[av98m2]

I'm eyeing the G7 and the Ricoh GRD. So far the Ricoh GRD is calling my name a lot louder (it has no zoom lens, but i'm used to shooting wide primes so...........plus its a lovely old fashioned design!!!)

 

[fureshi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dj_mocok /img/forum/go_quote.gif Met quite a few hobbyists too. First was this guy with his Canon and a large lens with red ring attached to it (I know nothing about Canon gears, but as far as I know, red ring = premium lens in general?), and he used it to shoot whatever he could point his camera at. Infinity, then medium range, and then did some flower macros, back and forth. Then met a bunch of students, I asked one of them, it was shooting day for their photography tuition. It's quite a sight to see a group of people with their DSLRs out. Then I bumped into the previous Canon guy, and this time he changed his lens to this 30cm-ish white lens, and still used it to shoot flower macros. Looks like he brought all his arsenals with him. Walked past him and he kept staring at my camera. I think he was trying to figure out what lens I got. From a quick glance when I passed him, it looked like he got this "my lens is bigger than yours and what the hell are you doing with that old looking lens" on his face. Can't stand smug with big lens thinking that just because he got a big lens then he's suddenly a pro or something. Or maybe he's really a super duper pro, looks like he pretty much "point and shoot" the hell out of everything he saw, came accross one flower, pointed, shot it. The resumed walking around (and holding his camera uphold like a soldier holding his AK-47), looked around, another flower, pointed, shot again. Either that he's a tard who don't have a concept of composition or he's so good at composition, didn't even need to think and just shoot everything right away and all come up perfect. Not jealous or anything, but it's a bit annoying when you see a guy who thinks he's better than you because his gears are better than yours.

sorry if this is kinda late but i haven't had as much time to follow this thread lately.

i've ran into a bunch of those guys before also. there was one guy that i could never forget while shooting in some of the hills above golden gate bridge. while walking by, i complemented him on his pair of canon mark2's that he had in the back of his pick up.

i struck up a conversation with him, telling that i had a lot of fun with my D50 and kit lens and said that he had good taste in cameras and lenses. the next thing he said really annoyed me. he said that nikons were okay for amateurs but canon are for serious photographers and really had better lenses. that's why he chose canon and only shoots with "L" lenses. here i was happy with my new D50 and he burst my bubble.

after that, i got really annoyed and ended the conversation. it was obvious to me that he only cared about the equipment instead of taking pictures. it was the middle of the day and on top of the fact that he had two of the exact same lenses on both of his mark2s but they also had a flash attached to the camera. why would he need his flashes during the middle of the day with such huge zooms attached to his cameras? and all he was doing was hanging out on the back of his truck!!! sheesh...

by the way, this was not meant as anything derogatory towards canon users. i think either canons or nikons are great and both make really good lenses.

 

[dj_mocok]

When he says something like that, that is obvious he himself was an amateur, probably a die-hard Canon fan that tries to make up his lack of skill with the best equipments he can afford.

If I were you, I'd ask him to let me see the images he's taken so far, and see whether he puts his money where his mouth is. When he said that only pros use Canon and that's why he only used L-lenses, you should've told him that a real pro can get nice pictures regardless it's L-lenses or not. Either that or ask him that since he got 2 MarkIIs with similar L-lenses so suddenly he's a pro now?

Seriously, you don't have to worry about other people's equipments, as long as you're happy with yours, that's the main thing.
But yeah, that's one hell of a w@nker you met there.

 

[fureshi]

no way, i'm really quite happy with my D50. his equipment was impressive but at the end of the day, it's the nut behind the camera that makes a picture good, not the camera.

 

[WhatMACHI]

Ok, got the D50 today. Couldnt get the D80 dad was pretty against it $$$ wise. If i grow out of the D50 which will be fair enough for me for a long time, i can consider upgrading

I got a HOYA UV filter for 135, and ill try get a rubber hood for the 50mm sometime

Just another note, with all the electronics ive had, ive charged the battery for 24hrs prior to the first use (to properly condition the battery) should i do the same with my Camera battery? Otherwise ill probably keep it on the charger at least overnight.

 

[av98m2]

Quote:

Originally Posted by fureshi /img/forum/go_quote.gif sorry if this is kinda late but i haven't had as much time to follow this thread lately. i've ran into a bunch of those guys before also. there was one guy that i could never forget while shooting in some of the hills above golden gate bridge. while walking by, i complemented him on his pair of canon mark2's that he had in the back of his pick up. i struck up a conversation with him, telling that i had a lot of fun with my D50 and kit lens and said that he had good taste in cameras and lenses. the next thing he said really annoyed me. he said that nikons were okay for amateurs but canon are for serious photographers and really had better lenses. that's why he chose canon and only shoots with "L" lenses. here i was happy with my new D50 and he burst my bubble. after that, i got really annoyed and ended the conversation. it was obvious to me that he only cared about the equipment instead of taking pictures. it was the middle of the day and on top of the fact that he had two of the exact same lenses on both of his mark2s but they also had a flash attached to the camera. why would he need his flashes during the middle of the day with such huge zooms attached to his cameras? and all he was doing was hanging out on the back of his truck!!! sheesh... by the way, this was not meant as anything derogatory towards canon users. i think either canons or nikons are great and both make really good lenses.

LOL what a wanker!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This twit obviously doesn't spend much time making or looking at prints.
Anyone who actually bothers to look at photographs will never make such an ignorant statement.

 

[Pm@c]

Man should I drop 1200 on the D80? Im looking to get into photography and have been looking at the D80. But its like 1200 Canadian (well thats average, its like 1050 on ebay and like 1500 at futureshop). i should just try and find a camera store.

