|
mAlfunkti0n posted:I have been convinced, I knew you guys would have some good advice. Depends on price really, dont expect to grt anywhere near what retail is but you could probably sell it. I will mention that it may be handy to hang on to if you ever consider selling your camera (depending on what camera, if it is a consumer model like a D40 or something people looking at buying them probably just want a package)
|
| # ? Jul 7, 2009 15:40 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2013 09:06 |
|
|
I'm looking for an extra battery (no battery grip, just a spare) and there are some non-Nikon branded batteries on Amazon with more charge (2000 mAh vs 1500 mAh) and cheaper. Are these safe to use or is it better to just spend the extra to get a Nikon brand battery?
|
| # ? Jul 7, 2009 16:29 |
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:If I remember right you can buy the same bag without the logo for quite a bit less money.
|
| # ? Jul 7, 2009 16:48 |
|
|
Dread Head posted:Depends on price really, dont expect to grt anywhere near what retail is but you could probably sell it. I will mention that it may be handy to hang on to if you ever consider selling your camera (depending on what camera, if it is a consumer model like a XS or something people looking at buying them probably just want a package) Fixed  You're looking at maybe $75-100 to an unsophisticated buyer or more likely about $50. The problem is for the vast majority of people who want one, they get it with their camera. It's about 140 new, and not going to hold up well as a "used" item.
|
| # ? Jul 7, 2009 16:55 |
|
|
rgoer posted:do you have a url for that? sounds tempting 
|
| # ? Jul 7, 2009 17:10 |
|
|
Fangs404 posted:What bags/backpacks do you guys use? I currently have one of the lower end Lowepro backpacks (the Fastpack 200 if I recall correctly), and it's pretty good, but I have 5 lenses now, and it's a little small. I've been looking at the Lowepro SlingShot 300 AW or 350 AW. They both look pretty solid, hold lots of lenses, and provide easier/quicker access without having to take the backpack off. http://www.amazon.com/Kata-KT-D-3N1...E/ref=pd_cp_p_2 also looks pretty sweet, and what's neat about it is that it can be used as either a sling or a backpack. I have one of the Slingshots (100? whatever the smallest one is) and really like it. I usually carry my camera in a Pelican case but got this for when I'm not carrying tons and tons of equipment. I used it for a 3 day job where I was walking around for 10 hours with a 5D, 580, meter, and a couple of other small things and had no problems with it and it was comfortable, didn't hurt my back or anything like that. They have nifty rain covers and the inside is 18% gray. I can also fit a Hasselblad 500 with a prism finder, an extra A12 back, a meter, and film in the 100 with a little room to spare to give you an idea on size.
|
| # ? Jul 7, 2009 17:16 |
|
|
I'll agree, the Slingshots are great bags. I have a 100 and I use it to carry/store all of my photo gear (granted it's not much, 3 lenses, a 40D and miscellaneous accessories). On to my question. I'm looking for a tripod in the $100 or less range. It won't be used all the time so weight and ruggedness isn't really an issue. I ran across this Sunpak tripod/monopod at my local Best Buy and was wondering if anyone has had any experience using it and if it would be recommended. The floor model that I played around with a bit seemed to be much more stable and easier to handle than the el-cheapo tripod that I had since high school and finally got rid of (for 3 bucks. YEAH!). Any opinions or is there something better that I should look at in the $100 price range?
|
| # ? Jul 7, 2009 18:35 |
|
|
I picked up one of these - http://amzn.com/B001D60LG8 It's not a bad tripod for the money.
|
| # ? Jul 7, 2009 18:42 |
|
|
mAlfunkti0n posted:I have been convinced, I knew you guys would have some good advice. The kit lens will probably not sell for much because everyone who wants a kit lens will probably have bought it with the kit! But people always need replacements or spares... Also - did you put the 100mm macro in the SA Mart thread? (the one I can't seem to find at this moment...)
|
| # ? Jul 7, 2009 22:16 |
|
|
for a tripod under $100, benro (aka gitzo knockoff) has a few good selections http://www.amazon.com/Benro-Mg-Alum...47021862&sr=1-6 larger shoulder bags - crumpler 7 million http://www.amazon.com/Benro-Mg-Alum...47021862&sr=1-6 I like the crumpler series because of its variety of colours, water resistant thick water resistant shell and that it does not look like a camera bag. I just tried it on a 2 week trip to the Banff national park and it was comfortable carrying a 50D, stand the 70-200 F4 IS vertically , a few more lenses and a flash. It was probably the nicer weather making things bearable  bad thing about the bag is that I wish there were more smaller zipper pockets to distribute and sort the smaller miscellaneous things instead of 1 big zipper pocket. quote:pelican case I saw on the lighting thread that someone was bringing a pelican case to stuff their gear and lighting stands. I was somewhat confused by the wide variety of selections in the website. Can someone please give me a few selections? The crumpler keystone looks nice and is comfortable to wear, but the size I got is a bit too tight to carry my 15.4 laptop and lenses together.
|
| # ? Jul 8, 2009 03:15 |
|
|
caberham posted:for a tripod under $100, benro (aka gitzo knockoff) has a few good selections can you recommend anywhere in HK that sells benro, etc?
|
| # ? Jul 8, 2009 03:25 |
|
|
Pelican cases are used for a lot more poo poo than just photo equipment so they come in pretty much any size you can think of. I have 4 of them for various things. Just figure out what equipment you want to put in one and then find an appropriate sized case, they come with this perforated foam that you just pluck out in the shape of your gear.
|
| # ? Jul 8, 2009 03:27 |
|
|
what's with the UV filters thing in the title? Any reason?
|
| # ? Jul 8, 2009 03:32 |
|
|
Gambl0r posted:The kit lens will probably not sell for much because everyone who wants a kit lens will probably have bought it with the kit! But people always need replacements or spares... Sorry, didn't see this until now. I have not put it in SA mart yet, I haven't taken a good picture yet (lightbox is being built). If you're interested in the lens let me know and I will throw a posting in real quick.
|
| # ? Jul 8, 2009 03:34 |
|
|
mackd717 posted:what's with the UV filters thing in the title? Any reason? It's in the OP. Basically they don't protect the lens like some people will lead you to believe. And in the case of one of my lenses that came with a UV filter, it threw off pictures of the moon (caused two moons to appear ..). Taking the UV filter off allowed me to shoot properly.
|
| # ? Jul 8, 2009 03:36 |
|
|
Someone should probably just put this in the OP.
|
| # ? Jul 8, 2009 03:47 |
|
|
Would the same apply to polarizing filters? I've been thinking about one for walking around out here.
|
| # ? Jul 8, 2009 04:02 |
|
|
So I've decided on a bag. The Domke F-2 is the lucky guy. I went to a camera store today to pick it up, but saw its little brother, the F-6. Gonna go to another camera shop tomorrow to get it. This bag just looks perfect - it can hold all my lenses, my XSi, and still have room for a shitload of other stuff - an external flash, extra batteries, etc, etc. And it doesn't scream "I HAVE THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS WORTH OF CAMERA EQUIPMENT" like some other bags. I like the fact that it's not over-padded and will conform to my body. Once I get it, I'll take pictures and post a review. It's a pretty famous bag, though, so I'm sure a lot of you have seen/used it before.
|
| # ? Jul 8, 2009 04:04 |
|
|
Martytoof posted:Would the same apply to polarizing filters? I've been thinking about one for walking around out here. The same applies to any cheaply-made filter, the difference with polarizing filters is that they actually serve a purpose. Get one of at least moderate quality, and you should be okay. You should see some of the ghosting I've got using shady eBay IR filters...
|
| # ? Jul 8, 2009 04:28 |
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:The same applies to any cheaply-made filter, the difference with polarizing filters is that they actually serve a purpose. Get one of at least moderate quality, and you should be okay. You should see some of the ghosting I've got using shady eBay IR filters... So even multi-coated filters are garbage? gently caress, I just ordered some so I wouldn't scratch my lenses. If I have to keep taking them off all the time, I'll probably not even bother using them.
|
| # ? Jul 8, 2009 04:34 |
|
|
I carry a 77mm filter that I can put on my lenses if it rains... so it's not a terrible idea to have some around, I suppose.
|
| # ? Jul 8, 2009 04:36 |
|
|
TsarAleksi posted:I carry a 77mm filter that I can put on my lenses if it rains... so it's not a terrible idea to have some around, I suppose. Wouldn't a hood be better for that too?
|
| # ? Jul 8, 2009 04:43 |
|
|
Shmoogy posted:Wouldn't a hood be better for that too? You need a filter to complete the weather sealing on a couple of Canon lenses, so it's important even if you have a hood on there.
|
| # ? Jul 8, 2009 04:44 |
|
|
TsarAleksi posted:You need a filter to complete the weather sealing on a couple of Canon lenses, so it's important even if you have a hood on there. Good to know. I asked this in the questions thread, but noone answered, so I guess I'll try my luck here, since it's related to camera gear anyway. --- Is it worth it to purchase a gray card for white balancing? Will it give me a significant improvement over the AWB (If it matters, I'm using a Canon XS) Also, I see in my manual: quote:
What write speed am I looking for on a card to allow non-stop JPEG shooting? Currently, after 8 the pictures start shooting slower, and at 11 I can't take any more until the buffer is clear. I'm looking at making a few GIFs of things, so it would be nice to be able to take unlimited shots. My current card is a Class 6, but it's a generic one and doesn't say the actual write speed. Would an Ultra II be able to, or am I looking at an Extreme III in order to shoot non-stop.
|
| # ? Jul 8, 2009 04:46 |
|
|
Shmoogy posted:Is it worth it to purchase a gray card for white balancing? Will it give me a significant improvement over the AWB (If it matters, I'm using a Canon XS) It'll almost certainly be better to set your WB off a gray card in post than it will be to trust that AWB did a good job. As far as buying a gray card, I haven't really found the need for one. I can often find something remotely neutral grey or darker white in my shots, and keying off that will usually get you in the ballbark as long as you're willing to add some manual tweaking. But before you invest in one, just see if you have something lying around your house that's gray. Chances are that unless you're doing a professional photo shoot you'll get close enough. I hot glued a cut out circle of a gray cardboard shoebox to my lenscap and that's gotten me where I needed to go 99% of the time. I know they're not expensive, but unless you're planning to go to the store and pick one up why bother paying for shipping when you can DIY.
|
| # ? Jul 8, 2009 04:56 |
|
|
brad industry posted:Pelican cases are used for a lot more poo poo than just photo equipment so they come in pretty much any size you can think of. I have 4 of them for various things. Just figure out what equipment you want to put in one and then find an appropriate sized case, they come with this perforated foam that you just pluck out in the shape of your gear. Fangs404 posted:I like the fact that it's not over-padded and will conform to my body. evil_bunnY fucked around with this message at Jul 8, 2009 around 08:43 |
| # ? Jul 8, 2009 08:40 |
|
|
it's kind of hard to trust you. 
|
| # ? Jul 8, 2009 10:06 |
|
|
mackd717 posted:it's kind of hard to trust you. 
|
| # ? Jul 8, 2009 10:19 |
|
|
Hello chaps. Currently the owner of a Canon 400d w/ Kit 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 and a Sigma DG 70-300mm 1:4-5.6, and I'm in a little bit of a dielemma. I absoultely hate the kit lens for obvious reasons but mainly due to the crap range on the focus wheel for manual focus due to how loose and abrupt it is. I played around with a Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM yesterday on my 400d and quite liked it, but it was £430. Now whilst that's a price I'm willing to pay, I'm considering migrating to a better camera. I've trialed both the D90 and D200 and liked them both. I've been thinking of either getting the D90 w/ kit lens or a second hand body only D200 and getting a couple different lenses for it. I take photographs of many things, from people, to closeup shots of things such as weapons, 1/18 model cars, aircraft at airshows (flying displays), and autosport. Am I better to get the 17-85mm from Canon (or a Sigma equivilant), or should I sell my 400d and take the plunge on a Nikon? One of the other things I did like about the Nikons was how solid they felt in the hand compared to my Canon due to my relatively large hands. Any help and advice would be fantastic
|
| # ? Jul 8, 2009 12:16 |
|
|
Falken posted:Hello chaps. You're comparing a 3 year old entry camera on one brand to a 3+ year old (semi-)pro model and a 6 month pro-sumer on another. Pick up a 40d/50d and see how those feel in your hands. The grass is always going to be greener... but at least compare apples to apples before you decide to switch systems. Admittedly the 17-55 3.5-5.6 (non-IS) kit lens is poo poo. However the 17-85 (which I own) is not much better optically. It's not going to give you a speed improvement or a lot of optical quality improvement. Look into the Tamron 17-50 2.8.... Oh! look! it's in the thread title now! According to calculations if you can get it at US prices it'll run you about 300£. SoundMonkey posted:Someone should probably just put this in the OP. Done! OP posted:Why no UV Filters? KennyG fucked around with this message at Jul 8, 2009 around 12:36 |
| # ? Jul 8, 2009 12:34 |
|
|
Even as a Nikon user, I'll point out you're not comparing like to like. The D90 is a bit of a step up from the 400D. You should compare it against whatever Canon body costs the same as the D90, not the 400D. Motorsport and airshow photography require expensive lenses to do it right. Canon have the cheapest expensive lenses. What's your budget? For the closeup shots, you could do worse than a Nikon with an AF-D 105mm f/2.8 lens. Get the AF-S 105mm f/2.8 VR if you want to spend a little more money. You could probably even use it for motorsport and airshow photography, depending on how close you get to the aircraft you want to take photos of. As for D90 vs D200... The D90 will win image quality. The D200 will win on usability, build quality and weather sealing. They will be equal in terms of autofocus. Other deciding factors include the D90's video mode, the fact that the D90 can take your existing SD cards, etc.
|
| # ? Jul 8, 2009 12:34 |
|
|
TokenBrit posted:
Fixed
|
| # ? Jul 8, 2009 12:39 |
|
|
spog posted:can you recommend anywhere in HK that sells benro, etc? Apliu Street in Sham Shui Po has a whole load of camera equipment stores, many of which sell Benro and other cheap tripods. The prices are pretty much the best in HK. One of the bigger and more trustworthy ones is Ying Kee, which is left of exit A2 of the MTR station I think.
|
| # ? Jul 8, 2009 13:17 |
|
|
Falken posted:Currently the owner of a Canon 400d w/ Kit 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 and a Sigma DG 70-300mm 1:4-5.6, and I'm in a little bit of a dielemma. If the kit lens is annoying you, well, that's why the Tamron's in the title. Same range, better optics, and faster (more sensitive). If you're set on switching, there's not much I can fault my D90 with.
|
| # ? Jul 8, 2009 13:54 |
|
|
Does anybody have advice about reflectors? I've got a couple weddings coming up and want to know which colours I should get and what size. I'd like one mostly to overcome some difficult lighting situations but also to remove harsh shadows on sunny days. For the most part it would be for bride and groom shots, and maybe a few other situations, so I don't think I need a really big one, but then again I don't know.
|
| # ? Jul 8, 2009 14:30 |
|
|
teamgod posted:Does anybody have advice about reflectors? I've got a couple weddings coming up and want to know which colours I should get and what size. I'd like one mostly to overcome some difficult lighting situations but also to remove harsh shadows on sunny days. For the most part it would be for bride and groom shots, and maybe a few other situations, so I don't think I need a really big one, but then again I don't know. White/silver is the most useful. silver for long through using the sun, white for reflecting with a flash. Square is more useful, but circular often folds up smaller, and having a decent one with you is better than having a perfect one at home.
|
| # ? Jul 8, 2009 14:34 |
|
|
teamgod posted:Does anybody have advice about reflectors? I've got a couple weddings coming up and want to know which colours I should get and what size. I'd like one mostly to overcome some difficult lighting situations but also to remove harsh shadows on sunny days. For the most part it would be for bride and groom shots, and maybe a few other situations, so I don't think I need a really big one, but then again I don't know. Silver's good for throwing light longer distances. White's nice and soft. Gold is a gimmick. Transparent white can come in handy for diffusing direct sunlight. If you're doing groups, bigger's probably going to be better.
|
| # ? Jul 8, 2009 14:38 |
|
|
dakana posted:Silver's good for throwing light longer distances. White's nice and soft. Gold is a gimmick. Transparent white can come in handy for diffusing direct sunlight. If you're doing groups, bigger's probably going to be better. Gold is generally used less often, maybe that's what you were getting at.
|
| # ? Jul 8, 2009 15:04 |
|
|
spog posted:can you recommend anywhere in HK that sells benro, etc? If you're in Bangkok, they're available there too. Pretty sure I've seen then in Pantip Plaza. I bought mine in The Mall Ngamwongwan.
|
| # ? Jul 8, 2009 15:04 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2013 09:06 |
|
|
Interrupting Moss posted:Gold is not a gimmick. Gold is great at warming up skin tones and, depending on intensity, the whole image. The exact quality of that gold reflector is going to be determined by the quality of your reflector, though. It has lots of used. Sorry -- yes, I meant that it's very special-purpose.
|
| # ? Jul 8, 2009 15:13 |
|
