Digital SLR Advice- Nikon D90. Now Looking for Lens Advice

[NCR600]

I'm looking at buying my first Digital SLR after finding the limits of my point 'n' shoot too many times and being too tight to pay for actual film for my ancient SLR's.

Due to certain constraints (which I won't go into here) I'm stuck purchasing from a shop which only carries Nikon and Canon, and I haven't really done any research at all on the equivalent Canon, in no small part due to the stupid advertising campaign Canon have at the moment. So Canon are out (unless someone can convince me otherwise).

I'm a rank beginner at digital SLR's so differences in menu navigation etc. don't fuss me, as far as I'm concerned it'll be a steep learning curve and pretty much all of the manufacturer's systems will piss me off equally.

Can someone give me some reasons why, or why wouldn't I buy a Nikon D90?

Thanks 'burners!

 

[donny70]

Nikon cameras are still compatible with all their old lenses. That's a plus right there.

I've got a canon 5dMkII and really it's the lens that makes the difference it costs the same as the d90. Where I'm going with this is the cheaper canon lens are fairly shit in both build and image quality and you really have to pay to get a good lens whereas the lower level nikon lens are much better for the price.

Plus like I said before old nikon lens are cheap and available. A 50mm 1.4 is worth it's weight in gold.

I love my canon, I paid a lot for it though...

 

[casnell]

Love Nikons, i can use lenses I bought 20 years ago with real glass. I think really Nikon v Canon is marketing, one gets ahead then the other, but they're both good.

Go to dslrusers.net and have a search for pros/cons and tips.

 

[AngoXC]

I think you'll love it

In the Nikon range, the beauty of the D90 is that it perfectly combines elements of the consumer market (SD card slot, hard plastic body, scene modes etc) and , with many 'pro' features (layout almost identical to 'higher' end models, lens compatibility with any Nikon lens made after 1977). The D90, compared to the Canon market, slots in between the XXXD (ie. 450D) and the XXD (50D) series.

It is perfectly weighted in hand, even with larger lenses, all controls are exactly where you want them (one of my biggest complaints with Canon platforms) with hard buttons for all major settings (as compared with 'lower' end Nikons which require more menu-hunting). It's not quite as big in-hand as the the Nikon D300 or the Canon 50D, but it's much more subtantial than the 'lower' Nikons and Canons. Perfect for applications where weight/space is at a premium.

They are available as either a twin lens kit (18-55 VR and 55 200 VR) or with the single 18-105mm VR. For a simple, no frills set up, I'd side with the 18-105. Gives you a really good range of focal lengths, the lens is reasonable fast to focus (housing its own focus motor) and is rather sharp, considering. Having the single lens as opposed to the two means you decrease chances of dust entering due to changing the lens as well as allowing you to travel much lighter.

Highly recommended.

(Just a quick one: Many retailers are offering cashback on Nikon cameras. Additionally, see if you can get the shop to throw in any accessories like a memory card, or a camera bag...)

 

[NCR600]

I think I'm sold. Ango, I'm looking at the twin lens kit as I'm fairly certain that none of my old lenses will fit. The idea of being able to buy proper lenses with proper glass optics is fairly appealing to a luddite like me. I had a play around with one this arvo and thought the weight and feel of the thing was quite good, and I actually liked the way the shutter felt, which has been a massive bugbear of mine about every digital camera (and the newest film camera) I've owned.

On that note, anyone have any opinions on DSLR shutters? which one feels the best? And by best I mean feels like the shutter on my 45 year old Minolta.

 

[AngoXC]

On that note, anyone have any opinions on DSLR shutters? which one feels the best? And by best I mean feels like the shutter on my 45 year old Minolta.

I thought the shutter in the D90 was pretty good. DSLRs typically use an electronic focal plane shutter and, especially in the lower end Canons, sound decidedly electronic.

The D90 has the distinctive (yet satisfying) 'slap' (which is loud, but not at all intrusive), retaining that more mechanical feel. Shutter feel is responsive also; if your in the high continuous shooting mode (ie 4.5FPS), the camera feels ready for action with very little lag.

Is that kinda the info/description you're after?

 

[casnell]

I think I'm sold. Ango, I'm looking at the twin lens kit as I'm fairly certain that none of my old lenses will fit. The idea of being able to buy proper lenses with proper glass optics is fairly appealing to a luddite like me. I had a play around with one this arvo and thought the weight and feel of the thing was quite good, and I actually liked the way the shutter felt, which has been a massive bugbear of mine about every digital camera (and the newest film camera) I've owned.

