450D, D90 or?

What you see is what you get, including photography, displays, and video equipment.

Moderators: Dposcorp, SpotTheCat

Re: 450D, D90 or?

Postposted on Tue Aug 04, 2009 12:02 pm

With a Nikon D300 (or D200, D700, or D3) DSLR, old Nikon AI manual focus lenses from 1977 and AI-S manual focus lenses from 1982 onward can be used in aperture priority mode (set the aperture, focus manually, and let the camera choose exposure duration and ISO). With the D90 (or D80, D70 or D50) or D5000 (or D3000, D60 or D40) DSLR, you won't have auto exposure and must shoot totally in manual. Nikon AF, AF-I and AF-S auto-focus lenses have been in production much longer than those AI and AI-S manual-focus lenses were produced, so you're still better off looking for a newer auto-focus lens.

There's a significantly larger selection of Canon EF lenses available. Canon made a complete conversion to the all-electronic EF mount and lenses with internal auto-focus motors in 1987. Even the cheapest Canon DSLR is fully functional in any shooting mode with any EF or EF-S lens made in the past 22+ years.

Because the flange-to-sensor distance of the Canon EF mount (42mm) is shorter than many other mounts, it is possible to adapt Nikon and other manual lenses to operate manually on a Canon EOS camera without using expensive optics in the adapter, but you're usually going to get better photos with a modern auto-focus lens.

Because almost no-one uses manual focus lenses any more, modern DSLRs do not have the split-prism focusing screens found in cameras from three decades ago. You can change out the focusing screen in your DSLR, with some possible side effects.
JustAnEngineer
Gerbil God
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 15339
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2002 7:00 pm
Location: The Heart of Dixie

Re: 450D, D90 or?

Postposted on Tue Aug 04, 2009 12:31 pm

With the D90 (or D80, D70 or D50) or D5000 (or D3000, D60 or D40) DSLR, you won't have auto exposure and must shoot totally in manual.

Yeah, sure, and that sort of thing mattered in film days. Today you waste a shot or two, and then you're set. You wouldn't use an older lens for anything delicate or important; you'd whip out your bestest of the best. I can stumble on most any lens made all the way back in 1959 and play around with it. An old 100mm f/2.5 manual is still insanely sharp, even wide open.

There's a significantly larger selection of Canon EF lenses available. Canon made a complete conversion to the all-electronic EF mount and lenses with internal auto-focus motors in 1987. Even the cheapest Canon DSLR is fully functional in any shooting mode with any EF or EF-S lens made in the past 22+ years.

... And in the process severing any legacy they may have had, although up until the AF revolution Canon's lenses weren't exactly heralded. Nikon, on the other hand, has been making amazing glass for longer than most people have been alive. It's not a matter of one being "better" than the other, only different. Sure, Canon may technically have "more" lenses, but who's going to buy them all? Who's going to buy more than a handful? Like I said earlier, outside of select special-purpose lenses or the really high-end (that is, looking at the lenses that a budget photographer would consider), they each cover essentially the same range. It's hard to go either N or C and not get good gear.
SPOOFE
Grand Gerbil Poohbah
 
Posts: 3167
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 5:50 pm
Location: Woodland Hills, CA

Re: 450D, D90 or?

Postposted on Tue Aug 04, 2009 12:51 pm

There's a significantly larger selection of Canon EF lenses available. Canon made a complete conversion to the all-electronic EF mount and lenses with internal auto-focus motors in 1987. Even the cheapest Canon DSLR is fully functional in any shooting mode with any EF or EF-S lens made in the past 22+ years.
The cheapest can, but not all canon cameras can mount and use all current canon lenses(unlike Nikon). A minor technicality, but important to address. Also, no canon body at any price does the remote flash stuff that even Nikon's low midrange bodies have done for years without a bulky and expensive attachment.
SPOOFE wrote:... And in the process severing any legacy they may have had, although up until the AF revolution Canon's lenses weren't exactly heralded. Nikon, on the other hand, has been making amazing glass for longer than most people have been alive. It's not a matter of one being "better" than the other, only different. Sure, Canon may technically have "more" lenses, but who's going to buy them all? Who's going to buy more than a handful? Like I said earlier, outside of select special-purpose lenses or the really high-end (that is, looking at the lenses that a budget photographer would consider), they each cover essentially the same range. It's hard to go either N or C and not get good gear.
The events of 20+ years ago scarcely matter now, although being able to throw older nikon glass onto a new camera is nice, particularly for certain uses. The 105/2.5 etc. for portraiture is excellent, and some of the old manual focus macros are outstanding bargains as well. For some applications AF is a bit superfluous.

The differences in lens selection that might matter to people come down to a few things. Canon has a better selection of fast primes and slightly cheaper exotics. They also have nice midrange f/4 glass. Nikon has more (and a bit better) options in the low-midrange zooms - the "optically nice but consumer build" area. Nikon's wide zooms are better. Canon's crop widezoom is cheaper (although by less now than used to be the case). Both take about the same selection of third-party stuff, if you swing that way. Nikon's use of screwdriver AF means that used Nikon stuff can be more clearly 1 or more generations behind in "features" so there are sometimes more optically-good used options at a low price if you have a screwdriver bdy like the d90.
...
mattsteg
Gerbil God
 
Posts: 15752
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2001 7:00 pm
Location: Applauding the new/old variable width forums

Re: 450D, D90 or?

Postposted on Tue Aug 04, 2009 1:15 pm

My way of looking at it assumes that for almost anybody, there's not much more than a half dozen lenses that really, really matter, and maybe another half dozen slightly less so. I don't know many people that use T&S lenses, but those that do seem to rave about the Canon offerings (I've never used 'em myself, and have no idea what Nikon's are like). I wish Nikon had as full a set of primes as Canon does, although I don't begrudge the f/1.2 lenses that much; the price is horrendous for my uses, but people that know that they'll use 'em can certainly use 'em. On the other hand, Canon would be better served with an improved range of 18-whatever lenses, but that's at the other end of the spending spectrum and, ironically, pretty outside my usual shooting patterns.
SPOOFE
Grand Gerbil Poohbah
 
Posts: 3167
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 5:50 pm
Location: Woodland Hills, CA

Re: 450D, D90 or?

Postposted on Tue Aug 04, 2009 1:37 pm

SPOOFE wrote:My way of looking at it assumes that for almost anybody, there's not much more than a half dozen lenses that really, really matter, and maybe another half dozen slightly less so. I don't know many people that use T&S lenses, but those that do seem to rave about the Canon offerings (I've never used 'em myself, and have no idea what Nikon's are like).
Nikon's were somewhat absent for years. Now that they've released a new lineup of T/S lenses, they're probably excellent. Canon was the only real game in town for a while there.
SPOOFE wrote:I wish Nikon had as full a set of primes as Canon does, although I don't begrudge the f/1.2 lenses that much; the price is horrendous for my uses, but people that know that they'll use 'em can certainly use 'em. On the other hand, Canon would be better served with an improved range of 18-whatever lenses, but that's at the other end of the spending spectrum and, ironically, pretty outside my usual shooting patterns.
That about matches my take. More fast Nikon primes would be nice, but they'd also be $$$. Canon could probably use more kitzoom stepup options, but for my purposes I wouldn't really care, even if I shot canon. Canon's f/4 stuff, particularly the 70-200s, hits a target that nikon doesn't, but nikon can get you into an f/2.8 for a bit cheaper than canon can.
...
mattsteg
Gerbil God
 
Posts: 15752
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2001 7:00 pm
Location: Applauding the new/old variable width forums

Re: 450D, D90 or?

Postposted on Tue Aug 04, 2009 4:49 pm

JustAnEngineer wrote:All Canon EF and EF-S lenses produced since 1987 are fully-functional with even the cheapest Canon EOS DSLR.

They keyword is DSLR, they won't fit the other way around, so I suggest staying with EF lenses which will fit all Canon cameras and will probably work with DSLRs when they'll be full frame.

Skrying wrote:That is the entire point. At some point you must make a decision. You either use multiple lenses and have superior image quality or you use one lens and have worse image quality.


That's the problem I have with my set. I have Canon 18-55, 28-90, 90-300. Most of the time there is a huge lens swapping and missed opportunities as well...

18-55 is crappy stockers,
28-90 is nicer lens, but they have sucky wide end when you suddenly need that
90-300 is bloody telephoto, especially with 1.6x crop of DSLR, but they are good for portraits as well when you can run away from the person :lol:

So, yea, I know super-zooms are mostly bad and quite expensive, but swapping is annoying as well.

Then again if it's quality you're after you shouldn't use zoom lens at all... :roll:

SPOOFE wrote:Even a superzoom will get very sharp if stopped down, and with camera bodies getting better and better handling high ISO's the loss of aperture isn't as big of an issue outside of select circumstances (low light without the ability to use a flash, or the need to catch quick movements).

With Canon-Uberdarks it always is... You need a tripod if you're stepping down 1 step and also dust on the lens are causing artifacts with high steps.

By the way, there is that new Canon T1i http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos500d/ which seems to be awesome with HDTV video capability and hybrid ISOs upto 12800. I would change my 450D for 500D in a second if I could :roll:

Richie_G wrote:The assistant explained that it actually performs better than the 500D and 50D at higher ISO owing to the fact that they cram too many pixels.


Not necessarily true, read the dpreviews 500D review, they have ISO tests 450D vs 500D, 500D has different type of sensor, so everything changes.

Don't always trust assistants, they might not follow the latest trends, try to find unbiased reviews if you can.

Richie_G wrote:It is rather light, and I decided that I preferred a larger camera, which ultimately ruled out this option.


External battery like this -> http://shopper.cnet.com/power-devices-b ... 81319.html

Takes care of the weight, and will make sure the battery will run dry only after a year or so :lol:

SPOOFE wrote:Yeah, sure, and that sort of thing mattered in film days. Today you waste a shot or two, and then you're set.

I don't know about you, but shooting session usually turns into 4+GB of RAWs, and going through them to delete bad shots before you burn them to media is annoying for me.

When I just started out with DSLRs, I used to do burst shots, because I was using non-green-camera settings, and most shots were not adjusted well enough. Those libraries with 3x shots, from which one was not shaky, was pain to go through.

Now I mostly get stuff right, but still, sorting the bad shots is quite annoying.
Last edited by Madman on Tue Aug 04, 2009 4:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Core 2 Duo E6300, MSI P45 NEO-F, Club 3D GTX 260, 4Gb DDR2-800Mhz, Audigy X-Fi Fatal1ty Champ1on ed., 0.5Tb+1Tb Seagate Barracuda 7200.12, 630W AXP, Samsung SyncMaster BX2450, ViewSonic VP171b
Madman
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
 
Posts: 2317
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2003 4:55 am
Location: Latvia

Re: 450D, D90 or?

Postposted on Tue Aug 04, 2009 7:05 pm

SPOOFE wrote: I can stumble on most any lens made all the way back in 1959 and play around with it.
You are very likely to damage your camera if you try to attach one of those pre-1977 F-mount lenses without modifying the lens' aperture linkage. The well-regarded AI-S 105mm f/2.5 lens was introduced in 1982, so it does just fine on the D300.

SPOOFE wrote:
JustAnEngineer wrote:There's a significantly larger selection of Canon EF lenses available. Canon made a complete conversion to the all-electronic EF mount and lenses with internal auto-focus motors in 1987.
.... And in the process severing any legacy they may have had...
Canon did produce FD to EF adapters for a while in the late 1980s to aid in the transition.

mattsteg wrote: Being able to throw older Nikon glass onto a new camera is nice, particularly for certain uses.
The inexpensive adapter that I linked above would also let you attach those old F-mount manual lenses to a Canon EOS camera. While it is certainly possible to get great photographs with a totally manual exposure, it's a lot easier with modern automatic equipment.

Madman wrote:
JustAnEngineer wrote:All Canon EF and EF-S lenses produced since 1987 are fully-functional with even the cheapest Canon EOS DSLR.
They keyword is DSLR, they won't fit the other way around, so I suggest staying with EF lenses which will fit all Canon cameras and will probably work with DSLRs when they'll be full frame.
If you have an old Canon film SLR or a $2.5k+ full-frame DSLR like the EOS 5D Mk. II, then yes, you should skip the 7 Canon EF-S lenses or sell them when you sell your APS-C camera body, since the EF-S lenses cannot be mounted on a full-frame camera. My EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM is the most expensive EF-S lens. The other six might easily be as disposable as your old APS-C camera when you upgrade. There are still 50+ other Canon EF lenses from which to choose. If you spend $3k+ on the Nikon D700, you probably want to avoid the 15 Nikon DX lenses, since their reduced image circle will make more than half of the D700's 12.1 megapixels useless. Being able to get some image is a nice feature with the Nikon DX/FX switch. That's not an option for Canon because the EF-S lenses might protrude into the camera body far enough to contact the mirror if you made modifications to force an EF-S lens onto a full-frame camera.

Richie_G wrote:The assistant explained that it actually performs better than the 500D and 50D at higher ISO owing to the fact that they cram too many pixels.
If you zoom in to the individual pixel level, the Rebel XSi (EOS 450D) and EOS 40D might have slightly less high-ISO noise then the Rebel T1i (EOS 500D) and EOS 50D. However, the newer cameras have so many more pixels, that once you've re-sized the images to the same resolution, the newer cameras produce the better images.
JustAnEngineer
Gerbil God
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 15339
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2002 7:00 pm
Location: The Heart of Dixie

Re: 450D, D90 or?

Postposted on Tue Aug 04, 2009 7:35 pm

JustAnEngineer wrote:
SPOOFE wrote: I can stumble on most any lens made all the way back in 1959 and play around with it.
You are very likely to damage your camera if you try to attach one of those pre-1977 F-mount lenses without modifying the lens' aperture linkage. The well-regarded AI-S 105mm f/2.5 lens was introduced in 1982, so it does just fine on the D300.
Your continuous spouting-out of google-sourced half-truths regarding Nikon only serves to showcase your ignorance (which is fine, there's no real need to know much about camera systems you don't use). Seriously though, you might as well just not talk about Nikon. The 105/AI-s (and mostly the identical 105-AI that it followed) isn't safe to mount because of when it was launched. It's safe to mount because it's an AI(s) lens. The year of introduction is rather immaterial except as historical trivia since whether it will mount safely is indicated by the name of the lens.
JustAnEngineer wrote:
SPOOFE wrote:
JustAnEngineer wrote:There's a significantly larger selection of Canon EF lenses available. Canon made a complete conversion to the all-electronic EF mount and lenses with internal auto-focus motors in 1987.
.... And in the process severing any legacy they may have had...
Canon did produce FD to EF adapters for a while in the late 1980s to aid in the transition.
Converters with optical elements are hardly ideal. In any case that was over 20 years ago and isn't a big deal at this point.
JustAnEngineer wrote:If you spend $3k+ on the Nikon D700, you probably want to avoid the 15 Nikon DX lenses, since their reduced image circle will make more than half of the D700's 12.1 megapixels useless. Being able to get some image is a nice feature with the Nikon DX/FX switch. That's not an option for Canon because the EF-S lenses might protrude into the camera body far enough to contact the mirror if you made modifications to force an EF-S lens onto a full-frame camera.
Some will fill more of the frame at most zoom levels if you want to push it, but it's scarcely an ideal situation.
JustAnEngineer wrote:
Richie_G wrote:The assistant explained that it actually performs better than the 500D and 50D at higher ISO owing to the fact that they cram too many pixels.
If you zoom in to the individual pixel level, the Rebel XSi (EOS 450D) and EOS 40D might have slightly less noise then the Rebel T1i (EOS 500D) and EOS 50D. However, the newer cameras have so many more pixels, that once you've re-sized the images to the same resolution, the newer cameras produce the better images.
I don't think that having 25% more pixels (so ~12% linear difference in size) realistically counts as "so many more". The difference in pixel count is pretty immaterial between 450D/50D. It's a bit more substantial vs. the 40D, but still hardly a huge deal.
...
mattsteg
Gerbil God
 
Posts: 15752
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2001 7:00 pm
Location: Applauding the new/old variable width forums

Re: 450D, D90 or?

Postposted on Tue Aug 04, 2009 7:47 pm

mattsteg wrote:
JustAnEngineer wrote:
SPOOFE wrote: I can stumble on most any lens made all the way back in 1959 and play around with it.
You are very likely to damage your camera if you try to attach one of those pre-1977 F-mount lenses without modifying the lens' aperture linkage. The well-regarded AI-S 105mm f/2.5 lens was introduced in 1982, so it does just fine on the D300.
Your continuous spouting-out of google-sourced half-truths regarding Nikon only serves to showcase your ignorance (which is fine, there's no real need to know much about camera systems you don't use). Seriously though, you might as well just not talk about Nikon. The 105/AI-s (and mostly the identical 105-AI that it followed) isn't safe to mount because of when it was launched. It's safe to mount because it's an AI(s) lens. The year of introduction is rather immaterial except as historical trivia since whether it will mount safely is indicated by the name of the lens.
Ah, there's the snarky mattsteg that we remember. :lol:

There weren't any AI or AI-S lenses prior to 1977. We can therefore conclude that F-mount lenses produced from 1959 to 1976 should be modified before mounting them to modern cameras, if you decide to use a museum piece for current photography. It's simple deductive reasoning, not ignorance as you proclaim.
JustAnEngineer
Gerbil God
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 15339
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2002 7:00 pm
Location: The Heart of Dixie

Re: 450D, D90 or?

Postposted on Tue Aug 04, 2009 7:55 pm

JustAnEngineer wrote:There weren't any AI or AI-S lenses prior to 1977. We can therefore conclude that F-mount lenses produced from 1959 to 1976 should be modified before mounting them to modern cameras, if you decide to use a museum piece for current photography. It's simple deductive reasoning, not ignorance as you proclaim.
Or you could just look at the lenses, see that they aren't labeled AI or AF, and know that without looking up the lens's date of manufacture. Somehow I think my process of just reading the lens is a bit easier. Also, your date on the 105 is wrong, in addition to being somewhat irrelevant.
...
mattsteg
Gerbil God
 
Posts: 15752
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2001 7:00 pm
Location: Applauding the new/old variable width forums

Re: 450D, D90 or?

Postposted on Tue Aug 04, 2009 8:49 pm

You are very likely to damage your camera if you try to attach one of those pre-1977 F-mount lenses without modifying the lens' aperture linkage.

Which is why I said "play around with it". I know what I'm doin', yo. Don't worry about my end.

Canon did produce FD to EF adapters for a while in the late 1980s to aid in the transition.

Absolutely. I'm merely observing the extra piece of gear one must acquire if one were to choose - for some reason - to delve into ancient history. Similarly, one must get an adapter to use a remote flash with 450D or similar body, another small bonus if one were to choose some of the Nikon bodies. Neither of these bits of trivia have much to do with the taking of great photos, of course.

The inexpensive adapter that I linked above would also let you attach those old F-mount manual lenses to a Canon EOS camera. While it is certainly possible to get great photographs with a totally manual exposure, it's a lot easier with modern automatic equipment.

You're preaching to the choir, buddy, as I've done it, and I know what it's like. I think I've pointed out the awkwardness of manual exposure with DSLR viewfinders several times already, as well as established that "easy" is not part of the equation.
SPOOFE
Grand Gerbil Poohbah
 
Posts: 3167
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 5:50 pm
Location: Woodland Hills, CA

Re: 450D, D90 or?

Postposted on Tue Aug 04, 2009 9:59 pm

Wow, the very reason I did not go Canikon. These endless useless arguments over lens trivia, and features that are nice but almost nobody uses. It is common throughout the forums and camera sites for these two. Yes Nikon has a great flash system, but last I checked I have yet to see a person who argues its merits and actually use it. The reason we get cameras with high ISO capability is to avoid using the flash in the first place.

Spend time taking the pictures, not arguing the finer points of historical lens manufacture.

The best way to buy a camera is ignore the brand for the most part and find one that you can easily operate and press the shutter and compose the way you want. The next thing to do is pick your desired lens line-up and price it out. Then you will get an idea of total cost.

I did something foolish when I bought the Panasonic G1, I bought into a system that didn't exist yet but sounded good. Well, I got lucky. I love the little bugger, and it does everything that a decent dSLR does and more. The electronic view finder is second to none except the bigger-brother GH1. Having histogram exposure right in the viewfinder is priceless. The articulating screen (this is BIG) is a huge plus too. Also... there has YET to be a user who has had to clean their sensor off. The Panasonic dust removal really works well.

And lately, the crap is flying about 4/3 sensors vs. APS-C. "Oh, the 4/3 is dinky therefore it is noisy! Oh, the 4/3 cannot hold a candle to the APS-C cameras!" Not so true any more. Olympus' diminutive PEN E-P1 runs a very close race to the lower-end Canikons: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/OlympusEP1/page17.asp but with arguably better detail. Too bad no EVF or flash, but there is rumors of a E-P2 around the corner with both.

And Olympus has been cranking out fantastic lenses for years, which for the most part work on Panasonic's camera too via an adapter. Check out their 12-60 lens (24 to 120 eq) which is just a great walk-around zoom. This one lens on an Oly 4/3 body can keep you going a long time and cover most bases. Also Oly is well-known for it's out of camera JPG being very very good (means much less time farting around on the PC developing RAW).

It is up to you, but if not for the G1, I was going to get the top-end Olympus and the 12-60 and be done with it except for perhaps a fast portrait prime.

Oh, and manual focus on the E-P1, G1, and GH1 is also second to none. That is why legacy lenses that are MF only are so much fun. They all allow easy magnification of the focus area to get perfect focus every time.

-Mark
liquidsquid
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
 
Posts: 2447
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 10:49 am
Location: New York

Re: 450D, D90 or?

Postposted on Tue Aug 04, 2009 10:03 pm

liquidsquid wrote:Yes, Nikon has a great flash system, but last I checked I have yet to see a person who argues its merits and actually use it.
Hey, the Nikon flash commander is a good thing. The rest of us have to spend a fortune for something like that.
JustAnEngineer
Gerbil God
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 15339
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2002 7:00 pm
Location: The Heart of Dixie

Re: 450D, D90 or?

Postposted on Tue Aug 04, 2009 10:50 pm

liquidsquid wrote:Yes Nikon has a great flash system, but last I checked I have yet to see a person who argues its merits and actually use it. The reason we get cameras with high ISO capability is to avoid using the flash in the first place.
I use it. High ISO is no replacement for properly-employed flash.
liquidsquid wrote:And lately, the crap is flying about 4/3 sensors vs. APS-C. "Oh, the 4/3 is dinky therefore it is noisy! Oh, the 4/3 cannot hold a candle to the APS-C cameras!" Not so true any more.
Not a huge deal anyway in either case. A bit of difference here and there is hardly make or break. The more significant difference is in control over depth of field and subject isolation, which may or may not matter in a given situation. Diffraction will kick in a bit sooner as well. Realistically, the more important limitations are system size and age. You may or may not be able to get what you want and there just isn't the same selection of legacy glass to pick up new or used. They're fine enough cameras, like just about everything you can by these days, but don't see (the original) 4/3 as a good bargain - performance tradeoffs (however inconsequential they've become) vs aps-c, but no real compactness or price advantage. m4/3 is another matter entirely, of course. It's what the format should have been in the first place.
...
mattsteg
Gerbil God
 
Posts: 15752
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2001 7:00 pm
Location: Applauding the new/old variable width forums

Re: 450D, D90 or?

Postposted on Tue Aug 04, 2009 10:55 pm

JustAnEngineer wrote:
liquidsquid wrote:Yes, Nikon has a great flash system, but last I checked I have yet to see a person who argues its merits and actually use it.
Hey, the Nikon flash commander is a good thing. The rest of us have to spend a fortune for something like that.
Ahh yes, because that really offers on-camera control of flashes and TTL operation...

Dumb radio triggers are useful in their own way, but they're not quite the same thing. They've got their own set of advantages and disadvantages, and cheap ones like that one aren't all that reliable or well-made. I've got a couple of sets of them. Sometimes CLS is a better option, sometimes the ebay triggers are.
...
mattsteg
Gerbil God
 
Posts: 15752
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2001 7:00 pm
Location: Applauding the new/old variable width forums

Re: 450D, D90 or?

Postposted on Wed Aug 05, 2009 10:10 am

mattsteg wrote:m4/3 is another matter entirely, of course. It's what the format should have been in the first place.


That has to be one of the most true statements to date. Frankly I don't understand how 4/3 was supposed to compete with C and full frame and still be locked into a reflex system. Obviously when you look at the shelves and see mostly Nikon and Canon, 4/3 did not fare so well as hoped. To be honest, I drooled over the Canon d40 for a long time, but I came from using a Sony DSC-R1 which was a C-sized sensor paired with fantastic glass. The Sony had features I got very used to, and when I could not find them usable on a dSLR I looked to the Panasonic G1. Most notably live histogram from the actual sensor, live full-view bright framing, and articulating displays. Then when I priced out lenses which could accomplish what the R1 used to do, I found I could not afford the quality the R1 produced. I had been spoiled and wasn't aware of it until I went shopping for a replacement. (That R1 was truly special).

Anyhow when I went to Stuart Horse Trials a few weekends ago, there were quite a few pro photographers there I was rubbing shoulders with. There was more money in glass than I have in my car on some cams (that isn't saying much!) However my little cam made a splash with one nice lady who follows horse events for a living, and she loved the G1. She thought it made an excellent "backup" cam since it was so capable and small. I think I sold her when I shared my results later.

That was a fun event, and watching how the pro's handled the event was very interesting. One guy was firing his high-end Canon like a machine gun every time he saw a horse. He will be pretty busy the next few years sorting out his "video" stream. The lady I spoke with was conservative, watching very closely and pulling the trigger at key moments. Her camera was capable of squeezing off a ~5 shots a second (the best Canon Body) but she stayed conservative and kept it to a minimum. While the other guy was sorting still, she could be selling.

The other interesting part was the lens choices. They all had the best glass, but not the fastest like you would assume for sports. In fact it appeared that they were taking shots with the deepest possible DOF to make sure they did not have a chance of missing focus on the subject. The lady just cranked her ISO to keep the shutter rate up, and the aperture small for deep DOF. I was opposite, keeping a shallow DOF to maintain a fast shutter, and wound up missing focus a lot. However I had the excuse of manual focus on moving subjects.

-Mark
liquidsquid
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
 
Posts: 2447
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 10:49 am
Location: New York

Re: 450D, D90 or?

Postposted on Wed Aug 05, 2009 11:32 am

Yes Nikon has a great flash system, but last I checked I have yet to see a person who argues its merits and actually use it. The reason we get cameras with high ISO capability is to avoid using the flash in the first place.

I use it a whole helluva lot, and is one of the most important features in Nikon's lineup to me.

And I can only note the irony of your whining about Canon/Nikon users and then turning right around running an ad for Micro 4/3s. If you're going to act like you're above the tumult, at least stay consistent.
SPOOFE
Grand Gerbil Poohbah
 
Posts: 3167
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 5:50 pm
Location: Woodland Hills, CA

Re: 450D, D90 or?

Postposted on Wed Aug 05, 2009 2:32 pm

SPOOFE wrote:I use it a whole helluva lot, and is one of the most important features in Nikon's lineup to me.

And I can only note the irony of your whining about Canon/Nikon users and then turning right around running an ad for Micro 4/3s. If you're going to act like you're above the tumult, at least stay consistent.


Well, you likely aren't the majority of P&S shooters gone dSLR then, actually using your equipment to its fullest. The people I know simply wanted the dSLR image quality for P&S style usage scenarios. Plus they do some more artistic stuff since the camera has the capability, but more often than not, the built-in flash or a basic flash on the shoe is more than enough for them.

I didn't intend to try and act above the tumult though... never said I was ;-). I am a notorious stirrer of arguments with no merit or basis in fact. Relying on memory is my downfall.

I have to say, the built-in flash system on the G1 is pure crap. Slow synch, 2-3 flashes per shot... which leads to a lot of people squinting in the final image. I have yet to use the flash successfully on the G1 with cats. They respond so fast their eyes are always closed when the final image is to be taken. I haven't looked into a better flash system yet for this cam. A large flash dangling on a small body sort of defeats the purpose, so I have no real incentive. Probably a Christmas item since it is going to start getting into indoor photography season here soon.

