Daryl

Just got myself on the digital slr ladder and was looking for a good uk based forum to use.

frog

Hiya, not a nikon user myself, and don't know of uk forums, however...

www.phototakers.com is pretty good, some very good tips, etc... on there, it isn't uk based, however, there are a few uk guys and gals on there.

PS: Check out: https://passionford.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=262702
It's a series of articles I wrote on the basics of photography (3 in total I think), I need to do more, but many on here found them a useful introduction.

Hope you like and welcome to the world of DSLR photography

Daryl

Thanks for that, Seems like you have put in a lot of time and effort into them posts. I look forward to reading them

Christian and Beccy

iTrader: (14)

Sorry to thread hijack, but how much money have you got to spend on a DSLR camera to get something decent. I don't mean enthusiast level, but with the ability to take cool photo's with different shutter effects etc.

How the fook do you do this.....?

XRT_si

iTrader: (2)

Cool cool pic

Christian and Beccy

iTrader: (14)

That was taken by the guy just before he climbed the fucker.

http://www.28dayslater.co.uk/forums/...ad.php?t=18733

The pictures on there are nothing short of stunning.

Daryl

Im guessing this might have something to do with it - http://www.amazon.co.uk/Nikon-D2XS-D.../dp/B000GBERB6

Also one of these while your at it ! http://www.amazon.co.uk/Nikon-Ii400M...207210&sr=8-25


crazy

Christian and Beccy

iTrader: (14)

Holy Crap.

BM08

Thats all you need to take quality pics? pfftt pocket money

Daryl

And the minimum of about 10 years of experience !

All the gear & no idea an all that !

I started at the bottom of the ladder http://www.amazon.co.uk/Nikon-D40X-D...0208980&sr=1-1

But blimey it can take some stunning photos even in auto mode out of the box.

Ade

That's my camera!
But that lens is a mega telephoto for sports use etc (very far away stuff). That bridge pic was taken with a regular wide angle lens which are never as big/expensive as that one, although they can still cost around a grand for a good 'un....

Nice pic but not that out the ordinary, just a right place at the right time long exposure shot really that anyone with a bit of knowledge could do.

As for the original post, Nikonians can be good for specifically Nikon issues, but it's not UK based....

topaz

iTrader: (1)

just bought the same, D40X

frog

Throwing money at equipment won't make you a good photographer Skills, experience, eye for composition, etc... make up for a lot, just like having a fast car doesn't make you a fast driver.

The more money, the more features to a point, which you need to understand (skills and knowledge again) in order to use them properly.

The more quality too, but this is largely subjective and much into diminishing retunrs territory. Entry level cameras are capable of stunning results, a more expensive one may show better detail and color accuracy, etc... but unless you have a very keen eye... you probably won't see the difference.
A recent comparison between a £300 pocket camera and £5K dSLR has had many people fooled

In terms of skills and knowledge, the three part intro I refer to in my first response to this thread only barely scratches the surface, so start learning with cheaper gear and get to a stage where your equipment is a real limiting factor before you upgrade to more expensive kit.

Hope this helps (And sorry for long post)

Christian and Beccy

iTrader: (14)

OK, thanks for that. I fully understand what you are saying.

I feel that I have found the limits of my Konica Minolta D-Image X50 and want a DSLR. So, without spending fortunes, whats a good camera?

frog

Any of the entry level Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax, etc... are very good cameras.

I think the D40x however only creates JPEG photos, and that can be limiting in some respects, best go for a camera that supports RAW as it gives you more options in terms of image processing in software.

Canon and Nikon are the top two, the others are a little esoteric but no less capable, bit like ferrari and noble, both very good, but there's more ferraris on the road

Best thing is to go to an independent shop if possible (avoid jessops, they don't usually know a great deal ) and try the cameras for size, see how they weigh, how they feel, how the menus operate, etc... to get an idea, bit like a test drive.

Don't worry about 12, 10 or 6 Mega Pixels, a 6MP pixel is plenty good enough to print up to A3 and many 6MP are actually considered better than 10 or 12MP.

I guess I am not really helping you make a decision, other than, they are all pretty darn good cameras and any will have plenty enough to learn about before you feel like getting a better one

PS: Canon, Nikon and Sony are about to (or have already) released a new range of cameras, so there's bound to be a few good deals on older stock now or soon.

frog

Also, try and separate the purchase of a camera from the lenses. By and large, your first investment should be in good lenses (you will keep these for years), the camera is the most likely upgrade, as long as you stick to the same camera manufacturer, your old lenses should be compatible, I say should because some older nikon lenses are not compatible with recent cameras

So best go for a lesser camera with a better lens, than a great camera and a poor lens at the same price point if you get my drift.

BM08

Frog i upgraded from my 2mp kodak easy share to a Cybershot w35, the reason i went for the Sony is because it has the Carl Zeiss lens i dont know if there actually that good but its the only compact digi cam i could find with a branded lens, takes superb pictures

Dal_

iTrader: (2)

Think my D50 can do RAW files.

What sort of post process software takes advantage of RAW files?

frog

RAW files are like a negative, it's the untouched output from the camera's sensor stored in a file.
Amongst other things, a RAW file will be 12 to 16 bits, whereas a JPEG is 8 bits, so essentially, RAW is better able to store detail and small variations than JPEG.

Also, JPEG is compressed, so when your camera converts the sensor output to JPEG, you loose some information again.

Software like Photoshop, adobe lightroom, picasa can take advantage of RAW files and allow you to make modifications to the original "negative" before converting it to JPEG.

Things like white balance, exposure, etc... can be much better adjusted on a RAW file than a JPEG.

On top of this, the conversion from RAW to JPEG in the camera is performed by a relatively small processor, which also needs to make sure it's done quickly enough to allow you to take up to 5 images per second.
A desktop PC might take 10 seconds to convert a raw image to JPEG and that is performed by a much more powerful processor, so you can imagine that corners are being cut in the camera's converstion

Again, law of diminishing returns applies, RAW means you have to spend more time in front of the computer preparing your images, JPEG allows you to put them on the web/email straight away.
You may not notice a great deal of difference between the two, and if that's the case, then stick to JPEG.

PS: All cameras that do RAW can also do JPEG.

Ade

Nikon D40X can shoot RAW, as can all Nikon DSLRs.

The more you spend the more convenient your camera becomes to use.... ergonomics and processing speed, those are the biggest advantages... Feature wise extras are usually quite specialist, and image quality is more down to the lens that the body's sensor.

Dal_

iTrader: (2)

Cheers for the explanation frog!

frog

I was sure one of the lower end ones couldn't

Ade

Think they all can.... even the very first 2.5MP D1 could, the old base model D50 could too so that only leaves the current basic 6MP D40 model...... quite sure that can as well.

Daryl

Well thanks for the replys ,I'm finding this photography thing quite interesting so i think i'm going to get myself a tripod and a new lense in the near future. I know what lense i would like but i'm a little unsure of where to start looking for a decent tripod ? Does any one have one they would recommend for general use ?

Thanks again

Ade

Manfrotto tripods are the dogs...... but if you just want a cheapy to experiment with/get you started you can get 'em from Tesco etc for a tenner!

Rich_w

DONT.................LOOOK....................DOWN !

Daryl

I already have a small £15 benk tripod from maplins for my point and shoot ,But its very lightweight and would rather pay out to have something that is nice and sterdy. Are they all pretty much the same or are there features to look out for ? . Also where do you buy your eqipment ?

Cheers again Daryl

danja

Come and use www.talkphotography.co.uk - wicked site and full of UK users.

The only big Nikon sites are www.nikonians and www.nikoncafe.com but both seem quite busy with yanks.

You could always use http://www.flickr.com/photos/djaphoto/ and join Nikon groups. Click the link and they are my pics.

Can't go wrong with a Nikon, most ppl know I use Nikon andhave a D50 with 3 lenses, 18-55mm, 70-300mm and a nifty 50mm with ND filters and Polarisers.

Will get you good pics no doubt, Im pleased with my results so far with my new grad filter kit from Cokin...

MikeR

I have a Nikon D40 and an 18-55mm lense what would be a good suggestion for my next lense, l found at Rally Day when taking pictures of cars on track l just could not get close enough !!

Cheers Mike

danja

Hi mate,

I would suggest the Sigma 70-300mm APO DG Super Macro II, cost around £160 and gets these kinds of pics for me and my D50...

http://www.djaphoto.co.uk/main.php

MikeR

There are some cracking shots there Danja, l was looking at the new Nikon 55-200mm lense today l think they call it the Black !! £139 from express warehouse in Norwich !! what do you think of this ?

How do the sigma's compare to the Nikon stuff, l have friends that have there big (expensive) lense's from Sigma to keep costs down

Mike

danja

Thanks mate,

Can't say I've seen the 'Black' yet, but the 55mm would be usefull but then the 200mm wouldn't be enough, so it;s a tough call.

Do you know what aperture the lens has? The Sigma 70-300mm is f4-5.6, that's minium of f4 fully zoomed out and f5.6 zoomed in basically. That determins the speed of the lens, be interesting to know the speed of the 'Black'

The Nikon lenses aren't bad, but I tend to find Sigma offer a better rival 'budget' lens, seeing as some lenses can cost £2k, to offer a 70-300mm for £165 comapred to the equivalent of Nikons 70-300mm, the overall quality is better on the Sigma and fairly similar in price...

MikeR

Hi Danja the lense is

Nikon AF 55-200mm F4 5.6 ED Black not sure maybe the color

Is warehouse house express a good place to shop they have a Sigma 70-300mm F4 5.6 APO Macro DG £156

Not sure either way cheers for the advise

I have also been told the D40 needs more exspensive lenses because they dont have the motor in the body of the camera !!

Mike

danja

I'd go with the Sigma over that then, same lens speed but better reach with the 300mm as a pose to 200mm, you can suffer the loss of 15mm difference though, and use your kit lens, which i'm assuming is 18-55mm?

Warehouseexpress is a very good place to buy, very reputable with all the magazines etc so should be fine.

Any problems ask over at www.talkphotography.co.uk

Dan

MikeR

Hi Danja,

One last one before i order

Apprently Sigma lenses wont work with my D40 or the D40x or D80 as they must have something which Sigma dont have, i was just on the phone with express warehouse as l also want one of those screen covers and is an extra battery pack worth while ?

There is a limited selection avaliable from Nikon the 70-300 is £330 !


Cheers Mike

danja

Bastard, you serious?

That's gutting, something I didn't know about and will take onboard considering I wanted a D80 next, will forget that and got a D200 instead lol

Defo get the 70-300mm from Nikon then, still worth it IMO for the money, just the Sigma is slightly better

As for accessories, I'd get some memory cards, 1gb x2 should be fine depending what you shoot? I shoot RAW and edit after then convert to JPEG, defo get another battery! And the screen cover is worth it too,e ven though I don't have one.

Do you intend on shooting any other kinds of shots? Landscape etc?

MikeR

I like taking static car shots and landscapes with town shots also,





What about wide angle lense's ? not sure if l can push myself to the 300mm as i keep seem to be spending money


cheers mike

danja

lol, I have a 18-55mm and a 70-300mm, plus a usefull little 50mm f1.8 lens which is well cool.

Some of my pics are here: http://www.djaphoto.co.uk/photoblog/index.php - just click the picture for the next one...

What kit lens do you have? 18-55mm?

I'd recommend a Polariser as a MUST if nothing else at all, helps cut doen reflections and enhances colours nicely in the sun...they cost about £20 for a decent one, check eBay

Christian and Beccy

iTrader: (14)

So, for around £400, would this be the best bet??

http://www.purelygadgets.co.uk/showp...4823&wysiwyg=2

Nikon D40x with 18-55mm lens kit.

danja

That sounds good Christian...

I paid £400 for my D50 with 18-55mm and 1GB SD Card last Autumn...and the D40X has a higher image resolution too.

Not sure what lens they are advertising, as they have mentioned it's a

Will look that up as it's obviously a new lens and I'm interested lol