lens advice
- Thread starter jham
- Start date
bigreen505
Expedition Leader
Yes.
that's what I thought originally. Apparently I was wrong.
DiploStrat
Expedition Leader
Steady up!
Nikon = VR "vibration reduction"
Canon = IS "image stabilization"
Sigma = OS "optical stabilizer"
All do the same thing and, as far as I know, all are completely internal to the lens as long as the body supplies power.
Stabilized lenses are are really nice, but:
-- Only really matters hand held, above 100mm. (If you can't hand hold below 100mm you need to practice.)
-- Does not stop action.
-- Ansel Adams never had a stabilized lens.
Seriously, great camera, good medium tele zoom, good advice on what to get next. (And no nasty crop factors to worry about.)
So, Velvia? Kodachrome? Other? So much to discuss, so little bandwidth!
Trevor,
Your picture intrigued me, so I set the loupe to 200% and started scrolling through my 18-200VR images. Got nothing that severe. I can find some CA (mostly purple) on one or two images taken against sunlit windows, but nothing like you show. What is most amazing at 200% is the amount of detail that shows up - camera serial numbers, people hiding in bushes, etc. Make no mistake, at any given length, Nikon (and Canon) makes a lens that is visibly better (I own two). If I know what I'm going to shoot, I grab a different lens, but if I don't know what is out there and I know that I can't change lenses (Think train ride, etc.) then the 18-200 is incredibly useful and amazingly good. 11x is simply a stupidly wide range. FWIW, I print 13x19 and can usually get about 150 ppi from 1/4 frame. (200mm simply wasn't enough for the gorilla and she wasn't going to let me get closer.)
All the best!
Nikon = VR "vibration reduction"
Canon = IS "image stabilization"
Sigma = OS "optical stabilizer"
All do the same thing and, as far as I know, all are completely internal to the lens as long as the body supplies power.
Stabilized lenses are are really nice, but:
-- Only really matters hand held, above 100mm. (If you can't hand hold below 100mm you need to practice.)
-- Does not stop action.
-- Ansel Adams never had a stabilized lens.
Seriously, great camera, good medium tele zoom, good advice on what to get next. (And no nasty crop factors to worry about.)
So, Velvia? Kodachrome? Other? So much to discuss, so little bandwidth!
Trevor,
Your picture intrigued me, so I set the loupe to 200% and started scrolling through my 18-200VR images. Got nothing that severe. I can find some CA (mostly purple) on one or two images taken against sunlit windows, but nothing like you show. What is most amazing at 200% is the amount of detail that shows up - camera serial numbers, people hiding in bushes, etc. Make no mistake, at any given length, Nikon (and Canon) makes a lens that is visibly better (I own two). If I know what I'm going to shoot, I grab a different lens, but if I don't know what is out there and I know that I can't change lenses (Think train ride, etc.) then the 18-200 is incredibly useful and amazingly good. 11x is simply a stupidly wide range. FWIW, I print 13x19 and can usually get about 150 ppi from 1/4 frame. (200mm simply wasn't enough for the gorilla and she wasn't going to let me get closer.)
All the best!
Last edited:
Could not have said it better myself. I've already started bidding on lenses on ebay, but I'll probably end up going amazon. Very excited to start using it!
DiploStrat
Expedition Leader
One serious thought.
I have not shot film in decades, so I don't know the answer to this.
-- Need to get advice from people shooting film on what to shoot: Slide/print and which stock/speed. After many experiments, I settled on Kodachrome 64, which probably dates me badly.
-- Next you need to figure out how to get it processed. Again, after many sad experiences - some of which you can see on my website - I settled on Kodak France or Kodak USA only. The low price labs weren't worth it. That may mean you have to carry mailers and think about access to post offices.
-- Final step, I would get the shots digitized as 16 bit TIFFS as soon as possible, ideally by the same lab. Slides attract dust and the sooner you get them digitized and the deeper the bit depth, the more you have to work with. Sadly, you will almost certainly need you images in digital form at some point - if only to post on ExPo.
Again, get a Canon guru to help you find a nice 28-80mm mid zoom and you are set. And if you saved money by buying a 35mm prime, I wouldn't argue with you at all.
Have a great trip!
I have not shot film in decades, so I don't know the answer to this.
-- Need to get advice from people shooting film on what to shoot: Slide/print and which stock/speed. After many experiments, I settled on Kodachrome 64, which probably dates me badly.
-- Next you need to figure out how to get it processed. Again, after many sad experiences - some of which you can see on my website - I settled on Kodak France or Kodak USA only. The low price labs weren't worth it. That may mean you have to carry mailers and think about access to post offices.
-- Final step, I would get the shots digitized as 16 bit TIFFS as soon as possible, ideally by the same lab. Slides attract dust and the sooner you get them digitized and the deeper the bit depth, the more you have to work with. Sadly, you will almost certainly need you images in digital form at some point - if only to post on ExPo.
Again, get a Canon guru to help you find a nice 28-80mm mid zoom and you are set. And if you saved money by buying a 35mm prime, I wouldn't argue with you at all.
Have a great trip!
bigreen505
Expedition Leader
It's been a while since I've shot film in any real way, but here is my take.
Slide:
Kodak E100G
Fuji Velvia 100
Fuji Velvia 50
Fuji Provia 100
Fuji Provia 400x
Fuji Astia
Horses for courses. Velvia is great for landscapes, horrible for people, very small dynamic range. I prefer E100G or Astia to Provia.
Print:
Kodak Ektar (great stuff)
Kodak 160 NC
Kodak 400 NC
Kodak 160 VC
Kodak 400 VC
Kodak Portra 800
Fuji Pro 160c (saturated)
Fuji Pro 160s (skin)
Fuji Pro 400H
Fuji Pro 800Z
Ask your lab for recommendations on Kodak or Fuji. Both are excellent, but the lab processing makes a big difference. Ektar is an excellent generic film and handles skin tones well with nice, saturated colors, all the rest are very specialized.
B&W - not much has changed in the last 15 years.
Fuji Acros
Anything Ilford
Kodak Tmax
If I was going off to shoot who knows what in lighting that I can't control, I would want Ektar, E100G or Astia. You can always add saturation digitally. If you are trying to learn photography stick with slide film. With negative film there is a lot of slosh in the system and if pictures don't come out the way you intended it is hard to tell if it was you, the film or the processing.
There are some great labs in Colorado, and all work with mail order/out of state clients: Photocraft is my favorite, but also most expensive. Denver Digital Imaging is good for 120 or 4x5 slide film, but they use cardboard slide mounts, which I hate. Qube Visual is also great - call and ask for Brent Doerzman. Qube will scan film to CD for not much and they give you 18 mb tiffs, which is enough for 8x10.
Nationally, try A&I in California.
-- Final step, I would get the shots digitized as 16 bit TIFFS as soon as possible, ideally by the same lab. Slides attract dust and the sooner you get them digitized and the deeper the bit depth, the more you have to work with. Sadly, you will almost certainly need you images in digital form at some point - if only to post on ExPo.
I wouldn't worry too much about 16 bit. A cheap lab scan is going to be small and srgb. You can pick up a film scanner for not much. The Nikon 5000 and Minolta are my favorites. I will probably be selling my Minolta soon.
Edit: I think my Minlota is a 5400 Scan Elite
Last edited:
DiploStrat
Expedition Leader
Another Vote for Nikon Scanners
I use a Nikon Coolscan VED with Vuescan.
I had a Minolta ScanDual IV which was very nice and had a lovely four slide carrier. Sadly, however, my slides have all been in the tropics for decades and have suffered terribly from mildew and dirt. Infrared cleaning is a must.
Your slides will be new and clean and you might be able to get a real deal on a used ScanDual. It is very nice to be able to do your own scans. (Just learn from my experience and spring for some form of archival box for your original slides!)
I use a Nikon Coolscan VED with Vuescan.
I had a Minolta ScanDual IV which was very nice and had a lovely four slide carrier. Sadly, however, my slides have all been in the tropics for decades and have suffered terribly from mildew and dirt. Infrared cleaning is a must.
Your slides will be new and clean and you might be able to get a real deal on a used ScanDual. It is very nice to be able to do your own scans. (Just learn from my experience and spring for some form of archival box for your original slides!)
so let me get this straight...
go with Etkar, because I'll be shooting mostly portraits and landscapes in who knows what kind of lighting. I need a good, all-around film. I guess the stuff at the checkout counter at walmart is out of the question?
Next, forget bringing it back to CVS for prints, right? Send it off to have them processed, and I'll get much better pictures. And while I'm at it, have them make them digital in the highest quality they can so I can add them to my website, edit them on a computer, etc.
Am I on?
go with Etkar, because I'll be shooting mostly portraits and landscapes in who knows what kind of lighting. I need a good, all-around film. I guess the stuff at the checkout counter at walmart is out of the question?
Next, forget bringing it back to CVS for prints, right? Send it off to have them processed, and I'll get much better pictures. And while I'm at it, have them make them digital in the highest quality they can so I can add them to my website, edit them on a computer, etc.
Am I on?
bigreen505
Expedition Leader
Pretty much. It is all about levels of quality. Get in touch with your local ASMP and APA chapters and see what they say.
DiploStrat
Expedition Leader
Once-in-a-lifetime-trip?
Cheap film and processing are WAY too expensive.
Cheap film and processing are WAY too expensive.
Photog
Explorer
The EOS-1 is a great film camera. It is Canon's Professional 35mm film camera.
Make sure you take enough spare batteries, as there may be a limited supply, depending on your destination in Africa.
Between now and when you leave, practice with a few rolls of slide film. Take a few notes with each frame (camera settings, scene brightness, etc). Then when you get your photos back from the lab, you can compare the results to your notes. Try using Program "P" mode, Manual "M" mode, etc. Learn to use the light meter in the camera. This will all be a huge help, when you can't look at the digital screen to verify the shot.
Then, when you go to Africa, you may want to use a high quality print film. Use the techniques you learned during practice. If an image is a little under or over exposed, it can still be processed into a good print. You can still get digital scans with no problem.
Edit: I just read the first post again. You were asking about lenses. Sorry for the bunny trail.
Make sure you take enough spare batteries, as there may be a limited supply, depending on your destination in Africa.
Between now and when you leave, practice with a few rolls of slide film. Take a few notes with each frame (camera settings, scene brightness, etc). Then when you get your photos back from the lab, you can compare the results to your notes. Try using Program "P" mode, Manual "M" mode, etc. Learn to use the light meter in the camera. This will all be a huge help, when you can't look at the digital screen to verify the shot.
Then, when you go to Africa, you may want to use a high quality print film. Use the techniques you learned during practice. If an image is a little under or over exposed, it can still be processed into a good print. You can still get digital scans with no problem.
Edit: I just read the first post again. You were asking about lenses. Sorry for the bunny trail.
Last edited:
off-roader
Expedition Leader
I've also had good success buying used lenses from KEHPhoto.com
For a decent walk around lens I like the Tamron 28-105mm f/2.8 although it's not a light lens it offers a fast lens with a decently wide ranging focal length. Any wider than that and I use my Tokina 12-24mm f/4.
Alternatively you might also consider a Tamron 28-70mm f/2.8 which would be an exact match for your existing focal length range.
HTH.
alright, here's a few shots from the first roll. we're in nashville doing some recording before the kids fly home, and we took them swimming outside at the hotel today. nice cloudy day. Kodak Max 400, developed by walgreens. Yeah yeah....i need practice before I use the big stuff. What do I need to work on? Does the temperature look a bit cool to you? Underexposed, maybe?
Attachments
Photog
Explorer
JHAM,
It will be difficult to determine exposure issues, as you are using print film, having a CD burned, then posting the files across the internet. Many steps where exposure & color can be changed.
Look on the back of the prints. Hopefully there will be a string of numbers and maybe letters. This is a listing of the adjustments the printer made to the data scanned from the negative. If you cand decifer the meaning of the info, ask Walgreens to explain it. All zeros, means they didn't make any corrections.
On my computer, the images look a little bright (over exposed). To check the color temp, look at the reflections off the wet skin. You said the sky was overcast; that means no blue in the sky. If the images were too cool, the reflections on the wet skin would be blue tinted. They look neutral on my computer.
Slide film is not normally corrected in the lab, therefore slide film is normally used when learning, to show exactly what went wrong with the exposure, etc.
It will be difficult to determine exposure issues, as you are using print film, having a CD burned, then posting the files across the internet. Many steps where exposure & color can be changed.
Look on the back of the prints. Hopefully there will be a string of numbers and maybe letters. This is a listing of the adjustments the printer made to the data scanned from the negative. If you cand decifer the meaning of the info, ask Walgreens to explain it. All zeros, means they didn't make any corrections.
On my computer, the images look a little bright (over exposed). To check the color temp, look at the reflections off the wet skin. You said the sky was overcast; that means no blue in the sky. If the images were too cool, the reflections on the wet skin would be blue tinted. They look neutral on my computer.
Slide film is not normally corrected in the lab, therefore slide film is normally used when learning, to show exactly what went wrong with the exposure, etc.