|
bortoletto
Apr 9, 2008, 4:48 PM
Post #1 of 12
(3798 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2005
Posts: 16
|
Hi All,
I´ve already bought a new cam based in a wish to improve my shots in terms of quality.
The main point to decide which cam could be suitable for the job is the size and consequently the weight. D40 with 18-55 mm is the result.
I´ve been climbed for several years only carrying poinshot models. My question is:
Which lens are better to take photos in a multpitch route?
I don´t know nothing regarding lens and other technical SLR tips. What is the next step?
tnx in a advance
Bortoletto
|
|
|
|
|
la_rouche
Apr 9, 2008, 6:12 PM
Post #2 of 12
(3770 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 3, 2008
Posts: 24
|
I wouldn't buy anything until you know how to use the camera's manual, aperture, and shutter modes inside and out. If you don't, it'll just be a waste of money, as buying new lenses and bodies won't make a difference if your picture quality if you can't use the camera correctly. If I were you and I was going to spend some money on camera gear, I'd invest in a few really decent lenses - something REALLY wide and a nice 300mm with vibration reduction, if possible. It'll set you back a bundle, but if you like Nikon, you can use them later when you upgrade your camera body to something nicer, like a D80 or D200.
|
|
|
|
|
elnero
Apr 9, 2008, 6:39 PM
Post #3 of 12
(3758 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 1, 2006
Posts: 191
|
you really really don't want a 300mm shake reduction lense for multipitch. A nice lense I'm sure, but definitely not a multipitch lense. I'm not a nikon user, so I can't give you specific lenses, but, here's my two cents.
you want small and light for multipitch, good call on the d40, its both of those things. In all honesty, the kit lense is probably the best bet for multipitch as it's also small and light, and a crucial third point- cheep. I've got a couple of top tier lense that I bring to the crag if I'm just shooting, and I use them around town when I'm taking pictures. When climbing multipitch though, a lot of things get bounced and banged, and I don't want my $900 hunk of glass to get hurt. I bought a used lense for cheap and I use that or the kit lense that came with my camera.
Other than that, for climbing, I think wider is usually good. It lets you get more of the views, and more often than not you're close to your climbing partner and a wide angle will let you fit your buddy and the view into the shot. I'd say something in the range of 16-30mm ish, and then maybe something up near 50mm for a bit more reach.. like the kit! :)
If you want even smaller, I'd look at some cheap used primes. in the 24mm range. Not sure how the nikon used market is though.
wow that was long.. maybe more like my 4 cents.
|
|
|
|
|
la_rouche
Apr 9, 2008, 6:51 PM
Post #4 of 12
(3751 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 3, 2008
Posts: 24
|
elnero wrote: you really really don't want a 300mm shake reduction lense for multipitch. A nice lense I'm sure, but definitely not a multipitch lense. I'm not a nikon user, so I can't give you specific lenses, but, here's my two cents.
Oops. I should have been more clear. I was recommending the big guns for shooting stuff from the ground. elnero's right, you wouldn't want to be dragging a monster like that up with you. It's a good suggestion to go with some prime lenses.
|
|
|
|
|
bortoletto
Apr 10, 2008, 11:33 AM
Post #5 of 12
(3673 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2005
Posts: 16
|
Hi guys,
I really appreciated your comments. I´m confident about body can now. Regarding lenses...wow, lots of things to learn. After reading your opnions I started to search more info about wikipedia and so...my god...lost of interesting info to handle.
Well, my strategy is first to find a good technical book to learning more about lenses (if you have some reference it´ll be great).
In the same time I´ll get your advice about buy a used lense (those small) for the war.
I´m very anxious to produce lost of pics and check them to see how my maturity campaign is going.
thank you very much
Andre Bortoletto
|
|
|
|
|
AlexCV
Apr 10, 2008, 2:38 PM
Post #6 of 12
(3643 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 25, 2008
Posts: 283
|
elnero wrote: If you want even smaller, I'd look at some cheap used primes. in the 24mm range. Not sure how the nikon used market is though.
The 24mm isn't that wide on a D40. The AF version is about 350-400$. The manual version can still be found and sometime cheaply on the used market and while it's a great lens and faster (f/2.0) not even the light meter will work on the D40 with that lens mounted.
A better bet is a mid-priced 18-35 to 18-55 zoom lens. A step up from the price point zoom lens. Maybe a Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 which is about 550$ here. Or the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 which goes for 525$.
On further thoughts, get a UV filter for your lens(es), they're cheap (under 20$ usually) and they're a lot less expensive to replace if they get scratched / broken by falling bits. The UV filtration part is sort of the bonus, the lens protection is the main deal. Getting a front-element replaced is quite expensive.
(This post was edited by AlexCV on Apr 10, 2008, 7:07 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
bortoletto
Apr 10, 2008, 7:30 PM
Post #7 of 12
(3610 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2005
Posts: 16
|
This makes sense at all.
Regarding UV filter, I´ve got one. How about a polarized one? Is it worth for the job?
tnx in advance
Andre Bortoletto
|
|
|
|
|
maldaly
Apr 10, 2008, 8:42 PM
Post #8 of 12
(3593 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2002
Posts: 1208
|
Hey bordoletto, good choice on that camera. You'll be amazed at the sharpness, color and contrast of the 18-55 lens that came with it. Don't rush to buy anything else yet. Go to http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d40/users-guide/index.htm for a great plain-English (sorry if it's not your 1st language but he does have some translations up on the site) user manual. He'll tell you how to set the background menu items for the best colors and contrast.
All that said, it's really, really hard to get good shots while you're climbing. The stuff you see in the mags is almost always taken by a third party who has set up the shot, has anticipated the best light and has a pile of lenses and lighting options to choose from.
Good luck and post up when you've got something you're proud of.
Mal
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
Apr 11, 2008, 5:30 AM
Post #9 of 12
(3543 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
I'd opt for a Tokina 12-24 f/4, and a fast 24, 28 or 35mm prime. The Tokina is a really solid lens, well built (like a tank), and half the price of the nikon. Optically it scores nearly as well, and in some areas actually better.
This should cover your on route shots pretty well.
I think Ken Rockwell is an idiot, but like everyone else I do have a look at his musings when considering things. I haven't really found his nonsense to be wrong, he just seems a bit melodramatic and tends to use his imagination and literary license to the extreme. But his site can be useful in the grand scheme of making a final decision on where to blow a wad of your hard earned cash.
I agree with Malcom though, don't necessarily rush to buy anything. And if you WANT something ASAP. I'd opt for a faster prime. A 24mm, 28, 35mm f/2 would be a good lens FL to look at, those come pretty close to the old 50mm f/2 standard lens on film cameras. Actually 28mm is true "standard" with a 43mm effective FL, while 24mm gives you closer to the 35mm equiv on a film camera (again a pretty standard FL on film).
|
|
|
|
|
bortoletto
Apr 11, 2008, 3:16 PM
Post #10 of 12
(3495 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2005
Posts: 16
|
Hi Maldaly,
I checked the web site and it seens pretty useful for first steps.
Thank you for the help
Andre Bortoletto
|
|
|
|
|
maldaly
Apr 11, 2008, 3:25 PM
Post #11 of 12
(3492 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2002
Posts: 1208
|
Ken Rockwell seems to elicit strong feeling either way. The two sides are pretty well divided along the lines of RAW vs JPEG. RAW shooters think Ken is an idiot, JPEG shooters like him.
Ha Ha!
What I like about KR is his great advice on how to manipulate your camera to make great photos. While the technical reviews in dpreview.com are unsurpassed, I find most of the information hair-splittingly irrelevant to the point of it being useless to my everyday shooting.
The articles I find on Ken's site help me make better photos. Period.
Mal
|
|
|
|
|
elnero
Apr 11, 2008, 10:23 PM
Post #12 of 12
(3456 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 1, 2006
Posts: 191
|
pico23 wrote: ...I think Ken Rockwell is an idiot...
10-4
As long as you keep in mind that that it's only his way of doing something, you won't be too bad off. Read up from a couple different websites and you'll get more of the full story on photography.
|
|
|
|
|
|
