Just Signed Up Today - Beginners Questions - Camera/Lens

[The Fisher King]

Hello.

I have learned alot already today reading other newby threads about the right camera and lens choices for them,but I still have a couple of questions about my camera package.

While on the local beach I saw a couple of sea eagles sitting side by side and I thought that would be a great photo.

They were about 50m away from me and about 3m above my feet on a log at the top of the sand dunes.

So from what I have just read a 200mm lens would do the trick giving me some versatility as well for other shots.

Were I live there is plenty of reptiles also hoping the 200mm will allow a quality closer shot.

I also googled review of the Nikon D3400/D3500 which seems a very good learners choice.

I also read here spending too much $$$$$$$$$ as a newby is not wise plus carrying in around too much weight is not really needed not knowing what I am doing.

I think the Nikon D3400/D3500 with the 200mm lens is my camera although I am not rushing in doing my due diligence.

Please help me to confirm such a choice or deny it adding your valued suggestions.

Thanks for your help and advice.

The Fisher King :D

[ricktas]

As an initial investment, I would look at something like an 18-200mm lens. Yes a 200mm prime lens is going to get those eagles well, but what if you want to take a sunset shot? Something like the 18-200 zoom is going to let you get your birds and reptiles, but also let you experience other genre as well. If after a while you are still enjoying your photography and know what genre you are going to shoot, then start looking at things like 200/300/400mm prime lenses, or if you decide landscapes are more fun you can start looking at the wide angle lens options.

I am merely suggesting this as you might be limiting what you can photograph, as a beginner, by going with a straight 200mm lens.

[nardes]

I use a Canon 100-400mm F4.5/5.6 L Mk II for most of my birding photography and I have found that maybe 95% of my photos of birds are taken at the 400mm end. Even at 400mm, I like my larger sized birds to be around 10-15 metres away with smaller birds less than 10 metres if possible. These preconditions have produced my most pleasing bird shots.:)

Another good feature of this lens is that it has a minimum focusing distance of just under 1 metre, which makes it useful for getting close to subjects such as butterflies and dragonflies.

But it is a heavy lens and is also quite expensive.:confused013

Just my 2c worth.:)

Cheers

Dennis

[Mark L]

I'd like to see the sea-eagle photos.:th3:
If you are thinking about getting into the bird photography then 200mm just doesn't work.

[The Fisher King]

I'd like to see the sea-eagle photos.:th3:
If you are thinking about getting into the bird photography then 200mm just doesn't work.

Sorry Mark but I didn't have my little Canon IXUS with me,I was metal detecting on the beach at the time.

But I am sure why you would understand why I want a good camera missing out on a potential photo of a life time.

Thanks for the advice :D

[tandeejay]

I've got a Nikon 55-300mm, and when I'm out in nature, I often find that the 300mm isn't enough. but that is what I have at the moment, so I'm learning to work within its capabilities. As Nardes said, getting within 15m is best. I got some nice ones of a blue wren the other day. It was only about 1.5m away...

I would have thought at 50m, a 200mm lens on a 1.5x crop sensor would not do justice to a sea eagle.

Doing your due diligence research is commendable!

[The Fisher King]

Thankyou to all contributors to my thread so far which has given plenty to think about.

To be honest with you I considered the Nikon Coolpix B700 with a 60 x optical zoom before I read about the Nikon D3400/3500 SLR's camera's now D5100.

Yes I am already very sure that any good DSLR would be better than the Coolpix,but the trade off is the DSLR is more complicated and certainly much more expensive regarding my desired lenses for bird photo's e.g. 400mm

I could buy a new Coolpix for $500.00 just point and shoot so to speak or a very good hardly used D5100 with the 55mm and 300mm lenses with accessories for $500

But saying all of that I am guessing the Coolpix 60 x zoom won't help me at 50m to photo a pair of Sea eagles sitting side by side.

If you might be stating the obvious please state it anyway.

Thankyou.

The F King :D

[Tannin]

Hi Fisher King. Unfortunately, what you are hearing from people like Mark L and Nardes is entirely correct. 200mm is hopelessly short for bird photography. 400 is skimping but with skill and patience you can just barely get away with it. Even at the 600 and 840mm focal lengths bird photographers habitually work at, getting close enough to the bird remains a constant challenge.

Broadly speaking, it is easy to design and manufacture medium-length lenses (which makes them reasonably cheap and small and light) but more difficult to design and manufacture very short lenses and very long ones. For this reason, wide-angle lenses tend to be quite large and rather expensive, and long lenses (anything over about 300mm) tend to be very large and very expensive. Added to this, lenses at the extremes (e.g., 10mm ultra-wides; 600mm birding lenses) are, by their very nature, pushing the envelope of the possible. As a result, these are not items it is wise to skimp on.

