[PNF]

First of all, I have a Nikon D40x with 2 kit lenses for about 2 years now (which are on SALE now in case anyone is interested. ).

I love the D40x and it is a great entry level DSLR. But until recently, I just cant get consistent images and the depth of field that I would have liked the past few months. My photography said that it is the glasses I have and I need to upgrade if I want to have better light meter calculation/algorithums, and I have been templating if I should upgrade my glasses, and upgrade my body at the same time.

my old setup

Nikon D40x
18-55mm f3.5-5
55-200mm f4 -5.6? (forgot the aperture on this lens since I dont use it often at all)

Placed order on Sunday for a Canon 50D and a couple lens + misc accessories.

:D

Cant wait!!

[MikesJo]

You live in NY? Nice! Where'd you buy your bundle?

[Soundy]

I'm a Canon fan, so I won't argue your choice of going Canon, but really, just some new/better lenses for your D40x would have been all you needed - you could have still used the Nikon gear you already had, and added a newer body later. If depth of field (or lack thereof) was your main concern, all you needed to do was go to "faster" lenses, like f/2.0-f/2.8 or something. DoF is purely a function of mathematics and the brand of camera is irrelevant.

That said.... enjoy your 50D. :D I have a 40D and I love it to pieces.

[PNF]

I'm a Canon fan, so I won't argue your choice of going Canon, but really, just some new/better lenses for your D40x would have been all you needed - you could have still used the Nikon gear you already had, and added a newer body later. If depth of field (or lack thereof) was your main concern, all you needed to do was go to "faster" lenses, like f/2.0-f/2.8 or something. DoF is purely a function of mathematics and the brand of camera is irrelevant.

That said.... enjoy your 50D. :D I have a 40D and I love it to pieces.

Live in Philly now~ was in NY and working in NYC a few years back for a couple years^^

Soundy, yes, I know. I could have just invested in better glasses, but then, my friends persuaded me that, if I invest in Nikon now, I may as well decide which brand I really want to start invest in and that it is also time to get a better body, for their better light meter/algorithum/calculations/faster auto focus/wider range of lenses that I could use and etc.. not to mention, D40x only has 3 focus points, which often frustrates me, especially when I try to try to take some nice landscape photos, and D40x is very hard to focus unless I have something for the camera to focus. Manual focus dont always work so well and inconsistent. (or I just suck at producing consistent images)

One of the main reasons I get the 50D is, I have been playing my friends 40D and I LOVE the 40D, and incidentally, ALL 4 of my friends, with whom I take photo trips with, all use Canon. 30D and 2 40D and a 5D!!

I'm not really a canon or nikon fan. the decision is purely for convenience and taking-advantage-of-Canon-friends purpose. .lol

I have been sticking my camera for a couple years now, and since I'm upgrading, I might as well switch to Canon.. (so that I could borrow my friends awesome 35mm f1.4 lens and some others!!) ha

Plus, I have not invested in Nikon gear at all yet.

Mike:

I bought from 2 places actually.

I placed order of my lens at B&H. But I cant buy there or the NY tax would apply, so I have to ship them to my parents place in NJ.

I ordered

EFS 17-55mm f2.8
EF 70-200mm f4. (thought was, since its a tele glass and when I do use it, probably will be in well-lit situation, so I thought f4 would suffice and non-IS model). IS-model cost 2x as much!!
Canon 17-55mm hood
580EX II flash
B+W UV filter

From ebay,

a 50D body only kit, from a store also based in NY. The kit is just a 50D + 16G + misc bags/tripods which probably'll suck/etc.
a 77mm Hoya CPL.

Just confirmed today, all of the items have been shipped and will arrive on Wednesday and Thursday!!!!!

:haha:

I cant wait.

[Senna4ever]

My condolences for you going canon.

:p

[niforpix]

Be nice Jason! :D

[PNF]

My condolences for you going canon.

:p

ha, you cant beat free equipment "rental" from friends!

I find photography, as a hobby, is only as fun as if you have friends who share the same interest with you and going out on photoshoot with you, well, at least for me that is.

Shooting alone is good sometimes, but not all the time.

