Thinkin of purchasing SLR camera - Page 2 - Orchid Board

cirillonb · #11 01-16-2009, 05:18 PM

I agree with Ross entirely. In fact, he helped me graduate to a slr and get a macro lens. The entire outfit, based on a Nikon D60 and using a 105 mm macro (nicon calls them micrro Nikkor) is now well over a Thousand dollars.
I looked up the camera you already have. Have you tried it for flower photos? it has a macro feature. It probably also has a shutter release timer, even cheap cameras do. You would want somewhat to compensate for the light you are using but if you go outdoors, the camera can do that. I could not discover whether you could manually focus the camera. That would be nice but not essential. IMHO more important would be the ability to go "aperture priority" because you need to go to as high a number=smallest aperture available on your camera to get the best depth of field.
What I am saying, in a nutshell, is the camera you own is quite capable and may serve you well for a long time. Also, what you are looking for does not come cheap.
Good luck. Let us know what you decide.
Nick

cirillonb · #12 01-16-2009, 05:30 PM

I agree with Ross entirely. In fact, he helped me graduate to a slr and get a macro lens. The entire outfit, based on a Nikon D60 and using a 105 mm macro (nicon calls them micrro Nikkor) is now well over a Thousand dollars.
I looked up the camera you already have. Have you tried it for flower photos? it has a macro feature. It probably also has a shutter release timer, even cheap cameras do. You would want somewhat to compensate for the light you are using but if you go outdoors, the camera can do that. I could not discover whether you could manually focus the camera. That would be nice but not essential. IMHO more important would be the ability to go "aperture priority" because you need to go to as high a number=smallest aperture available on your camera to get the best depth of field.
What I am saying, in a nutshell, is the camera you own is quite capable and may serve you well for a long time. Also, what you are looking for does not come cheap.
Good luck. Let us know what you decide.
Nick

Swamper · #13 01-16-2009, 05:59 PM

Tin the reason I looked at the 105 mm is because of the 2 more popular nikon lenses ,or as Nick referred to them Nikkor, seemed to be the 60mm and the 105. Priced at someher around 500 for the 60mm and close to a thousand for the 105. After reading every review I could read on these two I was sold on the 105. The only problem I had was the price. Not only buying orchids but fishing and bikes take up every penny I seem to find. So...if I could afford one I would get the 105. Look into them and see what you find. Good luck. BTW I am only a pre-beginner photographer with a very small budget but big ideas.

Ross · #14 01-16-2009, 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tindomul

I think so to. But them orchids keep taking my money, lol.
Why the 105mm? I'm really a novice with lenses.

Be aware there are two different 105's out there for the Nikon (the Nikkor 105's) One is the newest IS (image stabilized) lens Nikon | 105mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR Lens | 2160 | B&H Photo Video and the other is the older 105 autofocus that got such bad reps. Be sure you get the newest one. I use this lens and it is to die for! I also use the newest 200mm F4 and that is equally as good off a tripod.

Swamper · #15 01-16-2009, 06:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ross

Be aware there are two different 105's out there for the Nikon (the Nikkor 105's) One is the newest IS (image stabilized) lens Nikon | 105mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR Lens | 2160 | B&H Photo Video and the other is the older 105 autofocus that got such bad reps. Be sure you get the newest one. I use this lens and it is to die for! I also use the newest 200mm F4 and that is equally as good off a tripod.

Ross said to die for...that's pretty much the same kind of reaction/review you will get all the time. I figured so many people can't be wrong. Like I said I can't afford it right now but I will hold off and save my money till I can. In the meantime these cameras take really great pics even with the lenses on them now. It is taking me a lot of time to learn it well but Im having a great time. I need to figure out how to resize these pics from the Nikon program to post them here. When I go to the pics I no longer have the resize option on my pc?
There is also a smaller pic size to take from the camera, Maybe I should try that.

Ross · #16 01-16-2009, 09:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Swamper

Ross said to die for...that's pretty much the same kind of reaction/review you will get all the time. I figured so many people can't be wrong. Like I said I can't afford it right now but I will hold off and save my money till I can. In the meantime these cameras take really great pics even with the lenses on them now. It is taking me a lot of time to learn it well but Im having a great time. I need to figure out how to resize these pics from the Nikon program to post them here. When I go to the pics I no longer have the resize option on my pc?
There is also a smaller pic size to take from the camera, Maybe I should try that.

Swamper - just take the regular size pictures you always take. Then resize using the instructions Marty posted Resizing Images...originally posted 6/13/06 by Marty then you are good to go. I personally use Photoshop to do mine.

Amanda L · #17 02-06-2009, 10:47 PM

I found the lens you guys have been talking about for 733.51 plus 28.83 shipping. Here is the link to the site that has it. Riolala.com - Electronics, Mobile Phones, Cell Phones, Camcorders, Digital DSLR cameras, Lenses, Projectors, Game Consoles, and so much more!

I have no idea if that helped at all, but I tried.

cirillonb · #18 02-11-2009, 03:15 PM

I have to confess that I did buy the older 105mm lens used since I would had focus anyhow on orchids and portraits the loss of the autofocus feature was not that grave (nor the lens stabilization since always would be on a tripod) I don't have the eye to see any problems and I am happy with it. I did not find the articles panning it before I bought which is just as well now. It was significantly less expensive than the new 105 but it wasn't cheap by any means.
Nick

silken · #19 04-17-2009, 01:18 PM

Hi Tindomul, This reply is a few months after your question of why the Nikon 105mm but I thought I would reply anyways. I bought the newer version of this lens called the "AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor 105mm f2.8G IF-ED". That's a lot of title, but it is basically a macro 105mm lens with a nice large aperture of f2.8 and vibration reduction and great glass etc. It is rather expensive but you can buy a used one of the older model. It is also an excellent lens and had the f2.8 aperture, just not vibration reduction (VR) and a few new features like the silent wave motor for focusing. When you have the camera on a tripod you turn of the VR anyways. This lens is a nice in-between of the other two standard focal lengths for macros which is usually in the neighbourhood of 60mm and 200mm. With the 60mm you need to get real close and if you do bugs etc. that is not always possible. With the 200mm it is difficult to focus in confined areas at times as it is a long focal length. So you have to decide what suits you best, but they are all awesome lenses and the older models still get rave reviews from their owners. You can get less expensive macros but they usually come with a smaller aperture range such as starting at f4. The large aperture is important to allow you to use faster shutter speeds which are required when shooting outdoors in a breeze or shooting insects etc. However, quite often f2.8 gives too small a depth of field anyways so again you must decide what you are shooting. I love this 105mm macro and have used it a lot. It is also a great portrait and general use lens. I hope that helps.

Silken