Which Lense

[XT GIRL]

Originally Posted by mollydog

.

I would buy the best lens you can afford, and don't forget some filters....ND,
polarizer ect.

Mollydog - I've NEVER disagreed with anything you say (rare for me, honestly) - except now!

Leave the filters at home! Apart from a UV filter, which should stay on your lense permanently, as a protector, more than anything - LEAVE THE FILTERS AT HOME.

Some reasons:

1. Don't need them (ok - maybe polarizing - but how many times do you need that?). Use photoshop.

2. Each time, you remove a filter, and screw on another one - you're giving dust and crap a chance to get onto the lense. You ARE going to be changing filters in the field... so you're exposed to the elements.

3. More things to pack = more things to break, etc, etc, etc.


I challenge any photographer (I knoooow this is revolutionary talk for the purist among you), to bring a filtered photograph, that I can not reproduce EXACTLY in Photoshop.

[jkrijt]

I use a Nikon D70 with a Tamrom 18-200 lens. For me it is perfect. I have a good camerabag that will protect my camera when it's in the topcase of my bikes (GoldWing GL1200 and BMW R650GS) and I had no problem with it. The 18-200 is usable for almost all situations.
I also have my SB-600 AF Speedlight flash with me in my camerabag all of the time and some filters, spare battey's etc.

I do have a Nikor 70-300 lens but because of space limitations on a bike, I don't take it with me on trips.

My son has a Nikon D50 that he transported in the topcase of his moped for the last two years and it still working so I'm sure the Nikon's are strong camera's.

Next to the Nikon, I always carry a small Kodak compact camera with me, for snapshots and situations where I don't want to show an expensive camera.

It may be obvious but I always have an UV filter on my lenses to protect it from dust/damage and I always keep my camera and other equipment in my camerabag when I don't use it.

(Some pictures I made with not only the Nikon but also with other camera's are on: Jan Krijtenburg homepage (Photo page))

[Explorador]

This is a constant dilemma for me too. I don't know if it's related, but I took a trip to Yosemite last spring for some photography. All went well, but when I got back all I saw was double vision through my 70-200 VR Nikkor lens. I've always wondered if the 5 hour ride on the KLR is what did it. It was still under warranty and Nikon fixed it no questions asked.

Does anyone else have experience with the VR lens and the constant vibration of a KLR?

[mollydog]

Originally Posted by impasto

Mollydog - I've NEVER disagreed with anything you say (rare for me, honestly) - except now!

Leave the filters at home! Apart from a UV filter, which should stay on your lense permanently, as a protector, more than anything - LEAVE THE FILTERS AT HOME.

Some reasons:

1. Don't need them (ok - maybe polarizing - but how many times do you need that?). Use photoshop.

2. Each time, you remove a filter, and screw on another one - you're giving dust and crap a chance to get onto the lense. You ARE going to be changing filters in the field... so you're exposed to the elements.

3. More things to pack = more things to break, etc, etc, etc.


I challenge any photographer (I knoooow this is revolutionary talk for the purist among you), to bring a filtered photograph, that I can not reproduce EXACTLY in Photoshop.

I'm sure your right. Coming out of a film background I'm old school and suck at Photo shop. I'm a movie sound guy and learned alot from the DP's I worked with over the years, but now its all photo Shop. I really should spend more time learning it. I took a four day seminar a year ago .... I still never use it. Every month they want you to buy an updated version. I actually spend more time shooting than on the computer.

I'd prefer to learn how to shoot and how to see light and shadow than learning tricks on the computer...even though I should.

I've spent 30 years learning about light, focal lengths, angles and what lenses do.
On a set, sound is always right next to camera. Some of those broken down camera guys were pretty smart. Not much rubbed off but I can dream....

Patrick

[XT GIRL]

Originally Posted by mollydog

...I'm old school and suck at Photo shop. .... Not much rubbed off but I can dream....

Patrick

Hurray!!

It would have been very depressing (for me) if you were a bike guru as WELL as knowing your way round photoshop - at least there's ONE area where I can look like I know what I'm doing!

If anyone wants to swap bike know-how, for Photoshop skills...!

[klaus]

I got me a Nikon D40 lately and used the Nikor 55~200mm lense (I also got the regular lense - but the "big one" just seems to be more convenient). The few shots I took so far looked good or at least acceptable. Storage-wise I am using a small camera-bag (soemthing like 15x20x15cm) - not the ideal mode of transport - but until I come up with a better solution...
I am also very pleased with the Nikor 200mm lense - very fast, but to make it easy on myself, why not check here: Nikon 55-200mm VR. This should give you all the info you need.

[Xander]

Originally Posted by mollydog

I'd prefer to learn how to shoot and how to see light and shadow than learning tricks on the computer...even though I should.

No you shouldnt...Learn to shoot properly (like you said) that is the fun part ..A good shot that come out of the camera is better then a tweaked one every time. Photoshop is a great tool, no doubt, but there is no way it can make a bad photographer a good one.. MOST photoshoped pics have "tells" and a trained eye can see them (even just the filtering effects). Too much photo retouching and you are not a photographer you are a CGI engineer.

My brother is a CGI engineer and he is amazing at it, but even he admits there are tells... And he can spot the ones that most photographers would not even know could exist... Companies like National Geographic and BBC wildlife are starting to employ "Photoshop Busters" people to spot fake images as it is their reputation at stake ( I know this cus my brother was paid an outrageous sum recently to bust a NG spread) that photographer was found to have faked a couple of images and is now on a NG black list...

just something to think about...

[Mermaid]

Daveg,

Be careful if you're thinking of getting a teleconverter. I had a D70s and happily bought one only to find it didn't fit ...... can't remember now if it didn't fit the camera or the lens. Check your user manuals or Nikon website for compatability. I only checked with my local camera shop who got it wrong!

I always take my D200 (was D70s) on my travels along with the 'kit' lens and a 70-300VR. I make sure the VR is in the 'off' position when it's not being used and have had no problems.
I have a padded 'Tamrac' shoulder bag that sits inside a 'Buffalo' bag strapped to the back rack of my bike. It's easy to get at for impromptu photo stops and when I stop in towns etc. I just pull the 'Tamrac' bag out and take it with me.

[Touring Africa]

I travel in a car so have the ability to carry more than 1 camera and 1 lens.
The 18-200 is the one lens that never leaves a camera, it's either on my girlfriends d80 or my d200, as for the other stuff it depends what we are photographing. If you wanted to go for a little bit longer for an added extra few hundred buy the cheap plastic 70-300, don't bother with the VR version you will notice that you won't use the longer lens that much.

Milan
Touring Africa

[CrazyCarl]

If you're on a once in a lifetime trip good glass is critical. For a small kit AND all 2.8 glass on a D70 (or any DSLR for that matter) I recommend a Sigma 18-50/2.8EX and the 50-150/2.8EX. Take a teleconverter and have a blast.

My problem with all-in-wonder lenses like 18-200's is they suffer from softness or distortion at the extreme ends of the range. Either way, most any lens now will take good pictures and talking about edge2eedge sharpness and all this is splitting hairs. The most out of focus thing in a photograph is usually the photographer.

Good luck with whatever you choose!

CC

[jkrijt]

Originally Posted by CrazyCarl

For a small kit AND all 2.8 glass on a D70 (or any DSLR for that matter) I recommend a Sigma 18-50/2.8EX and the 50-150/2.8EX. Take a teleconverter and have a blast.
My problem with all-in-wonder lenses like 18-200's is they suffer from softness or distortion at the extreme ends of the range. Either way, most any lens now will take good pictures

Those two lenses may in itself have (a little) better quality but if you change lenses on the road a lot, you will get dust on your chip.
With the 18-200 on my D70s, I don't take my other lenses with me on a trip but only use the 18-200 and keep the body closed and the chip clean.
At home or in another clean environment I don't mind to change lenses but "on the road" I stick to my 18-200.

[Samy]

I can recommed a 18-200 lens and a 2x or 1.4 teleconverter.

this can cover most of your needs. You can decide 2x or 1.4x due to price and your needs of tele.

[CrazyCarl]

Originally Posted by impasto

I challenge any photographer (I knoooow this is revolutionary talk for the purist among you), to bring a filtered photograph, that I can not reproduce EXACTLY in Photoshop.

Well looky here! Big words from a high-and-mighty Canon user. Oh look at me and all my "pro" Canon buddies we all hang out and shoot Canon cameras together and use special Canon made tele-converters with flawless results. Toss the Nikon in the bin eh? I hope you're only pumping out this balloon-juice in jest. There's plenty of stuff to insult about Canon products, like their flimsy plastic bodied 1000+ dollar lenses which fall apart, but this is about photography and no matter what brand you use there will be issues.

Anyway, to the point. While I agree with you that most filters can be left at home and that PS is amazingly powerful, I'll take your ludicrous challenge Mr. Professional-Canon-Photographer-PS-Wizard-Man and offer you the following two pictures taken with a polarizer. Let's see you "EXACTLY" (your words) duplicate the effect in PS...and see the PSD too. When you're done not being able to do it, maybe you can tell us why you were wrong.

Before:


After:

Have fun! I shouldn't take too long.

CC

[Xander]

Originally Posted by CrazyCarl

Anyway, to the point. While I agree with you that most filters can be left at home and that PS is amazingly powerful, I'll take your ludicrous challenge Mr. Professional-Canon-Photographer-PS-Wizard-Man and offer you the following two pictures taken with a polarizer. Let's see you "EXACTLY" (your words) duplicate the effect in PS...and see the PSD too. When you're done not being able to do it, maybe you can tell us why you were wrong.

Have fun! I shouldn't take too long.

CC

:confused1::confused1:
your mean!!! I love it. (but she did acknowledge the usefulness of the polarising filter)

[CrazyCarl]

Originally Posted by impasto

1. Don't need them (ok - maybe polarizing - but how many times do you need that?). Use photoshop.

Yes, but not really. The point is if someone issues a challenge then they should either be willing to defend their claim or admit they are wrong. It wouldn't be so bad but this strikes me as a particualrly "un-professional" thing to say.

I'm interested to see what happens.

CC