DSLR & Lenses?

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

Moderators: Dposcorp, SpotTheCat

Re: DSLR & Lenses?

Postposted on Tue Jun 15, 2010 5:36 pm

Voldenuit wrote:
ludi wrote:
liquidsquid wrote:Nikon and Canon are NOT the only game in town, and in this case may be too bulky to deal with.
This is true, although for a beginner, there's a much larger used lens market for Canon and Nikon, which improves the odds of locating what you want at a tolerable price.
One of Micro Four Third's advantages is compatibility with almost every format ever made. There is a huge range of legacy formats you can get adapters for...
The relatively-short flange-to-sensor distance of the Canon EOS system allows it to similarly mount most old manual lenses (including Nikon or M42) with inexpensive adapters. However, I believe that auto-focus, auto-aperture and auto-metering are worthwhile things to have. Because macro photography is more likely to be manually-focused than most other uses, a 30+ year-old manual macro lens with one of these adapters may be a good solution for someone on a tight budget.
JustAnEngineer
Gerbil God
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 15443
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2002 7:00 pm
Location: The Heart of Dixie

Re: DSLR & Lenses?

Postposted on Tue Jun 15, 2010 6:03 pm

JustAnEngineer wrote:The relatively-short flange-to-sensor distance of the Canon EOS system allows it to similarly mount most old manual lenses (including Nikon or M42) with inexpensive adapters. However, I believe that auto-focus, auto-aperture and auto-metering are worthwhile things to have. Because macro photography is more likely to be manually-focused than most other uses, a 30+ year-old manual macro lens with one of these adapters may be a good solution for someone on a tight budget.


If you use regular 4/3 lenses with the Olympus 4/3->M4/3 adapter you still get AF and what not as long as the lens supports it.
Having twins has dramatically reduced the time I have to nerd out.
Corrado
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
 
Posts: 2568
Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2002 7:00 pm
Location: Gilbertsville, PA

Re: DSLR & Lenses?

Postposted on Thu Jun 17, 2010 11:22 pm

I wonder if the OP has managed to reach a decision, and if so whether we helped at all or if our Signal to noise and crosstalk was just too high :P .
Wind, Sand and Stars.
Voldenuit
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
 
Posts: 2454
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 11:10 pm

Re: DSLR & Lenses?

Postposted on Thu Jun 17, 2010 11:26 pm

I don't know, but for safety's sake he needs a longer telephoto than his current PowerShot SX100 IS can manage.
viewtopic.php?f=37&t=18390&p=1025056#p1025056
He shot that at a full-frame equivalent of 335mm. To get the same field of view, he'd need a 210mm lens with a camera that has a 1.6x crop factor.
JustAnEngineer
Gerbil God
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 15443
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2002 7:00 pm
Location: The Heart of Dixie

Re: DSLR & Lenses?

Postposted on Thu Jun 17, 2010 11:46 pm

JustAnEngineer wrote:I don't know, but for safety's sake he needs a longer telephoto than his current PowerShot SX100 IS can manage.
http://techreport.com/forums/viewtopic. ... 6#p1025056


I disagree. Even with a shorter or equal reach, a DSLR (or DSLR-like camera) with a good telephoto lens will outresolve the slow compact tele end by a country mile. A 200-300mm reach is all he needs to get started. He can always add a 1.4x or 1.7x teleconverter later, or a bigger lens if and when he finds it's not enough. The difference in IQ and high ISO/low light and faster AF will give him many more options and keepers in the meantime.
Wind, Sand and Stars.
Voldenuit
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
 
Posts: 2454
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 11:10 pm

Re: DSLR & Lenses?

Postposted on Thu Jun 17, 2010 11:49 pm

Point taken.

With almost double the pixel count, the Rebel T1i could get by with just 3/4 as much focal length to achieve the same pixel resolution, even if we disregard likely differences in lens and sensor pixel quality.
Last edited by JustAnEngineer on Thu Jun 17, 2010 11:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
JustAnEngineer
Gerbil God
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 15443
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2002 7:00 pm
Location: The Heart of Dixie

Re: DSLR & Lenses?

Postposted on Thu Jun 17, 2010 11:52 pm

I was about 5' away, well outside of that individuals strike range :wink: The snake was approx. 3' long (which for C. viridus is pretty good sized). I pretty well maxed out my zoom on that shot to stay safe. Would have liked to have gotten a full frame shot of the head scales, to demonstrate the difference between Crotalus and Sistrurus (head scales are the easiest marker and it's easier to show than tell).

I've not reached a final decision yet; I have to find a camera store to handle some examples first. I'm still reading the thread. And I'm deciding how to budget for this :lol:
Ugly people have sex all the time. We wouldn't have 6 and a half billion humans if you had to be beautiful to get laid.
paulWTAMU
Gerbil Elder
 
Posts: 5519
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 5:14 am
Location: Amarillo, Texas

Re: DSLR & Lenses?

Postposted on Fri Jun 18, 2010 12:07 am

Wikipedia wrote:Sistrurus {pygmy or ground rattlers} species have nine large head plates (same as Agkistrodon), whereas with Crotalus {other rattlesnakes} (and almost all other viperids) the head is mostly covered with a large number of smaller scales.
Good to know, I suppose.
JustAnEngineer
Gerbil God
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 15443
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2002 7:00 pm
Location: The Heart of Dixie

Re: DSLR & Lenses?

Postposted on Fri Jun 18, 2010 12:22 am

it is if you're trying to do a quick ID to tell if it's a snake you need to get good photos of for ID purposes :D Sistrurus catenatus is a possible but not verified in my area and I keep hoping to find one. If I do I'll report it to the state herpetologist and we'll have an official record, but I'll have to have really good photos of it (not artistic just ones that make it a good ID). Right now I think they've been verified in the south eastern 1/3 of the panhandle maybe but I'm more in the center.

that whole genus is also on my lifer list; I've never seen a pygmy rattler in the field and I really want to. I've seen most of the herpetofauna in the Panhandle at least once or twice but not those or the milk snake, or the ground snake. I've seen every chelonian we have, I've seen every lizard we have except for one (even if I haven't seen them all *here*, some were found in NM or further south in Texas). But I'm missing several amphibians and snakes.
Ugly people have sex all the time. We wouldn't have 6 and a half billion humans if you had to be beautiful to get laid.
paulWTAMU
Gerbil Elder
 
Posts: 5519
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 5:14 am
Location: Amarillo, Texas

Previous

Return to Visual Haven

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests