations worth of improvement in these 4 years in digital photography, that D70 looks, feels and produces images that are primitive. But it is not obsolescence really - I still see tons of D1 and D2 pics on the forums taken these days (i.e., to compare against D300 / D700 pics) that are virtually indistinguishable even today.. and many can be had for just a few 100$ today.. If one thinks these cameras existed even before my D70 was produced, it becomes clear that obsolescence is not an issue here - What is happening here is, the D70 was built for a certain amount of usage and we should be happy that it has lived this far. (I am sure the D2? from the same era would outlast the D70 in terms of performance, longevity, etc. - but it was expensive as hell in 2005 for an amateur). But, as it can be clearly seen that a D90 can outperform a D200 these days, one can easily attribute the progress to technological advance + trickle-down, as against planned obsolescence.<br>

Talking about FM2, I love this body, even with a bunch of lenses it is a light combo on hiking trips. I usually carry a 20mm f/2.8 ais, 24mm f/2.8 ais, 28-70 AFD plastic lens, a 135 f/2.8 ais and sometimes i throw in my 105mm f/4 micro ais too. But I think there is currently no digital replacement for the fm2 (yet). Most of the professional bodies from nikon today weigh more than the fm2. (comparing apples to apples, the FX bodies are much heavier than a fm2 for hiking). And, I don't understand why people compare a FM2 without electrical power but needing film, with a digital camera, which by definition needs power but doesn't need film replacements or developing... (to elaborate, why doesn't anyone compare the fact that, with a 8G card one can take 100's of images on a DSLR, and the 8G CF card weighs next to nothing, whereas a FM2 runs out of media after 36 or 24 shots.. and few multiples of 36 or 24 can take more space if not weight? or the instant gratification associated with digital exposures? or the cheaper cost of processing?.. I think it is silly to compare a FM2 directly with a digital body in terms of specs (as against the usage or utility), but hey, it is just my 2c..).<br>

So, now that we have the power vs. mechanical part out of our way (hopefully), I find a D40 or D60 comes as close to a FM2 as we can get as of date in terms of size and weight.. and because I don't use much of autofocus on fm2 anyways ... I wouldn't mind using a D60 or D40 with AI lenses in full manual mode to get what I want. However, there's no MLU, there's no killer performance in high-iso dept, etc. so I guess we still have to wait for the japanese manufacturers to do their miniaturization magic, and give us a fully weather sealed D700 in d40 size.<br /> cheers. -A.</p>

<div></div>

I am not familiar with both cameras you used, but it looks like you used the autofocus to lock onto an object and may have recomposed. Either way, there are few things you can try: try to meter based on medium gray (pavement etc). and set the exposure based on that. Also spot metering can be used to measure the exposure correctly.

 

If you want the evening sky colors exposed correctly, then by all likelihood people with their back to the sunset will have their faces underexposed. OTOH, if you try to expose for their face, the sky would get blown out. Same goes for bright highlights in background. Spot metering will help you measure exposure for a given specific point, and in such complex situations may actually overexpose the background (or severly under expose the f/g).

 

In such cases, you may want to try fill flash - on D70 something like rear curtain fill flash works well in this scenario - the shutter speed is slower than usual, so it records the background colors well, whereas the rear curtain flash throws just enough light to illuminate the subject's face. So you get a pic pretty well balanced between the f/g and b/g in terms of light. The caveat here is the shutter speed. I will let others explain this in more detail.

 

Hope this helps.

Hi Stuart,

I see this response is kinda late, but I hope it helps other new comers in future. Btw, even though I am a long

time fan of this site, this is my first post and I am glad I can offer something meaningful here.

 

I am going to address your question in two parts - landscape and portraits.

 

First let us address the landscape part:

I had a 50mm f/1.8 AFD from my D70 lens collection, that I used with the FM2 body (my 2nd) when I got it as a

'gift' ;). However, as you and several others have pointed out, I felt the need for wider lenses as I shot more

landscapes with this body. I am a tripod guy when it comes to landscapes (I learnt the hard way to lug it around

when I travel) - so even though the thought of getting several lightweight primes was appealing (and in turn

feeding my NAS), it is neither light on the wallet nor easy to carry when you are on a hike with a full size

tripod or traveling cross country with one or two laptops (and the tripod).

 

My search on this site and on google showed me a compromise - so I ended up with the 28-70 f/3.5-4.5 AFD (i.e.,

with aperture ring) zoom lens. This is an autofocus lens. But you can get it used in mint condition for less than

the cost of a new 50mm AFD f/1.8. When I use tripods for landscapes at any time of the day or night, I use the

smaller apertures so max aperture is not a problem here. This lens actually produces good results too, and

lightweight as well when you compare with other zooms. Well it is not a pancake 45mm lens - but you can get from

28 mm - 70 mm on one twist... for me, the convenience of 1 heavier zoom beat the total weight of 2 or 3 lighter

primes to cover the same focal range. your mileage may vary here.

 

If you want to shoot portraits, you could go with any of the lenses suggested by others. Typically I use either

50 or 85 mm focal range while shooting portraits, and any fast AI or AI-S lens will be good for low light

situations. The good part with the aforementioned zoom is if you shoot iso 400 in good light, you don't need to

swap lenses, but still shoot portraits at 70mm. For low light situations, yes you need fast portrait lens - you

can get a 50 and/or 85 (and/or any of the numerous fast primes) for that purpose.

 

To summarize, I would suggest considering this 28-70 zoom as a first lens for the fm2.

 

Enjoy your new camera! Cheers,

Arun.