So, I guess, my condolences to myself that my friends all have Canon gear...

:p

[Meowjin]

canon lenses are generally cheaper, and to get really good glass from nikon you need to drop a pretty penny.

[Soundy]

One of the main reasons I get the 50D is, I have been playing my friends 40D and I LOVE the 40D, and incidentally, ALL 4 of my friends, with whom I take photo trips with, all use Canon. 30D and 2 40D and a 5D!!

I'm not really a canon or nikon fan. the decision is purely for convenience and taking-advantage-of-Canon-friends purpose. .lol

I have been sticking my camera for a couple years now, and since I'm upgrading, I might as well switch to Canon.. (so that I could borrow my friends awesome 35mm f1.4 lens and some others!!) ha

Good thinking!

I helped two friends with their camera shopping recently... I told both of them to go Canon so I could borrow their stuff :D Then I gave them both the same advice:

Once you narrow down your choices to two or three based on price, features, or whatever else matters to you... go to the store and actually handle the cameras. Play with them, adjust them, go through the settings and menus. And in the end, pick the one that's most comfortable for you... because if you buy a camera whose operation is a chore for you, you won't ENJOY using it, and it will be a lot more likely to end up sitting on a shelf collecting dust. And fanwanking about specs be damned, the best camera is always the one that GETS USED.

And those two friends... one ended up with a Nikon D80, the other with a Pentax *ist, and they both love their cameras. I played with the D80 and found the menus horribly confusing. Case made.

So, it's great to hear that your purchase is based on your experience with your camera of choice, and that you bought because you DO like using it (or its immediate predecessor). Hopefully you continue to ENJOY it for a good long time :)

[Senna4ever]

canon lenses are generally cheaper, and to get really good glass from nikon you need to drop a pretty penny.
True, but the Nikons seems to be more solid. Under general use, it may not matter as much, but for the pro going to shoot in extreme conditions, Nikon may be the more reliable choice.

[Senna4ever]

I played with the D80 and found the menus horribly confusing.
I've found that the Nikons are more customizable though, and those extra layers in the menu may confuse most consumers if they don't know what they're doing. The menu system in the D300, D700 & D3 is especially confusing, but if you get the camera set up perfectly for what you're shooting, they can't be beat.

[Senna4ever]

ha, you cant beat free equipment "rental" from friends!

I find photography, as a hobby, is only as fun as if you have friends who share the same interest with you and going out on photoshoot with you, well, at least for me that is.

Shooting alone is good sometimes, but not all the time.

So, I guess, my condolences to myself that my friends all have Canon gear...

:p
Can't argue with that! :)

[[HuCk DuCk]]

hey all my friends shoot canon (with one friend shooting a film minolta) so we can share stuff too!

[Meowjin]

True, but the Nikons seems to be more solid. Under general use, it may not matter as much, but for the pro going to shoot in extreme conditions, Nikon may be the more reliable choice.

I do have a 28-105 f/3.5 - 4.5 that is suprisingly sharp.

[PNF]

I've found that the Nikons are more customizable though, and those extra layers in the menu may confuse most consumers if they don't know what they're doing. The menu system in the D300, D700 & D3 is especially confusing, but if you get the camera set up perfectly for what you're shooting, they can't be beat.

Maybe because i have an entry level D40x and been using it for a couple years, I thought Nikon has pretty good/straight forward menu? or Maybe I am used to it.

And yes, I have been shopping for about 3-4 months, but cannot pull the trigger until last weekend. Actually, the reality is, we went on a photoshoot last weekend, and again, I was borrowing my friend's 30D with his 17-40mm f4 glass.... then when we got home, I realized, I dont have as many photos in my own camera!!!! I had to ask my friend to send me the files! on MSN, in his words "Get your own fukin Canon".. <-- ok,yea, jokingly speaking..


I agree that we should try out the equipment, get a feel for it, before just following blindly. This time, I have been sparing playing around the 30/40D and they taught me quite a bit about Canon I thought.

However, I never used/tried this 17-55mm f2.8. Every single review I have read recommends this as one of their top choice for everyday/general purpose lens. Asked a few people online and looked at their results and it looks great. So, I'd think this should be a good blind-buy.

The only downside is that, this is a EFS lens and in 5 years, if I do decide to go for FF (which I dont think I will, since I think this mid-level is as high up as I go), my EFS wouldnt work...

PS. the more i think about it, the more I dislike how Canon price/make their lens. There is NO perfect lens and forces us to BUY A LOT of other lenses for our need...

i.e. I really like the 24-70mm f2.8 glass, but then, it has no IS and 24mm isnt wide enough! OR the 17-40mm, but its not large enough in aperture!! The only perfect lens that suits great "general purpose" everyday use is probably this 17-55mm f2.8.


PS. B&H is amazing!! My lens are ARRIVING TODAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! shipped out yesterday afternoon!!

damn... got lens, but no body!!:cry:

[PNF]

True, but the Nikons seems to be more solid. Under general use, it may not matter as much, but for the pro going to shoot in extreme conditions, Nikon may be the more reliable choice.

thank god I wont turn into a pro. I meant, I cant afford to turn into a pro unless I'm making money off my equipment....

A canon hood costs $56 USD a piece!! :eek:

[lilaznviper]

thats why u dont get a canon hood and just ebay it

i pretty much bough most of the camera access off ebay: remote, hood, filters

[Hehe]

Instead of a 50D, why didn't you go for an used 5D?

I've used my friend's 50D, 5D and 1Ds MKII from time to time to help on his assignments, and unless you need the extra reach of crop sensor, FF all the way.

And I agree with senna4ever, Nikon's layout for controls seems much more logical/easy than Canon unless you go 1D/1Ds class, which is on par at best with Nikon. But well, I personally shoot with a D700, so, I might be biased. :D

[Meowjin]

I agree with the ff comment.

[[HuCk DuCk]]

thank god I wont turn into a pro. I meant, I cant afford to turn into a pro unless I'm making money off my equipment....

A canon hood costs $56 USD a piece!! :eek:

deal extreme. you can get full hoods and petal hoods for under 10 bucks


PS. the more i think about it, the more I dislike how Canon price/make their lens. There is NO perfect lens and forces us to BUY A LOT of other lenses for our need...


does nikon have a "perfect" lens either?

[PNF]

;6428859']deal extreme. you can get full hoods and petal hoods for under 10 bucks



does nikon have a "perfect" lens either?


dealextreame.com?? I'm shopping for a hood now and saw a few on ebay for $10 or so, but not from Canon, and I am not sure about fitment. I am weary ordering these from ebay due to the fitment issues.

As for the FF comment.. I did actually, for a used 5D, just on ebay and look into some photography forum and even craiglist.

Was in long discussion with my friends about a used 5D vs new 50D, given my needs at this time, and the weary of a used products/defects/no warranty, 50D was the choice and hence hunting for the best price 50D i can.

Besides, I didnt find any 5D that I thought was worth the risk.. or even good deal refurbished 5Ds ~

I enjoy wide angle shots, and to compensate the 1.6x crop, 10-22mm ultra wide lens is one of my future glass that I'll be getting, just not at this moment.. too much $$$ out the door now.

As for perfect Nikon lens.. I dont know.. I never really actually done any homework on Nikon lenses.

[Hehe]

If you ever come back to Nikon on FF with a better budget, lens choices are simple.

14-24 2.8 -->ultra wide angle king. Not even 14L or Nikon 14mm come close to this one in term of sharpness.
24-70 2.8 --> Arguably the best 24-70 zoom on the market (debatable with Sony's Zeiss 24-70, definitely better than 24-70L though)
85 1.4 --> Close competitor to 85L at almost half the price. Sounds no brainer to me

This should cover 99% of situations I can think of. Of course if Nikon happens to remake them or you are just balling, get the 28mm F1.4 AFD.

[Senna4ever]

If you ever come back to Nikon on FF with a better budget, lens choices are simple.

