vresor Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 Canon vs. Nikon is like Ford vs. Chevy or Nissan vs. Toyota. There are equal zealots on both sides of the fence. Today I shoot Nikon, but I've had both. I wish I could use Canon lenses on Nikon bodies. The whole manufacturer debate is far less important than technique, which is far less important that being there when the light is right. My 2 cents. Link to comment
05XRunner Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 Canon vs. Nikon is like Ford vs. Chevy or Nissan vs. Toyota. There are equal zealots on both sides of the fence. Today I shoot Nikon, but I've had both. I wish I could use Canon lenses on Nikon bodies. The whole manufacturer debate is far less important than technique, which is far less important that being there when the light is right. My 2 cents. You can use Nikon lenses on a Canon body if you like..you just wont have AF Link to comment
clownfish1124 Posted January 10, 2009 Author Share Posted January 10, 2009 hey everyone! how are these lenses: 18-55mm EF-5 zoom lens Canon 50mm EF 1.8 Lens Tamron 28-105 1: 4 - 5.6 AF Tamron Tele-Macro 70-300mm 1: 4 - 5.6 AF thanks! clownfish. Link to comment
latazyo Posted January 10, 2009 Share Posted January 10, 2009 cheap and slow except the 50 Link to comment
clownfish1124 Posted January 10, 2009 Author Share Posted January 10, 2009 the 50 is good? how good Link to comment
latazyo Posted January 10, 2009 Share Posted January 10, 2009 Ive never touched a canon lens in my life, but if its anything like my nikkor 50 1.8 then I'd say it'll probably be your favorite lens, especially out of that group my tank was already gone when I got the lens though, so I can't comment on its tank picture value, although I would predict it is quite useful for tank pics Link to comment
clownfish1124 Posted January 10, 2009 Author Share Posted January 10, 2009 cool thanks. have you tried any of the other lenses? Link to comment
latazyo Posted January 10, 2009 Share Posted January 10, 2009 IM assuming the 18-55 kit lens is similar to the 18-55 kit lens that I had the lens is ok and all, but nothing spectacular honestly I wouldn't buy any of those lenses, but we may very well have different goals in photography and we may shoot different things which requires different equipment just because some stranger on the internet wouldn't buy something doesn't mean you shouldn't but to answer your question, they are all low cost, slow lenses that will probably make aquarium photography difficult on the other hand they might be useful for stationary or slow moving objects photographed outdoors in high light (i.e. the zoo), but would not be useful for any kind of sports or cars or indoor photography without additional equipment Link to comment
clownfish1124 Posted January 10, 2009 Author Share Posted January 10, 2009 cool, thanks! i don't really plan on taking any fast moving pictures with these lenses, just zoas and stuff. if my phone can take ok pics i bet this will be a TON better. and i could always buy other lenses in the future. it is not like i am choosing to buy these lenses; they are being sold in a local bundle, and i think that having these lenses would be a good start to my adventure in photography. Link to comment
coralcor Posted January 10, 2009 Share Posted January 10, 2009 i say go nikon they seem like they are built better the spot where the lens and teh body meat are made or metal not hard plastic's. to me the plastic stuff looks like its just gona crack or snap. ive use a cannon point and shoot messed with a dslr but i say go nikon but its because its what ive always used if i always used cannon i would say cannon so go to a camera store that will let you try the cameras and find witch you like best and on the uv filter part i have one on my old lens because my dad tole me to i was like 8 and he diddnt want me to scrach the lens dont use em any more but your choice Link to comment
latazyo Posted January 10, 2009 Share Posted January 10, 2009 hey coralcor, low quality nikon lenses also have plastic at the connection the 18-55 and the 55-200 VR both have plastic connections the 50 1.8 has metal though I am assuming that nicer canon lenses have metal connections as well, but again, just speaking out of my ass Link to comment
clownfish1124 Posted January 10, 2009 Author Share Posted January 10, 2009 i looked into nikon, but the cam i am looking for now (canon rebel 300d) is only one step down from the rebel XT (the cam lalani uses). everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and you have gone the ashton kutcher way. Link to comment
latazyo Posted January 10, 2009 Share Posted January 10, 2009 thanks for changing the thread title Link to comment
clownfish1124 Posted January 10, 2009 Author Share Posted January 10, 2009 yup, shoulda changed it 3 pages ago Link to comment
reefman23 Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 Are you considering buying the original digital rebel that came out in 2003? Why not buy a refurb XTi with 18-55mm IS lens from adorama for $430 shipped? At least the XTi is only a year or so old. Jesse Link to comment
TheUnfocusedLove Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 I just got my first DSLR (passed down from my dad) and its the original 2003 Rebel. I love it and would recommend it to other beginning photographers. Link to comment
coralcor Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 hey coralcor, low quality nikon lenses also have plastic at the connection the 18-55 and the 55-200 VR both have plastic connections the 50 1.8 has metal though I am assuming that nicer canon lenses have metal connections as well, but again, just speaking out of my ass your right i just looked at the lens my d40 came with its plastic but the body has metal conection Link to comment
vresor Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 Canon, Nikon, whatever. At the top of the DSLR food chain it all comes down to the lens between the sensor and your subject. I couldn't agree more with Latazyo. Skip the cheapo kit lenses and 3rd party lenses. Spend your money on a 50/1.8 (which is plenty cheap in its own right) and a decent macro lens, especially if aquarium shots are among your priorities. Link to comment
clownfish1124 Posted January 11, 2009 Author Share Posted January 11, 2009 thanks for the replies! i think of it this way about the kit: cam: $220 50/1.8 lens: $80 everything else is free because it is 300 dollars for the whole kit. so what if it is bad. edit for price changes Link to comment
05XRunner Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 Skip the cheapo kit lenses and 3rd party lenses. Spend your money on a 50/1.8 (which is plenty cheap in its own right) and a decent macro lens, especially if aquarium shots are among your priorities. Nothing wrong at all with the kit lens to use when starting out. Then you say skip the 3rd party lenses and get a good macro..HMMM Lets see what are some GREAT macros Tokina 100, Sigma 105, Sigma 150, Tamron 90...HMMMMM they seem to be 3rd party..Dont give out bad advice Link to comment
clownfish1124 Posted January 11, 2009 Author Share Posted January 11, 2009 well, back to the drawing board. i decided not to get the 300d because it is old and if i save up some more, i can get a newer, better camera. Link to comment
latazyo Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 I feel like this is an episode of punkd Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.