My first DSLR

[donthomaso]

Ive been here for a while now, viewing the photography section quit often..

A few years ago i bought a Canon PowerShot S80. Mainly because of all the manual settings.. That was fun at the begining, and a think i did some great shots. Mostly of cars. But then i came to the limit of the camera. Could't get good shots of objects in motion. Blury background seemed impossible..

So i bought a Nikon D80 yesterday

Nikon D80
Nikkor 18-200
Crumpler Bag

So i think i will post here more often now. Just started with post in the Lens Flair Thread


Ah and sorry for my bad english..

[Solberg]

It seems you got a top notch kit.

I'm really interested in the lens you got (18-200) I'll keep an eye out for your photos.

[LeVeL]

That's basically my story - had a PowerShot, got the absolutely maximum out of it, moved up to a DSLR last week.

[Whappeh]

Originally Posted by Solberg

It seems you got a top notch kit.

I'm really interested in the lens you got (18-200) I'll keep an eye out for your photos.

I have it, and love it. Don't like the guys who love those Prime lenses talk you out of it.

[donthomaso]

If you see all the great shots posted here all the time, you just have to get a DSLR...

So far im very happy with the lens. Its the first time a had such a big zoom and i guess it will need some time until i can see the drawbacks from huge focus range
Sure will post some more pics later.

[Raparperi]

Originally Posted by Whappeh

Don't like the guys who love those Prime lenses talk you out of it.

Prime lenses FTW!

(...ok ok, I have zooms as well...)

[donthomaso]

a few shots i did yesterday..

1.

2.

3.

4.

[donthomaso]

my first try at paning shots..

top 3 from about 50 shots

[epp_b]

Very nice, and good focus. I'm inspired to try some new things now with the D40 I just got

[donthomaso]

and some more










I realy like to take much sharper "macro" shots.. flowers 4 example..
will a close up filter do the job in the beginning or should i get a macro lense right away ?

[TopGearDog]

Originally Posted by donthomaso

I realy like to take much sharper "macro" shots.. flowers 4 example..
will a close up filter do the job in the beginning or should i get a macro lense right away ?

I'd say get a macro lens right away. The Tamron 90mm F/2.8 Di, Sigma 105mm F2.8 EX DG or Sigma 150mm F2.8 EX DG are regarded as great macro lenses on a budget. They are all 1:1 so a true macro, not the fake 1:2 or 1:3 "macro ability" of many zoom lenses. Only way to get a real closeup is 1:1 macro.

The Tamron 90mm is also said to be a great portrait lens.

Edit:

This is basically what you can expect from a standard zoom lense with 1:2 macro ability...



I took that on a Nikkor 28-105mm F/3.5-4.5D which has a 1:2 macro ability at f/4.5 at telephoto end.

anything closer then that and you need a proper macro lens.

[Raparperi]

^ Heh, I've got the same exact lens as my "temporary macro" at the moment And I think it'll have to do the job for quite some time, because a proper macro isn't that high on my "want to buy" list

[mgkdk]

Originally Posted by TopGearDog

I'd say get a macro lens right away. The Tamron 90mm F/2.8 Di(...)are regarded as great macro lenses on a budget.

I have that one, it's great

Originally Posted by TopGearDog

The Tamron 90mm is also said to be a great portrait lens.

Haven't tried that though, maybe I should

[TopGearDog]

Originally Posted by mgkdk

I have that one, it's great



Haven't tried that though, maybe I should

Basically anything from 50mm to a 100mm or so can give you great portraits with nice out of focus background (bokeh).

The 50mm f/1.8 and 85mm f/1.8 (or the more expensive f/1.4 which is also called the cream machine) are popular for that but the Tamron can do it aswell since it's razor sharp with nice bokeh.

The 90mm Tamron has been on my to-buy-list for a while, maybe i shall get it this summer.

Congrats on the D80 btw don.

[nomix]

TopGearDog, the out of focus area in a photo is not bokeh. The out of focus area is what's called just that, out of focus area. It comes in correlation with shallow DOF, which is a small field in which the focus is set. This is more shallow the longer the focal lenght; the larger the aperture and the closer the focus. That's why you'll often struggle when you're doing macros, even at relatively small apertures as f/5.6-8.0. You're so close, that you're getting a very thin DOF.

Bokeh, is how the out of focus area in the photo is drawn out, how the highlights are drawn by the lens, simply put, it's a charateristic where you review how obtrusive the out of focus part of the photo is. It's a very common thing to mistake.

Feel free to read more at wikipedia.

[tianluo]

Originally Posted by TopGearDog

Basically anything from 50mm to a 100mm or so can give you great portraits with nice out of focus background (bokeh).

No...it is more to do with the construction of the lens and in particular the number of blades

[nomix]

Yup. Look at some of the lenses churned out from Leica over the years, and some Carl Zeiss optics. If you're on a budget, however, the Nikkor 50/1.8 works great in terms of bokeh.

Oh, and by the way. In studio, little of this is relevant anyway, since you're not usually using the lens wide open, or have anything in the background. For traditional portraits, it's either wide open for outdoors or generally indoors, or stopped down in studio.

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Originally Posted by nomix

TopGearDog, the out of focus area in a photo is not bokeh. The out of focus area is what's called just that, out of focus area. It comes in correlation with shallow DOF, which is a small field in which the focus is set. This is more shallow the longer the focal lenght; the larger the aperture and the closer the focus. That's why you'll often struggle when you're doing macros, even at relatively small apertures as f/5.6-8.0. You're so close, that you're getting a very thin DOF.

Bokeh, is how the out of focus area in the photo is drawn out, how the highlights are drawn by the lens, simply put, it's a charateristic where you review how obtrusive the out of focus part of the photo is. It's a very common thing to mistake.

Feel free to read more at wikipedia.

I'm not sure what you're telling TGD here. TGD said that the 90mm has nice bokeh, and I'm inclined to agree, OOF elements are smoothly rendered with that lens. I agree that bokeh is a function of optical design, but your apparent background blur is generally going to look smoother on a long lens than a wideangle.

[bobo_1314]

I have a Micro Nikkor 105mm, and it's great!! However, for Nikon cameras with APS-C sensor, I think the new Micro Nikkor 60mm would be a better choice, because you can really get close to the subject (without seeing your own shadow).

[nomix]

Originally Posted by BerserkerCatSplat

I'm not sure what you're telling TGD here. TGD said that the 90mm has nice bokeh, and I'm inclined to agree, OOF elements are smoothly rendered with that lens. I agree that bokeh is a function of optical design, but your apparent background blur is generally going to look smoother on a long lens than a wideangle.

TGD said "Basically anything from 50mm to a 100mm or so can give you great portraits with nice out of focus background (bokeh)", which isn't right. First of all, not nearly all lenses in that category has in common that they've got nice bokeh. That depends on what you see as good bokeh, but in the end, if one sees it as unobtrucivenes, the Nikkor 50/1.8 has good bokeh. The EF 50/1.8 hasn't. The EF 50/1.4 has rather nice bokeh, while I'm told the Nikkor 50/1.4 hasn't.

I did think she meant OOF areas, as she was so general regarding fast tele primes when talking about good bokeh.