 

[mbriant]

For anyone who wants to stick their toe in the water and get a feel for DSLR Nikon photography without breaking the bank, I'd suggest they also take a look at a well maintained used D100. New body introductions have been coming fast and furious during the past 3 years so there's quite a few of these on the market. They are 6 megapixel and can be had now for around $400 to $500 (or less) in good and sometimes hardly-used condition .... and are built better (closer in feel and build quality to a D200) than the D50, and D70. Often the seller will throw in an extra battery or bargain-priced lenses as well. Yes, they are older ( but not that old ) and lack a couple of the features that the newer models have, but they also offer some features the newer models don't and most important ... take fine pictures. No matter which body you buy, you're going to take a major bath when it's time to upgrade, so you'll take much less of a bath with one of these. Of course any lenses you buy for it will be usable on a future body upgrade as well. I owned one for 3 years and never had a problem with it ... something I can't say about the more expensive D2H I replaced it with.

 

[perplex]

To support what mbriant said, there's http://www.pbase.com/alex_beb/africa_2005 to show you guys what the "inferior" and "ancient" D100 is capable of. There's quite a collection of D100 taken photos from that person. Just goes to show you how important the photography skills are compared to the need for having the latest and greatest cameras.

I was thinking about a used D100, but I found a good price for a used D70. Now I just need to build my lens collection

.

 

[fureshi]

the D100 is a great suggestion but do you guys think that all of the pro level features of it will make photography more difficult for a beginner? the great thing (and maybe not so great if you're an experienced photographer) about the D50 or D40 is that their interfaces are simplified for the consumer. getting to the extra features, which might not be used by a beginner, requires hunting through menus.

btw, i've noticed that the D100 uses about the same sensor as the D70/s with the D50 and D40 having a slightly upgraded version. for less than the price of a D50/40, you can get a pro level camera with the D100. sounds really tempting to me but i'd still consider myself a noob.

 

[mbriant]

For someone who only wants a camera to take the odd snapshot and never intends to truly "get involved" in photography, perhaps a D100 is overkill. Then again, if that's the case, perhaps any DSLR is overkill. But for beginners who do intend to learn and get involved more and more, IMO, it's a perfect camera ... and now cheap and good enough to keep as a quality second back-up body to any upgrade they may get in the future.

The D100 was Nikon's original entry level DSLR and was therefore purchased by both pros and amateurs. It may not come with fixed macro, landscape, portrait, etc. settings like a basic point and shoot, but it does have a built in pop-up flash and full auto settings. Once a beginner understands the relationship between aperture and shutter speed, along with depth of field and lighting, the "flower", "mountains", and "head-silhouette" settings aren't really needed. Even if they never use the advanced features ( that the D50, D70, and D80 would also have ) ... no harm done.

 

[skyline889]

Do you think it would be worth it to sell a D50 to get the D100? Is it a better performer than the D70? I had the D70 but sold it due to lack of use however, now that I'm starting to get back into it, will the extra features of the D100 be useful? The only mode I usually use is manual, so I don't need all the preset functions and modes of the D50/70. Would you recommend buying a better lens over trading in for the D100? I always thought that the D100 was more of a side-step from the D50/70 but perhaps I misjudged that. The one big thing for me that was a step up from the D70 to the D50 was the larger 2" screen on the D50, so I think going back to the 1.8" might be a little hard. The D100 bodies are pretty reasonable right now so I could probably pick one up on eBay. Thanks for your help!

 

[mb3k]

Wow, I didn't realize the D100 bodies are so inexpensive. I have no clue about the D100 skyline889, so I can't comment on your dilemma.
A question of my own... What's with these filter thread sizes?! I really want the 67mm Nikon circular polarizer but I'm planning to buy the 18-200VR which is 72mm. I heard a lot about buying a large filter then using step-up rings to fit them on smaller threads... but is there performance sacrifices to do such thing?

 

[mbriant]

My recommendation for the D100 was mainly based on cost, the fact that I owned one, and the fact that I usually give extra points for heft and build quality. I've read about the D50 and D70 when they were first released but since I had my eye on a D2H, never paid a whole lot of attention. I believe there are benefits to both the D100 and the D70 but you'd have to do a feature/spec comparison to see what the differences were and what's most important to you. I paid $2000 Can for my D100 body when new and recently sold it in mint condition to my brother-in-law for $1000 Can. ... but included an extra 2 batteries, a vertical/battery handgrip, and 3 practically untouched Tamron (their high end) fast zooms with Hoya MRC filters, and a case.

Like I said, because this product category is new and rapidly developing, any future upgrade will mean you'll take a big loss on whatever you own ... so if you're thinking of getting a DSLR as a stop-gap stepping stone to learn on, or if you're just looking for excellent value for a camera that if taken care of should last a while, IMO the D100 is a good choice at this point in time.

A good friend of mine has been a top commercial/fashion photographer in Toronto for many years and shot with a film Nikon F2, a Hasselblad medium format (which he eventually added a digital back to), and a 4 x 5 camera until recently. His first DSLR??? A Nikon D50 which he used to shoot for magazines. He finally upgraded ... to a D70. Again, he's an award-winning professional. So when people say that the camera itself isn't the most important part of photography ... believe it.

Here's his website. He keeps his promotional photos current, but over the years he has shot tons and tons of excellent product (including audio equipment) travel, and fashion photos.

http://www.lafondphoto.com/index.html

 

[dj_mocok]

Your professional friend should meet that snob guy with 2x 1DSMkIIs whom Fureshi met and have a bit of talk.

Another camera worth picking up is a used Canon 20D IMO. That of couse if you don't care about any particular brands or lenses they offer and you just start fresh. I'd rather have a used 20D than a brand new 400Xt.