Official Photography Thread

[clackamascoug]

I'll tell her that. Thanks.
You sure it was last year? I think she took it in the spring.

Who knows when... I'm getting old. One thing I do know.... It's back on my desktop background.

[swampfrog]

I know it's been a while since the 4th, but firework pics are always fun...







Whole Google+ album of firework show (Vancouver, WA):

https://plus.google.com/photos/10663...48218925109601

[Donuthole]

A couple questions for the photogs on the board. My wife has a Nikon D40. In most respects it is sufficient for her needs, but I think she would like to upgrade to a camera that can do both video and photographs. I'm looking at the D3200, which is on sale for $400. She also would like a better lens for portraits. Something like a 50mm lens. So I have two questions:

1) What is the difference between a 50mm f/1.8D AF Nikkor lens and a 50mmf/1.8G AF-S Nikkor lens? The AF-S is nearly $100 more, so I assume there is a difference.
2) Are the lenses for the D40 and the D3200 interchangeable? IOW, if I buy a 50mm lens for her D40 and she later upgrades to a D3200, would her lenses for the D40 work with her new camera?

Your thoughts are appreciated.

[Art Vandelay]

A couple questions for the photogs on the board. My wife has a Nikon D40. In most respects it is sufficient for her needs, but I think she would like to upgrade to a camera that can do both video and photographs. I'm looking at the D3200, which is on sale for $400. She also would like a better lens for portraits. Something like a 50mm lens. So I have two questions:

1) What is the difference between a 50mm f/1.8D AF Nikkor lens and a 50mmf/1.8G AF-S Nikkor lens? The AF-S is nearly $100 more, so I assume there is a difference.
2) Are the lenses for the D40 and the D3200 interchangeable? IOW, if I buy a 50mm lens for her D40 and she later upgrades to a D3200, would her lenses for the D40 work with her new camera?

Your thoughts are appreciated.

1) The AF-S is considered a "faster" lens, meaning it works better if low light situations. The AF-S also has internal mechanics versus an exterior aperture ring. Having shot both lens, I'm not a good enough photographer to tell any noticeable difference.
2) This is the more important question, IMO. Almost all Nikon or Nikkor lenses are interchangeable between cameras. Lens are also the least variable part of photography, many a pro is shooting with 10-15 year old lenses on the latest camera body. Most photogs say if you have to choose, spend money on higher quality glass versus the newest body iteration, go with the lens. With that said, if she does want to get more serious about her photography, she should upgrade from the D40. Not only does the 3200 have a few more bells and whistles (video), it has a far superior sensor, this translates into better quality photos especially in natural, or low light. If, and when, she ever really gets serious, there is HUGE difference going with a full-frame camera- D600 or D7000. One of these bodies combined with a f2.8 lens opens up a realm of possibilities for her.

I guess I never really answered your question. Either 50mm lens would work on the D40 or D3200.

[Dwight Schr-ute]

I had a great answer for this but Art did a pretty good job and I only shoot Cannon, so my great answer really wasn't.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Donuthole]

I had a great answer for this but Art did a pretty good job and I only shoot Cannon, so my great answer really wasn't.

The only reason she has a Nikon is because I bought it off a co-worker for pretty cheap a couple years back. As it turns out, her extremely passive-aggressive sister is a real Cannon snob, so I really enjoy not having a Cannon for that reason alone.

1) The AF-S is considered a "faster" lens, meaning it works better if low light situations. The AF-S also has internal mechanics versus an exterior aperture ring. Having shot both lens, I'm not a good enough photographer to tell any noticeable difference.
2) This is the more important question, IMO. Almost all Nikon or Nikkor lenses are interchangeable between cameras. Lens are also the least variable part of photography, many a pro is shooting with 10-15 year old lenses on the latest camera body. Most photogs say if you have to choose, spend money on higher quality glass versus the newest body iteration, go with the lens. With that said, if she does want to get more serious about her photography, she should upgrade from the D40. Not only does the 3200 have a few more bells and whistles (video), it has a far superior sensor, this translates into better quality photos especially in natural, or low light. If, and when, she ever really gets serious, there is HUGE difference going with a full-frame camera- D600 or D7000. One of these bodies combined with a f2.8 lens opens up a realm of possibilities for her.

I guess I never really answered your question. Either 50mm lens would work on the D40 or D3200.

Thanks, AV. I'm tempted to just pull the trigger on the 3200 ($400 with an 18-55 lens) but she might get mad at me for spending that much on her in a year when we're being pretty minimalist for Christmas. As for a full-frame, I seriously doubt we'll ever get to that point. But if we do, I'll definitely get your thoughts then.

[Art Vandelay]

Thanks, AV. I'm tempted to just pull the trigger on the 3200 ($400 with an 18-55 lens) but she might get mad at me for spending that much on her in a year when we're being pretty minimalist for Christmas. As for a full-frame, I seriously doubt we'll ever get to that point. But if we do, I'll definitely get your thoughts then.

Buy her the camera. In my experience, of all the times my wife gets annoyed at me, the spending too much money on her annoyance is pretty low, and quickly forgotten. Especially, for something she will use, and almost certainly love, immediately.

[swampfrog]

Thanks, AV. I'm tempted to just pull the trigger on the 3200 ($400 with an 18-55 lens) but she might get mad at me for spending that much on her in a year when we're being pretty minimalist for Christmas. As for a full-frame, I seriously doubt we'll ever get to that point. But if we do, I'll definitely get your thoughts then.

Bodies:

If it's just adding the capability of adding video that might be a good option. I'm more familiar with Canon's bodies so I'll use them as an example. My Daughter has a T4i, I have a 50D. My Daughter's T4i is newer, has a touch screen and takes video. The 50D is older, but is built better (durable), and shoots 6-7 frames per second (fps) in RAW but does not shoot video. The T4i shoots 2-3 on a good day. I'll take the fps over video. Stopping objects in motion is more important to me than video, the fps increases the likelihood of capturing something special while capturing motion. If video was important also, I'd be looking at the 7D or 70D. Recording video through DSLR is a different experience. The DSLR is designed to capture very high resolution single images with near instant very fine-tuned auto-focusing. Video requires much higher fps, lower quality, with the ability to track focus on moving subjects. The 2 different sets of requirements are melding together some in the most current bodies (Canon 70D), but watching a DSLR shot video as it loses focus and tries to re-establish is pretty painful.

Lenses:

A lens that retains its sharpness opened up to at least f2.8 allows the stopping of most motion in reasonable light (usually 1/500 second or faster to stop soccer balls and such) without having to increase ISO. You also want a lens that focuses quickly--usually meaning an ultrasonic motor (USM). Of the two you mentioned, I think one is USM. If you plan you shoot video through it, you definitely want that one, the other is likely to produce audible artifacts in your video.

[TripletDaddy]

Looks like I may purchase one for Xmas. Donute, did you go with the D3200?

Im looking for suggestions.

[Donuthole]

Looks like I may purchase one for Xmas. Donute, did you go with the D3200?

Im looking for suggestions.

After AV and swampfrog's comments, i decided to get to the bottom of what Mrs. D really wants in a camera. As it turns out, she isn't as interested in video as I originally thought, and shutter speed is important to her. The D3200 is a downgrade from the D40 in that respect. So I'm sticking with our D40 for a while. I did buy her the 50mm AF-S lens, which I think she'll love for portraits of our kids.

[Art Vandelay]

After AV and swampfrog's comments, i decided to get to the bottom of what Mrs. D really wants in a camera. As it turns out, she isn't as interested in video as I originally thought, and shutter speed is important to her. The D3200 is a downgrade from the D40 in that respect. So I'm sticking with our D40 for a while. I did buy her the 50mm AF-S lens, which I think she'll love for portraits of our kids.

Technically the 3200 is "slower", but practically it is not. This is primary due to the newere sensor with allows much sharper pictures at higher ISO. If you are inside a gym, taking pictures with both cameras, you will probably need to be at a minimum of 800 iso, to capture something relativley slow moving (unfortunatly, neither camera will give you stop action inside, until you go with an f2.8 lens). The D40 maybe able to shoot at one shutter speed faster, but the image quality due to iso will be much sharper with the 3200. With all that said, the difference may not be a big enough selling point to upgrade the camera.

The iso difference since i switched to the full-frame D600 is unbelivable. Pictures at ISO 1200 with my 600 are equivalent to ISO 400 with my old D300. When I use my f2.8 70-200mm inside poorly lit gyms, I still can get enlargment quality photos. The newer sensors that are reported to come out in 2014 are supposed to be another jump. Again, this really only matters for action shots indoors. For portraits or outdoor sports, lens quality is infinitely more important than the camera body.

[Dwight Schr-ute]

Looks like I may purchase one for Xmas. Donute, did you go with the D3200?

Im looking for suggestions.

Don-ute! That rolls right off the tongue.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jeff Lebowski]

Don-ute! That rolls right off the tongue.

No it doesn't.

[TripletDaddy]

Don-ute! That rolls right off the tongue.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It isn't Don Ute. This isn't wuapinmon you are talking to right now.

[swampfrog]

Technically the 3200 is "slower", but practically it is not. This is primary due to the newere sensor with allows much sharper pictures at higher ISO. If you are inside a gym, taking pictures with both cameras, you will probably need to be at a minimum of 800 iso, to capture something relativley slow moving (unfortunatly, neither camera will give you stop action inside, until you go with an f2.8 lens). The D40 maybe able to shoot at one shutter speed faster, but the image quality due to iso will be much sharper with the 3200. With all that said, the difference may not be a big enough selling point to upgrade the camera.

The iso difference since i switched to the full-frame D600 is unbelivable. Pictures at ISO 1200 with my 600 are equivalent to ISO 400 with my old D300. When I use my f2.8 70-200mm inside poorly lit gyms, I still can get enlargment quality photos. The newer sensors that are reported to come out in 2014 are supposed to be another jump. Again, this really only matters for action shots indoors. For portraits or outdoor sports, lens quality is infinitely more important than the camera body.

Sensors:

DSLRs have "full-frame" bodies and crop sensor bodies (Nikon or Canon). Full frame is really just a larger sensor chip. Manufacturing larger sensors is more costly than manufacturing a "crop" or smaller sensor of equivalent quality. The natural advantage of a larger sensor is it is more sensitive to light (more surface area), so ISO performance is improved (better low light performance). Sensor technology also continues to improve, so newer bodies with equivalent sized sensors get better results. The drawback to the larger sensor is cost, and not just in the body. The sensor is larger, which means the lens which focuses light onto the sensor must also be larger or placed further from the sensor, in order to illuminate the entire surface area when the shutter is released. Larger lenses are more expensive. The physics of sensor and lens alignment for a larger lens also results in a narrower depth of field, which throws the background more out of focus, which for most of us is a good thing as it isolates the subject from the background. In addition a larger sensor will capture an improved image geometry, straighter lines, less distortion.

Processors and Memory:

DSLRs are really mini computers, they have a CPU which takes the data from the sensor, performs some calculations based on a combination of firmware, hardware, software, and camera settings (parameters), and then passes the results to the memory storage system. Higher frame rates are a result of having a fast processor and a high throughput memory system. Typical memory cards are not fast enough to store higher burst rates, so the cameras with high burst capability have an internal memory buffer (kind of like a computer cache), that temporarily stores multiple images until the card can process the writes. The size of this higher speed memory buffer controls the number of images that can be shot in a burst. A camera might be capable of physically shooting 12 fps, but the memory system may only be able to deal with 6-7 RAW images before the buffer fills, then your at the mercy of your card speed as the buffer empties to the card. If you shoot jpeg only, then the buffer will be sufficient for significantly more images and sustain the 12 fps for multiple seconds. So while my daughter's T4i has a newer sensor, with better ISO performance that allows a faster shutter, the memory system is lacking so the 50D runs circles around it when it comes to fps. So just upping the ISO on the T4i does not allow it to compete with the 50D.

Stopping Motion:

If all you ever shoot is portraits and landscapes, fps will probably not interest you. If you're shooting your family and want to capture candid shots, stopping motion on a swing, stopping splashes at the water park or pool, etc. Then fps is fantastic. Shoot a burst and pick your favorite, rather than trying to time the shutter release at exactly the right moment.