Consumer Glass vs L Glass vs Digicam Glass

David Eaves · Feb 17, 2003

Hi there,

I'm currently in the process of weighing up a Canon DSLR and eagerly awaiting PMA in a few weeks to see what appears. I have no grounding with SLRs so do not have any lens yet. I've been eagerly reading the endless threads here on the relative merits of different lens and how, anything but an L lens is an insult to a D60 etc type of attitudes.

I've had a Canon Pro 90IS for nearly 2 years now, and will soon have taken over 10k worth of photos with it. I really like it however I am begining to feel limited by ISO and the amount of noise at ISO 50 and the lower end of the lens a bit. I've only got another 18 months or so where I am living part of the time now, and it is my best chance to get pictures of the beautiful city (Cambridge, UK). Therefore I'm thinking in the summer I may make the plunge for a DSLR with probably 2 lens, the 50 f/1.8 and another zoom with at least 24mm (Assuming 1.6x so about 38mm) at the lower end. I will be limited by cost, so I'm thinking no more than about £400 which equates to about $640 (More like $400-500 if you count how much we get ripped off) for the zoom.

I am really happy with what the lens can do on my Pro, and even with a DSLR I will have to use it for long range stuff to start with as I will not be able to afford a long lens. Having got to know the camera I know if you avoid the very extremes of the lens and know the camera you can get good quality, (Although noise is starting to annoy me now)

Anyway my main question is this: If I got a say Sigma or Tokina zoom which are affordable in the price bracket I've mentioned, would the quality be better than what I get with my Pro 90 now? I'm thinking surely it must be for the relative costs. I'd really like to hear your thoughts anyway, or do I really need an L lens to get the benefit. Any lens recommendations would be appreciated too. If its any help this gallery
http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~dge22/photoindex2.php?menu=Cambridge&st=1
shows the sort of shots I'll be thinking about taking with it to start with.

Thanks

David

--
My Gallery: http://photogallery.davideaves.co.uk

Jon Meddings · Feb 17, 2003

First, you will be impressed with the DSLR over what you use now.

Secondly, image quality and your satisfaction will be directly proportional to the quality of your lens. Unfortunately there is not a linear relationship between lens quality and price

Some here might argue that you can only get good pictures with an L lens. I don't agree - I own L glass but also some other glass that I like very much.

Couple of suggestions

Look for deals on used lenses - you might find a great L for a good price.
Primes are wonderful and the glass in these is often second to none.

What I did when I first got a D30 (and I'm still very happy with that decision) was to buy a 50 1.8 and a 28-135 IS. The 50 mm is a no brainer - the lens is so cheap you just have to get it.

The 28-135 gets a lot of grief regarding underexposure and poor AF but I can live with both of these. The IS makes up for a lot of sins. Couple this with a polarizer and you'll make a lot of your shots look even better. Alternatively the 24-85 is a good walk around lens.

Good luck!

David Eaves said:
Hi there,

I'm currently in the process of weighing up a Canon DSLR and
eagerly awaiting PMA in a few weeks to see what appears. I have no
grounding with SLRs so do not have any lens yet. I've been eagerly
reading the endless threads here on the relative merits of
different lens and how, anything but an L lens is an insult to a
D60 etc type of attitudes.

I've had a Canon Pro 90IS for nearly 2 years now, and will soon
have taken over 10k worth of photos with it. I really like it
however I am begining to feel limited by ISO and the amount of
noise at ISO 50 and the lower end of the lens a bit. I've only got
another 18 months or so where I am living part of the time now, and
it is my best chance to get pictures of the beautiful city
(Cambridge, UK). Therefore I'm thinking in the summer I may make
the plunge for a DSLR with probably 2 lens, the 50 f/1.8 and
another zoom with at least 24mm (Assuming 1.6x so about 38mm) at
the lower end. I will be limited by cost, so I'm thinking no more
than about £400 which equates to about $640 (More like $400-500 if
you count how much we get ripped off) for the zoom.

I am really happy with what the lens can do on my Pro, and even
with a DSLR I will have to use it for long range stuff to start
with as I will not be able to afford a long lens. Having got to
know the camera I know if you avoid the very extremes of the lens
and know the camera you can get good quality, (Although noise is
starting to annoy me now)

Anyway my main question is this: If I got a say Sigma or Tokina
zoom which are affordable in the price bracket I've mentioned,
would the quality be better than what I get with my Pro 90 now? I'm
thinking surely it must be for the relative costs. I'd really like
to hear your thoughts anyway, or do I really need an L lens to get
the benefit. Any lens recommendations would be appreciated too. If
its any help this gallery
http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~dge22/photoindex2.php?menu=Cambridge&st=1
shows the sort of shots I'll be thinking about taking with it to
start with.

Thanks

David

--
My Gallery: http://photogallery.davideaves.co.uk

--
---------------------------------------
http://www.pbase.com/meddings

David Eaves · Feb 17, 2003

very helpful too, you've confirmed what I was thinking as regards quality.

Jon Meddings said:
First, you will be impressed with the DSLR over what you use now.

Excellent I have to stop myslef looking at Phil's test shots too much, the detail and lack of noise in say the D60 shots is amazing.

Jon Meddings said:
Secondly, image quality and your satisfaction will be directly
proportional to the quality of your lens. Unfortunately there is
not a linear relationship between lens quality and price

LOL

Jon Meddings said:
Some here might argue that you can only get good pictures with an L
lens. I don't agree - I own L glass but also some other glass that
I like very much.

Good, thats what I was hoping

Jon Meddings said:
Couple of suggestions

Look for deals on used lenses - you might find a great L for a good
price.
Primes are wonderful and the glass in these is often second to none.

Yes I am considering second hand I keep trawling though the secondhand listings of Jessops, a major retailer in the UK.

Jon Meddings said:
What I did when I first got a D30 (and I'm still very happy with
that decision) was to buy a 50 1.8 and a 28-135 IS. The 50 mm is a
no brainer - the lens is so cheap you just have to get it.

Thats what I was thinking with the 50mm it would be daft not too

Jon Meddings said:
The 28-135 gets a lot of grief regarding underexposure and poor AF
but I can live with both of these. The IS makes up for a lot of
sins. Couple this with a polarizer and you'll make a lot of your
shots look even better. Alternatively the 24-85 is a good walk
around lens.

Thanks for the suggestions I have been looking at the 28-135 I'm spoilt by IS already so its a big consideration, the only negative is I would like it to got a bit wider idealy, shame its not 24-125! I'll have a look at the 24-85 thing is its only £20 cheaper than the 28-135IS doesn't have IS and not as much reach but has the wider low end.

Jon Meddings said:
Good luck!

Thanks, I've just been looking at your gallery you have some amazing shots there I really enjoyed them. I find the colour of the water quiet sureal in this photo amazing contrasts.
http://www.pbase.com/image/3725743

Thanks again

David

Paul Wood47470 · Feb 17, 2003

... to a D60. The difference in quality and ease of use is absolutely amazing.

I now have three lenses: the 50 1.8, which is incredibly sharp; the 28-135 IS, which in my opinion is a wonderful walk-around lens; and just in today, my Sigma 50-500.

The 28-135 isn't that expensive, and it has IS. Some people have said they have underexposure problems, but I haven't.

It's not a bad macro lens, either:

WalterK · Feb 17, 2003

David Eaves said:
Hi there,

I'm currently in the process of weighing up a Canon DSLR and
eagerly awaiting PMA in a few weeks to see what appears. I have no
grounding with SLRs so do not have any lens yet. I've been eagerly
reading the endless threads here on the relative merits of
different lens and how, anything but an L lens is an insult to a
D60 etc type of attitudes.

I have 2 L lenses which are great, but I also use and love my 28-135 IS, which is about $400 here in the US, and gives me very nice results. I also have the 50mm 1.8 which is as sharp as my L glass, and the 100mm 2.8 macro, which is sharper than all of my lenses.

David Eaves said:
I've had a Canon Pro 90IS for nearly 2 years now, and will soon
have taken over 10k worth of photos with it. I really like it
however I am begining to feel limited by ISO and the amount of
noise at ISO 50 and the lower end of the lens a bit.