14-24 2.8 -->ultra wide angle king. Not even 14L or Nikon 14mm come close to this one in term of sharpness.
24-70 2.8 --> Arguably the best 24-70 zoom on the market (debatable with Sony's Zeiss 24-70, definitely better than 24-70L though)
85 1.4 --> Close competitor to 85L at almost half the price. Sounds no brainer to me

This should cover 99% of situations I can think of. Of course if Nikon happens to remake them or you are just balling, get the 28mm F1.4 AFD.
The Sony Zeiss may be just a little bit sharper, but at the expense of bokeh quality. I find the bokeh on the canon & Nikon 24-70 f2.8 lenses to be very smooth, while the Sony Zeiss has compromised bokeh for sharpness....still very smooth, butnoticeable in some shots I've seen. In a fashion studio or landscape setting it doesn't matter though.

We tested a Nikon 24-70 f2.8 against a new Nikon 50mm f1.4 G on a D3X, and the 24-70 was NOTICEABLY SHARPER than the 50mm at all apertures! Now, I have no way of knowing if the 24-70 was a very sharp copy, and the 50mm was a shitty one, but the results surprised us.

The Nikon 14-24 f2.8 is almost as sharp if not as sharp as the Zeiss & Leica 15mm primes, which is saying something.

[Meowjin]

i love the bokeh on the 50mm f/1.4 zeiss.

btw i picked up my 28mm f/2 today... yay

not bad for 200 dollars :D

[Meowjin]

the nikon 14-24 f/2.8 and 24-70 is so unbelievably sharp it destroys primes.

[Meowjin]

If you ever come back to Nikon on FF with a better budget, lens choices are simple.

14-24 2.8 -->ultra wide angle king. Not even 14L or Nikon 14mm come close to this one in term of sharpness.
24-70 2.8 --> Arguably the best 24-70 zoom on the market (debatable with Sony's Zeiss 24-70, definitely better than 24-70L though)
85 1.4 --> Close competitor to 85L at almost half the price. Sounds no brainer to me

This should cover 99% of situations I can think of. Of course if Nikon happens to remake them or you are just balling, get the 28mm F1.4 AFD.

105 f/2 > 85mm f/1.4

also a old ed af 80-200 (which is rare) is probably the best "70-200" zoom there is for nikon.

[Hehe]

The Sony Zeiss may be just a little bit sharper, but at the expense of bokeh quality. I find the bokeh on the canon & Nikon 24-70 f2.8 lenses to be very smooth, while the Sony Zeiss has compromised bokeh for sharpness....still very smooth, butnoticeable in some shots I've seen. In a fashion studio or landscape setting it doesn't matter though.

We tested a Nikon 24-70 f2.8 against a new Nikon 50mm f1.4 G on a D3X, and the 24-70 was NOTICEABLY SHARPER than the 50mm at all apertures! Now, I have no way of knowing if the 24-70 was a very sharp copy, and the 50mm was a shitty one, but the results surprised us.

The Nikon 14-24 f2.8 is almost as sharp if not as sharp as the Zeiss & Leica 15mm primes, which is saying something.

Yeah, that's why I said it's debatable depends on what approach you take. Sony's Zeiss lineup is still excellent though. Or the STF... even though I'm a nikon shooter/fans myself, I gotta say, the Sony 135mm STF's images had me drooling all over it.

How do you like the 50 1.4G? I was planning on getting one since the only normal range prime I have is the noct and it's sometimes hard to focus when doing more action shots. I know you just said the 24-70 is sharper at all apertures (2.8 and up) but how about the performance wide open? comparing to say... 50 1.4AFD?

@Majin
Congrat on the new toy! :D

Now I have to find some way to fund my lightings... :banghead:

About the 105 F/2... I don't know why, but I've never learned how to really use anything beyond 100mm. The only 2 lenses over 100mm+ I have/had are 105 Macro VR and 70-300mm VR. The Macro is still around somewhere in the closet sitting in its box while the 70-300mm was traded for sth else.

I don't know, maybe I am just not born with the talent to shoot with telephoto range. I've only managed to get good shots out of 14-85mm's range.

[Senna4ever]

Yeah, the STF (and the Sony 70-200 f2.8 G) is the lens that is making the switch to Nikon painful. I've lusted after that lens for over 15 years.

The Sony Zeiss lenses are amazing, as is the a900....I know of a few studio & landscape shooters that have ditched their canon gear for it.

I haven't used the Nikon 50mm lenses much, so I can't say.

[SuperSlowSS]

why do people care so much about sharpness? seriously... how many of you actually make huge prints of your pictures? The way I see it ... almost all the lens today are pretty damn good and sharp. And I really hope sharpness isn't all that matters.

[PNF]

why do people care so much about sharpness? seriously... how many of you actually make huge prints of your pictures? The way I see it ... almost all the lens today are pretty damn good and sharp. And I really hope sharpness isn't all that matters.

while that is true, but it seems there are a couple very serious or pro photographers here.. so they probably want their images as sharp as they can be in all conditions.

I have not used any of the lens they're talking about it... :(

I used my friends new toy, 50mm f1.4 canon. That lens is SHARP and fast! but at $400 US, I'll have to hold off on that for now.... i enjoy compose photos with a front focal point with shallow background, and that 50mm f1.4 has to be in my kit, in the near future!

it is also hard to think that the nikon 14-24 f/2.8 and 24-70 would outperform prime lens... I gotta try that sometimes!

[Senna4ever]

why do people care so much about sharpness? seriously... how many of you actually make huge prints of your pictures? The way I see it ... almost all the lens today are pretty damn good and sharp. And I really hope sharpness isn't all that matters.

No one wants to buy an unsharp image. Simple as that. Looks unprofessional, and people will know that you don't care about your presentation. Even on a 8x10, you can see if an image is unsharp or not.

...and, no. Many lenses are not very sharp, contrasty or have good colour rendition.

[Meowjin]

why do people care so much about sharpness? seriously... how many of you actually make huge prints of your pictures? The way I see it ... almost all the lens today are pretty damn good and sharp. And I really hope sharpness isn't all that matters.


:facepalm:

I'm sorry but this is the dumbest thing i've ever read on this forum.

[J____]

why do people care so much about sharpness? seriously... how many of you actually make huge prints of your pictures? The way I see it ... almost all the lens today are pretty damn good and sharp. And I really hope sharpness isn't all that matters.

thats like saying ur buying a lambo or ferrari but dont care about it's handling....

[Hehe]

IMHO, the reason to get sharp lenses is because you could always soften images up if you don't want that much detail. But not the other way around.

Software sharpening is a totally different thing than getting a sharp image right out of the lens. The amount of details that could be lost is very often critical.

There are many things you can do in PP (contrast, color temp, saturation... etc) but there are some other things that you just can't.

[Senna4ever]

IMHO, the reason to get sharp lenses is because you could always soften images up if you don't want that much detail. But not the other way around.

Software sharpening is a totally different thing than getting a sharp image right out of the lens. The amount of details that could be lost is very often critical.

There are many things you can do in PP (contrast, color temp, saturation... etc) but there are some other things that you just can't.

Wut?

[Hehe]

^

lol, guess I have problem communicating with real pros. :p Just referring to some people got the idea of "sharpening" as in PP programs differently.

My friend once asked me why I spent thousands on lenses, I told him to get sharper images. He then asked me, doesn't Picasa have the option of sharpening?

I really lol'd.

Make it simple, suppose an image is
01010
01010
01010
01010
01010

On a sharp lens, it probably comes up as
01010
01010
01011
01011
01010

While a not-so-sharp lens comes up as

01011
01110
01110
01110
01011

As far as I'm capable of in PP, if I wish to make the image taken by sharp lens to be as soft as the non-sharp one, I probably have 1000 options to do that in PP. But not the other way around it.

[SuperSlowSS]

No one wants to buy an unsharp image. Simple as that. Looks unprofessional, and people will know that you don't care about your presentation. Even on a 8x10, you can see if an image is unsharp or not.

...and, no. Many lenses are not very sharp, contrasty or have good colour rendition.

I don't think I said anything about contrasty or color rendition. and really todays lens are very sharp compared to most lens in the old film days.

:facepalm:

I'm sorry but this is the dumbest thing i've ever read on this forum.

I don't know how to answer to this. But looking at your pictures...you have a ways to go. You could have taken most of them with a p&s. :) Please don't take this the wrong way, not saying your pictures are bad. But just p&s could have done the same job in some of your photos.

thats like saying ur buying a lambo or ferrari but dont care about it's handling....

