3NE2NR Official Phototakerouter & Photography Thread...

[RBphoto]

It is a jump compared..... to what? I said it is junk and I mean that: Compared to nikon crappiest 55-200 VR it is junk, and compared to other canon EF lenses it is even worse. Some of the consumer zooms cost not too much less than the 70-200 f/4. Buy it used at keh.com and save a bundle. The 70-300 is a little cheaper, and has more zoom, but I would take this 70-200 f/4+tripod instead. Say what, EF-S lenses don't work on my cameras.

[cornfused]

To each his own , but that recommendation of the 70 to 300 is real folly

In particular, the 75-300s are reputed to be as soft as custard beyond about 200, whereas the 55-250 is decently sharp to 250, so by that criterion alone, it is the 55-250 you should keep.

I

've got the original 75-300. As Leroy said, you can indeed get decent shots with it, but it takes effort. Unless you just absolutely have to have that extra 50mm at the long end, the 55-250 is a better lens.

truly depends on the environment in which you will be shooting. The 55-250mm isn't built as well as the 75-300mm, but the 55-250mm is quite a bit sharper. If you are going to doing a lot of outdoor work such as hiking, I would stick with the better build quality of the 75-300mm, but if your not going to be putting the lens through its paces keep the 55-250mm.

I have never used the 75-300 but have heard nothing but poor reviews about them. I have the 55-250 and it can produce some excellent shots, check out the 55-250 gallery?

All taken from Canon Digital Photography Forums

the 55-250 IS.

Will only work on a rebel or 50d / 7d etc, not on full frame EOS cameras or the 1D series.

The 75-300 lens is unusable beyond 200mm due to fringing, so the 55-250 actually has more usable range with IS, with similar cost and dovetails perfectly with the 18-55 kit lens.

Yahoo best answer

the 55-250 is about the best budget zoom you can get. Its very good for its price and i imagine almost everyone will agree that its a fair bit better than the 75-300 which have something of a horrific reputation

Flickr: Discussing the 55-250mm vs 75-300 Canon lenses

but Shiv amm maybe if you can get some one in the US to carry it for you that may help , see the cost and decide . It quite amazing the support they get for cameras and gear to what we have here .

[DVSTT]

I have the 55-250 and it is quite good


Christmas by DHARIN, on Flickr


White Bougainvillea In The Rain by DHARIN, on Flickr


WILD FOWL TRUST_20111107_0772 by DHARIN, on Flickr

Most of these were taken at 250mm. Would like the 70-200 f4 L though, but that is in a different league to this lens

[kurpal_v2]

but Shiv amm maybe if you can get some one in the US to carry it for you that may help , see the cost and decide . It quite amazing the support they get for cameras and gear to what we have here .

Actually once out of warranty they will charge you just to take it in for repair and then charge for the repair.

Speaking from experience here, it cost me less to buy a new lens (canon 18-55mm) than repair the old one.



As I'm posting here, I've been contemplating a prime between the 50mm 1.8 and the 40mm pancake, ill be usin it mainly as a walk around lens. What y'all prefer between those two?

[nicholas7129]

i hav a 18-55 lens and never used it i only use my 50mm prime and 75-300m

[meccalli]

90% of my photos are taken with my 18-55 stock lens. Rest are old E series manual lenses.

[DVSTT]

but Shiv amm maybe if you can get some one in the US to carry it for you that may help , see the cost and decide . It quite amazing the support they get for cameras and gear to what we have here .

Actually once out of warranty they will charge you just to take it in for repair and then charge for the repair.

Speaking from experience here, it cost me less to buy a new lens (canon 18-55mm) than repair the old one.



As I'm posting here, I've been contemplating a prime between the 50mm 1.8 and the 40mm pancake, ill be usin it mainly as a walk around lens. What y'all prefer between those two?

The 50 is really soft at 1.8 but it does get pretty sharp at 2.5. I never used the 40mm but u only get f2.8 with that. If you are using in a crop body then the 50mm would be a little less than what the eyes see. The 50 is a great lens IMO, and for the price hard to beat.
The 28mm f1.8 is would be the focal length of the eyes on a crop body so that is a good walk around but it's expensive.

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-28mm-Wide-A ... s=28mm+1.8

[Dragist]

Bird Maracas by dpds68, on Flickr

[cornfused]

Hold that for a so called cheap and nonsense lens

[SMc]

Bird Maracas by dpds68, on Flickr

nice shot, 90% sure thats a spotted sandpiper. Is the black 'wall' at the back of the picture down by the jetty or further west?

[aidan]

iphone shot from today

SWEET! where is that?! thats an awesome view.

[Terran]

I use the 55-250mm as well and I'm still amazed at the quality vs price. Cheap, yes, in terms of appearance and build, but certainly not crappy where image quality is concerned. These shots were all taken with my 55-250mm lens.


Ardastra Zoo, Nassau by Terran E, on Flickr


Ardastra Zoo, Nassau by Terran E, on Flickr


Ardastra Zoo, Nassau by Terran E, on Flickr


Ardastra Zoo, Nassau by Terran E, on Flickr


Ardastra Zoo, Nassau by Terran E, on Flickr


Ardastra Zoo, Nassau by Terran E, on Flickr

[Terran]

Also shot with 55-250mm


Atlantis Hotel, Bahamas by Terran E, on Flickr

[Terran]

Also shot with 55-250


Atlantis Hotel, Bahamas by Terran E, on Flickr

[Terran]

And again...


Atlantis Hotel, Bahamas by Terran E, on Flickr

[kurpal_v2]

Definatly

[mitsu_chick941]

loving the animals

[DVSTT]

Pic of te flamingo rell bess TERRAN!!! The pic of the jaguar shows the len's weakness, if it were f4 throughout the range you would have gotten less of the fence in your image. You post processed those pics?

[triniangie]

Great photos by everyone!

Sharing this:
http://www.nationalgeographic.com/ebook ... il_welcome

[Terran]

Hey Dharin, one of the reasons why I invested in a DSLR was to avoid/stop having to do any post processing. So, to answer your question, no, I did no processing - hardly ever (now). I aim at nailing the shot as best as I can with my available knowledge and equipment.

There was fence in front and behind the jaguar. The fence in front (between him and I) is actually the green pattern you're seeing. He was sitting not too far behind it.

[Chiney]

Lil advice from the Nikon guys..

Been using nikon a while now, but no experience with the D300..

Here are my current offers

D90 - $450
D300 -$550..

i dont give a rats ass about video..so that isnt a problem with me..

both good bodys...different class..but price difference adds some weight to the comparison because i can put the extra to lens or vice versa on body..

anyone ?

[stikid09]

Also shot with 55-250mm


Atlantis Hotel, Bahamas by Terran E, on Flickr

Oh yes. :3

Nice pics terran!

[DVSTT]

Hey Dharin, one of the reasons why I invested in a DSLR was to avoid/stop having to do any post processing. So, to answer your question, no, I did no processing - hardly ever (now). I aim at nailing the shot as best as I can with my available knowledge and equipment.

There was fence in front and behind the jaguar. The fence in front (between him and I) is actually the green pattern you're seeing. He was sitting not too far behind it.

Lol, nah boi, post processing pics make a hell of a difference tbh. Not saying go all out and retouch entire image but slight adjustments make a big difference. Pics came out good though

[Terran]

I used to do a lot of post processing when I used my old Nikon P&S. I'd take 100 pictures and spend 200 minutes trying to refine the shots for colour, exposure, sharpness and saturation (mostly). So, while I agree that it can make a huge difference, I'm tired of that, and use it (hardly) to convert to black & white, crop or saturate. Besides, I'm too lazy now to spend time in that direction.

[ImprezaDriver]

iphone shot from today

SWEET! where is that?! thats an awesome view.

central montana

[lighthammer]

Lil advice from the Nikon guys..

Been using nikon a while now, but no experience with the D300..

Here are my current offers

D90 - $450
D300 -$550..

i dont give a rats ass about video..so that isnt a problem with me..

both good bodys...different class..but price difference adds some weight to the comparison because i can put the extra to lens or vice versa on body..

anyone ?

If you on a budget - go for the D90 Bro.... it has the base architecture in the sensor as the D300 (but the D300 has a better 3D matrix for autofocusing; which only REALLY matters if you're into action/sport photography).

D90 has an aluminium body like the D300, with slightly less weather sealing as it's meant more as an enthusiast camera than a semi-pro camera.
I have a D200, and the only reason I bought that over the D80 (way back when) was the D200 was built to take more licks and could shoot in the rain. Other than that, the D80 would have served me just as well. I'd assume the same goes for the D90 and D300. Both can shoot up to ISO 6400 and have useable images (to print up to 8x10's), and both have excellent reliability records.


Yes you can save some money and put that towards lenses or other accessories. Definitely do that - that's what I did when I bought my d200 (i bought mine off Ebay UK, and saved some extra money and bought a couple SB600 flashes, so that I could do off-camera flash stuff).



If you really wanna know more, check out Thom Hogan's review on the D90 and D300. He's the foremost expert and guru on all things nikon and I trust him completely (p.s. don't ever listen to one thing that the other guy, Ken Rockwell says).
Thom Hogan even helps you out a bit by comparing the D90 vs D300 and creates a formula for whether or not you should buy one or the other.

http://bythom.com/nikond90review.htm

[url]
http://bythom.com/nikond300review.htm[/url]

[lighthammer]

and here's a bit of consumer advice from Thom Hogan's revew of the D90:

Should You Get a D90?
Yes. Or no. Surprisingly, it's not quite as easy decision as it might seem to be:

Film SLR owner who hasn't gone digital. Probably not. The DX frame and a host of other small compromises (no metering with non-CPU lenses) will likely push you to a higher specified camera in the Nikon lineup. For still image quality, though, the D90 would be sufficient; it's the handling details that will likely trip you up.

Consumer DSLR owner that's upgrading (D40, D40x, D50, D70, D70s, D80). The D90 is a nice step up in image quality, and even in feature sets over something as sophisticated as the D80 it replaces, thus I'd say that the D90 should hold considerable appeal to this group. It has the right combination of added features and higher image quality to consider as an upgrade. That's especially true if you covet something like GPS capability or Live View.

Prosumer DSLR owner (D100, D200, D300 user). Nothing of interest to your here unless you're a D300 user looking for a backup body. In that case, the D90's image quality is close enough to the D300's and uses the same controls to get there that it would be a no-brainer. However, you'll need to carry Secure Digital and CompactFlash cards.

Older professional DSLR owner (D1x or D2x user). Probably not. While the image quality is a step forward (especially at high ISO values), the camera isn't. The D300 or D700 is a better choice for this group.

[Chiney]

oh man..amazing info..

well i had the d90 already and loved it.. i`m guessin the d300 would be my next camera.. looking forward to using the advanced features to step up my game a bit..once i can learn it well enough..

might even take a try at some action shots.

thanks yo!

[Chiney]

question again..

on the guy's site i was reading the review of the d7000 as well

i am seeing for around $750 i can get the d7000 body and have the best of both worlds..

called over a friend and saw the d7000 first hand and was impressed and i caught on with the camera quickly since the extensive experience with the d90..

should i just go for the d7000 body and have a body good enough to last a while and get a 18-105mmVR lens to hold me till i figure out what glass my cousin and i will buy and share....


what you think lighthammer?

[meccalli]

7000 is like an upgrade on the d90- Flagship Dx, making it more rugged and pro-sumer oriented, anything after that needs to be full frame(fx). d600