Where I'm going here is the point that specialist lenses (such as one suitable for your sea eagles) are big, heavy, and very expensive. Don't buy one until you are sure you really want it, and if and when you do, don't buy a cheap one. There are no short cuts. (Well, OK, there are short cuts. But they don't work and always end in tears.)

The good news, however, is that you will spend nearly all your photographic time doing "normal" stuff, and normal lenses for everyday non-specialist use are cheap and very good. Start with one of those, and gain some experience with it. In time, your other needs will become clear, and you can address them them. Interchangeable lens camera are great because you can always add stuff later!

Your final choice comes down to either a do-everything lens (such as the 18-200 Rick suggested) or a do-most-things lens, say an 18-55 or a 15-85. The do-everything lens will be one or more of larger, heavier, more expensive, and/or lower quality. On the other hand, it is more versatile. The do-most-things lens will be cheaper, lighter, smaller, and sharper - but less versatile. Your choice.

And don't stress about it! Either choice will be a good place to start. Sure, there are differences, but you will get a great introduction to photography either way. And you can expand your lens collection later, selecting models that do exactly what you want to do. Enjoy!

Finally, I am unfamiliar with the Nikon world, but there may well be an equivalent set to the one I'm about to mention from Canon land. This is Canon's twin lens kit: very cheap, and remarkably good. Ridiculously good for the money, really. Canon make an 18-55mm (general purpose) and 55-250mm (telephoto) set of two, which they sell bundled with camera bodies. Because they make vast numbers of them, they are ridiculously cheap for the quality you get. You can get the twin lens kit with any of several bodies and it's a brilliant way to start. Most likely, Nikon have an equivalent other members here can tell you about.

- - - Updated - - -

PS: you are correct - the Coolpix isn't even in the same postcode if you are looking at tough subjects like birds.

[arthurking83]

If you can stretch the budget to a D5500, you'd be doing yourself a huge favour.
While they have the same sensors, there are a few little body specific advantages in the D5500 over the D3xxx models.
Very much worth the upgrade.

And I'd reckon a good value for money lens kit could be a Nikon 18-140VR plus a Tamron 100-400VC.

D5100 is a good camera, but this is compared to it's peers at the time it was a newer model.
D5300 uses the same 24Mp sensor as the D5500, so it'd be a better cheaper alternative.
More specifically, it's not the extra resolution that makes it better, it's that the actual sensor is a better sensor overall(in terms of light gathering ability) .. and so with elevated ISO values that will almost certainly be required with your chosen subject interest .. that higher ISO output quality will be an advantage.
I'd recommend that any Nikon Dx camera model to seek would be:
D3200 and higher if lowest price is the priority.
D5300 and higher if future proofing and price are more flexible
D7100 and higher is you can extend the cost of the camera further again.

ps. DSLR isn't 'more complex'!
This is a generally accepted myth.
Some DSLRs can be 'more complex' but the additional complexity is usually contained within complex menus.
Out of the box tho, DSLR, or mirrorless are no more complex to use than any other camera.

A better way to describe a DSLR compared to say a coolpix, is that the DSLR can be made more flexible, which some folks equate with complexity .. but once the flexibility features are understood, you will invariably get more consistent output results.

Oh! ... and welcome to AP :th3:

[ameerat42]

Identifying the "trade-off/s" correctly might help you to decide.

Apart from the financial difference you mentioned, you have to consider if there is a major difference
in the image quality that you might get. The B700 is "failry fully featured" with its 60X optical zoom,
optical Image Stabilisation (IS), 4K video capabilities, and fully articulated screen. On the "BUT" side
it has a very small sensor compared to the APSC-sized DSLRs listed. As in the days of film, the more
you enlarge an image, the more it degrades, because commercialism does not replace physics. The
linear difference in sensor size is nearly 4X. (Nearly 16X the area size.)

On another matter, make sure that you get the "equivalent lens reach" correct. The B700 specs list
the lens as having an equivalent reach (compared with a 35mm frame) of 24–1440 mm, even though
the actual focal length range is 4.3-258 mm.

To really know what this means, consider happens at the sensor with a 30 cm tall bird at 50m distance
when imaged by:
1) an actual 1400mm lens: image will be 14mm big
2) an actual 258mm lens : image will be 1.5mm big

Anyway, that's about it...

[Geoff79]

Some great advice here already, making my input pretty useless, lol, but coming from someone who has a 18-200mm lens, and uses it and has used it extensively for over a decade now... great all-round lens for almost everything... except birds. ;)

It might get you an okay shot if the bird is very close, but generally speaking, as others have said, it’s not great for birds. For everything else, though, including those reptiles you speak of (assuming they’re relatively close) it’ll get you pretty good results. Great holiday lens too.

[arthurking83]

As a quick example of a half decent value for money starting kit:
On Ryda dot com currently, is a D5300 + 18-140VR lens for under $850.
An even better camera tho would be there D7100 + 18-105VR kit for just a tad under $800.

Either of those kits would initially serve you fine. D7100 would be my preference(bu6t this is a personal preference). It has body advantages over the D5xxx series that make a world of difference.
18-140 lens is slightly better than the 18-105 lens .. but I'm talking minimal differences in IQ terms. I'd happily use either as a walk around lens. The extra 35mm focal length (in my view) isn't worth the effort.
I'd prefer to save the $50, for the longer lens you probably want to get as well.

There are many good consumer level long lenses that would serve you well in Nikon land.
The two that spring to mind are the Tammy 100-400 I referred too earlier, and also the Nikon 200-500VR lens. Tammy at about $1K is cheaper .. Nikon at about $1500, will give slight IQ advantage.
Nikon will be much more heavier in it's handling(heavier and longer!) .. so you may become affected by handling fatigue with that combo.
Tammy lens is lighter and shorter .. so it's more like an 18-300 type lens, much easier to handhold.
Never underestimate the ability to handle the camera lens combo easily too. Lighter, or more specifically .. less front heavy combo .. can give better results in some instances simply due to the physics involved in hand holding.

ps. I can vouch for Ryda dot com(I won't create links and stuff to commercial sites tho) .. I got my D5500 + 18-140VR lens from them for a very good price some time back. I didn't get it for me tho, I bought it for daughter as she seemed to have outgrown her little P&S.
I personally can't hold the D5500 body. It's too small for my hand. Gets uncomfortable after a few minutes and hand cramps up. I need a larger body(ie. why my preference for something like a D7100 type camera).
But the reason I recommend the D7100 to you here, is not due to that. It's body has many features advantages over the D5xxx and D3xxx bodies. Too numerous to mention unless you absolutely want to know what and why. Some of which you may never ever want/need .. but if you do ever develop your photography interest much much further .. some of those body features can be important.

[tandeejay]

I got my D5500 in a bundle that came with an 18-55 and a 55-300. As a beginner, that was more than sufficient for me. A lot of quality issues with photos come from poor user technique. So getting an expensive lens can bring disappointment if your technique is bad. Better to learn good technique. You probably don't want to invest in an expensive lens to have in your kit as a "just in case I might see a sea eagle" but if you get that 55-300 or the likes, it gives you the chance to develop your technique and to determine if that longer lens is a worthwhile investment.

Someone once told me "don't buy new gear because you think it will improve your photography, but only consider new gear when you find a short fall in your existing gear that isn't caused by a problem in your technique"

Sent from my LG-M700 using Tapatalk

[The Fisher King]

I feel complelled to say this -

I come from a metal detecting (forum) background for the last five years being a big poster but was constantly running into complete hypocricy and hard to justify biases far from what you would understand here as if you want to.

Just the other day after being punted again for more petty reasons I finally realized that the only thing that I had in common with most of the forum members was this - we all had metal detectors :lol:

Sad to say I also joined another Australian photography forum the day before here and left within 24 hours :rolleyes:

I had done a basic introduction less than here and had 36/38 views but NOT one comment,NOT even one :cool:

I also posted a basic camera/lens post and you guess it,nothing again so sad.

I had to contact management to unsubscribe now knowing I was on the wrong forum because I could not find the out key and I was banned NEVER to return they said :lol:

Anyway I am very very pleased to say that this photography forum has far exceeded my expectations :D

Thankyou very much for helping me in my embroyonic photographic journey tolerating my often asked questions

I am convinced that you have a higher I.Q. than average :nod:

Thanks again

The Fisher King :D

[ameerat42]

Without pursuing the themes you have just described (and it's good that no names were mentioned),
I will just say that you have independently hit upon a factor that makes a forum work - open interaction.

[The Fisher King]

Quick Lens Question Please - Tamron Lens

This 70 - 300mm Tamron lens is from a Nikon D3000 - will it fit a Nikon D3200

I don't know very much but I say yes but more importantly what do you say - ?

Can you also tell me the optimum middle use for this lens

Also - does the D3200 have RAW editing ?

Thanks :D

[Geoff79]

Someone once told me "don't buy new gear because you think it will improve your photography, but only consider new gear when you find a short fall in your existing gear that isn't caused by a problem in your technique"


Excellent advice. I’ve had a SLR for I think 11 or 12 years now and I just bought what is essentially my third lens. Got by for an age with my Canon 18-200mm (and/or Tamron 18-250mm kit lens) before I wanted to get more scenery in frame in my landscapes so I got a wide angle lens, and just recently I really took to macro photography, which requires a macro lens. Extension tubes and snap-ons do a solid job, but a prime macro lens is delicious. Next one will be a zoom lens, but that’s possibly decades away, if ever...

Anyway, what a ramble. John posted above about an 18-55mm and 55-300mm kit lenses. That would see you through for a long time if you scored something like that.

[The Fisher King]

Thanks Geoff for reminding me but - does the lens from a D3000 fit a D3200 ?

Cheers :D

[tandeejay]

D3xxx, D5xxx, D7XXX, D500, D300 are all Dx cameras so lens's that fit one will fit the other. The FX lenses will also work on a DX body, however, that is where the 1.5x crop factor comes in... if you had the 70-200 FX lens, it would be 70-200mm on an FX body, but the Dx bodies would have the same framing as a 105-300mm (Note howerver, that the DOF is not equivalent... I'm sure there would be someone on here who could explain why the DOF is not equivelant...)

Note however, that Non nikon lenses may have issues on different bodies... (to do with the camera controling things like autofocus and aperture) My father has a Sigma 150-500mm lens that works fine on his D3100, but my D5500 can't control the autofocus. However, this would be correctable by installing a later firmware on the lens. Nikon does not guarantee compatibility for body upgrades with non-nikon lenses. So not sure if your referenced Tameron lens would have issues on a later body or not. I have no experience with tamron lenses. also some older lenses do not have a built in focus motor, so require a body that can drive the focus mechanism. the D3xx and D5xx series of nikons can't control focus on a lens that has no focus motor.

[ameerat42]

...why the DOF is not equivelant...)

TFK, go and check out the idea of "reach" again. That is related to what Tandeejay is saying about
framing. The smaller sensor size effectively "crops" (hence the name) the field of view of the FX lens
so that the resulting "view" is like that of a longer focal length lens - a 1.6x longer FL. Again, you do
NOT, however, get an actual increase in focal length.

As for changed DOF, it is partly due to the cropped field of view, and partly due to the increased
aperture size at any given f-stop.

There's a relation between f-stop and aperture. The two terms are not the same.

[The Fisher King]

I really appreciate your posts about the above mentioned lens being the 70 - 300mm Tamron but all of the acronims mean nothing to me sorry only being here since yesterday.

No offence intended :nod: but I am still no wiser sorry.

I suppose to put it this way - if I buy it will work sort of or maybe not.

D3000 lens to D3200 body :rolleyes:

Still fishing :D

[ameerat42]

...
I suppose to put it this way - if I buy it will work sort of or maybe not.

D3000 lens to D3200 body :rolleyes:

Still fishing :D

OK, it appears the lens has its own built-in AF motor. As far as I can see, both cameras will take this lens.
I checked the specs for both cameras as well.

NB: I'm not 100% sure, and you had better get confirmation from some Nikon users here.

Yeah, acronyms, eh? - They seep in after a while, then a new crop come up :eek:

Now to some acronyms... a complicated reference of names you might see :confused013

[Hawthy]

Yes. If it works on a D3000 it should work on a D3100, D3200, D3300, D5000, D5100, D5200, D5300, D5500, D7100 and a D7200. Here is a link showing lens compatibility for Nikon DSLRs and Nikon lenses.
https://www.nikonians.org/reviews/nikon-slr-camera-and-lens-compatibility

As a guide, if you are looking for a Nikon lens on a D3200 or D5100 or any of the D3XXX, D5XXX, or D7XXX series cameras, the things to look out for on the lens are VR & AF-S. VR is Vibration Reduction (?) and will help you take clearer shots. I don't know what AF-S stands for (it may be Auto-Focus Silent wave) but it means that the lens has a motor in it and it will auto-focus on the D3200.

Some other Nikon DSLRs have the focus motor in the camera and if you buy one of those lenses you will need to manually focus. I made this mistake when I bought an AF-D 35mm lens. It worked but I had to manually focus, which became a drag.

Be careful when buying lenses to make sure that they not only fit but that they will also auto-focus. I remember another problem lens that I bought once and it would not recognise the in camera aperture settings. there was a work around but it was a pain in the you know where.