You really should look into NeatImage, a noise reduction program. Do a search for it on this forum and you'll find the link. People shoot at ISO 1000 with the D60, and 1600 with the 1D, and easily clean up the noise still keeping detail. The Pro90 is a heck of a camera.

By the way, your pix are very nicely done, with a good eye for composition.
--
Walter K

David Eaves · Feb 17, 2003

Paul Wood said:
... to a D60. The difference in quality and ease of use is
absolutely amazing.

Cool, don't tell me too much.. I need to hold out for a while yet. I imagine the AF is amazing too I'm sure half the people that winge about the D60 AF here haven't used a con/prosumer digicam!

)

Paul Wood47470 said:
I now have three lenses: the 50 1.8, which is incredibly sharp; the
28-135 IS, which in my opinion is a wonderful walk-around lens; and
just in today, my Sigma 50-500.

Great, I think I can see me going for the 28-135IS as its affordable and has the IS, and I really do like the IS on the Pro

Paul Wood47470 said:
The 28-135 isn't that expensive, and it has IS. Some people have
said they have underexposure problems, but I haven't.

It's not a bad macro lens, either:

That is an amazing shot, not only the finger print but the SMT components really give the scale. How did you get the fingerprint to show up like that, was it done with some sort of ink?

Thanks for your input
David

--
My Gallery: http://photogallery.davideaves.co.uk

Paul Wood47470 · Feb 17, 2003

David Eaves said:
That is an amazing shot, not only the finger print but the SMT
components really give the scale. How did you get the fingerprint
to show up like that, was it done with some sort of ink?

Thanks. That's green ink. I tried a couple of other things, and I liked that the best. The lighting was the hardest part -- that disc reflects EVERYTHING.

David Eaves · Feb 17, 2003

Hi Walter, thanks for your thoughts

WalterK said:
I have 2 L lenses which are great, but I also use and love my
28-135 IS, which is about $400 here in the US, and gives me very
nice results. I also have the 50mm 1.8 which is as sharp as my L
glass, and the 100mm 2.8 macro, which is sharper than all of my
lenses.

Cool I think the 28-135IS is winning at the moment, its good to know that it gets good results.

WalterK said:
You really should look into NeatImage, a noise reduction program.
Do a search for it on this forum and you'll find the link. People
shoot at ISO 1000 with the D60, and 1600 with the 1D, and easily
clean up the noise still keeping detail. The Pro90 is a heck of a
camera.

Yep I agree about the Pro I love it and will never get rid of it. I've been using the noise reduction in Breezebrowser since last year. A few other people have recommended NeatImage, I'll check it out now.

WalterK said:
By the way, your pix are very nicely done, with a good eye for
composition.

Thanks I appreciate your comments

David

--
My Gallery: http://photogallery.davideaves.co.uk

David Eaves · Feb 17, 2003

Paul Wood47470 said:
Thanks. That's green ink. I tried a couple of other things, and I
liked that the best. The lighting was the hardest part -- that disc
reflects EVERYTHING.

Cool I bet that was fun trying not to get a self portrait behind the camera, with the mirror like disc. The result you got anywayis great, the lighting is very balanced.

David

--
My Gallery: http://photogallery.davideaves.co.uk

FUCK DPREVIEW!! · Feb 17, 2003

David Eaves said:
the plunge for a DSLR with probably 2 lens, the 50 f/1.8

...almost a must, good choice...

David Eaves said:
and another zoom with at least 24mm (Assuming 1.6x so about 38mm)
at the lower end.

Do you think this is wide enough? Further, why do you think you need a zoom?

David Eaves said:
I will be limited by cost, so I'm thinking no more
than about £400 which equates to about $640 (More like $400-500 if
you count how much we get ripped off) for the zoom.

IF cost is an issue, stay away from zooms, especially good quality zooms, or even worse, L zooms... ;-)

David Eaves said:
Any lens recommendations would be appreciated too. If
its any help this gallery
http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~dge22/photoindex2.php?menu=Cambridge&st=1
shows the sort of shots I'll be thinking about taking with it to
start with.

It is very helpful to see what people are actually planning to shoot. Congrats, there is some really fine photography on your pages. You have a good eye.