I think most people that buy lambo and ferrari don't care too much about its handling... or they just like to know it can do it(like some people after sharpness).. but they don't actually take it to the limit.. but thats a totally different topic. haha



anyways guys... I just have one point: don't buy into this sharpness shit. Having the sharpest lens in the world. It is like the mega pixel crap. I am not saying you should have a blurry len. But theres more to pictures than sharpness. And you can take good pictures with even kit lens. (might be limited in some aspect.. but it shouldn't hold you back in terms of sharpness if you just post on the net, print 4x6 or even 8x11)

[w00tgasm]

So tell me, what happens if you crop an image and it's not sharp because the lens happens to be a bad copy?

[Meowjin]

There's going to be some serious ownage when I get off at work.

[niforpix]

^^ lol Oh you guys are funny. Great way to start a day! :D

[PNF]

I don't know how to answer to this. But looking at your pictures...you have a ways to go. You could have taken most of them with a p&s. :) Please don't take this the wrong way, not saying your pictures are bad. But just p&s could have done the same job in some of your photos.

I think most people that buy lambo and ferrari don't care too much about its handling... or they just like to know it can do it(like some people after sharpness).. but they don't actually take it to the limit.. but thats a totally different topic. haha




Now, I dont think I want to post my future shots... people probably going to think whats this amateur doing taking pictures that my daughter can do with a P&S..

Valid logic on the lambo/ferrari.

very few people who buy them actually "drive" them to their potential. Some do, just saying, few do.

Anyway, all my stuff are here!! except my filters, and my battery rechargers, for my flash!! Gonna go out and shoot something this weekend!!!

Thanks for all of you guys input. I'm learning and I'll catch up!!!

;)

[77civic1200]

Those are some of the most retarded generalizations I have ever read on here.

If you are happy shooting with a p&s, fine, then maybe you should sell off your Dslr gear. You yourself have asked a few questions in the forum about which lens to get, why? sharpness doesn't matter to you, so whatevers cheapest should win out right? don't be such a hypocrite.

[Meowjin]

I don't know how to answer to this. But looking at your pictures...you have a ways to go. You could have taken most of them with a p&s. :) Please don't take this the wrong way, not saying your pictures are bad. But just p&s could have done the same job in some of your photos.





Just because you say something dumb, doesn't mean you can go off insulting other peoples work. The problem I have right now is your claiming that "who cares about sharpness" ALOT OF PEOPLE DO. Why spend MONEY on a LENS you will be UNSATISFIED WITH because you knew there were SOMETHING BETTER DOWN THE ROAD.

Also I do take offense, just because you use the cop out "don't take it the wrong way" doesn't mean that it isn't an insult, and is such a stupid generalization anyways, because any photo can be taken with a p&s. But it'll be impossible to achieve DOF, rich colors, and high ISO shots.

But you know what I will respond with these.


http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3067/3555013490_d585ea4af0_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3335/3555013540_3945e2eb12_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2425/3554207305_9f482045b4_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2481/3554208207_a0fec10e17_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3581/3555017464_59d5500d50_b.jpg

[Meowjin]

full resolution shot of the third

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2425/3554207305_4318d5c21c_o.jpg

17-55 f/2.8 shot on a d2x

[SuperSlowSS]

lol sorry to get you guys all worked up, I had too much to drink... haha
Just get whatever works for you and makes you want to shoot! :)

But I stand by my generalization.. todays lens(lets assume you have a good copy) are very good. you are far likely to have focus issues, dof, etc than len sharpness problem. And of course buy the best you can buy.

[baldy]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3067/3555013490_d585ea4af0_o.jpg

were you asking her to make pig noises and this is her nose on the recoil?

[Soundy]

full resolution shot of the third

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2425/3554207305_4318d5c21c_o.jpg

17-55 f/2.8 shot on a d2x

What, you couldn't have posted a full-size of one of the chicks?? :haha:

[77civic1200]

^ha ha ditto

I was like third pic eh *scrolls back up to count* ah damnit! its the guy with the fake abs

[PNF]

lol on the fake abs.