jiawei_zhang

<p>So none of you recommend the 70-210 f/4 AF? Online reviews of it are stellar.</p>

<p>Wouter, the reason I'm looking in to the 60mm is because it's macro. My 35-70 only does macro at 35mm so all my cucrrent "macro" shots are 35mm. I think any macro will suit me. I would get the 40mm but EVERYONE says that the shadow blocks out the light. So, I think what i'll do is get the 60mm 2.8 non-D for like $200 and that's it. I don't think the extra stop on the 35mm f/1.8 will do me much good.</p>

<p>And another question: I'm looking for an additional cheap camera because I don't like changing lenses and it tends to attract dust and crap, so would getting a D3100 on eBay be a good option? I think I can get one used for like $220, or should I get one from cameta refurb for $300? This is going to be from a separate budget and my parents are getting this for me.</p>

<p>Yeah, I've been looking around for a Nikon 60mm f/2.8 D but haevn't found one for a decent price yet. Is the new D version worth like $50 more than the non-d?</p>

<p>Thanks for all the help, but can you guys please link me all the feasible lenses? I feel that I'm really starting to crave macro lenses with a long focusing path (like 290degrees preferably). Can I have some suggestions? I'm currently considering:<br>

1. Nikon 60mm f/2.8<br>

2. Tamron Adaptall 90 f/2.8 (not 2.5 which is only 1:2)<br>

3. Nikon 200mm f/4 AI-S micro (too expensive - cheapest I could find is $400)</p>

 

<p>John, are you talking about the Tamron Adaptall? How does that work? Do I get just get the adapter? I have bad experiences with adapters...</p>

<p>John Crowe, I actually ordered an UGLY keh lens (35-70 f/2.8 non-d) and it was crap... sticky focus, loose zoom, etc. I saw that 180mm f/2.8 but I'm not sure it focuses fast enough for sports. I saw that 300 f/4 as well and WANT that darned thing but can't justify the cost lol. Reviews of that lens aren't great. So, is the 60mm f/2.8 Non-D decent for $205?<br>

http://www.keh.com/camera/Nikon-Autofocus-Fixed-Focal-Length-Lenses/1/sku-NA06009009731N?r=FE</p>

<p>Ray, I was talking about the 200 f/4 AIS, my bad. THAT one is macro. I personally don't plan on spending more than $300 on a macro lens alone. I'm really looking into the 60mm f/2.8 and f/2.8D. Do you guys see any significant difference? All I know is that the D adds better flash capabilities and a better lens coating. I can get the non-d for like $200 on the bay and the D for like 250. Do you guys have any longer range manual macros, not necessarily Nikon? I actually tested the 90mm Tamron and 100mm Tokina at a store and loved them both but they are out of my budget. $400 is my ABSOLUTE budget and I really don't wanna spend more than $300. </p>

<p>I think the main issue is not enough macro (4x on the 35-70 without the diopter) and not enough light at other apertures. That's why I was wondering if I could get the 70-210 f/4. I use my 35 70 macro function in MF anyways so that's not an issue. Do you guys have any MF macro suggestions? I googled the 200 f/4 macro and it doesn't exactly have very favorable reviews. They all suggested the Tamron 90mm, Tokina 90mm f/2.5, and 55mm Nikon.</p>

<p>I've written a Java program to find out all the focal lengths I've ever used on my 35-70 and I've found this approximation:<br>

35-49 - 24%<br>

40-44 - 5%<br>

45-49 - 8%<br>

50-54 - 19%<br>

55-59 - 13%<br>

60-64 - 8%<br>

65-70 - 23%</p>

<p>So, I guess nothing really sticks out but I'm not sure about manual lenses. I think those are out of my budget.</p>

<p>Hello everyone,<br>

I'm a high school senior and really into photography. I currently have a D90, a Nikon 18-200 VR II lens, a Nikon 35-70 f/2.8D lens, and two manual focus lenses from a garage sale (E series 28mm and 50mm).</p>

<p>I am currently suffering from some high school poverty but have some money to spare (around $400) and am looking for some extra lenses. I really enjoy macro photography (I've been using the 35-70 with a +3.0 diopter) but I also enjoy night photography and long range photography (sports and stuff). I often also shoot school events on the auditorium in the dark. Unfortunately, I don't think $400 will get me more than one lens. What do you guys suggest? Below, I have listed my top few choices that I am currently considering. I have no brand loyalty and don't mind used products as long as they are clean.</p>

<p>1. Nikon 35mm f/1.8 - $196 new - idk if that extra step is worth it over the 35-70 but everyone says this lens is otherworldly <br>

2. Nikon 60mm f/2.8 macro - $200 used on keh - cheapest macro other than 40mm f/2.8 but everyone says the 40mm is too close<br>

3. Nikon 70-210 f/4 (really old) - $200 used on ebay - is this any good? it's one of the earliest autofocus zooms so I don't know if it's that good<br>

4. Nikon 50mm f/1.8G - $220 new - for a DX camera is this too wide? I've been messing around with the 35-70 at different focal lengths and this feels too long but I sometimes go beyond this even.<br>

5. Nikon 50mm f/1.8D - $125 new - Is this good also?</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I have 4 or 5 Nikon AI lenses<br>

1. Nikon 50mm E series<br>

2. Nikon 28mm E series<br>

3. Nikon 105mm f/2.5<br>

4. Nikon 135mm E series<br>

5. something else<br>

Will all of these work well? (If you're wondering why I have all these lenses, I got them on ebay for $28 for all 5 lol)</p>

<p>How exactly do these g adapters work? Aren't electrical contacts required for aperture change? Can you link me one on ebay? Thanks!</p>

<p>I plan on buying an Olympus Pen E-PM1 with the kit lens. I heard that you can buy an adapter for it in order to use manual focus, manual aperture lenses. Will IS (image stabilization) still be available when you use a Nikon lens (say 50mm f/1.8D)? What about auto-exposure? If both work, then I'll probably be using my old lenses because of their amazing image quality. =)</p>

<p>Thanks, but I'm no longer considering option 3. I figured if I was spending the money on a compact camera. Getting the 14-150 would make the camera rather thick. I'm just worried about buying refurbs. Does cameta offer squaretrade warranties?</p>

<p>That sony is way out of my price range.</p>

<p>On Amazon and other review sites, they all say that the 14-150 focuses faster and better than the 14-42. The sample images aren't much worse than the kit lens, maybe a bit more CA. Is the focusing faster than a Nikon d90 with 18-200? </p>

<p>I plan on getting an Olympus PEN Mini E-PM1. I already have a Nikon D90 but it's too heavy to lug around everywhere. I plan on getting refurbs from Cameta. Are there any downsides for buying refurbished? I currently have 3 options.</p>

<p>1. Refurb E-PM1 + 14-42mm kit lens for $240.<br>

2. Refurb E-PM1 + 14-42mm + 40-150mm for $420.<br>

3. Refurb E-PM1 + Refurb 14-150mm for $500.</p>

<p>I have these questions. I don't really like changing lenses on my Nikon with my 18-200mm but do you guys think it's worth the extra $80 to get a superzoom? What can you guys say about the lens quality for these lenses? Is the 42-150 range worth the extra money? If I get either (1) or (2), I most likely won't get the 14-150 in the future and will be stuck with changing lenses forever. What do you guys think?</p>

<p>Thanks!</p>

<p>So, on your Nikon d70, the BIM is faster than the Non-BIM? I have a d90. I went to the store today and they had only the BIM version and it seemed to focus with about the same speed as the Nikon 18-200 with the cap on. Since I really had no way to test the low-light functionality of the autofocus, I need to ask again, is it fast enough to photograph moving dancers on a dimly lit stage? If the BIM does, then I'll get the BIM since it is likely I'll be getting a d3200 soon as well so the motor will be nice. Choices choices choices...The only place I can still find the Tamron non-bim new is on newegg and it seems to be running out fast, so I need to decide...</p>

For a d90, which would be faster?

<p>I've searched everywhere for this but no one seems to know whether the d90 af speed is good or not. For example, will the Tamron 28 75 2.8 Non-BIM<br>

<a href="http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16830997648">http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16830997648</a></p>

<p>focus faster or slower than the Tamron 28 75 2.8 BIM<br>

<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-28-75mm-Aspherical-Built-In-Digital/dp/B001955P8W/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1336101540&sr=8-3">http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-28-75mm-Aspherical-Built-In-Digital/dp/B001955P8W/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1336101540&sr=8-3</a></p>

<p>Can someone please tell me which one is faster focus since the optics are both the same. What about the focusing noise? Will the NON BIM be softer? Thanks so much.</p>

<p>It's for a d90. I'm mainly worried about af speed.</p>

<p>Eric, can you tell me one more thing about value? For the d-version of the 35 70 I can get a deal for about $360 nearly mint condition with perfect glass. For only $100 more I can get the tamron 28 75 with 4 years warranty. Do you think it's worth getting the old lens over the new lens if I can spare the money? I'm just scared that the Nikon malfunctions and repair costs would soar over the value of the actual lens. And is the bim of the tamron faster than d90 motor?</p>

Eric, thanks for your response. Since you seem to

be recommending zooms, and I can no longer get

the tamron, which has been sold, would you

recommend the 25 year old nikon 35 70 2.8 non d

or a newer tamron 28 75 with bim. I'm just

worried that one of them won't be fast enough for

shooting moving objects. Which one would

actually be better on moving objects? does the

nikon have much life left? It's bargain grade on

keh.

I was initially thinking of buying prime lenses but

wouldn't switching lenses would be too much

work and get dust of my sensor. Plus, I might

miss a shot. Plus, the 85 1.8 is out of my budget.

This is not for a fashion show but just random

auditorium performances.