Add group to favorites
Back to post list
Send new message to group Search:
Post Subject:
OT-Cameras
Re: OT-Cameras
On Sun, 04 May 2008 16:28:08 -0500, "Donna A."
<flhtcui1995@SPAM.hotmail,com > wrote:
>Steve wrote:
>> On Sun, 04 May 2008 09:31:23 -0500, "Donna A."
>> <flhtcui1995@SPAM.hotmail,com > wrote:
>> There's EF, EF-S and pre-EOS. Sure, pre-EOS is 20 years ago. But
>> quality lenses 20 years old are still quality lenses. They just can't
>> be used.
>
>Honestly, tho, the vast majority of people buying consumer and prosumer
>digital cameras are not going to have "quality" lenses from more than 20
>years ago.
Of course if you have a Canon EOS, because that option is not
available. But many Nikon users are using lenses like a 50mm f/1.8
from the 80's or 70's or even earlier because they're so inexpensive
for a very sharp, fast lens. And the older 80-200mm f/2.8 push-pull
zoom lenses are also popular because you get a high quality ED glass
lens for like $400. That's equivalent to the Canon L-series white
lens for 1/4 the price. Only thing missing is the tripod colar.
>So that's 3 types vs. Nikon F-mount, which is 1 mount type
>> for the past 50 years. You can buy some really excellent old Nikon
>> glass for cheap on ebay and be reasonably sure it will work on many of
>> today's cameras. Not true with Canon. That's why I made the comment
>> about Canon not caring as much about lens interchangability as Nikon.
>
>Nikon may well have just the F-mount, but there are variations nowadays
>such as the DX lenses that are for cropped-size sensors only. They'll
>fit a full-frame camera but the image circle won't cover the whole
>sensor. So they don't really have a one-size-fits-all solution anymore
Actually, they do. Because the D3, Nikon's FX DSLR can use any DX
lens and use the smaller, DX part of the sensor. You just give up
some megapixels. And of course, the Nikon DX cameras can use the
full-frame lenses. Now if you're talking about film cameras, you're
right... a DX lens might not fill the whole film area. Some zoom DX
lenses do fill the full frame at certain zoom ranges but not others.
But you'd be silly to buy a DX lens if you have a film camera. Sure,
it'll work but it would still be silly. And I don't know anyone who's
gone the DSLR route and invested in DX lenses but then wanted to use
those lenses for a film camera because they decided to go back to 35mm
film.
>either. And I think there's the thing about the drive thingy for the
>motor in some lenses. I know the newest low-cost consumer Nikon digital
>SLRs don't have the interface to drive those lenses so they won't
>autofocus. I didn't know that some nikon lenses required that until I
>read a review on one of the newer DSLRs.
Right. Really cheap ones like the D40 won't autofocus on the older
autofocus lenses. But you can still use them in manual focus. The
rest of the DSLR line will autofocus them because they have the drive
motor. Even the non-cpu lenses can be used with 3d matrix metering
with the D200 (and maybe some others, I only know about the D200
because that's what I have) if you enter the lens parameters. Other
DSLRs can use them but not with the 3d matrix metering.
Really, the only point I'm making is that if you have a decent Nikon
DSLR body (i.e., better than a D40), you have a much wider array of
choices available in the used and older quality lens market than if
you have a Canon DSLR body. And that's only because your Nikon can
use older lenses (20 years or more) that people are getting rid of for
cheap on ebay. Canon doesn't have that option. It's not a huge deal,
but it is something. Especially if you already have invested a lot of
money in lenses from your film days and now want to switch to digital.
Steve
On Sun, 04 May 2008 16:28:08 -0500, "Donna A."
<flhtcui1995@SPAM.hotmail,com > wrote:
>Steve wrote:
>> On Sun, 04 May 2008 09:31:23 -0500, "Donna A."
>> <flhtcui1995@SPAM.hotmail,com > wrote:
>> There's EF, EF-S and pre-EOS. Sure, pre-EOS is 20 years ago. But
>> quality lenses 20 years old are still quality lenses. They just can't
>> be used.
>
>Honestly, tho, the vast majority of people buying consumer and prosumer
>digital cameras are not going to have "quality" lenses from more than 20
>years ago.
Of course if you have a Canon EOS, because that option is not
available. But many Nikon users are using lenses like a 50mm f/1.8
from the 80's or 70's or even earlier because they're so inexpensive
for a very sharp, fast lens. And the older 80-200mm f/2.8 push-pull
zoom lenses are also popular because you get a high quality ED glass
lens for like $400. That's equivalent to the Canon L-series white
lens for 1/4 the price. Only thing missing is the tripod colar.
>So that's 3 types vs. Nikon F-mount, which is 1 mount type
>> for the past 50 years. You can buy some really excellent old Nikon
>> glass for cheap on ebay and be reasonably sure it will work on many of
>> today's cameras. Not true with Canon. That's why I made the comment
>> about Canon not caring as much about lens interchangability as Nikon.
>
>Nikon may well have just the F-mount, but there are variations nowadays
>such as the DX lenses that are for cropped-size sensors only. They'll
>fit a full-frame camera but the image circle won't cover the whole
>sensor. So they don't really have a one-size-fits-all solution anymore
Actually, they do. Because the D3, Nikon's FX DSLR can use any DX
lens and use the smaller, DX part of the sensor. You just give up
some megapixels. And of course, the Nikon DX cameras can use the
full-frame lenses. Now if you're talking about film cameras, you're
right... a DX lens might not fill the whole film area. Some zoom DX
lenses do fill the full frame at certain zoom ranges but not others.
But you'd be silly to buy a DX lens if you have a film camera. Sure,
it'll work but it would still be silly. And I don't know anyone who's
gone the DSLR route and invested in DX lenses but then wanted to use
those lenses for a film camera because they decided to go back to 35mm
film.
>either. And I think there's the thing about the drive thingy for the
>motor in some lenses. I know the newest low-cost consumer Nikon digital
>SLRs don't have the interface to drive those lenses so they won't
>autofocus. I didn't know that some nikon lenses required that until I
>read a review on one of the newer DSLRs.
Right. Really cheap ones like the D40 won't autofocus on the older
autofocus lenses. But you can still use them in manual focus. The
rest of the DSLR line will autofocus them because they have the drive
motor. Even the non-cpu lenses can be used with 3d matrix metering
with the D200 (and maybe some others, I only know about the D200
because that's what I have) if you enter the lens parameters. Other
DSLRs can use them but not with the 3d matrix metering.
Really, the only point I'm making is that if you have a decent Nikon
DSLR body (i.e., better than a D40), you have a much wider array of
choices available in the used and older quality lens market than if
you have a Canon DSLR body. And that's only because your Nikon can
use older lenses (20 years or more) that people are getting rid of for
cheap on ebay. Canon doesn't have that option. It's not a huge deal,
but it is something. Especially if you already have invested a lot of
money in lenses from your film days and now want to switch to digital.
Steve
Re: OT-Cameras
In article <amqs141jia47o1hqd42nsl5rmtop4ch6vf@4ax,com >,
Steve <steve@example,com > wrote:
> But many Nikon users are using lenses like a 50mm f/1.8
> from the 80's or 70's or even earlier because they're so inexpensive
> for a very sharp, fast lens.
ISTR my dad's F2s has a 50mm with it that's a bit better - f 1.4 or 1.2.
As cool as the new digitals are, I sill love the feel of that thing - it
feels like a camera, not a plastic electronic gizmo.
Too bad Kodachrome's all but dead :(
In article <amqs141jia47o1hqd42nsl5rmtop4ch6vf@4ax,com >,
Steve <steve@example,com > wrote:
> But many Nikon users are using lenses like a 50mm f/1.8
> from the 80's or 70's or even earlier because they're so inexpensive
> for a very sharp, fast lens.
ISTR my dad's F2s has a 50mm with it that's a bit better - f 1.4 or 1.2.
As cool as the new digitals are, I sill love the feel of that thing - it
feels like a camera, not a plastic electronic gizmo.
Too bad Kodachrome's all but dead :(
Re: OT-Cameras
On Sun, 04 May 2008 23:27:22 -0400, Philip Nasadowski
<nasadowsk@usermale,com > wrote:
>In article <amqs141jia47o1hqd42nsl5rmtop4ch6vf@4ax,com >,
> Steve <steve@example,com > wrote:
>
>> But many Nikon users are using lenses like a 50mm f/1.8
>> from the 80's or 70's or even earlier because they're so inexpensive
>> for a very sharp, fast lens.
>
>ISTR my dad's F2s has a 50mm with it that's a bit better - f 1.4 or 1.2.
Yes, and you can still use them today on the new DSLRs. I didn't
mention the f/1.4 because they're still commanding a decent price,
like over $200, while the f/1.8 I've seen as low as $10 for manual
focus, $50 for auto, and I was only mentioning the cheap ones. I
didn't even know about the f/1.2. For me, the f/1.8 is a much better
deal. That little bit extra speed costs too much, both in terms of
money and some softness wide open. But some people, the people who
like to shoot in the dark without a flash I guess, benefit from it.
>As cool as the new digitals are, I sill love the feel of that thing - it
>feels like a camera, not a plastic electronic gizmo.
Pick up a D200 or D300 and it will feel like an older film camera.
Nice weight to it and very solid, excellent build. None of that
plastic electronic gizmo feel.
>Too bad Kodachrome's all but dead :(
Fuji still makes a wide variety of excellent film. They even make
polaroid instant film even though polaroid has stopped making it. The
Fujichrome slide films (Velvia, Sensia) are better than Kodachrome
ever was.
Steve
On Sun, 04 May 2008 23:27:22 -0400, Philip Nasadowski
<nasadowsk@usermale,com > wrote:
>In article <amqs141jia47o1hqd42nsl5rmtop4ch6vf@4ax,com >,
> Steve <steve@example,com > wrote:
>
>> But many Nikon users are using lenses like a 50mm f/1.8
>> from the 80's or 70's or even earlier because they're so inexpensive
>> for a very sharp, fast lens.
>
>ISTR my dad's F2s has a 50mm with it that's a bit better - f 1.4 or 1.2.
Yes, and you can still use them today on the new DSLRs. I didn't
mention the f/1.4 because they're still commanding a decent price,
like over $200, while the f/1.8 I've seen as low as $10 for manual
focus, $50 for auto, and I was only mentioning the cheap ones. I
didn't even know about the f/1.2. For me, the f/1.8 is a much better
deal. That little bit extra speed costs too much, both in terms of
money and some softness wide open. But some people, the people who
like to shoot in the dark without a flash I guess, benefit from it.
>As cool as the new digitals are, I sill love the feel of that thing - it
>feels like a camera, not a plastic electronic gizmo.
Pick up a D200 or D300 and it will feel like an older film camera.
Nice weight to it and very solid, excellent build. None of that
plastic electronic gizmo feel.
>Too bad Kodachrome's all but dead :(
Fuji still makes a wide variety of excellent film. They even make
polaroid instant film even though polaroid has stopped making it. The
Fujichrome slide films (Velvia, Sensia) are better than Kodachrome
ever was.
Steve
Re: OT-Cameras
In article <gqqt14dvbb5ofptfl6d9408gbhqrmmmlc5@4ax,com >,
Steve <steve@example,com > wrote:
> Yes, and you can still use them today on the new DSLRs. I didn't
> mention the f/1.4 because they're still commanding a decent price,
> like over $200, while the f/1.8 I've seen as low as $10 for manual
> focus, $50 for auto, and I was only mentioning the cheap ones.
Geez. I don't think the whole setup was that much when he got it. and
mom was pissed he blew so much for a camera :/
> I didn't even know about the f/1.2.
I don't remember if it was 1.4 or 1.2. I'm thinking 1.4, but it's a
nice lens so who knows.
> For me, the f/1.8 is a much better
> deal. That little bit extra speed costs too much, both in terms of
> money and some softness wide open. But some people, the people who
> like to shoot in the dark without a flash I guess, benefit from it.
I think like most of my dad's purchases pre retirement, he just scanned
the list of 'good, better, best, obnoxiously expensive' and picked the
'best' choice. I'm still amazed my parents dropped something like 500
bucks for stereo speakers in '81. Ok, they're nice speakers, but geez...
> Fuji still makes a wide variety of excellent film. They even make
> polaroid instant film even though polaroid has stopped making it. The
> Fujichrome slide films (Velvia, Sensia) are better than Kodachrome
> ever was.
I've heard so, but there's just something about Kodachorme anyway.
maybe all those 8mm movies and slides we still have that haven't lost
their color (yes I know it fades when projected).
In article <gqqt14dvbb5ofptfl6d9408gbhqrmmmlc5@4ax,com >,
Steve <steve@example,com > wrote:
> Yes, and you can still use them today on the new DSLRs. I didn't
> mention the f/1.4 because they're still commanding a decent price,
> like over $200, while the f/1.8 I've seen as low as $10 for manual
> focus, $50 for auto, and I was only mentioning the cheap ones.
Geez. I don't think the whole setup was that much when he got it. and
mom was pissed he blew so much for a camera :/
> I didn't even know about the f/1.2.
I don't remember if it was 1.4 or 1.2. I'm thinking 1.4, but it's a
nice lens so who knows.
> For me, the f/1.8 is a much better
> deal. That little bit extra speed costs too much, both in terms of
> money and some softness wide open. But some people, the people who
> like to shoot in the dark without a flash I guess, benefit from it.
I think like most of my dad's purchases pre retirement, he just scanned
the list of 'good, better, best, obnoxiously expensive' and picked the
'best' choice. I'm still amazed my parents dropped something like 500
bucks for stereo speakers in '81. Ok, they're nice speakers, but geez...
> Fuji still makes a wide variety of excellent film. They even make
> polaroid instant film even though polaroid has stopped making it. The
> Fujichrome slide films (Velvia, Sensia) are better than Kodachrome
> ever was.
I've heard so, but there's just something about Kodachorme anyway.
maybe all those 8mm movies and slides we still have that haven't lost
their color (yes I know it fades when projected).
Re: OT-Cameras
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve" <steve@example,com >
<snip>
> Fuji still makes a wide variety of excellent film. They even make
> polaroid instant film even though polaroid has stopped making it. The
> Fujichrome slide films (Velvia, Sensia) are better than Kodachrome
> ever was.
>
> Steve
velvia for shooting stuff that is green, provia for night shooting, kodak
ektachrome e100v or vs for blue sky. i have lots of other favorite
combinations for portrait work and other situations... man i miss film
michael
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve" <steve@example,com >
<snip>
> Fuji still makes a wide variety of excellent film. They even make
> polaroid instant film even though polaroid has stopped making it. The
> Fujichrome slide films (Velvia, Sensia) are better than Kodachrome
> ever was.
>
> Steve
velvia for shooting stuff that is green, provia for night shooting, kodak
ektachrome e100v or vs for blue sky. i have lots of other favorite
combinations for portrait work and other situations... man i miss film
michael
Re: OT-Cameras
"Philip Nasadowski" <nasadowsk@usermale,com > wrote in message
news:nasadowsk-A68639.23272104052008@news.optonline,net ...
> In article <amqs141jia47o1hqd42nsl5rmtop4ch6vf@4ax,com >,
> Steve <steve@example,com > wrote:
>
>> But many Nikon users are using lenses like a 50mm f/1.8
>> from the 80's or 70's or even earlier because they're so inexpensive
>> for a very sharp, fast lens.
>
> ISTR my dad's F2s has a 50mm with it that's a bit better - f 1.4 or 1.2.
>
> As cool as the new digitals are, I sill love the feel of that thing - it
> feels like a camera, not a plastic electronic gizmo.
>
> Too bad Kodachrome's all but dead :(
i like ektachrome e100v better anyway. i really like shooting my f100 with
my old manual focus 50mm f1.2. what a fast and sharp lens...
michael
"Philip Nasadowski" <nasadowsk@usermale,com > wrote in message
news:nasadowsk-A68639.23272104052008@news.optonline,net ...
> In article <amqs141jia47o1hqd42nsl5rmtop4ch6vf@4ax,com >,
> Steve <steve@example,com > wrote:
>
>> But many Nikon users are using lenses like a 50mm f/1.8
>> from the 80's or 70's or even earlier because they're so inexpensive
>> for a very sharp, fast lens.
>
> ISTR my dad's F2s has a 50mm with it that's a bit better - f 1.4 or 1.2.
>
> As cool as the new digitals are, I sill love the feel of that thing - it
> feels like a camera, not a plastic electronic gizmo.
>
> Too bad Kodachrome's all but dead :(
i like ektachrome e100v better anyway. i really like shooting my f100 with
my old manual focus 50mm f1.2. what a fast and sharp lens...
michael
Re: OT-Cameras
"Donna A." <flhtcui1995@SPAM.hotmail,com > wrote in message
news:481dc8c2$1@127.0.0.1...
> Steve wrote:
>> On Sat, 3 May 2008 22:30:13 -0500, "Invisible68" <plathrop@lcom,net >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> "Steve" <steve@example,com > wrote in message
>>> news:5i6p14hii0f0nd062m1hmpkevmlj67a4u2@4ax,com ...
>>>> On Fri, 02 May 2008 21:38:06 -0400, Sheep <d.l.dubose@bell.south,net >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Finally go this place to put some Guinness on tap so get it while it's
>>>>> available.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cameras. Been getting by with my old Nikon 4300 for a long time.
>>>>> During said long time I've bought my wife a Sony Cybershot DSCT30
>>>>> (miserable camera)and my daughter a Sony Cybershot DSC-N2 (excellent
>>>>> camera).
>>>>>
>>>>> Me? I've been getting by looking at digital SLR's and trying to
>>>>> decide if I wanted to make the jump. Now the reviews I'm reading and
>>>>> the pictures I'm looking at taken by the Nikon D300 are making me want
>>>>> to take the leap.
>>>> D300 is a great camera *but* take a look at used D200's. You can get
>>>> them for 1/2 the price of a D300 and there isn't all that much of a
>>>> difference. Spend the difference on great lenses and you can still
>>>> use them if you feel the urge to get a D300 when their prices come
>>>> down in a year or two as well.
>>>>
>>>> The lens is what matters more than any particular camera body. You'll
>>>> go through many different body upgrades and still use the same high
>>>> quality lenses.
>>>>
>>>> Steve
>>> yes very true... I will be staying in the Canon brand because of all the
>>> lenses I have from my 650....
>>
>> That's one of the reasons I don't like Canon. They don't care as much
>> about lens interchangeability between various SLR/SDLR bodies as Nikon
>> does. I do have a Canon pocket camera that I like a lot though. But
>> if you already have a lot invested in lenses, you're kinda stuck.
>
> There are only two--EF and EF-S. If you're talking about the autofocus,
> the change happened over 20 years ago. Most people don't have lenses that
> old... When I used a camera that used the EF-S lenses (cameras with the
> smaller sensors), I only purchased EF lenses knowing that some day I would
> upgrade and would want them to work on that camera.
>
> "Invisible," your lenses will work fine on whatever Canon you choose...
>
> --
> Donna A.
> Wench #17
Yep... I know My brother was up with one of his D200 camaras.... I can not
wait to get one of those bigger faster digitals the delay on the pocket a95
just plain sucks.... all in time.... anyway I am having way to much fun on
my latest toy from last year... even thinking about making it to tenn... in
early june(Roger's place) if that thing is open to new younger riders(owe
drinks to some in person)
Invisible68
"Donna A." <flhtcui1995@SPAM.hotmail,com > wrote in message
news:481dc8c2$1@127.0.0.1...
> Steve wrote:
>> On Sat, 3 May 2008 22:30:13 -0500, "Invisible68" <plathrop@lcom,net >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> "Steve" <steve@example,com > wrote in message
>>> news:5i6p14hii0f0nd062m1hmpkevmlj67a4u2@4ax,com ...
>>>> On Fri, 02 May 2008 21:38:06 -0400, Sheep <d.l.dubose@bell.south,net >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Finally go this place to put some Guinness on tap so get it while it's
>>>>> available.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cameras. Been getting by with my old Nikon 4300 for a long time.
>>>>> During said long time I've bought my wife a Sony Cybershot DSCT30
>>>>> (miserable camera)and my daughter a Sony Cybershot DSC-N2 (excellent
>>>>> camera).
>>>>>
>>>>> Me? I've been getting by looking at digital SLR's and trying to
>>>>> decide if I wanted to make the jump. Now the reviews I'm reading and
>>>>> the pictures I'm looking at taken by the Nikon D300 are making me want
>>>>> to take the leap.
>>>> D300 is a great camera *but* take a look at used D200's. You can get
>>>> them for 1/2 the price of a D300 and there isn't all that much of a
>>>> difference. Spend the difference on great lenses and you can still
>>>> use them if you feel the urge to get a D300 when their prices come
>>>> down in a year or two as well.
>>>>
>>>> The lens is what matters more than any particular camera body. You'll
>>>> go through many different body upgrades and still use the same high
>>>> quality lenses.
>>>>
>>>> Steve
>>> yes very true... I will be staying in the Canon brand because of all the
>>> lenses I have from my 650....
>>
>> That's one of the reasons I don't like Canon. They don't care as much
>> about lens interchangeability between various SLR/SDLR bodies as Nikon
>> does. I do have a Canon pocket camera that I like a lot though. But
>> if you already have a lot invested in lenses, you're kinda stuck.
>
> There are only two--EF and EF-S. If you're talking about the autofocus,
> the change happened over 20 years ago. Most people don't have lenses that
> old... When I used a camera that used the EF-S lenses (cameras with the
> smaller sensors), I only purchased EF lenses knowing that some day I would
> upgrade and would want them to work on that camera.
>
> "Invisible," your lenses will work fine on whatever Canon you choose...
>
> --
> Donna A.
> Wench #17
Yep... I know My brother was up with one of his D200 camaras.... I can not
wait to get one of those bigger faster digitals the delay on the pocket a95
just plain sucks.... all in time.... anyway I am having way to much fun on
my latest toy from last year... even thinking about making it to tenn... in
early june(Roger's place) if that thing is open to new younger riders(owe
drinks to some in person)
Invisible68
Re: OT-Cameras
Invisible68 wrote:
> "Donna A." <flhtcui1995@SPAM.hotmail,com > wrote in message
> news:481dc8c2$1@127.0.0.1...
>> Steve wrote:
>>> On Sat, 3 May 2008 22:30:13 -0500, "Invisible68" <plathrop@lcom,net >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Steve" <steve@example,com > wrote in message
>>>> news:5i6p14hii0f0nd062m1hmpkevmlj67a4u2@4ax,com ...
>>>>> On Fri, 02 May 2008 21:38:06 -0400, Sheep
>>>>> <d.l.dubose@bell.south,net > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Finally go this place to put some Guinness on tap so get it
>>>>>> while it's available.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cameras. Been getting by with my old Nikon 4300 for a long time.
>>>>>> During said long time I've bought my wife a Sony Cybershot DSCT30
>>>>>> (miserable camera)and my daughter a Sony Cybershot DSC-N2
>>>>>> (excellent camera).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Me? I've been getting by looking at digital SLR's and trying to
>>>>>> decide if I wanted to make the jump. Now the reviews I'm reading
>>>>>> and the pictures I'm looking at taken by the Nikon D300 are
>>>>>> making me want to take the leap.
>>>>> D300 is a great camera *but* take a look at used D200's. You can
>>>>> get them for 1/2 the price of a D300 and there isn't all that
>>>>> much of a difference. Spend the difference on great lenses and
>>>>> you can still use them if you feel the urge to get a D300 when
>>>>> their prices come down in a year or two as well.
>>>>>
>>>>> The lens is what matters more than any particular camera body. You'll
>>>>> go through many different body upgrades and still use the
>>>>> same high quality lenses.
>>>>>
>>>>> Steve
>>>> yes very true... I will be staying in the Canon brand because of
>>>> all the lenses I have from my 650....
>>>
>>> That's one of the reasons I don't like Canon. They don't care as
>>> much about lens interchangeability between various SLR/SDLR bodies
>>> as Nikon does. I do have a Canon pocket camera that I like a lot
>>> though. But if you already have a lot invested in lenses, you're
>>> kinda stuck.
>>
>> There are only two--EF and EF-S. If you're talking about the
>> autofocus, the change happened over 20 years ago. Most people don't
>> have lenses that old... When I used a camera that used the EF-S
>> lenses (cameras with the smaller sensors), I only purchased EF
>> lenses knowing that some day I would upgrade and would want them to
>> work on that camera. "Invisible," your lenses will work fine on whatever
>> Canon you
>> choose... --
>> Donna A.
>> Wench #17
>
> Yep... I know My brother was up with one of his D200 camaras.... I
> can not wait to get one of those bigger faster digitals the delay on
> the pocket a95 just plain sucks.... all in time.... anyway I am
> having way to much fun on my latest toy from last year... even
> thinking about making it to tenn... in early june(Roger's place) if
> that thing is open to new younger riders(owe drinks to some in
> person)
> Invisible68
If you can read this yer invited (I can do that , I'm a charter member) .
Be aware this year it's like the last w/e in May , the weekend following
Memorial Day (observed) as always .
What part of the country are you in ? Chances are very good that you could
line up some company for the ride ...
--
Snag
'90 Ultra "Strider"
'39 WLDD "Popcycle"
Buncha cars and a truck
Invisible68 wrote:
> "Donna A." <flhtcui1995@SPAM.hotmail,com > wrote in message
> news:481dc8c2$1@127.0.0.1...
>> Steve wrote:
>>> On Sat, 3 May 2008 22:30:13 -0500, "Invisible68" <plathrop@lcom,net >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Steve" <steve@example,com > wrote in message
>>>> news:5i6p14hii0f0nd062m1hmpkevmlj67a4u2@4ax,com ...
>>>>> On Fri, 02 May 2008 21:38:06 -0400, Sheep
>>>>> <d.l.dubose@bell.south,net > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Finally go this place to put some Guinness on tap so get it
>>>>>> while it's available.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cameras. Been getting by with my old Nikon 4300 for a long time.
>>>>>> During said long time I've bought my wife a Sony Cybershot DSCT30
>>>>>> (miserable camera)and my daughter a Sony Cybershot DSC-N2
>>>>>> (excellent camera).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Me? I've been getting by looking at digital SLR's and trying to
>>>>>> decide if I wanted to make the jump. Now the reviews I'm reading
>>>>>> and the pictures I'm looking at taken by the Nikon D300 are
>>>>>> making me want to take the leap.
>>>>> D300 is a great camera *but* take a look at used D200's. You can
>>>>> get them for 1/2 the price of a D300 and there isn't all that
>>>>> much of a difference. Spend the difference on great lenses and
>>>>> you can still use them if you feel the urge to get a D300 when
>>>>> their prices come down in a year or two as well.
>>>>>
>>>>> The lens is what matters more than any particular camera body. You'll
>>>>> go through many different body upgrades and still use the
>>>>> same high quality lenses.
>>>>>
>>>>> Steve
>>>> yes very true... I will be staying in the Canon brand because of
>>>> all the lenses I have from my 650....
>>>
>>> That's one of the reasons I don't like Canon. They don't care as
>>> much about lens interchangeability between various SLR/SDLR bodies
>>> as Nikon does. I do have a Canon pocket camera that I like a lot
>>> though. But if you already have a lot invested in lenses, you're
>>> kinda stuck.
>>
>> There are only two--EF and EF-S. If you're talking about the
>> autofocus, the change happened over 20 years ago. Most people don't
>> have lenses that old... When I used a camera that used the EF-S
>> lenses (cameras with the smaller sensors), I only purchased EF
>> lenses knowing that some day I would upgrade and would want them to
>> work on that camera. "Invisible," your lenses will work fine on whatever
>> Canon you
>> choose... --
>> Donna A.
>> Wench #17
>
> Yep... I know My brother was up with one of his D200 camaras.... I
> can not wait to get one of those bigger faster digitals the delay on
> the pocket a95 just plain sucks.... all in time.... anyway I am
> having way to much fun on my latest toy from last year... even
> thinking about making it to tenn... in early june(Roger's place) if
> that thing is open to new younger riders(owe drinks to some in
> person)
> Invisible68
If you can read this yer invited (I can do that , I'm a charter member) .
Be aware this year it's like the last w/e in May , the weekend following
Memorial Day (observed) as always .
What part of the country are you in ? Chances are very good that you could
line up some company for the ride ...
--
Snag
'90 Ultra "Strider"
'39 WLDD "Popcycle"
Buncha cars and a truck
Re: OT-Cameras
"Terry Coombs" <snagone@bellsouth,net > wrote in message
news:2fPTj.29273$DY1.1031@bignews5.bellsouth,net ...
> Invisible68 wrote:
>> "Donna A." <flhtcui1995@SPAM.hotmail,com > wrote in message
>> news:481dc8c2$1@127.0.0.1...
>>> Steve wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 3 May 2008 22:30:13 -0500, "Invisible68" <plathrop@lcom,net >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "Steve" <steve@example,com > wrote in message
>>>>> news:5i6p14hii0f0nd062m1hmpkevmlj67a4u2@4ax,com ...
>>>>>> On Fri, 02 May 2008 21:38:06 -0400, Sheep
>>>>>> <d.l.dubose@bell.south,net > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Finally go this place to put some Guinness on tap so get it
>>>>>>> while it's available.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cameras. Been getting by with my old Nikon 4300 for a long time.
>>>>>>> During said long time I've bought my wife a Sony Cybershot DSCT30
>>>>>>> (miserable camera)and my daughter a Sony Cybershot DSC-N2
>>>>>>> (excellent camera).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Me? I've been getting by looking at digital SLR's and trying to
>>>>>>> decide if I wanted to make the jump. Now the reviews I'm reading
>>>>>>> and the pictures I'm looking at taken by the Nikon D300 are
>>>>>>> making me want to take the leap.
>>>>>> D300 is a great camera *but* take a look at used D200's. You can
>>>>>> get them for 1/2 the price of a D300 and there isn't all that
>>>>>> much of a difference. Spend the difference on great lenses and
>>>>>> you can still use them if you feel the urge to get a D300 when
>>>>>> their prices come down in a year or two as well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The lens is what matters more than any particular camera body. You'll
>>>>>> go through many different body upgrades and still use the
>>>>>> same high quality lenses.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Steve
>>>>> yes very true... I will be staying in the Canon brand because of
>>>>> all the lenses I have from my 650....
>>>>
>>>> That's one of the reasons I don't like Canon. They don't care as
>>>> much about lens interchangeability between various SLR/SDLR bodies
>>>> as Nikon does. I do have a Canon pocket camera that I like a lot
>>>> though. But if you already have a lot invested in lenses, you're
>>>> kinda stuck.
>>>
>>> There are only two--EF and EF-S. If you're talking about the
>>> autofocus, the change happened over 20 years ago. Most people don't
>>> have lenses that old... When I used a camera that used the EF-S
>>> lenses (cameras with the smaller sensors), I only purchased EF
>>> lenses knowing that some day I would upgrade and would want them to
>>> work on that camera. "Invisible," your lenses will work fine on whatever
>>> Canon you
>>> choose... --
>>> Donna A.
>>> Wench #17
>>
>> Yep... I know My brother was up with one of his D200 camaras.... I
>> can not wait to get one of those bigger faster digitals the delay on
>> the pocket a95 just plain sucks.... all in time.... anyway I am
>> having way to much fun on my latest toy from last year... even
>> thinking about making it to tenn... in early june(Roger's place) if
>> that thing is open to new younger riders(owe drinks to some in
>> person)
>> Invisible68
>
> If you can read this yer invited (I can do that , I'm a charter member) .
> Be aware this year it's like the last w/e in May , the weekend following
> Memorial Day (observed) as always .
> What part of the country are you in ? Chances are very good that you
> could line up some company for the ride ...
> --
> Snag
East side of Iowa just off of I80... but my sisters house is by Marion Il so
I might stop there and hang out a bit, I'll go through st. Louis too..
Invisible68
(will work on riding plans)
"Terry Coombs" <snagone@bellsouth,net > wrote in message
news:2fPTj.29273$DY1.1031@bignews5.bellsouth,net ...
> Invisible68 wrote:
>> "Donna A." <flhtcui1995@SPAM.hotmail,com > wrote in message
>> news:481dc8c2$1@127.0.0.1...
>>> Steve wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 3 May 2008 22:30:13 -0500, "Invisible68" <plathrop@lcom,net >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "Steve" <steve@example,com > wrote in message
>>>>> news:5i6p14hii0f0nd062m1hmpkevmlj67a4u2@4ax,com ...
>>>>>> On Fri, 02 May 2008 21:38:06 -0400, Sheep
>>>>>> <d.l.dubose@bell.south,net > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Finally go this place to put some Guinness on tap so get it
>>>>>>> while it's available.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cameras. Been getting by with my old Nikon 4300 for a long time.
>>>>>>> During said long time I've bought my wife a Sony Cybershot DSCT30
>>>>>>> (miserable camera)and my daughter a Sony Cybershot DSC-N2
>>>>>>> (excellent camera).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Me? I've been getting by looking at digital SLR's and trying to
>>>>>>> decide if I wanted to make the jump. Now the reviews I'm reading
>>>>>>> and the pictures I'm looking at taken by the Nikon D300 are
>>>>>>> making me want to take the leap.
>>>>>> D300 is a great camera *but* take a look at used D200's. You can
>>>>>> get them for 1/2 the price of a D300 and there isn't all that
>>>>>> much of a difference. Spend the difference on great lenses and
>>>>>> you can still use them if you feel the urge to get a D300 when
>>>>>> their prices come down in a year or two as well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The lens is what matters more than any particular camera body. You'll
>>>>>> go through many different body upgrades and still use the
>>>>>> same high quality lenses.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Steve
>>>>> yes very true... I will be staying in the Canon brand because of
>>>>> all the lenses I have from my 650....
>>>>
>>>> That's one of the reasons I don't like Canon. They don't care as
>>>> much about lens interchangeability between various SLR/SDLR bodies
>>>> as Nikon does. I do have a Canon pocket camera that I like a lot
>>>> though. But if you already have a lot invested in lenses, you're
>>>> kinda stuck.
>>>
>>> There are only two--EF and EF-S. If you're talking about the
>>> autofocus, the change happened over 20 years ago. Most people don't
>>> have lenses that old... When I used a camera that used the EF-S
>>> lenses (cameras with the smaller sensors), I only purchased EF
>>> lenses knowing that some day I would upgrade and would want them to
>>> work on that camera. "Invisible," your lenses will work fine on whatever
>>> Canon you
>>> choose... --
>>> Donna A.
