miroslav_majstorovic

<p>Well the camera's flash sync is 1/200 sec,so when using flash you cannot use shutter speeds over 1/200 sec. With sb-400,I think your only option is to close down the aperture. If you don't do that, you will only get overexposure. For now,it will probably be good enough,but if you want shallow DOF with large apertures,you need SB-600,800 or 900 since they are better for fill flash(as I understand),and can be used at faster shutter speeds,and when used like that,they lose their maximum power. I don't know much about sb-400. I am also a newbie when it comes to fill flash,I only used my pop-up as a fill,and only few times,but I am reading about fill flash whenever I found a thread about it. Don't take my words 100% correct because I sad I'm not an expert at this,I am just trying to help. Cheers :)</p>

<p>I do not intend to use multiple flashes right away,but I will add more flashes in the future,but I don't see a problem because I will trigger them with my camera's built-in flash in commander mode,thanks for your answer.</p>

<p>I am thinking of buying a flash for my D80. I am trying to decide which is better for me,SB-600 or SB-800. My budget is arround the price of a new SB-600,so a new SB-800 is out of question,but I would try to find a used one in good condition if I decide to by it. I am asking all users of SB-600,what do you think about it,do you feel it's lacking something? But it would be even better to hear from users who have both. What do they like or don't like about both of them,and are they missing something on SB-600 that they use on SB-800 regularly.I think the SB-600 would be enough for me,since I am mainly interested in using it remotely,and just want to have a decent flash with a head that moves for bouncing,but I want opinions from users themselves,so I can make my final decision.</p>

<p>Thanks guys very much,I appreciate all responses. It's very interesting how much it depends on the person using it. Opinions go all the way from ''its amazing,I use it all the time'' to ''I don't use it at all,it's very unuseful''. I considered the 35mm 1.8(I would find the money somehow),but I think the 50mm 1.8 is more suitable for me,'cause I want it to shoot portraits,not just for low light. Somehow, I don't like the new 35mm being DX,when it was announced,I was thinking ''so what'' but now,I am not that sure. Looks like it has a lot of distortion and quality compromises that had to be made in order to be cheap(although this particular 50mm is also not well built at all,but I mean opticaly),and who knows what camera I will buy in the future(maybe the FX will be the way to go one day). Maybe the 35mm will come next but first,I think I am going for the 50mm. Thanks once again everybody.</p>

<p>I want to hear from all people out there using this lens,how much they use it and how often,and what they think about using it on a crop body(I have a D80). It wouldn't be a problem if it was FX,because I think that 50mm is one the most useful focal lenghts,at least for me,and I would probably use 50mm and some wide prime lens like a 28mm or 24mm. I am not into having a lot of lenses mostly because i think that it kills much of the effort and it makes you lazy,but I will probably but few in the future for covering a bigger range of focal lenghts for different purposes. For now I have a kit lens(I had to start with something) but now I want a fast prime. So all of you shooting a 50mm lens on a crop body,do you get bothered by a crop factor making it a 75mm,or should I put it this way,do you get bothered by the lens giving you a too narrow view for most situations??? If it's too narrow sometimes,I can live with that,since I only have enough money for this particular lens,so some compromises have to me made :) thanks in advance....</p>

<p>Great WedNEsDAy this week,and I hope to see even more great shots. Garry,you are getting better and better every week:) I really shot this one passing by....I walked beside the church,and looked to the right,I liked the overall scene. I pointed my camera( D80 with 18-135mm kit lens) at it,but it was kind of empty,and I just waited few seconds when a person walked by the church from the other side and then I took a shot. I converted it to B&W,because I like it better that way and generally I love B&W :)</p><div></div>

<p>Well,I am 18 years old so I don't have any old stuff(actually I have but it's not a Nikon and it's not working properly,it' my father's old Minolta and I hope it will be fixed soon)......here's one from me:)</p><div></div>

<p>Thanks for all responses.The Pentacon lenses he has are both f/2.8,and the Zeiss is f/1.8,so I guess it would be enough for manual focusing on a 400D,altough it really has a small viewfinder,I tried it. He is not planning to shoot every day,only for his joy,and he doesn't care much for taking time for focusing and metering,he just want to have fun and buy a cheap body so that he can put those lenses in use. He has a an old Practica but here where we live,they sell only the worst and basic films,and they develop them in dirty chemicals because no one is using film here anymore,and those chemicals are old and get very dirty so when they give you a processed negative,it's full of particles and scratches also. Not to mention that they do not process B&W film. If they were doing all this how it should be done,I wouldn't buy a DSLR at all. By the way,is focusing screen exchangable in 20D and 30D.</p>

 

<p>I am trying to help my friend here. He is interested in buying a Canon digital body (probably used,something like 400D),but he is wondering if he can use it with m42 lenses with adapter. He has two m42 Pentacon lenses which are quite good according to reviews on the internet,and one Zeiss 50mm f/1.8. He wants to know what is he losing,beside AF(and he is not bothered by that fact). Will a 400D(or maybe 350D,20D,30D...) be able to meter with these lenses,and are there any focusing issues,because I know they can't reach infinity on Nikon bodies,and you can't meter either? Miki</p>