Your Camera Equipment

markryder

Active Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2007
Messages
305
Location
oslo, norway
My current setup, which reflects my desire to keep photography as simple as possible:

Canon eos 400d
bg-e3 battery grip
ef-s 17-55mm f2.8 usm is lens
ep-ex 15 eyepiece extender
rc-1 remote control
velbon sherpa 600r tripod.
sandisk 4gig and 8gig extreme III sd-card
 

IceBone

Blue Wheel Hipster
DONOR
Joined
Jan 14, 2007
Messages
27,151
Location
Slovenistan
Car(s)
Audi A5 Quattro
simple photography: one point and shoot cam, not all the garbage. if you're so adamant on simple, wanna trade? :p
 

SileNceR

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2004
Messages
889
Location
Warrnambool, VIC, Australia
Car(s)
1998 BMW E39 540iA, 1979 BMW E21/4.0i
Mine so far:
Canon EOS 400D
Canon EF-S 17-55mm f3.5-5.6 kit lens
Canon EF 75-300mm f4-5.6 twin lens kit lens
Cheap tripod with carry bag and quick release attachment
"Phottix" copy wired remote control (for night shot etc)

Waiting on my lowepro bag to come in, I can't even remember which one I ordered. It should be here middle of this month hopefully.
 

mgkdk

Aced mod training!
Joined
Mar 19, 2005
Messages
6,438
Location
Denmark
Car(s)
VW UP! Renault Clio
I totally forgot to post my new stuff in this thread (now it's not so new anymore)

and I still have my canon ixus i zoom.
 

rootrider

Mr. TDI SportWagen
Joined
Mar 31, 2005
Messages
1,525
Location
Tacoma, WA (USA)
Car(s)
'95 E36 M3, '14 Panamera Turbo S
Canon eos 400d
ef-s 17-55mm f2.8 usm is lens
that's certainly simple. I would feel horribly limited if I only had my 17-50 and a cheap camera. I would have gotten a D200 or D300 next month if I hadn't lost my job last Friday... I just bought a 1.4x TC for my 80-200 and 300mm, and the Tokina 12-24 is very high up on my list of things to buy.

I could probably get by without my 17-50 more than I could something like a 12-24 and 70-200.

Nice lens though :D
 

watto

Unloved and lacking a title
Joined
Jun 13, 2005
Messages
6,003
Location
Melbourne, Australia
Car(s)
2013 Holden Cruze SRi Series 2
I would feel horribly limited if I only had my 17-50 and a cheap camera.
Well, perhaps a "cheap camera" is all some can afford? I don't consider my 350D cheap, not by my student-on-a-limited-wages standard...
 

IceBone

Blue Wheel Hipster
DONOR
Joined
Jan 14, 2007
Messages
27,151
Location
Slovenistan
Car(s)
Audi A5 Quattro
PFFFF!!!! i have a full time job and all i can afford is a fujifrickinfilm s5600 :(
 

rootrider

Mr. TDI SportWagen
Joined
Mar 31, 2005
Messages
1,525
Location
Tacoma, WA (USA)
Car(s)
'95 E36 M3, '14 Panamera Turbo S
Well, perhaps a "cheap camera" is all some can afford? I don't consider my 350D cheap, not by my student-on-a-limited-wages standard...
there is a difference between only using a cheap dslr because it's all you can afford and using a cheap dslr because it's what you're satisfied with.

He didn't say he had a 400d with one lens because it's what he could afford.. he said he liked it that way. Most people will move up when they get the chance. He already has a thousand dollar lens.. so I really doubt money is the huge issue here, since his kit is probably above the average here in this thread. I was simply commenting on one being comfortable with a small kit like his, since I can't imagine myself being that way.

Trust me.. I know what it's like to not be able to afford equipment. I had my D70 donated to me by the PNW Volkswagen community because I wasn't able to afford one. That doesn't mean I didn't want something better ;)

Every piece of equipment that I have, outside of the lens cloth, lens pen, a couple new lens caps, the 77mm B+W CP, and the cheap tripod I bought years ago was purchased used, and at a very good price.
 

watto

Unloved and lacking a title
Joined
Jun 13, 2005
Messages
6,003
Location
Melbourne, Australia
Car(s)
2013 Holden Cruze SRi Series 2
there is a difference between only using a cheap dslr because it's all you can afford and using a cheap dslr because it's what you're satisfied with.
Righto, I understand where you're coming from now. I do agree, when I have the money (ha!) I will certainly be upgrading various pieces of my kit.
 

markryder

Active Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2007
Messages
305
Location
oslo, norway
To set things right: I upgraded from a canon powershot s3 compact camera because I felt the camera was limiting my possibilities as a photographer. When I get the same feeling about the 400d, I will upgrade to something better. But right now it feels just right for me.

Would an expensive camera improve these pictures:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v398/markryder/fotowork/diablo11.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v398/markryder/fotowork/skyline05.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v398/markryder/fotowork/mr2mk209.jpg

I don't think so. Not for me atleast.

Next on my "to buy" list is the canon ef-s 10-22mm lens, a 580EX II and two 430EX blitz'es to free me (somewhat) from the restraints of needing enough natural light to shoot pictures. So, no, money isn't an issue :)

Sorry for starting a whole offtopic issue in the thread ;-)
 

markryder

Active Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2007
Messages
305
Location
oslo, norway
Seems like I have to keep this thread alive with a little game of "spot the new toys" 8)



Bought the 430EX to evaluate the light it produces, to see if I really need a 580EX - or just a bunch of 430's :p And I got the ef-s 10-22 because it's... Well.... :wub: to be honest :D

Right now, me loves me!
 

rootrider

Mr. TDI SportWagen
Joined
Mar 31, 2005
Messages
1,525
Location
Tacoma, WA (USA)
Car(s)
'95 E36 M3, '14 Panamera Turbo S
well I was going to buy an F90x/N90s today, but the dude on craigslist failed me :mad:

Either way.. I did get my 1.4x TC today.


It's a Kenko 1.4x Teleplus Pro 300 DG teleconverter. It's almost as heavy as my 18-70, and heavier than my roommate's cheap Kenko 2x MC7 TC. It works wonderfully with AF-S... but shows a small degradation in AF performance on my two big lenses.. the 80-200mm 2.8 and 300mm f/4.. since there's so much my d70's AF motor has to work with. It works great on my 50mm 1.8 as well :D

effectively 70mm f/2.5.. and still focusing at around 30cm
 

STi Nut

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2005
Messages
988
Location
Adelaide, Australia
Car(s)
2008 Toyota Yaris 1.3L 5 Door Auto
guys i need help!,

NOOB QUESTION!
alright well i have been looking at a wide angle lens for my D80 and Sigma is in my price range, i am also thinking of going Tokina but am not set yet. I was just on the Sigma Website, and noticed in the menue there is "Wide Zoom Lenses" and "Wide Lenses", what is, if any the difference between the 2? :S

Thanks
 

rootrider

Mr. TDI SportWagen
Joined
Mar 31, 2005
Messages
1,525
Location
Tacoma, WA (USA)
Car(s)
'95 E36 M3, '14 Panamera Turbo S
"wide lenses" would be wide prime lenses like their 20mm f/1.4.. and "wide zoom lenses" would be.. wide zoom lenses, like their 10-20 f/4-5.6

The Tokina 12-24 f/4 is easily the best all-around 3rd party ultra-wide zoom. It even beats the Nikon 12-24 f/4 in some image quality tests (though it doesn't have the same flair control or the af-s that the Nikon has). Most people get the Sigma 10-20 because it's 2mm wider.. that's a big difference. But the image quality isn't up to par, and that maximum aperture of f/5.6 at 20mm really keeps the lens off my list. But if you want wide.. that's definitely the lens to get.
 

STi Nut

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2005
Messages
988
Location
Adelaide, Australia
Car(s)
2008 Toyota Yaris 1.3L 5 Door Auto
Well i have been quoted for the Tokina,

"New Tokina AF ATX124 12-24mm F4 Pro DX Lens (Nikon AF) $599 Australian"
That is in my price range, my next question would be, would it work with all the featurs on the D80, such as AF,

I also got these quoted aswell,
New Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6 DC (Nikon AF) $640 Australian
2nd hand 10-20mm F4-5.6 DC (Nikon AF) $450 Australian
New Sigma 12-24mm F4.5-5.6 DG AF (Nikon) $820 Australian

I am thinking of going away from the Sigma since everyone that i have talked about outside a camera store has said they are crap.......
 

rootrider

Mr. TDI SportWagen
Joined
Mar 31, 2005
Messages
1,525
Location
Tacoma, WA (USA)
Car(s)
'95 E36 M3, '14 Panamera Turbo S
A Sigma EX lens is far from being crap. They tend to be very good lenses, especially for the price. Their consumer (non-EX) lenses otoh... do tend to be crap :p

And yes.. any Nikon mount autofocus lens will work perfectly on your camera and any other current Nikon SLR.

FYI, that Sigma 12-24 doesn't have much use unless you want a cheap (compared to the new 14-24 2.8 lens) ultra-wide zoom on a film or FX camera. You can't use any filters, it's a flair monster, and the image quality is so-so. It's almost completely distortion free though :)

The two best 3rd party ultra-wide zooms right now are definitely the Sigma 10-20 or the Tokina 12-24. The Nikon 12-24 is hands down the best, but it's also hands down the most expensive.
 

STi Nut

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2005
Messages
988
Location
Adelaide, Australia
Car(s)
2008 Toyota Yaris 1.3L 5 Door Auto
Well i got quoted $599 for the Tokina and $1335 for the Nikon 12-24, more then twice the price, out my budget for a student :(
 
Top