>>> Wench #17
>>
>> Yep... I know My brother was up with one of his D200 camaras.... I
>> can not wait to get one of those bigger faster digitals the delay on
>> the pocket a95 just plain sucks.... all in time.... anyway I am
>> having way to much fun on my latest toy from last year... even
>> thinking about making it to tenn... in early june(Roger's place) if
>> that thing is open to new younger riders(owe drinks to some in
>> person)
>> Invisible68
>
> If you can read this yer invited (I can do that , I'm a charter member) .
> Be aware this year it's like the last w/e in May , the weekend following
> Memorial Day (observed) as always .
> What part of the country are you in ? Chances are very good that you
> could line up some company for the ride ...
> --
> Snag
East side of Iowa just off of I80... but my sisters house is by Marion Il so
I might stop there and hang out a bit, I'll go through st. Louis too..
Invisible68
(will work on riding plans)
Re: OT-Cameras
Invisible68 wrote:
>>> What part of the country are you in ? Chances are very good that you
>> could line up some company for the ride ...
>> --
>> Snag
>
> East side of Iowa just off of I80... but my sisters house is by
> Marion Il so I might stop there and hang out a bit, I'll go through
> st. Louis too..
> Invisible68
> (will work on riding plans)
There are fershure some folks coming from/thru Saint Looie . Maybe one of
them will chirp up here ...
--
Snag
'90 Ultra "Strider"
'39 WLDD "Popcycle"
Buncha cars and a truck
Invisible68 wrote:
>>> What part of the country are you in ? Chances are very good that you
>> could line up some company for the ride ...
>> --
>> Snag
>
> East side of Iowa just off of I80... but my sisters house is by
> Marion Il so I might stop there and hang out a bit, I'll go through
> st. Louis too..
> Invisible68
> (will work on riding plans)
There are fershure some folks coming from/thru Saint Looie . Maybe one of
them will chirp up here ...
--
Snag
'90 Ultra "Strider"
'39 WLDD "Popcycle"
Buncha cars and a truck
Re: OT-Cameras
"Donna A." <flhtcui1995@SPAM.hotmail,com > wrote in message
news:481dc8c2$1@127.0.0.1...
<snip>
>
> There are only two--EF and EF-S. If you're talking about the autofocus,
> the change happened over 20 years ago. Most people don't have lenses that
> old... When I used a camera that used the EF-S lenses (cameras with the
> smaller sensors), I only purchased EF lenses knowing that some day I would
> upgrade and would want them to work on that camera.
>
> "Invisible," your lenses will work fine on whatever Canon you choose...
>
> --
> Donna A.
cannon's first generation eos1-d mk3 45 point autofocus is only implimented
fully with lenses that are f2.8 or faster. this means that currently there
are only 5 to 8 lenses in their current product line that the new autofocus.
cannon has a "fix" for the new cameras being shipped but the warranty fix
for the folks with the 6,000 dollar non focusing cameras are still in limbo.
but nikon had a dead pixel problem when they shipped d80's and the d200's
had back focusing issues when first shipped is one f the reasons there are
so many factory refurbs out there.
my personal advice is this when going to a DSLR. if you have been using a
particular brand for any amount of time then stick with what your familiar
with. if you are new to the DSLR game then my recommendation for whatever
brand you choose is spend your big money on your lens. in two years your
body will be old news and in five it will be obsolete. A good lens is a
thirty year or better investment.
i saw a guy recently using a 200 dollar zoom lens on a 4,000 dollar nikon
d3. both were a total waste of money configured like that. a 1,500 dollar
zoom on a 800 dollar camera body would have been a much wiser investment.
michael
"Donna A." <flhtcui1995@SPAM.hotmail,com > wrote in message
news:481dc8c2$1@127.0.0.1...
<snip>
>
> There are only two--EF and EF-S. If you're talking about the autofocus,
> the change happened over 20 years ago. Most people don't have lenses that
> old... When I used a camera that used the EF-S lenses (cameras with the
> smaller sensors), I only purchased EF lenses knowing that some day I would
> upgrade and would want them to work on that camera.
>
> "Invisible," your lenses will work fine on whatever Canon you choose...
>
> --
> Donna A.
cannon's first generation eos1-d mk3 45 point autofocus is only implimented
fully with lenses that are f2.8 or faster. this means that currently there
are only 5 to 8 lenses in their current product line that the new autofocus.
cannon has a "fix" for the new cameras being shipped but the warranty fix
for the folks with the 6,000 dollar non focusing cameras are still in limbo.
but nikon had a dead pixel problem when they shipped d80's and the d200's
had back focusing issues when first shipped is one f the reasons there are
so many factory refurbs out there.
my personal advice is this when going to a DSLR. if you have been using a
particular brand for any amount of time then stick with what your familiar
with. if you are new to the DSLR game then my recommendation for whatever
brand you choose is spend your big money on your lens. in two years your
body will be old news and in five it will be obsolete. A good lens is a
thirty year or better investment.
i saw a guy recently using a 200 dollar zoom lens on a 4,000 dollar nikon
d3. both were a total waste of money configured like that. a 1,500 dollar
zoom on a 800 dollar camera body would have been a much wiser investment.
michael
Next: Where may I find instructions on how to remove rear tire on my 06 Sportster...
Previous: To cover or not to cover
