[Steggy]

Do you guys think the d5000 is a worthy purchase? one of the reasons i wanted a dslr like the d5000 was for the hd video aspect, but lack of AF or external mic input is what deters me. I've seen like, the gh-1 having great af for video, and the new d300 has AF for video and an external mic, but these are both way out of my price range, and the video hasn't even been perfected yet. do you guys think they will be able to hammer out the kinks with the video feature and have a <1000 option with these features? or should i just learn to manually focus like a mofo and go with the d5000. i mean, i'd probably be taking more pictures than videos anyways.

 

[Towert7]

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackwave /img/forum/go_quote.gif This is the first time I've browsed this thread and WOW.. I feel like I'm in the stoneage after reading the posts. I have three cameras.. one made in 1982, one made in 1969, and one made in 1939. I use three basic functions on all of them.. focus, aperture, shutter speed. They make me happy I also shoot all b&w, develop at home, print in a wet darkroom. I'm like the vinyl junkie of photography.

If the results are good, that's all that matters. ^_^

 

[fureshi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ka-boom /img/forum/go_quote.gif I have the non-VC version and am consistently impressed by it's sharpness. Not the fastest focusing lens in the world, but the IQ is just fantastic for a 3rd party lens. I think the VC version fills a niche for people who really think they "need" VR/VC/OS but who want the flexibility of a fast aperture. Kudos to Tamron for coming up with something innovative. If they would just come out with a 50-150 f2.8 VC I would be stoked!

i'm quite interested in seeing a review of the VC version. i have a copy of the non-vc and non-motorized version that was made in japan and was one of my favorite lenses. on the D300 it was sharp, well balanced and obtained focus quickly. at least much faster than on my old D50. hopefully this new version will be just as good as i wouldn't mind having VC and a motor since i'm using a D40 nowadays.

 

[dj_mocok]

I have the 17-50mm older non-motor version too, but I have no wish to upgrade to new one at all. The picture quality is that good.
I wonder why Tamron is so obsessed with changing their 17-50mm all the time.

They should just make that VR into their 28-75mm full frame or something.

 

[ka-boom]

The elusive Tokina 11-16 is FINALLY back in stock at B&H.

Just placed my order.

 

[JaZZ]

Don't forget the new Sigma 3.5/10-20. I have mine since a month now and am very happy with the image quality. It's at least on par with my former Tokina 12-24, and the additional 2.5 mm in the wide-angle range really pay off. Moreover it's also quite usable wide open, just at 10 mm the corners are a little soft then.

BTW, I'm also interested in the new Tamron 17-50 VC. Fast aperture plus VR is the best of both worlds, provided that the optical quality stays the same.
.

 

[dj_mocok]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ka-boom /img/forum/go_quote.gif The elusive Tokina 11-16 is FINALLY back in stock at B&H. Just placed my order.

It's a good move. Excellent lens. Been using it for awhile now.

 

[milkpowder]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ /img/forum/go_quote.gif Don't forget the new Sigma 3.5/10-20. I have mine since a month now and am very happy with the image quality. It's at least on par with my former Tokina 12-24, and the additional 2.5 mm in the wide-angle range really pay off. Moreover it's also quite usable wide open, just at 10 mm the corners are a little soft then. BTW, I'm also interested in the new Tamron 17-50 VC. Fast aperture plus VR is the best of both worlds, provided that the optical quality stays the same. .

I was hoping to get the new Tammy to replace my slightly lacklustre 16-85VR. It's not that sharp wide open and the focus searches in low light.

I'm glad you've given the new Sigma 10-20 a thumbs up. It is exactly what I was looking for and maybe I'll be able pick one up when I'm in Asia. The UK price is outrageous.

 

[JaZZ]

Shots with Nikon D300 and Sigma 3.5/10-20

ISO 640, 1/15 s, f/3.5, 10 mm

ISO 200, 1/50 s, f/6.3, 10 mm

ISO 200, 1/50 s, f/8, 10 mm

Of course the small formats make it not really useful for judging image quality, after all it's better than nothing.
.

 

[Steggy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steggy /img/forum/go_quote.gif Do you guys think the d5000 is a worthy purchase? one of the reasons i wanted a dslr like the d5000 was for the hd video aspect, but lack of AF or external mic input is what deters me. I've seen like, the gh-1 having great af for video, and the new d300 has AF for video and an external mic, but these are both way out of my price range, and the video hasn't even been perfected yet. do you guys think they will be able to hammer out the kinks with the video feature and have a <1000 option with these features? or should i just learn to manually focus like a mofo and go with the d5000. i mean, i'd probably be taking more pictures than videos anyways.

anyone?

 

[bigshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steggy /img/forum/go_quote.gif anyone?

At this point, video on DSLRs isn't a replacement for a dedicated camcorder. I wouldn't spend a lot of money on a DSLR if your main consideration is video. Better to get a less expensive DSLR or point and shoot and spend the money you save on a good camcorder. I have a Canon HV30 and a pocket Flip Mino and I am very happy with both of them.

 

[Steggy]

Well, with that in mind, do you think the D5000 would be worth the price jump from like, a d40? I would be able to get a d40 for 400 dollars and a d5000 for 640 dollars, both with the stock lens. I was also looking at the canon t1i since i could get that for...680 i believe. reviews from like, engadget peg the canon as being better, but i'm told the nikons have faster autofocus...what would you guys think the better choice would be for someone getting into DSLR's for the first time?

 

[DeusEx]

Denon D5000....Nikon D5000...coincidence?

 

[mightyacorn]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steggy /img/forum/go_quote.gif ... reviews from like, engadget peg the canon as being better...

No offense, but if you are going to read reviews on cameras, you would be better off reading from a site like Digital Camera Reviews. Here are reviews of two of the cameras you mentioned: Canon T1i and Nikon D5000.

The next thing you should do is go to a store that has both of these cameras and try them for yourself.

 

[Towert7]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steggy /img/forum/go_quote.gif Well, with that in mind, do you think the D5000 would be worth the price jump from like, a d40? I would be able to get a d40 for 400 dollars and a d5000 for 640 dollars, both with the stock lens. I was also looking at the canon t1i since i could get that for...680 i believe. reviews from like, engadget peg the canon as being better, but i'm told the nikons have faster autofocus...what would you guys think the better choice would be for someone getting into DSLR's for the first time?

I can't think of any normal DSLR today that will take anything less than a wonderful picture. With that said, go try them out at a store and see how they feel, how they function, which one is easier to work with, etc etc.