[Edited to say "should" rather than "will"]

[tandeejay]

Yes. If it works on a D3000 it will work on a D3100, D3200, D3300, D5000, D5100, D5200, D5300, D5500, D7100 and a D7200.

This is not quite 100% true. As I said earlier, my father has a Sigma 150-500 lens that works fine on his D3100, but my D5500 can't auto focus. The lens needs a firmware update for my D5500 to be able to control the autofocus. I'd make your "will work" to a "should work". Although my experience with the sigma was a difference between a D3xxx and a D5xxx. Maybe the difference between different D3xxx models is far less likely to cause compatibility issues...

So would need someone with Nikon/Tameron experience to confirm absolutely if that specific Tameron lens has any "quirks" with a D3200. Theoretically it should work.

[Hawthy]

Good call, John.

I also just realised that he is asking about a Tamron rather than a Nikkor / Nikon.

Surely, Tamron will have a compatibility chart somewhere. :confused013

[Colin B]

Just to weigh in a bit late on this thread..........For years I carried a Fuji SLR with two lenses and a flash unit and found the weight and the fact that I needed two bags - one for the camera and one for the accessories a bit of a pain. I now have a Nikon Coolpix B700 and recently used it on a holiday through Europe and another touring up to Broome from Perth by caravan.

I chose this camera because for a relatively modest price it does most of the things I want to do well and at only 565gms weight I can hang it around my neck all day with both hands free while I scramble on rocks or thread my way through crowds. I can also carry extras like a brolly or backpack without looking like a pack mule. :D The shutter and autofocus are fast and the long zoom lets me chase wildlife or candids easily but a note on his: Crank the zoom right out and you need good light for a fast shutter speed to get clear pics. It is tricky framing accurately at long range and a rest or tripod makes this much easier.

sure, as Ameerat points out, it has its limitations and would not do for a serious professional but for a hobbyist it is a petty good compromise.

Just another suggestion - My manual, like most of the camera manuals these days can be downloaded online and if you are planning to spend serious money on new gear it would be worthwhile checking out the full manuals of the contenders first.

[arthurking83]

Just one more thing(actually two, but who's counting!)

1/. lens image quality if usually tied to focal length multiplication. The more focal length range, usually the lower the overall IQ. It's not strictly true, but generally true. That is, a 70-300mm lens usually has less IQ at the long end, than a 150-300mm lens will.
So a 18-200mm lens usually is much much larger to compensate for this loss of IQ at the long end, or it just loses out in IQ terms.
Tamron for many years were the masters of uber long focal length multiplication .. they still have their 18-400mm lens .. recommend to avoid this type of lens for use a the long end!

2/. this is where it gets long and arduous, but it'll be important if you don't stick to recommendations already offered!

AF-S in Nikonspeak has two meanings: Don't worry about the second meaning which related to how you focus with the camera, concentrate on the lens hardware version of AF-S.

in terms of lens hardware, an AF-S lens = AutoFocus Silent wave.
Other lens hardware focus types are:
AF = very hard to find old lenses .. fine to ignore
AF-D = old focus drive type, needs body focus motor
AF-I = very expensive lenses, don't bother researching this focus drive type
AF-S = basically an electronic focus motor drive type
AF-P = Nikons latest focus drive type. Nikon have brought on a whole new meaning of PITA when they introduced this new focus drive type .. be very careful what camera body you choose for this lens type!

AF and AF-D are mechanically driven focus system types. Those two focus types necessitate a camera body that has a AF motor in them.
D3xxx and D5xxx bodies don't have that. These are very old lens types, and not many are sold new. As I currently remember, I think only the 105, 135 mm(DC type lenses), the macro 200mm and 80-200mm are the only brand new Nikon lenses that are body driven(AF-D) that still sell new.
If chasing old Nikon branded lenses, be mindful of the name in the lens and that it doesn't contain AF or AF-D.

What gets more confusing is third party lenses! Basically it's very hard to know which lenses will work on a D3xxx and D5xxx if second hand.
I'm fairly sure almost all brand spanking new thridparty lenses from Tamron/Sigma/Tokina are all silent wave compatible. They have their own nomenclature.

I think Tamron's is USD and Sigma's is HSM.
These are the two telltale signs that the lens will focus on those non focus motor bodies.
So if a Tamron lens is model No. XXmm f/N.N DiII VC USM .. you know that it will work on a D3xxx and D5xxx. If that model was XXmm F/N.N DiII VC only, then it won't autofocus on those two bodies.

This is where the D7xxx bodies(except for the D7500!!) is handy to have.
The D7000 - D7200 all have in body focus motors, so will focus with the non focus motor type lenses! :th3:

Some of those old lenses can offer very good IQ/$ value.
So you may pay more in terms of camera body .. you could easily make up for it in cheaper lenses due to the in lens focus type.

if you were to look for a 70-300 lens, I'd recommend a Nikon 70-300 AF-P.
Focusing will be slightly faster due to the focus motor type in the lenses, and according to Thom Hogan both the AF-P models are very sharp at the 300mm end.

I've had a play with the Tammy 70-300 USM lens, it is very large for what it is, and does work well, but focusing was medium slow affair as I remember it. IQ was good, but indoors and dark doesn't allow for proper judgement.

AF-P = a bit of a PITA from Nikon in terms of compatibility.
There is a list of camera models that don't work with this lens focus type, the PITA component is that some camera bodies kind'a work, but not fully, other just don't work at all, and others are fully compatible.

For your purposes, D3000 - D3200 bodies don't work. D3300 and later will.
D5000-51000 bodies don't work, D5200 is semi compatible and D5300 and later work fully.
The breakdown here is, if you are intent on a D3xxx or D5xxx, then stick with D3300 or D5300 and later models.
The AF-P focus drive type is much better than the AF-S on those model cameras for consumer grade lenses.

A nice relatively cheap camera lens combo with up to 300mm would be D3300/D5300 + Nikon 70-300 VR DX AF-P lens, plus a 18-105/18-140 walkabout lens.
But seriously, if your interest is in birds ... 300mm even on Dx is still far too short. Min 400mm(why I recommended the Tammy 100-400 lens) .. 500mm better either Tamron 150-600 or Sigma 150-600 work well at this focal length.

At this stage of your photography experience the DoF equivalence referred too earlier isn't so important.
However! whether a lens is Fx or Dx, makes no difference to DoF! The difference in DoF is related to the framing - focus distance - focal length relationship. Nothing to do with the fact that a lens is Fx or Dx.

Only restriction with Fx/Dx lenses, is that a Dx lens on an Fx body will not produce a full image circle on the Fx sensor. It will produce a very strong mechanical vignette.
Fx lenses on Dx bodies is probably an optimal combo.

Makes no difference if a specific lens type is a Fx or Dx type.
eg. as above with the 70-300mm types.
There must be 3 million Nikon 70-300mm lens models, some Dx some Fx. .. the latest three AF-P lens introduced in the last few years, two are Dx, one with VR one without, and one Fx with VR.
They will all give the exact same FoV(roughly speaking) and DoF for the same focal length set on the lens.

The only difference is that the Fx model is physically a lot larger and heavier. And on a Dx camera, the IQ it produces at the edge of a Dx camera will be of higher quality than the two Dx lenses will give.

note that it's good to see you still 'fishing' .. best way forward is to gather all the info you can before you commit to whatever you decide on.
If it helps too, give us a rough estimate on a budget you want to limit yourself too.

No point in offering $XXXX hardware recommendations, if your budget is $xxx dollars!
OH! and in the world of photography .. the old adage that you get what you pay for is almost 99.999% true!
Pay less, get less. Pay more .. this is where the 99.999% happens .. you usually get more.

So with more of the above now explained, I do highly recommend that camera body should be a minimum D3300, a more better(!!??) :D .. body would be a D5300 or greater.
If you do want to go down the cheaper lens path at some point in the future tho .. then I'd strongly urge that a D7100 camera body is the way to go.
Some nice fast longish lenses available for that camera body type that would struggle with the consumer spec bodies.
Note that I said 'struggle' and not 'not work'.

Tandeejays specific issue of a non focusing lens on a camera body is hit and miss. My Sigma 150-600S lens focuses fine on my D5500, D70s, D300 and D800E .. just a later lens with better compatibility I 'spose.
Lenses with compatibility issues are usually taken back to service centre formware updated and all is forgotten. I remember this for Sigma lenses was a free service .. almost whilst you wait too.

Some newer lenses, from Tamron and Sigma have this ubute USB dock compatibility that allows you to update firmware in the comfort of your own PC environment.
Also handy to tweak lenses for a bit better compatibility with your requirements.

ps. did I mention the Tamron 100-400 lens! :p

[The Fisher King]

Thanks Arthur K for your very well informed and written above post,appreciated :D

Question Please - I think my introduction thread has run it course,so were would I go to start my own thread.

I have one photo to upload and a "big announcement" to make,don't worry it isn't that big.

Thanks :nod:

[ameerat42]

If you want to post a photo for CC - constructive critique - go to the appropriate CC sub-forum.
Click on the Forums tab near the top of the page, or here. (http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/forum.php) Scroll down to the section in the green bar called
CONSTRUCTIVE CRITIQUE - Members' Photos:

Look through there to see what is a suitable place.

If it's for posting a picture of equipment for info only, scroll back up to "Gear Talk" and look in there.
Finally, there the Not For Critique forum when all else fails :p

- - - Updated - - -

If you need help posting an image by uploading to AP, have a look at
this thread here. (http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/showthread.php?156515-Attaching-Images-To-Posts-On-AP)

[The Fisher King]

Do we as members have our own thread titled say - The Fisher Kings Photo's etc - or do we all post them together under certain headings

Thanks :nod:

[ameerat42]

No, just a new thread each time, unless posting an update to an earlier one.

[tandeejay]

This is where the D7xxx bodies(except for the D7500!!) is handy to have.
The D7000 - D7200 all have in body focus motors, so will focus with the non focus motor type lenses! :th3:

Some of those old lenses can offer very good IQ/$ value.


:th3::th3::th3:

This is one reason I love this forum! Someone asks a question, and then answers are provided from various levels of technical expertise, and then others (me) discover answers to questions it never occurred to me I could ask... I've now got that D7200, so that opens up to me some of those older lenses as possibilities... but I'll ask in my own thread later...

- - - Updated - - -

Oh, The Fisher King, don't worry if you don't understand terms people might put in their posts. Everyone on this forum started where you are and all those fancy terms have confounded us all at one point or other. It is OK to not understand what someone said, and no offence taken for any questions you ask :)

Great to have you on board, and looking forward to traveling with you on your journey.

Cheers,
John

[arthurking83]

:th3::th3::th3:

This is one reason I love this forum! Someone asks a question, and then answers are provided from various levels of technical expertise, and then others (me) discover answers to questions it never occurred to me I could ask... I've now got that D7200, so that opens up to me some of those older lenses as possibilities... but I'll ask in my own thread later...

....

if you've ever wanted one of them 70-200/2.8 lenses but were afraid of the usual prices they go for .. Tammy 70-200/2.8(original version) works really well .. Nikon 80-200/2.8 AF-D also equally well too.

I personally wouldn't pay more than say $500 for either of them models now only because there are other options around too. (eg. Sigma's later version for between $700-1000)

Nikon 80-200 had about the best bokeh and natural colour from any lens I've had/seen .. I reckon better than the 70-200/2.8 AF-S lenses.
Only reason I got rid of mine was that I had misfocus issues from it at 200mm. This was a common problem, and was a hit and miss affair .. some cameras did, others didn't. Just one of those issues that could crop up.

Tammy old model is slower to focus than more modern lenses .. still usable. sharper IQ, but bokeh not quite as good as the 80-200(I think).
But for about $500 for a fast long focal length lens .. you can forgive some issues I think.

[Glenda]

I have quite a few Tamron lenses and on the whole find their quality good. My first DSLR was a D3200 with a Tamron 18-270 which worked well and gave me a good focal range without having to change lenses. I don't have the Tamron 70-300 but do have the Nikon 70-300 and I have taken bird shots with it but you have to be close to the bird or be prepared to crop the image severely which can introduce other problems. If, on the other hand you want to take a shot of the beach, I think you would find 70mm not wide enough so I would look for a 18-270 in preference to the 70-300.

You seem to be leaning towards a DSLR over the Coolpix :th3:. DSLRs scared me initially so I bought a Coolpix superzoom first and after only one year found it frustrating and limiting and bought the D3200. So get the latest camera and lens you can within your budget and then learn to use it - you'll get lots of help on the forum.

[Tannin]

The big question here, TFK, seems to be P&S or SLR. The way I look at it, P&C cameras are between a rock and a hard place. They don't really do a whole lot that you can't do with a telephone, but (like phones) they have nothing like the ability of an SLR to do work of seriously good quality. P&S cameras and phones are alike insofar as they have very small sensors. These are fine in good light. But when the light is less than perfect, or where anything else is wrong and needs to be overcome (e.g., tricky backlighting or you need to crop hard) they don't cut the mustard. Essentially, they are downhill skiers. They'll score a lazy 102 not out coming in on a flat track two wickets down with 320 on the board already ... and snick the third ball through to the keeper for an easy catch when the openers go out cheaply and you really need the runs. Depending on the model, you get a little more reach (not all that much) and a suite of handy controls and features, but by the time you are considering P&S cameras with reach and handy features, you are already looking at the sort of money which will get you a nice little SLR.

Do not, repeat NOT, make the mistake of thinking that their "equivalent focal length" is actually equivalent to the same thing in an SLR. It isn't. Nowhere near. What counts in cameras, above all else, is the number of photons you can capture coming off the subject of interest. Simply: bigger sensors work better. And only a tiny handful of P&S cameras have a sensor very much bigger than the tiny thing in your phone. Those few are expensive.

(Disclaimer: I have and use a P&S camera. But it has a sensor almost as big as a small SLR sensor. I use it (alongside various SLRs) because it fits in a shirt pocket and takes a decent picture. But it has a very limited focal length range (Canon deliberately kept the range small in order to keep the product pocket-sized yet have good quality optics for the range it does cover) and it cost $600 or so - about the price of a cheap SLR and lens. And although I use it a fair bit, I never, ever reach for it if I have a real camera handy.)

[The Fisher King]

Thankyou all again for your posts whether long or short,I have gained plenty of useful information that is helping make a decent decision for me :nod:

I have decided to purchase a good used DSLR camera,I am looking at a Nikon D3400 with the basic lens.

Yes this is at the bottom end of the high quality advice I have asked for and received,but not getting too far ahead of myself was another great piece of advice.

Yes I would like a longer lens,but I will see what comes along.

So this leads me to my next question -

I have come a cross the word RAW I believe this is an inbuilt quality editing program.

Does this editing program come standard with Nikon DSLR cameras starting at the D3200 or above or :rolleyes:

Thankyou for your answers in advance :D

[ameerat42]

"RAW", often not capitalised, refers to the native output of ANY sensor.

You can say that all digital sensors record image information in raw format.
What happens to the image data after that depends mostly on the camera model.

Many cameras, especially DSLRs, and increasingly more "lower end" cameras can save
this data in its own "raw" file format so that it can be manipulated later by the user.
But many "point-and-shoot" cameras, including many phone cameras, do an in-camera
conversion of this raw data to a finished JPEG (or maybe TIFF) format according to a
number of pre-sets the manufacturers have installed.

There is no single "raw" format (in spite of what is often misrepresented about the "DNG"
format). Each manufacturer has its own group of raw formats, such as NEF for Nikon, CRx
for Canon, X3F for Sigma, etc...

You invariably must convert a raw format to a more "publishable" file format, such as JPEG
or TIFF or Bitmap... for web, printing, etc. Specialised programs can do this. Some are supplied
camera companies, like DPP (you look up) by Canon, Capture/View-NX by Nikon, Sigma Photo Pro
by... (you guessed it). In addition, there are 3rd-party programs like Lightroom by Adobe, and
plug-ins like ACR (Adobe Camera Raw) for the likes of Photoshop also by Adobe, and a slather of
other free, standalone programs like RawTherapee, IrfanView... that can convert many raw formats.

Hey, but that's enough from me. Look up raw format in Google, and... - don't expect to lean all
about it in a flash :D

- - - Updated - - -

PS: Of course, "your" Nikon D3200 will save in raw format, as well as in JPEG, and most probably
as both at the same time.

[Hawthy]

I agree with Tony. If I had my time over, and knew what I know now, I would have bitten the bullet and bought a full frame DSLR and explained the extra cost to the wife at a later time. That's water under the bridge now and, because of the choices that I have made , and the lenses that I have acquired, I am locked in to APS-C Nikon cameras.

My DSLR experience started with a Pentax K100D Super (APS-C sized sensor) bought second hand on EBay. A couple of years later, I was off on an overseas trip and got talked into buying a Panasonic TZ30 Travel Zoom. The photos, according to the salesman were "as good as any DSLR". The light weight, zoom capabilities, and promised photo quality dragged me in. I gave my Pentax away (and rather strangely ended up with it given back to me some years later) and set off to Alaska, Canada and all points north.

Well, it was light and had a great focal range from macro, ultrawide to a 20 or 30X zoom. The photos on the LCD screen looked awesome. When I got home the deficiencies of the small sensor and the inability to shoot in raw showed up. Highlights were blown and all in all I was disappointed. Choosing aperture was done via a menu rather than a more intuitive wheel on a DSLR.

I bought a Nikon D5100 when I got home. The little Panasonic is still awesome for stuff that people use their phone for. I remember taking a photo of something that needed fixing and going to Bunnings with it and they said that it was the first camera (rather than phone) that they had seen that year. I almost felt old.

So, yeah. Sensor size makes a great difference to photos. https://newatlas.com/camera-sensor-size-guide/26684/