damon_macleod

<blockquote>

<p><em>"obsolete"--(adj.) no longer produced or used; out of date.</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p >Forgive the pesky grammarian… but obsolete isn't a verb. You can make something obsolete, but you can’t obsolete it :) </p>

<p >I certainly don’t know what I’m talking about, but Bryan Peterson seems to. He’d suggest an f stop between f/8 and f/11 for this type of shot, and would recommend that you take your meter reading from the sky instead of from the buildings. I’ve yet to try out his advice, but if it ever stops snowing here I might get the chance…</p>

<p >Thanks! In your experience, is the exposure delay effective? Is it comparable to a real mirror lock up?</p>

<p >The D90 doesn’t have a mirror lock up function, but I read somewhere that it’s possible to set a 1 second delay that will counteract the mirror vibration. Unfortunately I can’t find any information on how to set this delay. Have I been led astray?</p>

<p >Chris, I’m mostly interested in shooting flowers and bugs. I have a decent tripod and an SB-600 speedlight. Alas, I can’t find a 500D at 62mm… is there such a thing?</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Lil, I checked out the kenko tubes, and they seem like a nice alternative that’s in my price range. But how exactly do the tubes work in terms of lens attachment? (From the picture, it looks like they mount directly onto the camera, so I’m guessing I can use them with any Nikkor lens?) Also, the three tubes only add up to 68mm… if I understand correctly, this won’t give me 1:1 with my 85mm. But will it give me a ratio that’s close enough for what I want to shoot? </p>

<p > </p>

<p >Thanks for all of your help!</p>

<p >My D90 just came in the mail, with a 24mm/2.8 and an 85mm/1.8. I would very much like to shoot macro, but I don’t really feel like burning $600+ on a macro lens. My local camera store has a hoya 62mm close-up filter set that runs for about $130 (with +1, +2, and +4 diopters…whatever that means.) My question is this: with the hoya filter attached to my 85mm, will I be able to shoot quality macro? Or is worthwhile to purchase a dedicated macro lens (such as the AF-S Micro 60mm/2.8)?</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Thoughts?</p>

<p >I recently purchased a D90, though alas I’m still waiting for it to come in the mail. Anyway, I was reading up on the Nikon site, and the D90 ISO catch phrase is “Rich color and low noise from ISO 200 to 3200.” Reading a little further, Nikon tells you that there is also a Hi mode (ISO 6400) and a Lo mode (ISO 100.)</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Now maybe it’s just the nitpicky analytic philosopher in me…but can I assume that I <em>shouldn’t</em> expect rich color and low noise in the Hi and Lo modes? This would make sense for ISO 6400, but why would there be any distortion at ISO 100? Perhaps Nikon thought that the Hi mode would be lonely without a Lo mode, so they added one in for kicks, when really the optimum ISO range is 100 to 3200?</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Thoughts?</p>

<p>The 055x just came in the mail, and it <em>is</em> a bit too heavy for travel. That said, I'm 6'4'', so I really appreciate the extra height that it offers. I'll just have to hit the gym before I buy my ticket, and all should be well.</p>

<p>Thanks for the advice! I did a bit more shopping around, and I've decided on the Manfrotto 055XPROB. It's heavier than the Gitzo, but 2/3rds of the price. And it should make for a good club if I'm ever accosted by camera stealers.</p>

<p >Howdy!</p>

<p > </p>

<p >I’m looking for a sturdy travel tripod/ball head combo that will handle a Nikon D90 with an 85mm prime. I know that “pay for what you get” is a cliché for a reason, but I’m trying not to spend more than $200 a piece. (That said, I’ve been spending way more than I actually earn lately, so we’ll say my budget is $400 to $600.) </p>

<p > </p>

<p >Any suggestions? Thanks in advance!</p>

<p >Thanks for your advice! I just splurged on the Nikon, and now I get to wait with bated breath until the box arrives. Maybe I’ll look for another job while I’m waiting… :)</p>

<p >I recognize the difficulties in raising a question like this, and certainly don’t intend to spark another Canon vs Nikon debacle. I’m hoping for feedback from anyone who has experience handling both of these cameras, and who has tested their ISO capabilities and generally compared their image quality.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >I’m shopping around for my first dslr system, and I’ll be using it to travel in Africa. Initially I was thinking of a Rebel XSi, but since used 5Ds are reasonably priced these days, and since video features are sexy, I’m starting to feel like I might splurge. Whatever I choose, I’ll be taking along a couple of fast primes.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >The main benefit of the 5D is obviously the full frame sensor. In my mind this trumps the video on the D90, since I can always take along a tiny video-capable point-and-shoot. However, the 5D is heavier, has slower fps, and has a lower ISO range than the D90. Here’s where my ignorance sets in… will the full frame sensor of the 5D produce better images at high ISO than the D90, despite the D90’s higher sensitivity range? Setting ISO aside, will the newer D90 sensor produce better quality images than the older 5D sensor, despite the crop factor?</p>

<p > </p>

<p >I haven’t handled either of these cameras yet, and I’ll probably make my decision based on how they feel. But assuming that both are a good fit, what factors would sway you either way?</p>

<p >Sincere thanks for all of your advice. David and Mike, I’m intrigued by your prime lens solution, and it should still be in my price range. Actually, after a few more weeks of research, I’m thinking of coughing up some extra dollars for the Nikon 90D. As for glass, I’m wondering if I can’t get away with the 24mm 2.8 and the 85mm 1.8 (since the 1.4 is a little too steep for me.) I’ll be sacrificing a true wide angle, but I hope I’ll be able to live with that. I was thinking of a 50mm 1.8 as well, but with the crop factor I’m wondering how useful it would be. I might wait for this lens until I can afford a full frame camera. </p>

I’m an aspiring photographer in the “thank God this MA is almost over, it’s time to do some travelling” stage of life,

and I’m about to invest in my first dslr system. I’ve managed to avoid the consumerism bug, and I’m pretty sure that

a Rebel XSi will take care of most of my needs at this stage. Lenses are the real question.

 

I’ll be travelling in East Africa, and hope to spend a decent amount of time on Safari, but the truth is, I might end up

anywhere in the world, shooting whatever there is to see. Here’s the trouble: I’ll be travelling very light—no more than

one massive backpack, and certainly no tripod or bulky camera accessories. My main considerations, then, are

versatility and bulk reduction, which seem to be difficult goals to reconcile.

 

I was initially considering an 18-200mm lens, and with a little comparison shopping, I’ve priced out a $1200 package

for both body and lens. Unfortunately, I’ve also found a package that includes 18-55mm, 55-250mm and 75-300mm

lenses, plus body, for $1240.

 

Hence the conundrum. I suspect that I will not want to carry around 3 bulky lenses with me wherever I go for a year

(or more.) That said, $40 for an extra lens seems like an offer I can’t refuse.

 

What are your experiences? Will I never forgive myself for giving up the extra 100mm of zoom, or will I curse myself

for dragging along 3 lenses, when 1 would have done the trick? And is the XSi really the best tool for the job

(considering that I’m certainly no professional, but seem to have a good eye, and might like to be some day)? Or

would I be better served by an old 20 or 30D?