Photography folk, a little help?

sunvalleylaw

sunvalleylaw

Yep.
Today, I reawakened my desire to update my camera rig. I shot a roll of PanX B/W at my son's XC meet, and am hoping it comes out. I loved holding my hold Nikon FE (that body always felt so great in my hands) and shooting away. It was a challenge to find good light that would let me close down the aperture for good depth of field, with enough speed, and focus to a point close to where I wanted to shoot. I hope some good shots come out of the effort. But it also made it clear that I would like to go ahead and join this century. (while holding on to my old lenses, which have become old friends.)

I am looking (after saving a few bucks) to invest in a Nikon DSLR camera body, and likely one automatic lens that covers a good range. I am looking at a D600/610 (I have a line a near new 610 I can get from a trusted friend/pro who wants to get an 810) or maybe if i cannot pay what my buddy wants for the 610, a 700 or D3s. I want to stay away from the 3100/5100 types for one reason: they do not accept my old lenses. I want to purchase only one newer autofocus etc. lens for general use, and want to use the lenses I learned on, Kiron built Vivitars. Maybe dumb, but I really want to be able to use these old lenses. (a 70/150 and a 28mm).

Any Nikon users who can give me some insights into the camera bodies? And also into the new lenses? What brands are good, (very good is good enough, I don't need absolute pro models). What focal lengths are best for general use? etc. Seems like most cameras come with a 25-185 or something like that.



PS. I really wish I could afford a Nikon Df, as it looks very much, ergonomically speaking, similar to my own camera that I have had since I earned Eagle scout and this camera back in 1981. But at $2800, that is a no go.

D3S_0444-0600.jpg


I am leaning toward the 600/610 if I can buy used as it seems at 24 megapixels, that it will last me a long, long time, just like my old camera.

4aa878f43f23a2dcf94fe7fb7fe18721.jpg
 
I know nothing of Nikon, growing up with Pentax, but wish you luck. I love my Canon, but it is very much a basic, entry level DSLR by today's standards.
 
I'm a Nikon user but you're shopping way above my budget. I've heard that the D600/D610 is basically a full frame D7100. I could be repeating nonsense.

Also, reviews on the just released D750 have been very flattering.
 
dmn23 said:
I'm a Nikon user but you're shopping way above my budget. I've heard that the D600/D610 is basically a full frame D7100. I could be repeating nonsense.

Also, reviews on the just released D750 have been very flattering.
Click to expand...

A brand new D750 would be way above my budget too. Looking for good used, that takes old AI lenses.
 
I just did a little more research. I think that if I really do this, I will try to find a good used camera in the FX line rather than the DX line. The FX line has sensors that are the same size basically as 35mm film, as opposed to the DX where the sensors are "smaller" for lack of a better term. I am not sure if that is technically correct, but it is the practical effect. Therefore, my old lenses would have a different effective focal length on the DX cameras as opposed to the FX cams. So @dmn23 , now I understand what you were getting at. A D7100 body would be tempting in terms of price, but I think if I am going to do this, I want to save a little longer and get the "full frame" camera. The D700 is similar, but with a lot fewer megapixels than the D600/610 models, so could be an option. We shall see.

If I get some good shots out of this roll I just shot with my old FE, I will post them up for fun. Where does anyone get their b/w film developed? I think I will end up sending it in to The Darkroom in CA. Seems to be about the best bet.
 
I would go with full frame to maximize whatever lens assortment you have now.
Now in terms of megapixels..20MP is different camera to camera..How so you ask? Just like computers, they have different CPUs that determine the actual input.output of the image.
One thing to keep in mind, as that MP value increases, your need for hard drive storage increases as well, unless you are a relentless in camera editor.
 
I'd love to help, but I am a canon guy, so I don't know much about the Nikon line up.

I think you are on the right track in going full frame and including the ability to use your old manual focus glass. My only advice would be to pick up your new camera with a kit type lens (like a 18-55, 18-185, or something similarly broad), as then you will have one lens with image stabilization, modern autofocus, and the like. I get the desire to use your old glass, but modern lenses are pretty awesome tools and it is worth having at least one. Kit lenses these days are pretty darn nice.

As for the change in focal length, yes, a cropped sensor camera will alter the effective focal length of your lenses meant for 35mm/full frame. At least in Canon land, you can use the full frame lenses on a crop sensor camera, and just live with the altered length. In general, using a full frame lens on a crop sensor will make everything longer. For Nikon that crop factor is 1.5, so a 50 mm prime full frame lens becomes a 75 mm lens on a crop sensor camera.
 
Tiltsta said:
I'd love to help, but I am a canon guy, so I don't know much about the Nikon line up.

I think you are on the right track in going full frame and including the ability to use your old manual focus glass. My only advice would be to pick up your new camera with a kit type lens (like a 18-55, 18-185, or something similarly broad), as then you will have one lens with image stabilization, modern autofocus, and the like. I get the desire to use your old glass, but modern lenses are pretty awesome tools and it is worth having at least one. Kit lenses these days are pretty darn nice.

As for the change in focal length, yes, a cropped sensor camera will alter the effective focal length of your lenses meant for 35mm/full frame. At least in Canon land, you can use the full frame lenses on a crop sensor camera, and just live with the altered length. In general, using a full frame lens on a crop sensor will make everything longer. For Nikon that crop factor is 1.5, so a 50 mm prime full frame lens becomes a 75 mm lens on a crop sensor camera.
Click to expand...
I am not certain about the numbers, but that is how it is with Nikon too, in terms of how full frame lenses (like my old glass) work on the crop sensor cameras (Called DX line for both bodies and lenses in the Nikon world). Except you cannot use the old lenses on the consumer models sold at Costco. You have to step up a bit for that.

After researching it, it seems that I would do well with a D600 or 610 body. They are the most modern "pro-sumer" models. one is a slight mod of the other. They are very well regarded and produce similar results to the much more expensive pro models. A D700 would also work, but it is a 12 megapixel camera vs. a 24. It is a little larger body camera. But they sell used not much less than a D600/610 (right around a grand). In fact, you can find D600's being sold that had shutters replaced with 610 shutters due to some warranty issue that Nikon fixed for people, so that a camera with maybe 10,000 clicks on the whole body, really has only 850-1500 on the new shutter. Those seem to go for from 1850-1050 or so. Might be a good way to go.

As far as lenses, you hit the nail on the head for my goal. I have old glass for a 28mm wide angle fixed focal length, and a 70-150 zoom. I may buy an old 80 to 200 Nikkor too as they can be had for very little money. Maybe replace my 70 to 150 with it. But it would be good to get a modern mid-range zoom for general use and video. I am looking at what they have that is not too expensive. there is a difference between the DX line lenses and the FX line lenses, and the FX ones are a lot more expensive. I need to learn more specifically what happens if you use a DX lens on an FX body. Perhaps it just changes the focal length a little. If so, maybe I could live with that to get started while I saved up for the full on FX lens.
 
Last edited:
I was Nikon back in the 35mm days, but I switched to Canon for digital. So I'm not much help. But it looks like you've got this pretty well figured out. Good luck!

Are you all sorted for photo editing software? Adobe Lightroom is absolutely the way to go. No bones about it.
 
jaxn slim said:
I was Nikon back in the 35mm days, but I switched to Canon for digital. So I'm not much help. But it looks like you've got this pretty well figured out. Good luck!

Are you all sorted for photo editing software? Adobe Lightroom is absolutely the way to go. No bones about it.
Click to expand...
Looks like it will be between that and Aperture. Aperture looks like it is a good bargain as compared to Adobe Lightroom, and Adobe software tends to bug me with its "bloats" feel. I will see if I can find some demos.
 
sunvalleylaw said:
Looks like it will be between that and Aperture. Aperture looks like it is a good bargain as compared to Adobe Lightroom, and Adobe software tends to bug me with its "bloats" feel. I will see if I can find some demos.
Click to expand...
I'm not familiar with Aperture, and I'm not sure what "bloats" feel is. But Lightroom is definitely worth checking out. Just about every pro I know who edits their own stuff uses it. :shrug:
Looks like the price for Lightroom has gone up recently. It used to be $100, but I see it's up to $140. In the grand scheme of photo things and how much use you get out of it, $140 vs. $80 is still pretty close.
 
jaxn slim said:
I'm not familiar with Aperture, and I'm not sure what "bloats" feel is. But Lightroom is definitely worth checking out. Just about every pro I know who edits their own stuff uses it. :shrug:
Looks like the price for Lightroom has gone up recently. It used to be $100, but I see it's up to $140. In the grand scheme of photo things and how much use you get out of it, $140 vs. $80 is still pretty close.
Click to expand...
el diablo said:
Aperture makes multiple copies of saved images. It can really eat up HD space.
Click to expand...
Aperture is Apple's equivalent. As for making multiple images, I think that is because it saves the original image unless you delete it. Probably not a bad thing for me. But, I looked a little further at reviews and found that it is not being updated any more apparently, or so the rumor says. So the Adobe one may be the way to go. With regard to "bloat", I am not sure that is the right word. But Adobe Photoshop always seemed a pain to me, and Reader always tries to make itself the primary JPEG viewer, though I prefer Apple's Preview, and the constant desire of Flash Player to upgrade itself every 5 minutes bugs me. But Lightroom appears to be the best program out there right now from my research last night.
 
Looks like the new Photos will be an "in between" product, which may not be ideal. Apple is apparently working on a "transitionary workflow" from Aperture to Lightroom, which may signal the new program will not meet the needs of pros without some possible additional apps that they hope to develop and plug into the Photos program I guess. So maybe Lightroom is still the way to go for now.

http://appleinsider.com/articles/14...h-pro-level-image-search-editing-plugins-more

re: lenses, I am researching the older lenses, both manual focus and auto focus. It looks like I can find some that will work pretty darn well for pretty cheap. I may get a lens I lusted after in my youth, the Nikkor 80-200 zoom, because you can get them for like 50 bucks now, or really $75-$80 shipped. http://www.ebay.com/itm/EXC-Nikon-Z...92018951?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item3a9a036d07 This lens will be cool because I can use it on my old FE when I get a jonesing to shoot some old film just for fun.

And for practical real live there is a mid zoom that comes from the kit cameras that works just fine with the FX cameras, and has the VR (vibration reduction), auto focus, auto zoom, etc. And though some of the parts are plastic, it should work ok to start, and is cheap enough to replace later with a nicer one. Will be good for general use and video. Now just to fine a good low light one with a nice wide aperture for indoors general use.

See the 28-80mm G (2001-2006)and 28-200mm G (2003-2006) here: http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/10-best.htm (and the zoom I want to pick up cheap as well).

D3S_6188-with-hood.jpg


And here is the body I am thinking about getting. This one, or the D600, the predecessor, with the replaced shutter via warranty, which would be a cheaper body, with low click count on the replaced shutter.

D3S_0299-0600.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top