I may be seeming to be running an ad for 4/3 but I am only providing an alternate POV for the initial poster that there are other options out there to look at if the Canon/Nikon solution isn't exactly what they are looking for, especially if eyeballing up the Sony too. The problem I have with "Canikon" is they are both very good systems, but the user base gets so passionate about the details and merits of each when they are trying to help, that the really useful basic information for beginners such as myself gets lost in the noise. (Take the old lens argument in this thread as example) The arguments go on and on. I couldn't sort out the mess when I was done with my research back when I was looking apart from knowing: I have to go try it myself, and learn from my own mistakes, and there may be compatibility issues when trying to use my dad's old glass. Never really got straight answers.

-Mark

So important points for a camera you may not have asked yourself:

How important is the flash system to your style?
Are you going on trips with the system often? i.e. on a plane. (dSLR may not be the answer)
Do you like to take pictures without your camera at eye level? If not, look at cams with articulating screens. Especially useful if you want to do macro work or have a messed up back.
Silent shutter helpful if doing street photography or shooting in theaters. (dSLRs are noisy)
Mass storage link to PC without using special software helpful? Example downloading images at a remote location or parents house.
Memory type? Sony has it's exclusive memory system which is more expensive.
Battery life? If traveling, the longer the better obviously. Otherwise budget for extra batteries/charger. Can you use cheap 3rd-party batteries with the camera (Panasonic will not let you for example)
Taking it hiking? Weight important, as well as long appendages getting in the way and getting caught on things. Lens cap should be tethered or a bush will get to enjoy it.
Weather sealing necessary? (see Olympus)
Goals with the system? Spell them out in importance to what you want to do, and list cams of interest and manufacturer and it may narrow you down to a very limited list.
Spell out what you like taking pictures of and the best lens for the job (can be fictional). Does the manufacturer have what you want at a decent price?
Night time photography: Do the lenses you wish to use have a focal distance scale? Most of the newer lower-cost lenses do not, and are impossible to focus without a illuminated target. Example lightning storms, fireworks, etc.
Camera remote control through USB or tether something you want to do?

Well, that is all I can think of, but are usually questions that pop up after you have bought into a system. I am trying to highlight them here because almost all cams these days can do everything else obvious like "capture a good image".

-Mark
liquidsquid
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
 
Posts: 2447
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 10:49 am
Location: New York

Re: 450D, D90 or?

Postposted on Wed Aug 05, 2009 3:04 pm

I don't care for how the G1 feels in my hand, I think is mainly because I have big palms. Otherwise I think it is a cool camera just not something I would own.

Now... if Olympus can fix up the E-P1 a bit then it would have me super excited for m4/3.
Skrying
Gerbil Jedi
 
Posts: 1792
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 1:37 am
Location: Missouri

Re: 450D, D90 or?

Postposted on Wed Aug 05, 2009 3:08 pm

Well, you likely aren't the majority of P&S shooters gone dSLR then, actually using your equipment to its fullest.

You hit the nail on the head.

The problem I have with "Canikon" is they are both very good systems, but the user base gets so passionate about the details and merits of each when they are trying to help, that the really useful basic information for beginners such as myself gets lost in the noise.

On the other hand... it's ALL noise. Until you're out and shooting, it's nothing but noise. Distinguishing one kind of noise from another kind of noise is just stretching it a little. Since there is a TON of data about any camera system - hell, basic photography principles can soak up weeks of reading - the discussions can go on forever. All the various tricks, tweaks, factors, facets, and options can be shifted and shunted about in a huge number of ways, it's no surprise these discussions can get intense. Photography is a passion for a lot of people, and they're supposed to shut it off?

The bottom line is that Nikon and Canon are the two big fish in the pond, so much so that they deliberately avoid bumping heads. The bottom line is that there aren't many systems with as robust and extensive an offering of options as either. Olympus, Pentax, Sony, Panasonic, all offer great systems, but the fact is that they're little guys and there are certain inherent results of that fact (one, observed earlier in this thread, is that some lenses will tend to be more expensive than Nikon/Canon equivalents, a fact probably related to lower sales volume).

I couldn't sort out the mess when I was done with my research back when I was looking apart from knowing: I have to go try it myself, and learn from my own mistakes, and there may be compatibility issues when trying to use my dad's old glass. Never really got straight answers.

This thread is full of straight answers. I can quote some if you like.
SPOOFE
Grand Gerbil Poohbah
 
Posts: 3167
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 5:50 pm
Location: Woodland Hills, CA

Re: 450D, D90 or?

Postposted on Wed Aug 05, 2009 7:55 pm

I should say I never got straight answers to specific questions at the time... like "What system has similar performance to the Sony R1 and a decent zoom of similar range?" All I received was a huge dissertation of the available glass out there, none of which met my needs. Then it turned into a flaming battle, all before I even came back to check the thread. There really wasn't anything out there which went from f2.8 24-120 and was sharp and reasonably undistorted with very low CA and vignetting throughout it's range from corner to corner and affordable. Sure I could buy two good affordable lenses that would cover that range, or a huge super-zoom with compromises, but none that had it all that anyone could recommend. Then someone pointed me to the Olympus 12-60, but I did not like the sensor noise characteristics at high ISO (blotchy). But when I got on the Olympus forums, huge change of tone with no cocky attitudes, just help plain and simple. Then I saw the G1... someone on the Olympus forum guided me there and the rest is history.

Two lenses that are sharp as a tack cover from 14mm to 200mm (28 to 400mm), small, and image stabilized. I am awaiting the 17mm f1.7 pancake, and have been drooling over the 7-14mm wide-angle but it is currently $1K. The pancake is the king, making the G1 exceptionally small.

Oh, and check 4/3 rumors on a detachable electronic viewfinder for m4/3 a lot like the G1 viewfinder for the EP-1 and future Panasonic version. I'm certain I would be the first to loose one.

-Mark
liquidsquid
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
 
Posts: 2447
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 10:49 am
Location: New York

Wow, this is the new one...

Postposted on Thu Aug 06, 2009 9:25 am

In line with what I was talking about in the previous post, a leak on the new GF1. Damn! I want...

http://forum.xitek.com/showthread.php?threadid=652133
liquidsquid
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
 
Posts: 2447
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 10:49 am
Location: New York

Re: 450D, D90 or?

Postposted on Thu Aug 06, 2009 11:17 am

I should say I never got straight answers to specific questions at the time... like "What system has similar performance to the Sony R1 and a decent zoom of similar range?" All I received was a huge dissertation of the available glass out there, none of which met my needs.

I understand. You were unaware how complicated it is. The real, basic answer to your question is "Just about any of them." To me, and this is not to be insulting, but to me it looks like the problem was in your expectations.

There really wasn't anything out there which went from f2.8 24-120 and was sharp and reasonably undistorted with very low CA and vignetting throughout it's range from corner to corner and affordable.

Come on, now, look at that list of criteria you provided:

-Great range.
-Great aperture.
-Great image quality.
-Cheap.

I really have to ask what you expected to hear. It looks like you wanted an exact duplicate of the R1, to which I can only wonder why you even wanted to change up from the R1 at all, unless it was broken. You already had exactly what you wanted and didn't see any compelling arguments to shift gear. That's my perception, anyway.

I can only stress that gear doesn't make a better photographer. Most of the arguments you'll see are about individual styles or preference or, oftentimes, simply a matter of what various photogs find to be fun. On that note, I'm thrilled that the G1 has been suiting your needs. I've been fascinated by the camera and can't wait to see the results it can help get.
SPOOFE
Grand Gerbil Poohbah
 
Posts: 3167
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 5:50 pm
Location: Woodland Hills, CA

Re: 450D, D90 or?

Postposted on Thu Aug 06, 2009 1:11 pm

Yeah, my beloved cheap Sony R1 couldn't handle a almost 3yo child dropping it right on the lens end from ~1 foot up. Thus the hunt for a new camera was unaffordable at the time, but necessary for the upcoming holidays. Not going to miss out on pictures with my only child, so I had to get something. The hope was is there was something out there pretty close and affordable, knowing there was a huge selection. Was there anything like the R1's IQ that wasn't the R1 with exchangeable lenses in that price range? Apparently not.

Oh, and the one reason to upgrade was the focus rate on the R1 was pretty slow in low light. With my child reaching to hyperactive states, I was missing a lot of shots. Even if the R1 had not broken, I would have been looking though I could have taken my time.

The thought was to get another R1, but at the time the prices were still high as demand was outstripping supply. Also I didn't trust the R1 being very robust mechanically if a relatively short drop resulted in (quoted) $1K repair cost. I could have taken my chances on used, but I couldn't stomach the risk. Anyhow that lead into this path... and thus the not-straight answers from people on the Canon and Nikon forums who could not accept the fact that a simple Sony R1 could be so good with IQ that I could not find a comparable solution in my price range.

The crummy part is I spent almost $1.1K on the G1 system to date when I was done, so it wouldn't have been much of a stretch to get a new mid-range dSLR and decent used glass. You can get it for a lot less now, which it my own fault for being an early adopter.
liquidsquid
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
 
Posts: 2447
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 10:49 am
Location: New York

Re: 450D, D90 or?

Postposted on Thu Aug 06, 2009 1:39 pm

and thus the not-straight answers from people on the Canon and Nikon forums who could not accept the fact that a simple Sony R1 could be so good with IQ that I could not find a comparable solution in my price range.

Yup, that sounds like fans, all right. Their motivation is that better sales of THEIR system would result in more/new/better/cheaper equipment for them. It's hard to stay objective when one is accustomed to thinking ten years down the road with their toys.

Speaking of objectivity, that brings us to another point: The fact that "image quality" is generally interpreted subjectively. For instance, you mentioned the desire for a 24-120 zoom lens, as well as the need for a wide aperture; the fact of the matter is that NO zoom lens is going to be ideal for low-light photography, an area dominated by primes. Is sharpness your most important desired quality? Contrast? Speed? Do you need VR/IS? Do you care much about high ISO noise, or does your photography still work with loss of detail and saturation? Not that I'm asking you, since you've already made your commitment to what seems like an excellent camera system with a budding future. I just feel I can't stress enough how many details are important, depending on your style and preferences. What seems like a simple question may in fact have a whole heaping load of specifics and factors that go into answering.
SPOOFE
Grand Gerbil Poohbah
 
Posts: 3167
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 5:50 pm
Location: Woodland Hills, CA

Re: 450D, D90 or?

Postposted on Thu Aug 06, 2009 2:24 pm

An thus you hit the nail on the head why photography can be so much fun for those of us who have technical backgrounds. Soo many "knobs" to turn it almost gets frustrating. Nothing better than a toy you cannot get bored of because there is always something else to try.

And you bring up a lot of valid points I was not aware of when I first went dSLR shopping. I was shocked when I tried out my 50mm f1.4 prime wide-open and watched live when the contrast went to pot, but also watched the DOF narrow to a ridiculously thin layer. The live view is really cool for this. I also discovered that a f2.8 zoom is HUGE, HEAVY, expensive, and could use as a weapon.

Now I know what I really want to do and what to expect in this realm, however recent advances in zoom lenses are allowing prime-like performance as far as distortion and CA. Still not going to get a f1.4 zoom any time soon, but there are rumors that Panasonic/Leica are developing a 14-45 f1.9 for the m4/3. Now THAT would be something to see. I better get a second job...

Now I hope I am still posting useful data for the OP, I think I have stolen this thread...

-Mark
liquidsquid
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
 
Posts: 2447
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 10:49 am
Location: New York

Re: 450D, D90 or?

Postposted on Thu Aug 06, 2009 2:45 pm

Yeah, about the only old lenses I ever bother with are primes; zooms are often very soft, and the ones that aren't are still so expensive you might as well get a brand-new one with some autofocus. The rumors of the f/1.9 zoom have me jealous, of course, but what Panasonic really looks to be doing right is proper support of their movie system. Now, I know a lot of people don't like still cameras that also record movies, but to my view, most of a still camera's hardware is essentially identical to a video camera's, anyway; the move is inevitable. Now I love my D90, but its movie mode sucks. ISO goes wonky, no autofocus; it's clear that it's a rudimentary early attempt at making video work with their existing gear.

Even if they did add autofocus ability to future iterations of their movie mode, you're still going to have plenty of AF noise from a lot of lenses while doing it. I like the step that Panasonic took with their new quiet focusing lens; it shows commitment to the feature, rather than just slapping it in.

Now I hope I am still posting useful data for the OP, I think I have stolen this thread...

Aw, don't worry. Like you observed earlier, there's fifty trillion Canon and/or Nikon users in the world. Getting some insight on a brand new camera system is invaluable.
SPOOFE
Grand Gerbil Poohbah
 
Posts: 3167
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 5:50 pm
Location: Woodland Hills, CA

Re: 450D, D90 or?

Postposted on Thu Aug 06, 2009 3:51 pm

mattsteg wrote:
liquidsquid wrote:Yes Nikon has a great flash system, but last I checked I have yet to see a person who argues its merits and actually use it. The reason we get cameras with high ISO capability is to avoid using the flash in the first place.
I use it. High ISO is no replacement for properly-employed flash.

Yes and no. Flash almost is always bad. I hate it. It always mixes with the natural light and makes the white balance go hi-wire. Reflections from face sucks, red eyes suck, all the wrinkles multiplied with flash sucks, sharp shades suck. Basically flash sucks.

Unless... You have a huge umbrellas, multiple reflectors, you can move the flash around a lot and so on.

If you can turn the flash into a soft fill light, it's ok - but it's PITA, otherwise it sucks.

So flash is not a thing you should worry about, if it's built in, it sucks, if it's external, well, it's external 8)

liquidsquid wrote:There was more money in glass than I have in my car on some cams (that isn't saying much!)

Whatd'ya drive? :lol: :lol: :lol:

liquidsquid wrote:The problem I have with "Canikon" is they are both very good systems, but the user base gets so passionate about the details and merits of each when they are trying to help, that the really useful basic information for beginners such as myself gets lost in the noise. (Take the old lens argument in this thread as example) The arguments go on and on.

The bright side of "Canicon" is that you can just go in your grocery store, buy your "Canicon" and you've got the jackpot.

That's how I brought my Eos 350D and ever since I love the brand. I switched to 450D and left the 350D for my parents, I recombined the IS lenses so that they could use the 350D. The stock lenses from 350D I still use on my 450D sometimes. Now I have some EF lenses that might be used on full frame cameras, and every-time I open a accessory or lens section for "Canicon" I'm shocked, I have to use multiple filters to narrow down the selection. :wink:

liquidsquid wrote:I should say I never got straight answers to specific questions at the time... like "What system has similar performance to the Sony R1 and a decent zoom of similar range?"

Ok, here is my answer, Sony R1 is wannabee camera. If you want to be an amateur or a pro, buy a DSLR like "Canicon", if you don't, buy a soapbox and call it a day. :wink:
Last edited by Madman on Thu Aug 06, 2009 4:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Core 2 Duo E6300, MSI P45 NEO-F, Club 3D GTX 260, 4Gb DDR2-800Mhz, Audigy X-Fi Fatal1ty Champ1on ed., 0.5Tb+1Tb Seagate Barracuda 7200.12, 630W AXP, Samsung SyncMaster BX2450, ViewSonic VP171b
Madman
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
 
Posts: 2317
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2003 4:55 am
Location: Latvia

Re: 450D, D90 or?

Postposted on Thu Aug 06, 2009 3:59 pm

Madman wrote:
mattsteg wrote:
liquidsquid wrote:Yes Nikon has a great flash system, but last I checked I have yet to see a person who argues its merits and actually use it. The reason we get cameras with high ISO capability is to avoid using the flash in the first place.
I use it. High ISO is no replacement for properly-employed flash.

Yes and no. Flash almost is always bad. I hate it. It always mixes with the natural light and makes the white balance go hi-wire. Reflections from face sucks, red eyes suck, all the wrinkles multiplied with flash sucks, sharp shades suck. Basically flash sucks.
You're doing it wrong if you encounter those problems.
Madman wrote:Unless... You have a huge umbrellas, multiple reflectors, you can move the flash around a lot and so on.
There's a fairly sizable middle ground.
...
mattsteg
Gerbil God
 
Posts: 15752
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2001 7:00 pm
Location: Applauding the new/old variable width forums

Re: 450D, D90 or?

Postposted on Thu Aug 06, 2009 4:02 pm

mattsteg wrote:
Madman wrote:
mattsteg wrote:...

Yes and no. Flash almost is always bad. I hate it. It always mixes with the natural light and makes the white balance go hi-wire. Reflections from face sucks, red eyes suck, all the wrinkles multiplied with flash sucks, sharp shades suck. Basically flash sucks.
You're doing it wrong if you encounter those problems.
Madman wrote:Unless... You have a huge umbrellas, multiple reflectors, you can move the flash around a lot and so on.
There's a fairly sizable middle ground.

Ok, Canon 450D, you push a button on the left side of the built in flash, flash pops up... And all your photos suck till you close it again :lol:
Core 2 Duo E6300, MSI P45 NEO-F, Club 3D GTX 260, 4Gb DDR2-800Mhz, Audigy X-Fi Fatal1ty Champ1on ed., 0.5Tb+1Tb Seagate Barracuda 7200.12, 630W AXP, Samsung SyncMaster BX2450, ViewSonic VP171b
Madman
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
 
Posts: 2317
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2003 4:55 am
Location: Latvia

PreviousNext

Return to Visual Haven

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests