All you Nikon users out there, this thread is for you to talk about your gear. You can also use this thread to ask questions, ask for feedback, technical things etc.

Please no Canon Vs Nikon crap. :)

I wish there was a Nikon version of the Canon 5D. :(

I want to move to full frame photography but the D3 is far too expensive.

What's full frame photography?

its as if you were shooting onto 35mm film....on most digital SLR's you might have a 18mm lens....but in equivalent you only get a photo which looks as if its taken by a 25-28mm lens......its hard to explain....if you research google you will probably get a better answer :S

Yeah full frame is basically a camera with a sensor that is 35 x 24mm big, regular DSLRs have sensors 1.3, 1.5 and 1.6 times smaller than that.

I got out with my new Nikon toy on Sunday, I'm still learning in the ways of SLRs but what do you folks reckon of this one?

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3157/2565018851_9f2d22d9fd_b.jpg

This photo is currently unavailable. :cry:

Bloody flickr :bash:

Hope it's visible now!

Lovely picture. :happy:

There are rumours on the internets about a consumer level Nikon full frame camera. The D10. :happy:

^^The rumours were true, but it's called the D700 not the D10. http://www.photographybay.com/2008/06/18/nikon-d700/

I bought the Nikon 55-200mm lens recently (i won't bore you with the letter and numbers that come after it, suffice to say it has Vibration Reduction).

I've only tested it around the house, but it seems bloody good - image quality is top notch, and the zoom is great (just like my old panasonic).

Just need a day or two to actually go out and take some pics :|

Good choice, that's a quite good lens. Make sure you don't get dust all over your sensor while changing them. :colgate:

Yeah, i try to change them as quickly as possible with the camera facing down - seems alright so far actually. There is the odd particle of dust that shows up on a very blue sky, but you need eyes like a hawk to spot them.

However, there's an annoying speck that i can see through the viewfinder it's been there since the second day i've had the camera. I've tried blowing any dust off the mirror (dunno if that would help :dunno:), and cleaning the lens but had no luck.

It's just really irritating.

I've had a few dust specs come and go :weird: thankfully when they do appear they only appear in the sky, they're very easy to photoshop out though.

I really need another lens, the kit one is getting on my nerves a bit with it's passable zoom :shifty: how much would you reccommend the 55-200mm, NBTD?

^^ Well, i can't compare it to any other SLR lenses, but from just testing it out i'm quite impressed.

It's small (only a CM or two longer than the kit lens, but a bit bulkier), and doesn't seem to add too much weight to the camera. It focuses quickly and the VR is very useful.

Here's a few sample piccies i took (just random test shots), the colours seem true to life and the images are detailed - even on high zoom.

All these are unadjusted and original size
http://img294.imageshack.us/img294/3045/dsc1469qv5.th.jpg (http://img294.imageshack.us/my.php?image=dsc1469qv5.jpg)

http://img209.imageshack.us/img209/4276/dsc1477al5.th.jpg (http://img209.imageshack.us/my.php?image=dsc1477al5.jpg)

(edit- for some reason this won't upload full sized - but you get the idea)
http://img177.imageshack.us/img177/9854/dsc1490ps6.th.jpg (http://img177.imageshack.us/my.php?image=dsc1490ps6.jpg)

http://img92.imageshack.us/img92/2883/dsc1517bv6.th.jpg (http://img92.imageshack.us/my.php?image=dsc1517bv6.jpg)

The cat picture is excellent. What a handsome cat. :happy:

8/10 Nice!

:drool: :shocked: some great pics there Nbtd!

In this pic how far was the distance?
http://img209.imageshack.us/img209/4276/dsc1477al5.th.jpg (http://img209.imageshack.us/my.php?image=dsc1477al5.jpg)

It's probably about 2 miles from my house to Alexandra Palace (give or take), and the flats are a bit less than a mile. The lens was at full zoom for that pic.

If you make it full sized on imageshack you can just about make out the blue lamposts infront of the palace :happy:

It's probably about 2 miles from my house to Alexandra Palace (give or take), and the flats are a bit less than a mile. The lens was at full zoom for that pic.

If you make it full sized on imageshack you can just about make out the blue lamposts infront of the palace :happy:

ooo impressive :happy:

:gaah: it's so hard trying to find what lens to have :cry:

Helium why not go for the amazing Nikon 18-200mm VR? Yes it's a bit expensive but it would mean no lens changing. :happy:

It's the only lens I use.

But it's a bit big and heavy, but it feels nice and solid on my D40.

^^ i had a look at that one, but the cheapest i could find it for was £380......so i instantly stopped looking at :nuts:

If i used the camera very often i would have considered it, but it's really only an occasional hobby, so i couldn't justify spending that much money. It would be like buying a sports car and leaving it parked in the Garage all the time.

Lens changing will be a bit of a pain, but meh...i'll live. Photography isn't for penny pinchers like me :(

Helium why not go for the amazing Nikon 18-200mm VR? Yes it's a bit expensive but it would mean no lens changing. :happy:

It's the only lens I use.

But it's a bit big and heavy, but it feels nice and solid on my D40.

hmmm so im guessing it's a great all rounder lens? :shifty:

hmmm so im guessing it's a great all rounder lens? :shifty:

It is indeed. I've had mine for over a month but haven't yet had time to truly test it. But from what I've seen so far it gives great images from 18 all the way to 200mm without loss of sharpness. Also the price keeps coming down. I got mine for £417 but now you can find it £50 cheaper from places like amazon.

Been considering the 18-200mm lens as a replacement for my D80 kit lens (18-135mm) , but will it really make 400 quids worth of difference ?.

^^I wouldn't recommend it if you've got the 18-135mm, the extra zoom and VR is not worth it. But I would recommend you get the Nikon 70-300mm VR instead.

For £400 you can get the 70-300mm + the 50mm f1.8. :)

Lens changing will be a bit of a pain, but meh...i'll live. Photography isn't for penny pinchers like me :(

:pet:

It is indeed. I've had mine for over a month but haven't yet had time to truly test it. But from what I've seen so far it gives great images from 18 all the way to 200mm without loss of sharpness. Also the price keeps coming down. I got mine for £417 but now you can find it £50 cheaper from places like amazon.

i'll wait for the price to come down just that ickle bit more :yes:













...provided the temptation doesn't become too much :shifty:

For £400 you can get the 70-300mm + the 50mm f1.8. :)

Do all Nikon lenses fit all Nikon cameras ? I have a Nikon D200 with an 18-70mm (f3.5-4.5) and a Sigma 70-300 (f4-5.6) lens (which isn't that great). I was wondering about buying something with a shallower depth of field or perhaps something with a wider angle. Any recommendations ?

...

Do all Nikon lenses fit all Nikon cameras ? I have a Nikon D200 with an 18-70mm (f3.5-4.5) and a Sigma 70-300 (f4-5.6) lens (which isn't that great). I was wondering about buying something with a shallower depth of field or perhaps something with a wider angle. Any recommendations ?

Yes all Nikon lenses made in the past 50 years will work on the new Nikon cameras. But some new Nikon 'G' lenses will not work on old manual cameras.

As for shallow depth of field I would recommend the Nikon 50mm f1.4 or the 1.8 version. For a wide angle lens I recommend the brilliant Sigma 10-20mm.

As for shallow depth of field I would recommend the Nikon 50mm f1.4 or the 1.8 version. For a wide angle lens I recommend the brilliant Sigma 10-20mm.

Thanks - I'm going to the States in September so will look out for them there as I'm sure they'll be cheaper. :)

Well, looks like I'm 'one of the gang now' (blame Medo for that!).. as of about an hour ago!

Just got myself a D40 (under Medo's advice, and after reading a fair old few reviews) and treated myself to a shiney new Nikon 16-85mm VR lens... this little beauty to be exact.. http://www.europe-nikon.com/resources/g==/GNEaxCabQL2I_aRF3JcbZWfCwjXv5sVk/e1tthQ_UrWHcoaKXZkqzwTiddU6e1xx2/O_FrFPa6GzAivuhTiTr7F.jpg
http://www.europe-nikon.com/product/en_GB/products/broad/1548/overview.html

In the end I decided if I was only going to use one lens most of the time I'd rather something with a slightly wider angle than longer zoom. And if I ever end up wishing I had more zoom there always the 70-300mm in Santa's stocking.. (or is he just pleased to see me?)

So excited I haven't even got it out of the box yet...

If I've done a really really stupid thing, please be kind and pretend I made a good choice, at least for a week or so.... :)

Anyway, I imagine I'll be frequenting this neck of the woods a lot more in the weeks and months to come. :cheers:

TOM congratulations and welcome to the Nikon family. :)
Once you're in there's no out. :evil:

That is a really good lens that is. I was going to get it instead of the 18-200mm I ended up getting. It's got plenty of zoom and optically it is really good quality. It's quite new, came out last year I think. Also the VR on this thing is fantastic. Overall you won't regret it, have fun. :)
I just hope the missus doesn't beat you up for spending a tad bit over your budget. :D

Cheers Medo (or should that be 'boss' now?)... as my Grandma always used Nikon, and she's pretty much why I have such a passion for photography I kinda feel like it's in the blood.

Just been giving it a quick test spin.. and so far so good! Can't believe how easy and intuitive the D40 is to use.. up and running in no time. The lens seems great, although I've not yet had a chance to upload my shots and check out the quality in great detail yet. It's a heck of a lot heavier than the standard 18-55mm, almost alarmingly so! Is that because of the extra glass, or the VR system (which is fab by the way!)?

Overall I'm very happy... although have just got the post-purchase jitters... wondering if I should have gone for the D60 with the 18-55mm lens, or whether I should have splashed out that little bit extra on the 18-200mm... arghhhhhh! :argh:

To be fair though, this lens does what I want it to, it gives me those few extra mm at the wide end, which really seems to make a difference, and should be great for my 'urban photo' shots.. and gives me a perfectly sufficient zoom range for 90% of the everyday situations I'll be using it in. At the end of the day you adapt to whatever kit you've got I guess. At some point in the future a mega zoom would be good, but this lens means that when I do get that zoom I can make sure it's extra loooooooooong..

In the mean time I'd better take some stirling shots of my little lad to appease the inevitable wrath of his mother..

Anyway, cheers for all your advice Meedy.. you're a rock of sense in a sea of opinion chaos. (Just wait till the Canonites hear about this though... sounds almost biblical doesn't it, 'Thus the Nikonites went forth and defeated the Canonites at the valley of DeeEsselarr..') One last question, what sort of lens filter would you reccomend for the 16-85mm?

Have a :cheers: on me (although obviously I'll have to owe you, cause I'm now skint for the next few months!).

Yes that's right, it's heavy because of all that fine Nikon glass also the VR adds a few grams too; the kit lens is all plastic. Personally I find the heaviness nice, it balances out the camera body nicely.
With my 18-200mm lens I found that VR should only be used when needed, i.e. low light situations and towards the telephoto end of the lens. Otherwise it can get in your way, like for example when you need speed and quick focus it can slow things down a little, also it drains the battery faster. So turn the VR off when it's nice and sunny.
I would recommend a UV filter for that lens, not because it makes any difference to the pictures (granted it can give you sharper images of the skyline when the sky is all hazy and stuff, but that is not too much of a gain) but because your new lens needs protection. A regular UV filter will protect your expensive lens against scratches and fingerprints and stuff.

I expect pictures soon. :D :cheers:

Cheers Medo. I agree that the weight feels nice, very 'solid', although it'll take a bit of getting used to after using my dinky IXUS for so long! It does seem to ballance the camera nicely though.

Point taken re. the VR. I've kinda figured the same thing, although I've been trying a few indoor low light shots tonights and it's proved very useful.

Can you recomend a particular make of UV filter or give a guide as to what I should expect to pay.. is there much difference between them?

Ok, here we go, with all of half an hours experience.. hopefully these will help pacify the missis once she sees the credit card bill..


http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/6434/dsc0210fj9.jpg



http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/8215/dsc0094ka6.jpg

I know it's early days, and a bit cliched, but I'm totally blown away by the quality of this camera! The images are incredibly sharp and rich in detail, even in the relatively poor lighting conditions I've been using... can't wait to give it it's first proper 'road test'.. watch this space.. :)

Well Hoya and Hama are well respected for making decent filters, but I've found no brand filters are also adequate. Amazon is the cheapest place for filters.

Here is a Hama 67mm UV filter for under £10.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Hama-Filter-O-Haze-67-0-Coated/dp/B00006JA5T/ref=sr_1_11?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1217112579&sr=1-11

Don't buy from camera shops like Jessops and whatnot, they would charge £30 for the same filter.

Cheers Medo, sounds like a worthwhile investment!

:happy:

Great pictures. Excellent detail. Show the wife ASAP, she will go awwwww and the credit card bill will not matter to her.

You should also tell her that there is no way you are going to use a cheapo point and shoot to take pictures of your baby, these pictures will document your baby's early years and you need a capable camera to capture every moment with breathtaking detail. That should bring a tear to her eye and she would think what a nice and considerate father you will be. It's all in the delivery, you need to make it sound like you bought the camera for the baby and not for yourself. :)

NOTE: Flash may hurt baby's eyes. :nono:

:happy:

Great pictures. Excellent detail. Show the wife ASAP, she will go awwwww and the credit card bill will not matter to her.

You should also tell her that there is no way you are going to use a cheapo point and shoot to take pictures of your baby, these pictures will document your baby's early years and you need a capable camera to capture every moment with breathtaking detail. That should bring a tear to her eye and she would think what a nice and considerate father you will be. It's all in the delivery, you need to make it sound like you bought the camera for the baby and not for yourself. :)

NOTE: Flash may hurt baby's eyes. :nono:

Cheers Medo, I might just print that off and read it word for word (or would that be missing the point?).

Re. the flash, I think I may have blinded my son already (although that first shot was taken without the flash).. oh well, at least I got some good photos which he can, er.. not, look back on... :nuts:

http://img523.imageshack.us/img523/3221/dscn0485nz6.jpg

My camera and only lens, got the body on sale for 599€ and the lens to go for 9€ (which is just about how much the lens is worth). Hopefully I'll be able to afford a 18-200mm and/or a 10-22mm Sigma soon.

Whislt waiting for my new lens I thought I'd give my Grandma's old Nikon lenses a quick spin yesterday. Bit of a steep learning curve as I've never used a camera in fully manual mode, controlling everything from ISO, shutter speed and apature.. but I got the hang of it eventually and these are some of the restults (which go to show that a quality lens is always a quality lens, no matter how old)

Taken with the Nikkor 28mm f/2.8 with polarising filter



http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/6637/dsc0516jt9.jpg



http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/1893/dsc0511ba3.jpg



http://img230.imageshack.us/img230/6677/dsc0422bf3.jpg



http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/5905/dsc0539fj4.jpg

And here are a few taken with the Nikkor 50mm 1:1.8

I just love the results from this lens, it makes taking portraits child's play.. I just click away and have got some amazing results with relatively little effort (well, they're amazing to me, who's used to point and shoot compacts!)

http://img384.imageshack.us/img384/9884/dsc0566gm9.jpg



http://img227.imageshack.us/img227/8425/dsc0676wl2.jpg

Great pictures. Prime lenses are always sharper than other lenses.
I use my 50mm lens more than any other of my lenses.

Cheers Medo (what's a 'prime' lens? Does than mean it's a fixed focal length?).

The results from the 50mm are brilliant, and I'll be using that for all the photos of the little fella as he grows... but for the out and about stuff, there can be only one... I'm picking up the new lens tomorrow... can't wait!! :colgate:

Yes prime means fixed focal length.

I've just started messing around with my Nikkor 50mm f1.4 literally about 5 minutes ago. Just took photos of random things like my whisky flask and other lens, and funk me sideways with 2 litre cola bottle... it's incredible! The possibilities are endless. A whole new window has been opened up to me that my last lens was unable to do. Low light conditions? Pfft! I can handle 'em! Fan flipping tastic! :)

Yep it's brilliant, it produces razor sharp images. :cheers:

I've just started messing around with my Nikkor 50mm f1.4 literally about 5 minutes ago. Just took photos of random things like my whisky flask and other lens, and funk me sideways with 2 litre cola bottle... it's incredible! The possibilities are endless. A whole new window has been opened up to me that my last lens was unable to do. Low light conditions? Pfft! I can handle 'em! Fan flipping tastic! :)

Do you think the lens is as / more important than the camera then ? Hmmm - that's food for thought.

Hi smarty, I'm no expert, but I've done a lot of reading up on cameras and lenses (and a lot of bugging Medo every 5 mintues) over the last few weeks, and the overall consensus seems to be that lenses are the single biggest determinant of image quality after the photographer themselves.. provided you're using a half decent camera. That's why I opted for a cheap (ish) dslr and a lens which was almost twice as expensive (YES - I've swaped my 16-85mm for the 18-200mm! :colgate:). I'll still be using the lens in years to come, whereas the camera will probably be replaced in a few years as digital technology changes rapidly, but the basic elements of a good quality lens haven't changed for half a centuary.

I've just been using my Grandma's old Nikkor prime lenses which are nearly 30 years old and the results are stunning. So that tells you something.

^^I completely agree! I see the camera body itself as the engine to capture the ability of the photographer and lens. I still see it as a very important piece of kit - I mean, how else am I going to get a picture? I'm a lost duck with myself and a lens!

Still can't get over how sharp this lens is though. Makes me want to throw my Sigma 70-300mm lens out the window in true rock and roll style now!

Can we see some comparison pictures of the F1.4 and F1.8 50mm lenses? Is it worth the extra money? :)

Makes me want to throw my Sigma 70-300mm lens out the window in true rock and roll style now!

:lol:

I've got one of those and now want to do the same :)

So if you were starting out from scratch with a new Nikon camera and had say £500 to spend on lenses, what would you go for ? No specific photgraphic needs but would like to have a good range from relatively wide angle to decent zoom.

That's why I opted for a cheap (ish) dslr and a lens which was almost twice as expensive (YES - I've swaped my 16-85mm for the 18-200mm! :colgate:)..

That probably answers my previous question. 18-200 would cover most scenarios. How much was that ?

That probably answers my previous question. 18-200 would cover most scenarios. How much was that ?

Yes, that's probably the best bet. There are some excellent reviews of it about and having given it a test run it really does cover everything from wide angle (important to me for taking photos of buildings) and very impressive telephoto. The images are nice and sharp and in low light or at high zoom the image stabilzation seems to really work.

All this doesn't come cheap... good price for a new lens is around £400, but you can pick them up in good nic second hand from £300 upwards on eBay.

Now that I've got this and the old 50mm prime lens I pretty much have everything I need. The great advantage of the 18-200mm is that you only need to take one lens out with you on photo shoots, I keep the 50mm at home for portrait style shots of family and friends.

Good review here: http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/18200.htm

If you've already got the camera I'd get this lens, and possibly this http://www.microglobe.co.uk/catalog/product_info.php?pName=nikon-50mm-f18d-af-lens&gclid=CMTBzLr07JQCFQ6S1QodEihpqA

I'm sure Medo has plenty of good advice to offer as well though...

Messed about with the 50mm lens in the garden today! I can see why everyone loves the lens! I can't achieve a picture this sharp and just so.... awwww with any of my other lenses!

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3115/2722715776_f85e77b084_b.jpg

My only issue with the lens is that I am having trouble with focussing - especially on very small objects. I guess it's not built to work like a macro lens but I find that it tends to focus on the stuff immediately around the subject as opposed to the subject itself.

Example (although almost impossible to tell at this size). Here the lens focussed more on the flower than on the bee itself. It's hard to tell but it's still annoying for me! Am I asking for too much?
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3268/2722708084_d20e935693_b.jpg

Great shots Erebus! Pin point sharpness. Because my lens is older I have to manually focus it and so don't know how well the autofocus works, but it can only ever be so good. I'd suggest using manual focus for shots like the bee, and actually most shots, because with that type of lens you're rarely shooting fast moving objects, and manual focus gives you much more control.

I can't manually focus because my right eye is a bit dodgy. I rely on the auto-focus to get it just right! I have tried adjusting the view finder but I still find it difficult to tell if I have focussed properly on something. I have tried shooting whilst wearing glasses but that's just very uncomfortable. :(

Tom is right. Manually you can chose what to focus on and what not to. I too use manual focusing with my 50mm lens, it actually makes taking pictures more fun that way.

Edit: Sorry about the eye. You can still focus on the things you want with autofocus but it takes a few tries and you may need to move forward of backwards a little.

Yeh, I've noticed that I need a lot of patience when it comes to photographing that stuff. I've no problem with that! Except I expect that bee to have patience too and stay there whilst I'm trying to take a snap of it! I get mighty pissed off when it flies away! I would chase it if I wasn't so scared of being stung... :|

You could always capture it and kill it and place it on a flower and then photograph it. :shifty:

:lol: I'll give it a go but if I end up riddled with bee stings because his buddies didn't approve my stunt, then I'm holding you accountable!

:lol:

I've got one of those and now want to do the same :)

So if you were starting out from scratch with a new Nikon camera and had say £500 to spend on lenses, what would you go for ? No specific photgraphic needs but would like to have a good range from relatively wide angle to decent zoom.

That probably answers my previous question. 18-200 would cover most scenarios. How much was that ?

I'll give you some advice tomorrow if you are coming to the London meet-up.

These 18-200mm lenses arent very good...at least thats what Ive heard.:dunno:

That's true when it comes to Tamron and Sigma 18-200mm lenses but the Nikon one is something special. I used to have a Sigma 18-200mm and it was no where near as good as the Nikon. :yes:

I'll give you some advice tomorrow if you are coming to the London meet-up.

I had to leave after the OCS part of the trip but I see you didn't make it anyway. Would you recommend the 18-200 ?

^^ And I couldn't make it to the main meet-up. :lol:

Yes, I would indeed recommend the 18-200mm.

So would I! (You'll be pleased to know..) :colgate:

Excellent - 18-200 it is then. Time to start doing some searching on e-bay. And I think I'll look out for the other lenses recommended earlier - the 50mm f1.4 and a 10-20mm lens. Then that's me sorted :) For the moment at least :lol:

Excellent - 18-200 it is then. Time to start doing some searching on e-bay. And I think I'll look out for the other lenses recommended earlier - the 50mm f1.4 and a 10-20mm lens. Then that's me sorted :) For the moment at least :lol:

Go Smar-tee.. go smar-tee.. :cheer:

(Better not check your bank statements for a while though... :shifty:)

(Better not check your bank statements for a while though... :shifty:)

I'll wait on buying anything until I'm in the US in September - then I can focus on how much money I'm actually saving. :)

Smart by name, smart by nature..

Go to Adorama in NYC 42 West 18th Street. If you are ever in NYC.

And here are a few taken with the Nikkor 50mm 1:1.8

I just love the results from this lens, it makes taking portraits child's play.. I just click away and have got some amazing results with relatively little effort (well, they're amazing to me, who's used to point and shoot compacts!)

http://img384.imageshack.us/img384/9884/dsc0566gm9.jpg



http://img227.imageshack.us/img227/8425/dsc0676wl2.jpg


Great pics of your new edition Tom...get yourself one of these SB 400 speedlights..http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/sb400.htm

Bounce the flash of the ceiling and Babys eyes are safe..and your pics will be 10 times better...(Although still take care and dont get too close too baby)
Weclome to the Nikon gang..

Cheers Ged, i had thought about getting an additional flash, and that one looks great - but pricey though after all my recent expenditure! But definately something for the ever growing 'wish list'! :cheers:

Cheers Ged, i had thought about getting an additional flash, and that one looks great - but pricey though after all my recent expenditure! But definately something for the ever growing 'wish list'! :cheers:

You're welcome Tom..I originally ordered a SB600 and then canceled after reading Ken's SB400 review..I should have mine tomorrow..I use the 18-200 VR lens mainly and when shooting indoors with flash that annoying shadow appears..using the SB400 will hopefully get shut of this..I want a D300 Now..Dont tell my Mrs :shifty:.....
You dont know what you've let yourself in for by the way..you'll Always be skint now..:)..Best of luck Tom..and a belated Congratulations. :cheers:

Tom,I dont know if this site has been mentioned on here The Nikonians (http://www.nikonians.org/)

You'll pick up a few hints and tips on there.

Those sneaky Nikonians charge you for the good stuff. :no:

And I officially welcome you to the Nikon thread. :banana:

Re: D300, it's damn fine camera, and heavy. :D

^^^^..Thanks for the welcome Medo..much appreciated.

Cheers Ged, I'll check that site out (although I'm trying to steer clear of things likely to cost me more money at the moment... not easy.. got my eyes on a couple of nice filters as well... :shifty:)

Go to Adorama in NYC 42 West 18th Street. If you are ever in NYC.

Thanks I should be in NYC on at least one day so will give it a go. I'm actually going to be in Philadelphia but will also go to NYC and Washington whilst there.

An American girl at work (who admittedly doesn't know much about photography) had suggested this place on the corner of 9th Ave and West 33rd nr Penn Station. Do you know it ?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/

Yeah B&H are a famous camera dealer. I just checked, both Adorama and B&H sell the 18-200mm for around $644- $649. That comes to £330.

Cheers Ged, I'll check that site out (although I'm trying to steer clear of things likely to cost me more money at the moment... not easy.. got my eyes on a couple of nice filters as well... :shifty:)

Get a filter on ASAP Tom and leave it on,it will protect your lens,polarising filters really make the clouds all fluffy and bring out the blue skys..I have others but the polariser is my fave everyday filter...all year round.

Get a filter on ASAP Tom and leave it on,it will protect your lens,polarising filters really make the clouds all fluffy and bring out the blue skys..I have others but the polariser is my fave everyday filter...all year round.

Cheers Ged. Got a basic UV filter for now, and want to save up for a decent polarising filter as I love those fluffy clouds and brilliant blue skies!

Cheers Ged. Got a basic UV filter for now, and want to save up for a decent polarising filter as I love those fluffy clouds and brilliant blue skies!


I got a £20ish Hama PL circular M72 when I 1st got my Nikon D80 about 12 months ago..I would not change it Tom for any other polariser no matter how expensive...I am absolutely blown away by the results this produces on a good sunny day when the mashed potato clouds are out..there are plenty of examples in my pics...I'm not bigging my pics up Tom..I hope it does not come across like that..I'm trying to save you a few bob....and I dont use photoshop..as its too f'n complicated for me..so my pics are basically as they were taken..in raw..processed in Lightroom..with me £20 Hama polariser...Dont go loopy buying fancy names you dont need.

Sorry Tom...I meant blue skied mashed potato days...Not sunny days..Yeeeeeeeeeak...horrible washed out skies..

This will do you Tom for Blue skys and fluffy clouds...promise yer Lad...check thread size..this is 72mm..(The Number inside your lens cap..72 ?...77 ?)


http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/NEW-HAMA-CIRCULAR-POLARIZING-POLARIZER-FILTER-72MM-72_W0QQitemZ360063675817QQihZ023QQcategoryZ30066QQtcZphotoQQcmdZViewItemQQ_trksidZp1742.m153.l1262

Cheers again Ged. I'll look into that (also looking at a few Hoya's but don't plan to spend mega bucks) - if they give you the shots you get on a regular basis that's a pretty good reccomendation!

Cheers again Ged. I'll look into that (also looking at a few Hoya's but don't plan to spend mega bucks) - if they give you the shots you get on a regular basis that's a pretty good reccomendation!

Thanks Tom...and fire away with any questions..best of luck mate.

OK, so Erebus is having dust-on-the-sensor problems. I've already given it a go with the blower and I accidentally touched it with the nozzle - thank god the sensor is covered with glass. The great big dust lump I want to get rid of (as shown in the pic below) hasn't budged though and I don't wanna fork out £30 to send it to Stoke on Trent. What other ways can I clean it? Some people have been using all these brushes and some have just used a lens cloth and a spot of water. They all seem to work for them but I'm too scared to risk it! I can't afford a replacement camera at the moment. Any tips on what to do?

Find the spot!
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3032/2734816985_d86cb33538_b.jpg

Just clone it out.

:puke:

What an awful piece of dust you got there.

Unfortunately I have no experience in this field, you may like to ask some of the more seasoned photographers here, i.e. Ginger Tosser. :D

Or use photoshop.

Whatever you do DON'T use jam on the end of a thin fish finger.

Maaaaaaaaaaaan I need ta sleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep... :crazy2:

I can't use photoshop because my computer is just too bollocks to install it. :(

I might have a go with my lens cloth and a spot of water. Sometimes you've got to take risks! :|

I might have a go with my lens cloth and a spot of water. Sometimes you've got to take risks! :|


Nooooooooooo shhtop....:)

Dont go sticking no damp cloth in there FFS...you'll just make it worse by smudging everything..it'll be like being in a car in the rain with no wipers...have a bash with one of them womens powder brushes, a really soft one...the ones that are dome shaped..hold your camera upside down above you head so any gunge falls out..Gently..take note..Gently brush Inside and then use the blower again..still with camera upside down..it works for me..stay away from all fluidy crap on cotton buds etc..if the brush fails I'd pay to get it done by a pro..

Done using Corel paint shop pro..

You also have a little smudge somewhere..top centre of your pic slightly left.


http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c60/gedfleming/ANY%20PHOTOS/2734816985_d86cb33538_b.jpg

I got a £20ish Hama PL circular M72...

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/NEW-HAMA-CIRCULAR-POLARIZING-POLARIZER-FILTER-72MM-72_W0QQitemZ360063675817QQihZ023QQcategoryZ30066QQtcZphotoQQcmdZViewItemQQ_trksidZp1742.m153.l1262

Blinking heck, that's cheap. Are the Hama ones much cop, I've only got Hoya Circ Pols? I need a new 67mm one, which is sub £20

OK, so Erebus is having dust-on-the-sensor problems. I've already given it a go with the blower and I accidentally touched it with the nozzle......Any tips on what to do?

When you say "blower", do you mean a bulb blower or an aerosol?

Yeh, don't use the aerosols as they contain fluid which can gunk up the glass... a bulb blower is better (don't use aresoles either, they'll do you no good whatsoever!)

Try this site for a few tips for self cleaning.. http://www.cleaningdigitalcameras.com/

Blinking heck, that's cheap. Are the Hama ones much cop, I've only got Hoya Circ Pols?....

I'm happy with results produced by me cheapo filter..Indoors,outdoors,day and night..left on all the time..:cheers:

The 1st pic needs scrolling..Cheers.


http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c60/gedfleming/SKYLINES/merseyskylinenewBIGONE.jpg


http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c60/gedfleming/SKYLINES/SEACOMBESKYLINE1.jpg


http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c60/gedfleming/DSC_0331.jpg


http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c60/gedfleming/DSC_0341.jpg


http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c60/gedfleming/GIRLSATWATERFOUNTAIN2-1.jpg


http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c60/gedfleming/CROSBY/crosbybeach4_5_6_tonemapped.jpg


http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c60/gedfleming/BOATS%20AND%20DOCKS/NEWHDR.jpg


http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c60/gedfleming/BOATS%20AND%20DOCKS/northstanleywarehouse.jpg


http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c60/gedfleming/BOATS%20AND%20DOCKS/AROUNDTOWN19TthDEC07239.jpg


http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c60/gedfleming/BOATS%20AND%20DOCKS/1-5.jpg


http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c60/gedfleming/BOATS%20AND%20DOCKS/2-5.jpg

Stunning pictures Ged, splendid. :happy:

^^ Thank you Medo..:cheers:














Bladdy links ?

Smashing shots Ged. :cheers:

Yeh, don't use the aerosols as they contain fluid which can gunk up the glass... a bulb blower is better (don't use aresoles either, they'll do you no good whatsoever!)

I used an AF Sprayduster aerosol on my D70, but I took the precaution of holding it quite far away so it didn't leave any residue. I had thought about using the hoover, an air line, or a bike pump with a needle for inflating a football on the end. Hadn't thought about the arsehole though, but thanks for stopping me in my tracks.

I'm happy with results produced by me cheapo filter..Indoors,outdoors,day and night..left on all the time..:cheers:

Tidy pics guv. I'm ordering a 67mm and a 58mm on pay day. Thanks for the recommendation. Not sure about leaving polarizing filters on indoors - isn't that the photographic equivalent of being Bono? :)

Thanks Lads..best of luck Borras..you wont go wrong with them filters..always leave a filter on Borras..best bashing a £20 filter than a £400 lens.

Thanks Lads..best of luck Borras..you wont go wrong with them filters..always leave a filter on Borras..best bashing a £20 filter than a £400 lens.

Depends how exposed your element is, but I take your point. I tend to leave them on a couple I've got. Usually a neutral density though, a polarizing filter tends to rob too much light for my liking.

Nooooooooooo shhtop....:)

Dont go sticking no damp cloth in there FFS...you'll just make it worse by smudging everything..it'll be like being in a car in the rain with no wipers...have a bash with one of them womens powder brushes, a really soft one...the ones that are dome shaped..hold your camera upside down above you head so any gunge falls out..Gently..take note..Gently brush Inside and then use the blower again..still with camera upside down..it works for me..stay away from all fluidy crap on cotton buds etc..if the brush fails I'd pay to get it done by a pro..

I didn't use the cloth and water technique! The dust is still there. I'm going to have to get one of these brushes then - none in the house! I'm a little reluctant to get it done by a professional store, only because I think it is time I learned how to do it myself.

Thanks for the advice! :)

Done using Corel paint shop pro..

You also have a little smudge somewhere..top centre of your pic slightly left.

Ooh wow, good work! Yep, there is a dust spot on the very top. There are also about three or four on the left side of landscape pictures which are fainter. They don't show up in this picture but in ones which are predominantly sky, they are almost as obvious as the one at the top. I have never had a dust spot like that black one though. It is really bugging me!

When you say "blower", do you mean a bulb blower or an aerosol?

By blower, I mean:
http://www.birdsasart.com/231/GTRAB.JPG

The Giottos rocket blower. :)

Depends how exposed your element is, but I take your point. I tend to leave them on a couple I've got. Usually a neutral density though, a polarizing filter tends to rob too much light for my liking.

I leave whatever filter on I've used that day..I mention the polariser as its just a great everyday filter which I tend to use most of the time...I forget they are on to be honest but if I think on I will take it off for Indoor shots..if I've been shooting spooky infra red shots around parks or whatever with my Hoya R72 I will forget thats on..but change it to my polariser for everyday use when I realise what filter is on the lens..Whatever kind of filter,apart from Indoors if I think on,theres always a filter on my 3 lenses to protect the glass behind it.

Thanks for the advice! :)..Ooh wow, good work!..


My pleasure Erebus555..best of luck.

Nikon yesterday announced the D90, the replacement for the D80. The most interesting thing about this camera is that is can record HD video, yes you heard that correctly, a DSLR that can shoot video. :eek:

u can use any lense with the HD video! taking a HD clip with a fisheye lense, thats kool!

I was just going to post this scoop! Trust you to beat me to it Meedy... :tongue:

More detailed specs here. http://www.bythom.com/

:drool:

Perhaps I'll hold off on buying a new digital camcorder then?..

More details here... http://yourphotoarchive.com/laugh.htm :wink2:

The real stuff: http://chsvimg.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/d90/en/index.html

I'm now kinda gutted I just bought a new D40.. but then, there's no way I would have been able to afford this with a decent lens (it's £700 for the body only!), so I guess it was the right choice to get the good lens and the cheaper camera..

Nah you made the right choice Tom. You can get the D90 next year, that'll give you plenty of time to set aside a few extra quid. :D

The real stuff: http://chsvimg.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/d90/en/index.html



Did you check out the sample movies shot with the D90? :drool:

I'm now kinda gutted I just bought a new D40..

I too have recently bought a D40. I don't know much about the whole Nikon range, and I don't know for how long the D40 has been about, but with the current discounts and cashbacks I suspected a new generation was about to be born.

I too have recently bought a D40. I don't know much about the whole Nikon range, and I don't know for how long the D40 has been about, but with the current discounts and cashbacks I suspected a new generation was about to be born.

I kinda figured the same thing, but then I suppose it meant that we got a good bargain! I'm glad now that I didn't shell out more on a D40x or D60 body with an inferior lens.

Medo I've just seen those movies! Amazing! The idea of being able to use such high quality and variable lenses to shoot short movies is wonderful. The creative possibilities are endless. It also potentially makes lenses even more versatile and a better investment.

I reckon I'll get a cheap digital camcorder to tie me over (and catch all those 'first moments' with the little one) but the D90 is definately on my hit list for next year, by which point it should have dropped in price a fair bit too!..

I currently have a Canon Power Shot S3 IS which is quite good but I want to get a dslr camera. I was thinking of buying the D40, but how good is it with the standard 18-55mm lens? I don´t know that much about cameras and lenses.

Is the D40 a good camera even though I don´t have a fancy lens?

Get yourself a Hasselblad :yes:

Nikon yesterday announced the D90, the replacement for the D80. The most interesting thing about this camera is that is can record HD video, yes you heard that correctly, a DSLR that can shoot video. :eek:
Sweet mercy! It's time to get saving...

My D50 needs upgrading anyhow :happy:

Forget cleaning the sensor, I'm getting a brand new piece of kit! Better raid my piggy bank...

I'm sure by the time i'd have enough money for the D90 or when it's at a reduced price they'll be something far greater (and money pinching...)

My 18-200mm lens was supposed to come the day before yesterday... fingers cross it comes tomorrow :shifty:

I currently have a Canon Power Shot S3 IS which is quite good but I want to get a dslr camera. I was thinking of buying the D40, but how good is it with the standard 18-55mm lens? I don´t know that much about cameras and lenses.

Is the D40 a good camera even though I don´t have a fancy lens?

The D40 is a superb camera and the lens that comes with it is excellent. You will notice a dramatic improvement in the quality of your pictures. I highly recommend it. But if I was you I would save a bit more and get the D90. :drool:

My 18-200mm lens was supposed to come the day before yesterday... fingers cross it comes tomorrow :shifty:

:pet:

can I ask how much a 18-200mm lens for a D40 costs, and where's the best place to buy one?

querido you'll pay around £400 in the shops at the moment - you can save a few bob if you get it online, and you could get a good second hand version for around £330 on eBay. Not cheap, but pretty much the only lens you'll need!

The D40 is a superb camera and the lens that comes with it is excellent. You will notice a dramatic improvement in the quality of your pictures. I highly recommend it. But if I was you I would save a bit more and get the D90. :drool:

Thanks Medo :)

I can´t afford a D80 right now. Would the D60 be a better choice than the D40?

Deleted..

The D90 looks good..anybody after a D80 body.. Nikon D90 (http://dcuser.net/nikon/nikon-d90-announcement.html)

So I'm already sold on the D90 - I've been wanting to get into shooting video too, but the camcorder I've got is utterly awful, so this seems like the perfect progression, especially because of the quality of image produced in low light.

But do think because this is the first every DSLR to shoot video that it might end up as nothing more than a work in progress gimic in an early stage of development?

It's going to be a huge investment if I go for one - I know the photograph aspect of the camera will be awesome - at the very least superior to the already impressive D80, but will the whole package live up to an £850 asking price?

^^ The £850 package will be a bargain David..be aware that you can only shoot 5 minute vids on the D90..I'm not after it for its video function ..I'm considering getting it for its excellent Image quality and low light capabilities..but I'm now thinking again about the D300 as I wont be upgrading for a while and want to make sure I make the right choice.

Ged I would go with the D90 if I was you, because the D90 has the same sensor as the D300, that means the same excellent low light performance + the video advantage. The D300 obviously is the better camera in terms of speed, responsiveness and build quality, and it has a superior AF system. If you want it to last a long time then go for the D300. It feels like a rock in your hands. If I was buying a new camera I would go for the D700. :D

^^Thanks Medo,I'm changing me mind more than a kid in a sweet shop here mate:lol: ..
I'm back on to the D90 now..I'm weighing all the options up,do I need the D300's better 51 point AF system etc when the D90 will produce excellent results,I've a feeling this D90 is going to be a cracker,I think my mind is made up..for an hour at least..decisions decisions eh..:banana:

It'll be the D300 in the end..betcha..:nuts:

It's the fact that it only records 5 minutes of video that's the killer for me. Why make a camera with such fantastic capabilities for both photography and movie lovers, but then cripple it's capability to actually replace the standard camcorder? Surely storage can't be an issue give the exponential increase in the capacity of memory cards?

If I was being cynical I'd say it was because they want to trial this feature as a gimmick first, see how popular it is, and then, if it sells, release the D90x with unlimited recording capability.... just like Apple release the iPhone knowing full well they'll be introducing a 3G version within months... :ohno:

But Tom, you can shoot 5 minutes then stop and shoot 5 more and so on, then you can edit it all together.

But Tom, you can shoot 5 minutes then stop and shoot 5 more and so on, then you can edit it all together.

True, but why put any sort of arbitrary limit on it in the first place? Having to stop and start half way through filming is likely to get very annoying.

I know what most people are thinking, 'this is a serious camera, with a nice little added extra, so who cares if it can only record for 5 minutes'... but that nice little added extra could have been soooo much more! Watch this space for a D90x once the original drops in price.. not soft those Nikonians!

True, but why put any sort of arbitrary limit on it in the first place? Having to stop and start half way through filming is likely to get very annoying.

Import duty, any more and it becomes a camcorder which attracts duty.

Digital cameras for some reason are duty free. Lenses aren't unless it's in a kit with a body. All require lovely VAT though.

It's the fact that it only records 5 minutes of video that's the killer for me......

Tom,it can shoot 20 minutes in non High Def mode.

Cheers guys, very informative!

The reason for the shorter recording time is to do with tax - any longer it would be classed as a camcorder. Therefore higher tax.

I would have imagined that there is an obvious technical reason for the 5 minute limit, too: storage.

5 minutes of 720p will decimate most SD cards - at 24 fps x 1280x720 plus mono sound and additional frame data, even a 16GB card won't last you long.


But yeah, T0M, you've pretty much echoed my sentiments that this will just be a tester for an X version, which is fine, but I don't want to go buy a D90 and see it replaced with some far superior within a year or so (ala the D40 / D40x).

I'm probably still going to get it, I think, but I came across a brainwave in Glasgow airport the other day: the D80 in Dixon's tax free had £160 knocked off the price.. now I know that the D80 has been out for ages, and there's all number of different prices going about now, but when the D90 comes out there'll only be a very small variation of price kicking about - a £150ish saving would help quite nicely, I reckon :happy:

The D40x was never a superior camera than the D40.

The D40x was never a superior camera than the D40.
Is it not? I always thought that it was like a D40.5 - they improved on the areas lacking in the original?

I don't really know much about the D40 though, I was kind of only guessing :)

What they did with the D40x is insert a 10MP sensor into a D40 and added a couple of new features and a £150 extra price tag.

Does anyone here think that Nikon's tend to over expose ? I've had the D70 and now the D80 and I have to constantly shoot in exp comp -1 or more

^^The D300 rarely does that.

The reason why I rarely ever shoot in Auto mode is because nine times out of 10, it over exposes! The only time I use it is if I think I'm being followed or when I've accidentally knocked it into that setting! Of which, both those situations happened to me yesterday (Saturday). :|

EDIT TO ADD: I have a D70 btw.

Yeah that's because the D300 is a serious camera! The D50 does it all the time, but its a perfect indicator for what the actual settings should be: Take the levels from auto and drop em' slightly - you'll never under-expose a shot :)

I would get a second hand D200 for the money it has nearly all the features of the d300.

I would get a second hand D200 for the money it has nearly all the features of the d300.

battery life is pretty shocking on the D200's i've heard, kinda put me off them

You can buy a spare battery for the D200 for peanuts. Or you can also buy an additional battery pack which will take standard batterys. I have a d200 and never found the battery life a problem.

Yeah that's because the D300 is a serious camera! The D50 does it all the time, but its a perfect indicator for what the actual settings should be: Take the levels from auto and drop em' slightly - you'll never under-expose a shot :)

The D40 is as good as the D300 when it comes to exposure. Maybe it was a problem with the older generation Nikons. :dunno:

So The Boy David, did you get your D90 yet? :naughty:

Alas, no, not yet - I'm still saving! It'll be a couple of months at least before I'll have enough to pick one up. I am, however, going to give one a shot today at a local camera store. Funtimes!


Btw, I freaking LOVE your avatar picture thingy. My favourite film of all time.

I'm looking in to buying a new lense and I've set my eyes on the Nikon 18-200 3.5-5.6 VR lense which seems nice and versitile. But I noticed that there's a Sigma lense with the same focal length and almost same speed (without the VR though) for about half the price.

Just hoping to get some input if the Nikon lense is worth the money. Any experience with one or both of the lenses?

Thanks.

^^

Yes Manuel I would stay away from the Sigma and the Tamron equivalent. I had a 18-200mm Sigma and it was very mediocre, the Nikon version is a much much better. Also Nikon cameras are designed to work with Nikon lenses, whereas Sigma and Tamron lenses are designed to work with many different cameras therefore they are not specialised.

The new Nikon camera bodies when used with a Nikon lens totally eliminate chromatic aberrations, and you end up getting much sharper pictures.

The Nikon 18-200mm VR may be more expensive but it is totally worth it in the long run, it is the only lens you need.
Thanks.

^^ This should answer your question. :)

I have question regarding the lense I would like to buy with my NIKON D90. Medo, you suggested me to opt for a 18-200mm stabilized lense. Is it necessary to spend more on the Nikon one? does the Sigma or tamron represent good value? :)

Yes Manuel I would stay away from the Sigma and the Tamron equivalent. I had a 18-200mm Sigma and it was very mediocre, the Nikon version is a much much better. Also Nikon cameras are designed to work with Nikon lenses, whereas Sigma and Tamron lenses are designed to work with many different cameras therefore they are not specialised.

The new Nikon camera bodies when used with a Nikon lens totally eliminate chromatic aberrations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromatic_aberration), and you end up getting much sharper pictures.

The Nikon 18-200mm VR may be more expensive but it is totally worth it in the long run, it is the only lens you need. :)

LOL pencilcase you sneaky, you beat me to it. :lol:

I am so tempted to get an 18-200mm for my D40 – as recommended above – but elsewhere I have seen the 18-135mm lens recommended as being almost as good … at less than half the price.

Any comments?



:)

Well for one thing the 18-135mm doesn't have VR. VR may not be useful to everybody but it is essential for hand held photography, it makes a huge difference, I'm talking about razor sharp pictures at 200mm hand held. Also there is the matter of focal length, 200mm is better than 135, and it would mean you wouldn't need a further telephoto lens. But if you already have lets say a 70-300mm lens then it would be a better value to go with the 18-135mm. Quality wise all Nikon lenses are excellent, even the basic 18-55mm kit lens.

It's up to you. :)

Thanks Medo

So are you saying the nikkor 18-135mm lens is not much good without a tripod?

I have a D40 18-55mm kit which is great, but I’m looking for a light-weight, not-too-flashy-looking, inexpensive, multi-purpose lens I can use without a tripod.


:nuts:

The 18-135 is fine and will work nicely, I never said anything about a tripod, 135mm is not that long of a focal length so it will produce crisp hand held images in decent light . VR may be good but it's not magic, it's not revolutionary, it's just a bit of a support when the light is low and the focal length long. The 18-200mm is really heavy, as heavy as a D40.

If you really want something with VR then there is the new lens that was released with the D90, the Nikkor 18-105mm VR, also there is the Nikkor 16-85mm VR. What I would do if I was you is go down to a camera shop in Tottenham Court Road and try out these lenses, see which one feels good in your hands. Don't let those sneaky salesmen try to sell you something you don't need. :D

Good luck.

The 18-105 VR costs £200, twice cheaper than the 18-200mm VR and £50 cheaper than the 18-135.
http://www.jessops.com/Store/s75350/0/Lenses/Nikon/AF-S-18-105mm-f35-56-ED-VR-Lens/details.aspx?&IsSearch=y&pageindex=1&CatId=143&ManIds=1462,&MultiOpIds=52583,&SortBy=SkuOfferingPriceASC&IsInStockOnly=False&comp=y

Thank you for your help Medo. One of these days I will pop down to Tottenham Court Road and/or Jessops in Holborn to – hopefully – see the difference between the 18-105mm and the 18-135mm. I am assuming I will be able to fix the lens to my D40 in the shop to see what I can zoom in on.

:)

They will fix it to one of their cameras and let you play with it for a while, they allow me to go outside and take some pictures in from of the camera shop.

Thanks again Medo.

Is that Jessops you refer to: "..let you play with it for a while, they allow me to go outside and take some pictures.." ... or do they all do that?

PS I like your St Pauls and Buddies shot on Flickr. :)

Medo/Anyone,

Do you know of any websites showing sample images of the same subject using these different lenses?

:)

Thanks.

I'm not sure about Jessops, but all the smaller camera shops allow you to do that.

You might want to look at http://lens-reviews.com/ and http://www.kenrockwell.com/. These websites don't have sample images though.

Whichever lens you get will have better quality optics than your kit lens, and most Nikon lenses are excellent anyway. What you need to decide is whether you want VR or not. :yes:

The beast is mine! with the Nikon 18-200mm zoom! I've tried it on a sightseeing bus around London! It's a bit heavy compared to my bridge but the zoom range is already fabulous!

Thanks for giving me advices on this!

We expect pictures soon. :banana:

Here's one from wednesday!
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3251/2986502125_0cb12bbf22_o.jpg

Great picture! Fantastic :)

I've been trying out my Sigma 10-20mm in Lichfield over the past week! It's brilliant :)
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3035/2984342301_d8458a32cf_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3191/2981930951_2052e63bbf_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3221/2981885753_2d4d9005fe_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3014/2982697526_8fa0f37016_b.jpg

The 18-105 VR costs £200, twice cheaper than the 18-200mm VR and £50 cheaper than the 18-135.
http://www.jessops.com/Store/s75350/0/Lenses/Nikon/AF-S-18-105mm-f35-56-ED-VR-Lens/details.aspx?&IsSearch=y&pageindex=1&CatId=143&ManIds=1462,&MultiOpIds=52583,&SortBy=SkuOfferingPriceASC&IsInStockOnly=False&comp=y


Hi … looking at the Jessops website today I see they have:-

Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR at £219.95


Nikon 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 ED-IF AF-S DX at £199.95


I’m not too sure what this mm stuff is all about but I think I can safely say that the higher the number the more the zoom. I see the 18-135mm doesn’t have VR (Vibration Reduction) but it seems remarkably good value … or am I missing something?

Fantastic image Manuel.



Erebus555 … good stuff … but your 10-20mm lens may be wasted on pictures of buildings.
:nuts:

anyone got any tips/creative ideas on how to do a wide angle on the cheap? I’ve been experimenting with old glass bottles ... and did an interesting self portraits of me (with my camera) in my shiny happy kettle.

mm is the focal length of the lens, the longer the length of the lens the closer the objects in the distance appear i.e. 'the more zoom'. I figure you may understand the 'zoom' language used in compact cameras more, for example 3x or 5x zoom. To find out how much zoom a lens has you divide the longest mm by the shortest mm, e.g. for the 18-135mm lens the zoom would be 7.5x, (135/18).

Therefore the 18-135mm would give you more zoom than the 18-105mm. I say go with the 18-135mm one, it is cheaper and lighter and VR is overrated.

Thanks for your help once again Medo.

I visited my new local Jessops today in Westfield Shepherds Bush … got talking to the wrong imbecile … very tiring … McDonalds is too good for him.

So I’m going back there again in a day or two (back to square one with a different ‘assistant’ haha) … but … I’m thinking should I go for the 18-135 or even the 18-105 I’ll be landed with my 18-55 which has a value of … erm £100+ … or … nothing?

Well, I bought a Nikon 18-135mm lens from camerabox last week @ £175 + £5 postage ... delivered the next day.

From something so big & heavy I would have expected a little more zoom and I was, at first, considering returning her within the 7 day cooling-off period. But now I've got the hang of how to hold her, I ain't gonna give her up. I think I'm in love.

:)

Good lad, wise decision and very decent price.

I was in Jessops today with my folks looking at Nikon cameras. My dad said he'd been looking at the d60 for me.
Seeing as though this will be my first DLSR and that Im pretty much a novice to the world of photography, which one would you recommend me? d40 or d60?
I think a d60 will be abit too technical for me.

The D40 and D60 are more or less the same camera, the D60 is no more technical than a D40. Price wise the D40 is cheaper because it's an older camera and has 6MP instead of the 10MP the D60 has, this makes no difference when you print them or use them on the internet. They are both decent cameras. But I would go with the D40, many of us here have that camera and we will help you if you need tips and technical support, it's great for a first DSLR :)

Also the D40 is £224 at Amazon at the moment. That's £100 cheaper than the D60 and the Canon 1000D.

Forget jessops. Tell your dad to order it tomorrow. :D

Thanks for the advice Medo. We just passed Jessops whilst we were in Lincoln so went in to have a look. My dad had a look on the internet today to get an idea of how much it will cost.

I am very pleased with my kit (see posts above).

Stefan88 ... Maybe you could consider getting a D40 body only and purchasing separately an 18-135mm lens .. instead of the usual D40 kit (body with 18-55mm lens).

Of course many people are more than happy with the basic kit and then having a more powerful zoom say 55-200 or 55-300. But I don't like having to switch lenses.

Just a thought. :)

Stefan88, if you are hell bent on using Jessops they seem to have an extra £10 off DSLRs until 3/12/2008 using a discount code on their web site ... this still keeps the price above Amazon for the D40 but clouds the water a tad if you are looking at the D60. The D60 with the non VR lense is currently £299.99 with Nikon offering a £30 cashback offer and 2 years warranty. That means you could get a D60 for £259.99 after all deals which is only £10 more than most of the high street is offering the D40 for.

Im not going to buy it from Jessops I was just having a look with my dad to get an idea of how much it will cost. Thanks for your advice :okay:

I almost "up sold" myself to a D60 in John Lewis today due to the £30 cashback and VR lense but could not in the end resist the lure of the D40 price of £220. Really pleased with it and think it will do all I need for a while to come. Now the fun bit of getting out and playing with it :).

Wise choice. For that price you are getting one hell of a good camera, it's the same price as a shitty compact point and shoot and delivers the same picture quality of a camera 10 times more expensive.

Another new D40 owner here :) Just the standard kit lens. Will give the owner's manual a once-over tonight, and get snapping in anger tomorrow.

Medo you really should be on commission lad! 'If I had 10p for everyone who bought a D40....' :lol: no complaints from me though, you're advice has always been spot on! Still loving that D40 with the 18-200mm lens. Also recently got a SB-400 flash and the difference is amazing! My indoor shots are about 100 times better with it, especially shots of my little lad (now 4 and half months old!) - since I'm able to bounce the flash off the ceiling the shots are coming out perfectly exposed and have a really professional feel to them.

Part of the reason I've been out of action for so long is that I ended up organising a photography competition at work (based on the theme of water, as I work for a water and environmental research Institute) and have spent the last 4 weeks preparing the photos for the final exhibition, which finisihes this week. A real eye opener and extremely hard work but great fun.

One thing that amazed me was how good many of the photos looked when they were printed to large sizes. In some cases photos with a relatively low resolution (and file sizes under 1MB) looked absolutely fine printed up to A2 in size! I guess I always thought that you'd see a massive reduction in quality unless you were printing 10MP shots of the highest quality.

Anyway, I'm rambling now, but... I might be about to purchase a D90! Before you (or I) get too excited it's not for me. :cry: My boss has told me he wants a top of the range DSLR for 'work', so I'm living the dream at the moment and trying out some cracking cameras.

Currently looking at the D90 with the 18-200mm VR lens, and possibly the optional GPS module for good measure. Seems like a nice set and a good compromise of weight, quality and price. Just wondering if there's anything else I should be considering, how does the D300 compare for the extra bucks?

The D300 is basically the same as the D90 in a metal body minus the video function. Some reviewers say the D90 produces better looking pictures than the D300 because it is newer, even though they both have the same 12MP CMOS image sensor.

In that view the D90 is a better camera. The D300 is semi-pro meaning it will last longer and take more beatings from the weather and dust.

Conclusion: Get the D90 for your boss.

Nikon should reward me with a Nikon D3x because I've sold like 10+ cameras for them. :(

Cheers again Medo. The D90 did feel very good in my hand (although it does make the D4o feel like something you'd win in a cracker!) - but I reckon that with the 18-200 lens that's about as heavy as he'd want it to go. I'm assuming that the D300 weighs a fair bit more if has a metal body.

The video function is a bit of a gimmick, but I imagine it could come in useful in some situations. At the end of the day it's all going to be such a massive leap from his old 35mm SLR's and current compact digital that I think whatever I get him will impress him. (Do you reckon he'd notice if the receipt said D90 and I switched it with my D40?... :lol:)

The D300 weighs close to a kilo. :ohno:

Medo you really should be on commission lad! 'If I had 10p for everyone who bought a D40....'

I was already sold to Nikon - my 5 year old Nikon compact still takes wonderful shots in good light. I suppose there must be strong 'brand loyalty' in the camera market that goes beyond lenses alone.

Anyway, on to the D40, I've found the '30 second exposure' setting and that's all I need :cheer:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3056/3080340721_d47c146a69_o.jpg

The holocaust and humour, a classic combo.

tnwf2RShNV0

That never gets old, no matter that they use it on. :lol:

I never thought I would ever agree with anything Hitler says but he raises some important points. Nikon are charging £5000 for their top camera just because Canon are doing the same, the D3x is basically the D3 (£3000) with the new Sony 24.5MP sensor, no other improvements whatsoever. Is a 42% increase in linear resolution really worth £2000 extra? :ohno: Thankfully this doesn't affect people like us who are happy with a D40. :D

Hitler is right, if Nikon can't produce something similar to Canon 5D Mk2 for a similar price then all Nikon-specific lens and equipment procurement is just building up for a huge let down in the future. Abandon ship! :runaway:

I'll just have to tolerate that incredibly annoying shutter sound that Canon makes.

I'll be honest here, the only reason I don't like Canons is because I don't like the way they feel in my hands, they feel awkward to hold, whereas Nikons fit perfectly.

I got the d40 for christmas and I love it :banana:
My uncle has a spare tripod that his company gave him so he's going to give that to me as he doesn't use it anymore.
Im buying a memory card for it tomorrow. I've been looking at this.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/SanDisk-Extreme-III-SDHC-Card/dp/B000QUUFRW/ref=sr_1_11?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1230349247&sr=8-11

Enjoy. :happy:

As for SD cards I don't know much about them. I use a 256mb one in my D40 and stick the picture setting to basic and it fits about 260 pictures. :banana:

Thanks Medo. I thought 4gb sounded abit large. Im going off to ASDA tomorrow to have a quick look, just to get an idea of how much it will set me back.

I'm using a 4GB one but only because I went to Costa Rica and anticipated taking hundreds of pictures (which I did so it was a life saver!). You feel much more willing to be snap happy when you've got a great big memory card.

As for me, I got a Manfrotto tripod for Christmas! I just need to get a carry bag for it and then I'll be sorted for the year! I hope to take it into Brum sometime soon to get some moody nightshots! :)

I ended up buying a 2gb SD memory card from Asda for £5! I can take 545 photos on the fine image quality mode. I'm just using normal at the moment and I think it's gone to over 1000.

Nice one! And nice price! :)

ive got a D60 ... but its so hard getting new lens as its too expensive especially for the D60 and D40 :(

The only lens you need for the D60 is the Nikon 18-200mm VR. :)

I've been looking at lenses for my d40, as the zoom on the standard lense isn't brilliant. Any that you would recommend Medo?

I've been looking at this. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Nikon-55-200MM-F4-5-5-6G-AF-S-Black/dp/B000O161X0

Yeah that'll do, 200mm is quite a lot of zoom. I believe NothingBetterToDo has that lens, you might want to ask him about it. :)

Finally picked up a D90 - already absolutely delighted with it.

Such a functional camera with so much flexibility, got it for a cracking price, too. Image quality is superb, the 18-105mm lens is a belter and the HD video is pretty damn impressive (even if it's more of a gimic than anything else).

Feels great, solid and chunky, I absolutely love the thing. Will be heading off to Venice in a couple of days - will try post some of my results when I get back!

Nikon should reward me with a Nikon D3x because I've sold like 10+ cameras for them. :(

But Cheer up! you made 10 people happy!
I'm very very pleased with my D90!

Couple of shots with me new D90 from Venice. These are straight from the camera - I haven't touched these shots with any software (will do shortly though - need to clean them up slightly, straighten things out a bit).

Me (http://www.flickr.com/photos/25472209@N05/)

With tripod:

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1141/3167256540_ff274e89e6_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3085/3166411359_f30ceaeb19_b.jpg
(That's heavy fog, not noise that you can see :))


Without a tripod:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3080/3167236440_dba65cefdd_b.jpg
(ISO 2000!)

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1045/3166372299_94e10e55e6_b.jpg



Day time:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3088/3166380021_d5f6052e62_b.jpg


The camera's performance in low light is stunningly good, the kit lense is fantastic and it's a very easy camera to use (much more intuitive than the D50, bless it's cotton socks).

Might through up a bundle of Venice shots in the main cityscapes area of SSC, keep a look out for them, if you can be arsed :)

Good stuff. :okay:

... intuitive


:okay:

But Cheer up! you made 10 people happy!
I'm very very pleased with my D90!


and I'm very pleased with my D40 .. and thank Medo for the advice/encouragement on the 18-135mm lens ... love it.:)

Well the inevitable's happened, though a lot sooner than expected...

With the snowstorm, I rushed out to grab some pics. Unfortunately, my camera bag was open. When dashing away, the bag did a 180 and decanted the camera onto the floor. The lens snapped away from the body. Examining the damage, the plastic mount had snapped two shards of plastic off. Pics here (http://martinrossbrown.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/DSCN2526.jpg) and here. (http://martinrossbrown.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/DSCN2527.jpg) These two shards must have held the lens in place as it now falls off when attached. The body seems OK, as when I hold the lens securely in place it can take a photograph well, and the results are as fine as ever. The lens makes a clicking noise though, when auto/manual focusing, suggesting further damage inside. It focuses OK though. Oh, and the body now gives a slight rattle when given a shake, does anybody's D40 do this?

As I see it, my options are now:

1) to send off the lens for repair. My concern is that it would cost more than the lens is worth to repair. Anybody had experience of repair costs for this type of damage?

2) to do a DIY job, take off the broken mount, and attach a new one from Nikon's spare parts dept. My concerns are that, although I am good at taking things apart to repair them, a camera's a different beast to a computer. Anyone had a stab at self-repairing lenses?

3) to stick the damaged goods on ebay, and get another lens. Problem: Cash. Although I did visit a camerashop to view second hand, and I saw a Sigma 18-200 lens for £70 (according to Nikonians this is compatible with D40). Would this do as a replacement as a general-purpose lens? Medo, earlier in the thread you said you owned this lens? What's your opinion? And what's everyone's opinion of buying second hand lenses?

So hey guys, whattya think?

^ Ouch :pet:

Regarding the slight rattle, my D40 does that too - i was concerned it was sand stuck in the camera after a misguided trip to the beach to take pics :|

My D70 has a bit of a rattle and has for a while so I haven't bothered trying to find out the cause of the rattle and how to sort it.

For option 1, I think it is worth looking into it and you should go to a camera repair shop to get an idea of how much it could be. The one I use is quite a trek, all the way in Stoke on Trent but they are very reliable and very good. I thoroughly recommend them. However, always be prepared for the fact that if/when the lens is completed, the quality of the pictures may not be what they used to be. It depends what type of photographer you are - if you can cope with lower quality pictures because you take them for pleasure (like me) then it is probably OK to live with but if you are more serious about it then I would suggest looking for a new lens completely.

The 18-200 would make a great lens to use on an everyday basis because it can handle such a variety of sitations. Just make sure it is a Nikon mount and don't buy the first one you see - although if it is, for example, a Canon mount, you can get a converter so that it can still fit on your camera. Second hand lenses are very tough and go situations. Find out why they are selling it and if they have had any problems with it. I'd even ask to try it out for a few minutes just to see for yourself - although I can see the seller being very cautious about this.

Seeing as the camera and lens are quite new to you, I don't really suggest trying a DIY job because cameras are immensely fragile objects when they are exposed with the lens off. It's for that reason that I don't trust myself to clean the sensor and get it sent off. And with the lens taken off, there is a good chance that dust and dirt can enter the camera and onto the sensor.

I've been out tonight with my camera trying it out in the dark. This picture was taken in the pitch black but it almost looks like it was taken during the day. It was overcast and there was a lot of light pollution, which didn't help. That is a figure in the picture btw (my housemate fooling around)
I took my tripod out with me to see what it was like. It makes a hell of a difference but it's a right pain to carry around, and set up.
I feel a lot more confident taking pictures with my DSLR especially around people i.e in the streets etc as I get they impression they think I know what I'm doing and do it as a serious hobby rather than some weird guy lurking around with a standard point and shoot.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3133/3178122218_357be26dd6_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3428/3178130098_d37b88d72a_b.jpg

The last photo is fully zoomed in looking out onto some train tracks (the train went past but I missed it)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3516/3177296637_9d4fb644c1_b.jpg

^^ great pics there, which camera do you have ?

I have a D80 and i've found its a lot more noisy than the D70, does anyone else agree ?

Also i noticed a few people saying good things about the 18-200mm vr, i have this lens and i'm not that impressed. Its a huge range which cuts down on how many lens's you need to carry around but i find its really soft and its not the lightest thing to carry around nor is its auto focus that fast.

Ive been looking for an alternative lens for a while now but dont know which to go for, i want something similar, a wide angle zoom, any suggestions anyone ?

thanks

^^ great pics there, which camera do you have ?


The above pictures were taken with my Nikon d40 with the standard 18mm-55mm kit lense.

Nice pics Stefan - I take it you put them through some processing on photoshop, yeah?

Also i noticed a few people saying good things about the 18-200mm vr, i have this lens and i'm not that impressed. Its a huge range which cuts down on how many lens's you need to carry around but i find its really soft and its not the lightest thing to carry around nor is its auto focus that fast.

Ive been looking for an alternative lens for a while now but dont know which to go for, i want something similar, a wide angle zoom, any suggestions anyone ?

thanks

I don't know what you expect from a zoom lens with such magnification, it's obviously not going to be as sharp as a prime lens or shorter lens. However do not replace it with a similar length Sigma or Tamron version, that would be silly. None of the wide angle zoom lenses you buy are going to perform noticeably better than the 18-200mm VR, it would be a waste of money, unless money means little to you then you can buy faster professional lenses. But I suggest buy a prime lens (fixed focal length) i.e. the new Nikkor AFS 50mm f1:1.4.

Nice pics Stefan - I take it you put them through some processing on photoshop, yeah?

Just the standard image editing thing on flickr. It's called Picknik I think.
I'm thinking about getting photoshop, but at a later date when it will be worthwhile.

I don't know what you expect from a zoom lens with such magnification, it's obviously not going to be as sharp as a prime lens or shorter lens. However do not replace it with a similar length Sigma or Tamron version, that would be silly. None of the wide angle zoom lenses you buy are going to perform noticeably better than the 18-200mm VR, it would be a waste of money, unless money means little to you then you can buy faster professional lenses. But I suggest buy a prime lens (fixed focal length) i.e. the new Nikkor AFS 50mm f1:1.4.

lol of course i wasnt expecting amazing results....but i was still expecting better than what i get, some pics look almost fuzzy.

I have the nikkor 50mm f1.8 and that is super sharp i used nothing but that lens for months but on the D80 as you know its more like a 75mm due to crop factor which isnt the most usefull focal length, i find i can never get everything in the shot that i want, its way to small

Ive been thinking of getting a wide angle prime like a 24mm aswell

I'm starting to try and navigate myself through the photography maze, I'm a complete novice looking to start out on my first steps after being inspired by what I'm seeing in the Liverpool forum, not got a load of money but I have been looking at this

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Nikon-D40-Digital-SLR-Camera/dp/B000KIX65S/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1234712068&sr=1-1

or should I splash out an extra £100 for this

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Nikon-D40X-Digital-Camera-18-55mm/dp/B000O0WKUE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1234714138&sr=8-1

just wondering if its value for money and looking for a seal of approval really.

Hi guenuk, go for the D40, don't waste your extra £100 on the D40x.

The D40 has been and continues to be the best value for money camera. Buy it, you won't regret it. A lot of us here have the D40 and we are very happy with it. :)

Yeah, go for the D40 - i love mine, the extra megapixels on the D40X are pointless unless you plan to print out MASSIVE pictures (i don't even shoot with the full 6mp of the D40, it just makes the files bigger and slower without any noticable bonuses)

You might even be able to get cashback from nikon, check their website.

Hi guenuk, go for the D40, don't waste your extra £100 on the D40x.

The D40 has been and continues to be the best value for money camera. Buy it, you won't regret it. A lot of us here have the D40 and we are very happy with it. :)

Well I've gone and bought it so theres no going back, thanks for the quick reply I was on the verge of buying it anyway but I just needed that push, if I'm not happy you do know I'll just blame you:), can't wait for my new toy to arrive now.:cheers:

I will take the full responsibility if you don't like it, but others who I have recommended it to have all liked it so far.

I love my D40. Going from a basic point and shoot it's so much more enjoyable to take pictures with. The results are incredible and I don't think I've not even started to see what it is capable of yet. Thanks for recommending it to me Medo you should be on commision you'll earn a small fortune :)

I hinted to Santa to get me a D40 for xmas and he (well she) "upgraded" me to a D60. So far I'm impressed, and it looks so much better on my tripod than the little lumix tz-5 :)

I hinted to Santa to get me a D40 for xmas and he (well she) "upgraded" me to a D60. So far I'm impressed, and it looks so much better on my tripod than the little lumix tz-5 :)

Yoshef, I thought I'd seen a noticable increase in the quality of your shots (the actual photos, not the composition of course!)... welcome to the club!

Finally managed to go for a long walk with my new D40 last week and despite not really having a clue what I was doing, I loved every minute of it :).

What size printouts can you do with 6 megapixels without a loss in quality?

I was wondering if it is worth upgrading my Nikon D40 to a Nikon D60 for the higher resolution?

And, I wouldnt wanna go for any one of the larger/heavier Nikons.

You can make prints of up to A3 size.

I would wait for the replacement for the D40, Nikon are going to announce it one of these days.

You can make prints of up to A3 size.

I would wait for the replacement for the D40, Nikon are going to announce it one of these days.

Print A3 without loss of quality on 6 megapixels? Really? Thats a pretty good size.

Wasnt the D60 meant to be D40s replacement?

Apparently not, because more than a year after the D60 came out the D40 is still selling.

I had a go with the D60 and I must say I much prefer the D70 still. There seem to be far more pointless gimics on it - many of which do stuff that a simple bit of photoshopping could do too! Plus, it just doesn't feel like a DSLR - it feels so plasticky and hollow...

It takes better pictures though as it is one generation ahead of the D70. If you want a tough camera get the D90 or the D300. :)

It takes better pictures though as it is one generation ahead of the D70.

How very dare you! >(

If you want a tough camera get the D90 or the D300. :)

I've been looking at getting the D300, yet to try it out though.

I've been looking at getting the D300, yet to try it out though.

Make sure you try out the D90 first though.... it's a beaut! :drool:

Ken Rockwell says the D40 replacement could be called the D5000, basically same size as the D40 but with the new generation CMOS sensor of the D90/D300. :)

My dilemma is this:

I wanted to buy a D90 (I haven't been out for three years!) ...but to buy it with the 18-105 kit where I am it costs 1019 euros, even with the euro and the pound being the same this is expensive compared to th UK price.

I thought about trying to buy it in the UK, (I know nobody delivers electrionics abroad), but maybe getting a mate to buy it and post it over. But I thought well this is a pain, transferring money, putting the people out, customes issues (!?), returns issues, etc.

So my option is to buy it with 105 lens kit at 1019...or get the 55 lens kit at 900.00.

Would it be completely stupid not to fork out the extra 100?

Or should I just go for a D40? Ha!

Can someone make the decision for me....???? I am a complete novice. Maybe someone knows a UK firm that does deliver abroad - and I should risk it?



Thanks in advance...

Chris

Wait a few weeks for the D5000 or whatever it'll be called. It's basically a D90 in a smaller body, it'll probably cost 450Euros.

Ah nooo another choice in to the mix...

Thanks I'll wait a little....until after this show...

Disappointment. No D5000 yet :ohno:

Yes - looks like it was a rumour - still doesn't mean to say it isn't on the cards, for the future - I mean there's likely to be something. Think I'll go for the D90.

I think....

:bash:

What do people think about the Nikon 35mm f1.8

I got a D40 for my birthday. Excellent camera.

Close-ups are so incredibly clear :cheers:

^^nice. :D

What do people think about the Nikon 35mm f1.8

Really good lens but a bit expensive. :ohno:

Close-ups are so incredibly clear :cheers:

Yeah close ups and portrait shots are so damn good with the D40 (and the kit-lens). That really surprised me at first. It is overall very good (and even better for its prize), but the portrait/close up shots are astonishing.

Oh, and I would recommend the D40 to everyone as well. If you're not too expierenced and you're buying your first dslr, the D40 is the one.

I caught Medo out and about the other day! I admit, I took the picture with a Canon, hence the shite quality. :|

http://ljplus.ru/img4/y/a/yaghrf/899616121_ee9c8037a2.jpg

:lol:

That's my 800mm lens. :colgate: