Beginning into photography

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
PhotoTeach2 Senior Member • Posts: 8,212
Re: Beginning into photography

AlbertTheLazy wrote:

Hight Fly wrote:

Thanks for the advice.

As many of you say that I should get the 16-80, I might try to get it then.

Still interested in other points of views tho'!

For a start, don't worry about phototeach. He is obsessed by the FZ1000 and recommends it to everybody, regardless of their stated wants and needs. For many people it is all the camera they will ever need; for others it has an overwhelming array of options that they will never explore

But if the same price for (only) a lens, what is wrong with having options/features he indeed does not have to use until later ???

It has a normat "auto" or "P" mode for starting out.

You dont think he could/would use auto-bracketing, or HDR ??? Built-in flash or the fully-articulating LCD ???

There is a current ongoing thread about a FZ-1000 being used w/ "Time-Lapse" of the metor-shower so he won't have to continue manually shooting.

and for yet others it has limitations that they soon struggle to overcome.

Like what ... I indeed cant go to 100,000 iSO, but the Hand-Held Night-Shot works well.

Only you can know what group you are in.

The 16-80 sounds like a good option.If you buy used carefully you should be able to sell any lens for about what you paid for it

Do you seriously think that will remain true if Canon/Nikon's new ML takes off -- with their new mount.

if/when you decide to move to an incompatible system. Or maybe you'll be able to use it adapted on any future Nikon mirrorless.

What will be the "cost" of a new adapter -- and could you have gotten a new LENS instead of the "waisted" cost of the adapter.

Will it be as fully functional as native lenses ???

That said, I use a mixture of native Fuji glass and adapted (manual only)

Nikon mount lenses on my mirrorless camera. This is partly for cost and partly because there is no similar native lens. For example, I use a Nikon mount 70-300mm Sigma zoom that cost me 50 euros. You could fit that directly to a D300 as a cheap way into the world of long telephotos. It's not the sharpest lens in my bag but it is inexpensive fun.

You are making my point. (Manual Only / not sharpest)

The LEICA lens on FZ is very sharp.

Nice shots ... but all w/ a "normal" lens and SUN-light.

ANY camera could have taken those shots, even a $10 "disposable".

One of my photos was shot @ 800mm-EFL.

One was w/ flash @ 1/4000s.

One was of the Hawaii volcano, (at night and in the rain). from over 1.5 MILES away. And I assume you know the moon is 260,000 miles away.

The water-surfer was about 1/2 miles away.

I have another image of the (wooden), carving which is BLACK-SHADOWED w/out the SUN-light fill-flash.

I have another, (I didnt post), that shows the front of (an old) gasoline tanker where the back is totally washed-out -- followed by one where I reset exposure to darken the back and with flash to (equally) illuminate the front.

None of those could have been done as quickly as I did them, SOOC w/ NO "PP".

Two of them were shot at Wide-Angle FOLLOWED by a "zoomed" (400mm-EFL) IMMEDIATELY afterwards.

I challenge you to post a SOOC image I cant duplicate.

You cant duplicate most of mine.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow