Nikon Vs. Canon

[Dizzy1]

Now, what about a nice wide angle lens for landscape and some dramatic cityscapes? Thinking around the 18-20mm range.


Thanks to everyone in this thread for all your help and input, it is very much appreciated :)

[JLives]

I have this one for wide angle http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/sig ... _4-5p6_n15 It is crisp and clear. I mostly used it for real estate photography but have done some landscapes and other work with it as well. I'm not good with describing them in a technical way but I know I love it and it always captures the shot I have in my head that I'm trying to get.

[Jlabute]

One thing I learned about inexpensive prime lenses, is that although they may appear to give excellent images under normal photographic conditions, spherical aberrations maybe a lot more apparent in astrophotography.

[JLives]

One thing I learned about inexpensive prime lenses, is that although they may appear to give excellent images under normal photographic conditions, spherical aberrations maybe a lot more apparent in astrophotography.

Astrophotography is a whole new ballgame. My father in law is pretty into it. I'm slowly learning. He has some serious drool worthy equipment.

[kgcayenne]

I too am curious... I just go to bed way too early.

[JLives]

I too am curious... I just go to bed way too early.

Just get up earlier. =)

[Dizzy1]

I have this one for wide angle http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/sig ... _4-5p6_n15 It is crisp and clear. I mostly used it for real estate photography but have done some landscapes and other work with it as well. I'm not good with describing them in a technical way but I know I love it and it always captures the shot I have in my head that I'm trying to get.

I was actually just looking at that one on the L&S website - was going to take a peek on dpreview tomorrow, but I too seriously need to get to bed LOL!

One thing I learned about inexpensive prime lenses, is that although they may appear to give excellent images under normal photographic conditions, spherical aberrations maybe a lot more apparent in astrophotography.

One lens at a time, one lens at a time ;) I'd love to give astrophotography a try - eventually :) But what would be a good beginner lens for it?

[Jlabute]

Any good quality lens is fine and will work. Even a $100 50mm 1.8 is ok and will give mostly good results towards the centre. The better the lens, the more $ and better/more aspherical elements and higher index glass and better results out to the edge of the field of view. The faster the lens the shorter the exposure. On a sturdy tripod and high ISO you can get away with about a 5 second exposure without much star trails. Once you start to capture what the eye can't see it gets a little addictive. Did you know the andromeda Galaxy is actually twice Of the moon in the sky? It is too faint to see though. You can make it appear with long exposures. You'll start to see fuzzy little blobs instead of pin point stars. You can stack multiple exposures with software, or take longer exposures... Say 10 minutes for example... But, you'll need an equatorial mount to follow the motion of the sky. There are some small mounts just for cameras for those without telescope mounts. Worth experimenting on. Years ago my son and I were together on a moonless night taking sky shots up behind black mountain... A fox was a few feet behind watching us. Got a fox picture that night.

[Dizzy1]

Awesome ... I will have to try that one of these days :)

[Jlabute]

Awesome ... I will have to try that one of these days :)

Take a beer and a sturdy mount and remote to trigger the shutter... Any fast lens and boom... You'll have fun :-) you don't want to inadvertently shake the camera by touching it... So a remote is nice. A moonless night is best. I used to take my telescope up near Brenda mines. If you can see the Milky Way ... It is likely good conditions :-)

[Retrosnap]

Now, what about a nice wide angle lens for landscape and some dramatic cityscapes? Thinking around the 18-20mm range.


Thanks to everyone in this thread for all your help and input, it is very much appreciated :)

Depending on what you want in your landscape, you don't want to go any wider than this. The wider the field of view, the background will look much flatter and farther away than it is. I have the SIgma 10-20 mentioned earlier in this thread, and at 10mm a mountain range won't look anything like what you see through your eyes.

With a tripod, a panoramic head, like the Panosaur (http://gregwired.com/pano/Pano.htm), and some stitching software (Microsoft ICE is a great freeware option), you can produce very good panoramas using a long lens (35mm, 50mm and more), and you won't lose the sense of dimension that you lose with a wide lens. The longer then lens, however, the more you have to rely on hyperfocal distance, since you won't have the extreme depth of field you get with a wide lens.

[Dizzy1]

Just an update ...

I'm quite impressed overall with the D3300, the colours and dynamic range are brilliant, not as dull as my previous Canon Rebel XT was. Ease of use is fantastic, I've gotten a good handle on the controls, which of course is only a matter of time with any camera. Not to keen on having to go in the menu to switch between focus modes though, so that'll be something to look into next time around (which I'll get into in a bit).

The 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 kit lens is so-so, I actually find the autofocus quite loud on that lens which is kind of annoying. The 35mm f1.8 is a great lens for the $200 I paid for it, depth of field is great as is the low light capability. Of course, with the crop factor, turning it essentially into a 50mm, its not the greatest for street photography, so that's something that'll be looked into shortly. Still, its a fun lens to have - I took it as my only lens down to Vegas the other week just to play around with and the majority of the shots turned out great, only need a bit of cropping and levelling here and there. Think I'll give it a whirl in Mexico and back in Vegas next month and see how it fairs and go from there. Might look at getting the 20mm f/1.8G ED AF-S lens depending on any deals for Boxing Day.

Having been doing a bit of looking around online, I'm thinking of adding a D7200 sometime in the next year and start a nice collection of *bleep* lenses. Something about those *bleep* lenses really appeal to me and think it would be kinda need to have a collection going. Guess we'll just have to wait and see ;)

[Dizzy1]

Also, I've been watching a lot of the Mike Browne tutorial videos on YouTube, by far the best tutorials I've seen yet. He's just got a way of explaining things, even things one already understands and really brings it to light - I highly recommend them.

[Dizzy1]

I have this one for wide angle http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/sig ... _4-5p6_n15 It is crisp and clear. I mostly used it for real estate photography but have done some landscapes and other work with it as well. I'm not good with describing them in a technical way but I know I love it and it always captures the shot I have in my head that I'm trying to get.

Picked up that one last month - great lens - heavy too LOL!

[kgcayenne]

Can someone please go buy this one so I don't.

Thanks.

http://classifieds.castanet.net/details ... s/2583237/