On that note, anyone have any opinions on DSLR shutters? which one feels the best? And by best I mean feels like the shutter on my 45 year old Minolta.

I got a lovely 17-35 2.8 with glass secondhand on dslrusers, and an 80-200 2.8 glass as well, only prob is they're heavy for travelling. Don't know about the D90, but I've had a D70 and D200 and now a D700 and they've all had a lovely feel, including shutter.

 

[AngoXC]

I got a lovely 17-35 2.8 with glass secondhand on dslrusers, and an 80-200 2.8 glass as well, only prob is they're heavy for travelling. Don't know about the D90, but I've had a D70 and D200 and now a D700 and they've all had a lovely feel, including shutter.

The D700 shutter sounds very similar but I think the biggest difference I felt, comming from the D90 to the D300s and even when using my collegue's D3, is the 'spongy' shutter release feel. You can keep your shutter half depressed and snap away without any hesitation without having to utilize burst mode.

Which 80-200 f/2.8 do you use? the AF or the AF-S?

 

[casnell]

The D700 shutter sounds very similar but I think the biggest difference I felt, comming from the D90 to the D300s and even when using my collegue's D3, is the 'spongy' shutter release feel. You can keep your shutter half depressed and snap away without any hesitation without having to utilize burst mode.

Which 80-200 f/2.8 do you use? the AF or the AF-S?

The 2.8 D.

 

[NCR600]

Thanks to all that replied. Picked up the thing yesterday. Been madly taking photos of crap around the house to try and get the feel of the controls. So far I've found the basic manual controls easy to use and understand, although it'll be a long time before I work the thing out fully! I can see my photography improving out of sight now that I'm not limited by the cost of film and development.

Pretty stoked so far!

 

[AngoXC]

Thanks to all that replied. Picked up the thing yesterday. Been madly taking photos of crap around the house to try and get the feel of the controls. So far I've found the basic manual controls easy to use and understand, although it'll be a long time before I work the thing out fully! I can see my photography improving out of sight now that I'm not limited by the cost of film and development.

Pretty stoked so far!

Awesome mate! Jump on over to 'The Photosnob Thread' and post up some of your pics!

 

[schacksta]

Thanks to all that replied. Picked up the thing yesterday. Been madly taking photos of crap around the house to try and get the feel of the controls. So far I've found the basic manual controls easy to use and understand, although it'll be a long time before I work the thing out fully! I can see my photography improving out of sight now that I'm not limited by the cost of film and development.

Pretty stoked so far!

Mate I was also going to go +1 on the D90 - I have one. I have also used the D2H, D3 and D3X for work for a few years. When it came time to buy my own, the D90 represented incredible value for money when compared to what the 'big boys' provide.

A website worth checking out to get some good info on the D90, including tips/tricks/shortcuts (and other DSLRs and lenses etc) is

www.kenrockwell.com

cheers,

Schacksta
www.wsmtb.com

 

[NCR600]

Lens for shooting bands.

Posted this up in the photosnob thread and got nothing, probably because I'm not pro enough to have a watermark on my happy snaps yet.

I'd appreciate some feedback on these that I took of Daredevil and Pod People at the Utopia Records 30th bash last night. I'd also like some advice on what lens I should get for this sort of work. I'm thinking something like a 50mm f1.8. Any opinions on this?

They're all a bit grainy looking. I was using the kit lens.

I was thinking something like this http://www.digitalcamerawarehouse.com.au/prod3855.htm after reading this http://www.boudist.com/archive/2007/02/07/concert-photography-masterclass.php

Thoughts?

Cheers folks!

 

[spinner]

I reckon for the price , just buy it ! Shooting at 1.8 you should be able to shoot at a lower ISO to reduce noise (grainyness) and bump up the shutter speed a click or two. Also the shallow DOF will help pop the subject from the background. (All speculation on my part , I've never shot at a gig before.)

You're using the 18 - 105 kit lens yeah ? It's probably having trouble focussing in the low light. I think they aren't that bad a lens overall. Not real sharp at full zoom though.

Seeing as no one will give you any feedback on your pics: I like the first pic and the 4th and 5th would be better with a slightly wider view IMO.

 

[Bermshot]

What kit lens would be best to start off with, 18-55 or 18-105? I would presume the latter, more versatile?

 

[wombat]

NCR: I'd suggest this (although DCW don't seem to have it in Nikon mount).
If you could find the VC (stabilised) one cheap enough that might be an even better buy, but really if you're looking at shooting bands, I can't see any need for image stabilisation at 50mm.

It might not be as fast as the cheap 50 primes, but I've often found 50mm to be an awkward length at gigs (at least on a crop body). If you're down the front it's often too long to shoot anyone at the front of the stage, but if you're further away, say at the back of the venue or stuck in the side aisles it won't be long enough.

I know the Tamron is a more expensive option, but if you could afford it I think you'd find it much more usable. And it's still a fuckload cheaper than the first party options!

 

[AngoXC]

If you could find the VC (stabilised) one cheap enough that might be an even better buy, but really if you're looking at shooting bands, I can't see any need for image stabilisation at 50mm.

The non-VC model of that lens is reported to be optically superior to that of the stabilized (VC) version. As far as constant aperture zooms go, the Tamron is an absolute cracker and a steal at that price.

Personally, like Spinner said, the 50mm f/1.8 is cheap enough that even if you find it unsuitable for gigs, you're not that far out of pocket (not that you will...I think they're pretty sweet for gigs provided you have enough room to manouver )

 

[NCR600]

NCR: I'd suggest this (although DCW don't seem to have it in Nikon mount).
If you could find the VC (stabilised) one cheap enough that might be an even better buy, but really if you're looking at shooting bands, I can't see any need for image stabilisation at 50mm.

It might not be as fast as the cheap 50 primes, but I've often found 50mm to be an awkward length at gigs (at least on a crop body). If you're down the front it's often too long to shoot anyone at the front of the stage, but if you're further away, say at the back of the venue or stuck in the side aisles it won't be long enough.

I know the Tamron is a more expensive option, but if you could afford it I think you'd find it much more usable. And it's still a fuckload cheaper than the first party options!

I've had a look through the exif data for my shots from that night, and I've found that I'm shooting a lot in the 28-55mm range. I only took a few at 18mm and those were wide open crowd shots etc. I'm now thinking of something like this: https://www.dwidigitalcameras.com.au/store/product.asp?idProduct=374.

It's possibly a more versatile lens for what I want, and only a few bucks more than the 17-50 2.8 you suggested.

Spinner: these were all with the 18-55 kit lens: there's no issue getting close up to the bands I like, old, fat dudes don't mosh! The first one is my favourite too. I probably shot 300 odd, and these are just a small selection for my photobucket account. I'll start a flikr account soon and put more up. Appreciate the feedback!

 

[wombat]

I've had a look through the exif data for my shots from that night, and I've found that I'm shooting a lot in the 28-55mm range. I only took a few at 18mm and those were wide open crowd shots etc. I'm now thinking of something like this: https://www.dwidigitalcameras.com.au/store/product.asp?idProduct=374.

It's possibly a more versatile lens for what I want, and only a few bucks more than the 17-50 2.8 you suggested.

I was actually going to suggest that too. I almost ended up with the 28-75 actually, but a 17-50 popped up for the right price. At the end of the day I've been happy with it, but I'd agree about the range for gigs, unless you'll be getting right down in front of stage (or on the stage) you probably won't need the wider end; makes a good walk around lens range though.

IQ wise, all reports I read rated the 28-75 very highly for it's range.

If you're interested: $499 in Sydney.

 

[NCR600]

I was actually going to suggest that too. I almost ended up with the 28-75 actually, but a 17-50 popped up for the right price. At the end of the day I've been happy with it, but I'd agree about the range for gigs, unless you'll be getting right down in front of stage (or on the stage) you probably won't need the wider end; makes a good walk around lens range though.

IQ wise, all reports I read rated the 28-75 very highly for it's range.

If you're interested: $499 in Sydney.

Cheers Shayne!

I ended up ordering the Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f2.8 XR Di-II VC LD Aspherical after a few reviews said it seemed to be better that the 28-75. Getting up close to the bands generally isn't a problem for me (unpopular bands), and I think I've got a 50mm F1.8 prime for my old Minolta kicking around somewhere, which I can drag along too if I can be arsed buying fillum. I've got a gig on this weekend, so we'll see how it goes!