Based on how I see your "style", I would stay away from a zoom for the moment and go for another prime: My suggestion would be to have a look at the 20mm/f2.8, 24/f2.8, 28mm/f2.8 or 28mm/f1.8. I'm afraid that 28mm might not be wide enough for your purposes, so check out the 20mm or 24mm.

Andi

--
http://www.andreassteiner.net/photography

Juli Valley · Feb 17, 2003

I came from a similar background with the Olympus 2100UZ which has Canon built or authorized IS 38-380mm lens.

You will be amazed at the lack of noise at higher ISOs and the lack of lagtime with the shutter. It's much more like using a film camera in that regard.

Go for it. I bought the 28-135IS at first. I've since sold it for an 28-70L, but the IS lens is a good walkabout. Others recommend the 24-80. Do a search for lenses and you will find more than you can read. Adam T lives in the UK and could probably give you some suggestions. He's been my advisor.

David Eaves · Feb 17, 2003

Member said:
Member said:

and another zoom with at least 24mm (Assuming 1.6x so about 38mm)
at the lower end.

Click to expand...

Do you think this is wide enough? Further, why do you think you
need a zoom?

Err well I'm used to shooting at about 38mm at the moment at the wide end, and although some of the time I would like a bit wider I figure I can live with that.

As regards the zoom the main reason is I know from looking through most of my Cambridge shots they are mainly taken in the range 38-80ish mm

The other thing I am up against is finding a position for the shots, unfortunatly most of the grass you are not allowed to walk on which can be quite limiting to position yourself for the shots. Hence I think a zoom is probably best to give me the greatest flexiblility for shots. My biggest fear would be say with a 20mm and a 50mm would be not having something in the mid-range, and never quite framing shots how I would like.

Member said:
IF cost is an issue, stay away from zooms, especially good quality
zooms, or even worse, L zooms... ;-)

LOL

)

I'll have to see a)What comes out and with what crop factors related to price, and then see how much I will have left for lens, having just looked at my shots before writing this the 24-85mm seems quite sensible in zoom length.

Member said:
It is very helpful to see what people are actually planning to
shoot. Congrats, there is some really fine photography on your
pages. You have a good eye.

Thanks for your nice comments

Member said:
Based on how I see your "style", I would stay away from a zoom for
the moment and go for another prime: My suggestion would be to have
a look at the 20mm/f2.8, 24/f2.8, 28mm/f2.8 or 28mm/f1.8. I'm
afraid that 28mm might not be wide enough for your purposes, so
check out the 20mm or 24mm.

Okay thanks you've given me plenty of food for thought there as regards primes. However as I mentioned above, a zoom could be very useful. I'll have to compare the costs of a set of primes and a zoom vs quality trade offs etc. The other thing I guess makes me reluctant against primes is I could see myself on one of my typical walks having to change lens multiple times, which concerns me with the dust issue and other factors.

Thanks again, I respect your well considered thoughts. You haev a great range of shots in your gallery too. I particularly like some of your portrait shots.

David

--
My Gallery: http://photogallery.davideaves.co.uk

David Eaves · Feb 17, 2003

Juli Valley said:
I came from a similar background with the Olympus 2100UZ which has
Canon built or authorized IS 38-380mm lens.

Cool, I considered the UZI but at the time it seemed to dissapear in the UK, and the Pro90 came out with its few extra pixels, RAW, and just great ergonomics, so it won me over!

) Its a great camera probably go down in history with the Pro.

Juli Valley said:
You will be amazed at the lack of noise at higher ISOs and the lack
of lagtime with the shutter. It's much more like using a film
camera in that regard.

The noise looking a the samples here I can't get over how clean they are.

Shutterlag, I'd momenatrily forgotten about that one I like taking photos of trams and currently it requires very careful timing and pre-empting!

)

Juli Valley said:
Go for it. I bought the 28-135IS at first. I've since sold it for
an 28-70L, but the IS lens is a good walkabout. Others recommend
the 24-80. Do a search for lenses and you will find more than you
can read. Adam T lives in the UK and could probably give you some
suggestions. He's been my advisor.

Thanks for your thoughts, I like IS but worry about the low end loss. I've picked plenty of good recommendations up, I'll have to see what is feasible at the time and what comes out in a few weeks if the crop factor changed that could put 28mm in a whole new light. Although I do like Telephoto so the 1.6x is a good feature too!

I'm hoping Adam-T might chip in later, he seems very knowledgable on lens and as you say lives in the UK too.

Thanks for your thoughts

David

--
My Gallery: http://photogallery.davideaves.co.uk

Jetzone 2000 · Feb 17, 2003

The main reason why is sold my Pro 90 was the shutterlag and the EVF. I really needed a real viewfinder and the shutterlag was bothering me with my (aviation)action shots.

BTW AF with a D30 under normal (outdoor daylight) condition is more than acceptable ! Indoors it is bad indeed, but on the otherhand a Pro 90 has no AF assist at all.

My advice is by a DSLR and do NOT sell your Pro90 unless you REALY need the money. It is a very portable and capable travel camera !

--
Kind regards,
Andries van Straten
Enschede, The Netherlands
http://home.wanadoo.nl/jetzone2000/

David Eaves · Feb 17, 2003

jetzone2000 said:
The main reason why is sold my Pro 90 was the shutterlag and the
EVF. I really needed a real viewfinder and the shutterlag was
bothering me with my (aviation)action shots.

Yes that can be a pain, when I try and take sports shots I always seem to miss the moment. I tried planes a bit too, I had the most sucess with Harriers hovering!

)

Jetzone 2000 said:
BTW AF with a D30 under normal (outdoor daylight) condition is more
than acceptable ! Indoors it is bad indeed, but on the otherhand a
Pro 90 has no AF assist at all.

Cool I thought it would be much better.

Jetzone 2000 said:
My advice is by a DSLR and do NOT sell your Pro90 unless you REALY
need the money. It is a very portable and capable travel camera !

No danger of that I adore my Pro 90, I do a lot of walking and there will be many times when it is not practical to take a Dxx and lens. With the IS lens the Pro is an awesome camera with a very versatile lens. I have a B300 too so that helps at the top end at Zoos and things.

Thanks for you input

David

Jetzone 2000 said:
--

My Gallery: http://photogallery.davideaves.co.uk

Forrest41926 · Feb 17, 2003

David Eaves said:
I'm currently in the process of weighing up a Canon DSLR and
eagerly awaiting PMA in a few weeks to see what appears. I have no
grounding with SLRs so do not have any lens yet. I've been eagerly
reading the endless threads here on the relative merits of
different lens and how, anything but an L lens is an insult to a
D60 etc type of attitudes.

Take lens advice you read here with a grain of salt. Everybody has wildly different expectations from their gear ... and everybody uses their stuff differently. Unless you know you'll be using your camera system the same way someone else does, and you'll expect the same things from it that they do ... take in their experience, but know it doesn't necessarily apply to you.

( For example, I have three lenses. One of them is an L lens. It's definately the softest of the bunch. )

I had an Olympus 2100, which uses the same lens as your Pro 90. I think it's probably similar in a lot of ways. I used it to harass ducks in Golden Gate Park, and I got some good shots, but the AF was always too slow, and let me down. I really liked the EVF, compared to a rangefinder, but... The noise was probably my biggest complaint, at least until the thing died.

Then I got a D60. My first lens was a 50/1.4; incredibly sharp, pretty good color, ample bokeh, and all that. It winds up being about 80 mm, and I think this is a very unuseful length, but it was my only lens, and I hadn't had a camera for months ... so I was thrilled.

But I bought a car on the East Coast ( US ), and I live on the West Coast. That's not an every day opportunity; in fact, it took more than a week ( and about 4,200 mi ) to get the car to SF. I bought a 16-35L to take wide angle landscapes. I'm a little disappointed that it's really not wide enough ( damn 1.6x! ). And it's definately not as sharp as the 50/1.4... Finally, I got a 100/2.8 Macro a couple months ago.

With a good ( full-on ) USM lens, the autofocus in the D60 doesn't compare to the autofocus in my Oly. It's night and day. To be honest, the Olympus AF was accurate enough for me, but it was horrably slow. I would miss almost anything but a still-life. Now I can catch birds in flight.

The noise is really amazing. At 100, you just won't be able to see it at all ( unless you look very close in the deep shadows ) and at 200, you really have to look for it. It's pretty much invisable except in the bokeh, or maybe in a sky. At 400 it starts to be noticable, but it's like my Olympus at 100. Enough that I wouldn't want to print very large, but still very useable. ISOs 800 and 1000 are more like an emergency mode; you need a perfect exposure and some good software tools/skills to clean the noise.

You had asked about sharpness, though. I don't know how whatever lens you select is going to compare to your Pro 90. If you get anything but the worse lens available, use some technique, and put a little Photoshop elbow grease into it, you should come away with very good images. But there really are a lot of variables.

All in all, though, you'll have dramatically lower noise, more sensativity, more options ( lens, flash, and so on ), richer and more accurate colors, and all the benefits of RAW mode ( ie 12 bits and not just 8 ).

michael martin morgan · Feb 17, 2003

David Eaves said:
Yes I am considering second hand I keep trawling though the
secondhand listings of Jessops, a major retailer in the UK.

David,

Don't just rely on Jessops albeit a good start. As you know Amateur Photographer is worth buying if only for the classifieds and you'll come across lots of leads as regards other second-hand dealers. One such dealer that comes to mind is MXV Photographic in Uckfield; good people to deal with and with a swift turnover of gear. Lastly don't shun Loot or even Exchange & Mart, you'll be surprised what people want to get rid of.

I really enjoyed your shots, especially the series on Ely Cathedral as I was at school there for a good many years. Just for the record - the design on the floor of the West Tower: http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~dge22/ElyCathedral/img_5070.htm

is in fact a maze equal in length to the height of the tower. A Canadian tourist told me that in my last year of trampling across it day in day out!

Good hunting,
m.

David Eaves · Feb 17, 2003

michael martin morgan said:
David,

Don't just rely on Jessops albeit a good start. As you know Amateur
Photographer is worth buying if only for the classifieds and you'll
come across lots of leads as regards other second-hand dealers.

Thanks for that tip I haven't bought any photography magazines for a while, and had forgoten about all the adds. One thing I do like about Jessops 2nd hand is the 12month guarantee on them, sort of give you confidence.

michael martin morgan said:
One
such dealer that comes to mind is MXV Photographic in Uckfield;
good people to deal with and with a swift turnover of gear. Lastly
don't shun Loot or even Exchange & Mart, you'll be surprised what
people want to get rid of.

All good points, I'll look into MXV and some of the other classifieds

michael martin morgan said:
I really enjoyed your shots, especially the series on Ely Cathedral
as I was at school there for a good many years. Just for the record

the design on the floor of the West Tower:

http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~dge22/ElyCathedral/img_5070.htm
is in fact a maze equal in length to the height of the tower. A
Canadian tourist told me that in my last year of trampling across
it day in day out!

Thanks glad you liked them, thats cool about the maze (I nearly said amazing then realised) I'll add that fact to my caption some time! Thats so typical about the Tourists knowing more. Ely Cathedral is an amazing place I shall have to go again some time there is so much to take in.

One thing that is funny in the summer is to punt down the Cam following one of the guided tours and you get to find out all the historical info on the Cambridge buildings for free.

Thanks, you came up with some really good tips there

David

--
My Gallery: http://photogallery.davideaves.co.uk

JamesD · Feb 17, 2003

I have been using a coworkers 1D with 2 L lenses that blow me away. I sold all of my Oly equipment last month and have only my new Canon S230, which is always on my side. I'm hoping for a digital EOS 3 at PMA. I have currently have 2 L lenses in my safe and plan on buying 2 more after buying the next pro ????? Canon SLR.

David Eaves · Feb 17, 2003

Forrest said:
Take lens advice you read here with a grain of salt. Everybody has
wildly different expectations from their gear ... and everybody
uses their stuff differently. Unless you know you'll be using your
camera system the same way someone else does, and you'll expect the
same things from it that they do ... take in their experience, but
know it doesn't necessarily apply to you.

Thanks for the warning I have noticed that, there are many differing opinions.

Forrest41926 said:
( For example, I have three lenses. One of them is an L lens.
It's definately the softest of the bunch. )

Thats interesting to know.

Forrest41926 said:
I had an Olympus 2100, which uses the same lens as your Pro 90. I
think it's probably similar in a lot of ways. I used it to harass
ducks in Golden Gate Park, and I got some good shots, but the AF
was always too slow, and let me down. I really liked the EVF,
compared to a rangefinder, but... The noise was probably my
biggest complaint, at least until the thing died.

I like the EVF too, I think I'll miss that, but in other ways I won't I took some shots with a borrowed film SLR for something last year and was amazed at how bright the viewfinder was. (Interesting note I too the shots it parallel with my Pro and the Pro ones got used they were far superior in terms of dynamic range and stuff, down to the instant feedback of digital partially I think.

Forrest41926 said:
Then I got a D60. My first lens was a 50/1.4; incredibly sharp,
pretty good color, ample bokeh, and all that. It winds up being
about 80 mm, and I think this is a very unuseful length, but it was
my only lens, and I hadn't had a camera for months ... so I was
thrilled.

Yes I'm thinking the 50 f/1.8 will be ideal for portraits anyway and for low light, at its price it will be daft not to get it. (the f/1.4 is a bit too many pennys to start with)

Forrest41926 said:
But I bought a car on the East Coast ( US ), and I live on the West
Coast. That's not an every day opportunity; in fact, it took more
than a week ( and about 4,200 mi ) to get the car to SF.

Wow thats one hell of a journey and I think 230miles is quite far, Sheesh

Forrest41926 said:
I bought
a 16-35L to take wide angle landscapes. I'm a little disappointed
that it's really not wide enough ( damn 1.6x! ). And it's
definately not as sharp as the 50/1.4...

Thats interesting, theres always stitching I guess but it takes a fair bit of effort.

Forrest41926 said:
Finally, I got a 100/2.8
Macro a couple months ago.

With a good ( full-on ) USM lens, the autofocus in the D60 doesn't
compare to the autofocus in my Oly. It's night and day. To be
honest, the Olympus AF was accurate enough for me, but it was
horrably slow. I would miss almost anything but a still-life. Now
I can catch birds in flight.

Wow that sounds a good lens for the long term (I just saw its price)

Your comment about the AF strengthens my thoughts about a lot of people moaning about D60 AF have not practiced enough. The shot Ron Hodgson posted of an eagle last night made me think that too.

Forrest41926 said:
The noise is really amazing. At 100, you just won't be able to see
it at all ( unless you look very close in the deep shadows ) and at
200, you really have to look for it. It's pretty much invisable
except in the bokeh, or maybe in a sky. At 400 it starts to be
noticable, but it's like my Olympus at 100. Enough that I wouldn't
want to print very large, but still very useable. ISOs 800 and
1000 are more like an emergency mode; you need a perfect exposure
and some good software tools/skills to clean the noise.

Yes I thought that about 100 vs 400 with the Pro against the D60 samples, it will be amazing to have a flexible ISO with a camera.

Forrest41926 said:
You had asked about sharpness, though. I don't know how whatever
lens you select is going to compare to your Pro 90. If you get
anything but the worse lens available, use some technique, and put
a little Photoshop elbow grease into it, you should come away with
very good images. But there really are a lot of variables.

Yes I've found that with the Pro, it will be a case of learning a new camera again. I've got reasonable adept with photoshop now so I guess that should help.

Forrest41926 said:
All in all, though, you'll have dramatically lower noise, more
sensativity, more options ( lens, flash, and so on ), richer and
more accurate colors, and all the benefits of RAW mode ( ie 12 bits
and not just 8 ).

Droool..... Don't keep reminding me!

)

I'm hoping to last out to around June with this, though if I see a lens at a good price 2nd hand I may get it hence my advance planning.

Thanks for your very helpful post

David

--
My Gallery: http://photogallery.davideaves.co.uk

Consumer Glass vs L Glass vs Digicam Glass

Well-known member

Leading Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Senior Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

FUCK DPREVIEW!!

Guest

Forum Pro

Well-known member

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Forum Pro

Forum Enthusiast

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Keyboard shortcuts