Digital/optical Zoom

[markandhisfish]

if a dslr body doesnt have this can it be made up for by the lens?

 

[chrisbassist]

Put simply, the only zoom the body could possibly have is digital. Any optical zoom is always the lens.

Add to that digital zoom is basically cropping your photo, you don't want it because most image editing software will do a much better job. So you want optical. And the only place you'll find that is in the lens

that's what the 18-55mm numbers are, how much zoom the lens has.

 

[markandhisfish]

ahh that makes sense , could you do me a favour look at this and tell me what you think please?

ebay item number 260577348604

 

[kaivalagi]

To be honest though if you're going to be taking shots of your fish in the long term with some type of macro capable lens then zoom is more of less irrelevant for that alone. It does depend on whether you want a lens to do lots of things or a specific thing though...

If you decide to buy a macro longer term I'd recommend a prime lens (fixed, no zoom) of 100mm or thereabouts with low f-stop and close focal abilities, the general quality of any close up images will be fantastic (if done right which I am still working on! ). Portraits are great too. But it's down to whether you want zoom for other purposes too...

Just thought I'd throw that in there, as I am not sure what your intentions might be and figured it might be relevant to you?

Chris will likely give you good sound reasoning for taking the alternative approach and getting a nice zoom like he has (70-300mm is it Chris?) which is good at lots of things but not very very good at macro...

Cheers

edit: missed your last post, that's a good camera to start you off with, I assume £200 is a good deal? I haven't looked at what the going rate is...
One other thing, check with the buyer as to whether the lens has image stabilisation, it is a very useful feature, especially without a tripod...

 

[chrisbassist]

Looks good. Worth maybe 300ish the lens will be a similar zoom range to most compacts.

But since it's eBay you'll want to try and get it less than 250

 

[chrisbassist]

I think both routes have sound reasoning. I don't do much macro, I needed a lens which would let me take a photo of a guitarist, filling the frame from a balcony or sound booth. Macro was a lower priority. Still is. But I have a lens which can do it when I want it. So for me it's about a lens being flexible. Otherwise I'd have 25 different lenses and be swapping constantly instead of just taking the shot.

 

[markandhisfish]

cheers guys it going to be primarily for fish / tank shots , but i dont mind getting a macro lens at a later date

 

[kaivalagi]

I think both routes have sound reasoning. I don't do much macro, I needed a lens which would let me take a photo of a guitarist, filling the frame from a balcony or sound booth. Macro was a lower priority. Still is. But I have a lens which can do it when I want it. So for me it's about a lens being flexible. Otherwise I'd have 25 different lenses and be swapping constantly instead of just taking the shot.

Yep, I have 4 lens right now, I may want a wide angle next but that'll be it, so 5 in total for me....but I can't carry them all around with me so that's the down side...flexibility versus specialist



Mark, I found a good review of the kit lens that comes with the 400d here: http/www.bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/18-55.html

This excerpt is from the conclusion:

UPDATE 2008: The original EF-S 18-55/3.5-5.6 lens isn't widely available new now (though you may find one used at a bargain price). Even the EF-S 18-55/3.5-5.6 USM isn't around much. The current and widely available version now has Image Stabilization (IS) and the cost is a little higher. However the IS is very useful indeed and even if you have the choice of non-IS or IS, I'd still recommend the IS version. I have tested it and found the IS to be very effective and the image quality at least as good as the non-IS version.



So NO image stabilisation, your call...

 

[chrisbassist]

with tank shots i wouldn't worry too much about it, you'll have the time to take more shots ifyou're not happy. it'll come into its own when you need to capture the moment right when it happens and won't have a second chance.

i personally don't have any image stabilisation on any of my lenses and i'm not too bothered.

I only have 2 lenses atm, a 18-55mm and a 70-300mm and my case (hardcase) currently has my nikon body, my fuji bridge cam, accessories like charger for the nikon, spare memory cards and a few filters (mostly going unused) and my 2 lenses. it still has space for another lens which i think will be a nice ultra-wide angle, and since it'll be ultra-wide it'll prob be a prime. once i have that I'll see what space is left for other bits.

having said that, when i go out for the day, i'll take the case, and then decide when i get there what i'm using. for example, when i went to the cotswold wildlife park i got there, put the 70-300mm lens on, closed up the case and left it in the car. with bands i'd usually leave the case by the sound desk, starting with my 70-300mm, and if for any reason i needed to be in a certain place to get a good pic of a performer and that was too long, i'd go and change lens for the shot.

i usually stick with the 70-300mm because it has a nice range, good zoom, and a built in hood to stop lens flares and stuff.

now if i was a studio photographer, my set-up would be completely different, probably opting for a slightly wider lens, maybe a prime.


so i say, get what ou can now, see what you like using, see if you're wanting to zoom in more, or if you need to be able to focus closer or whatever, and get a lens based on your experience.

 

[kaivalagi]

so i say, get what ou can now, see what you like using, see if you're wanting to zoom in more, or if you need to be able to focus closer or whatever, and get a lens based on your experience.

Good call, for that price you're getting the lens for nothing anyway really

All my lenses have IS except for the macro...which I put onto a tripod for the fish, as I need to use a fairly low shutter speed to get the light levels I want.

Like you say personal preference from experience is what dictates above everything else, I like the IS which I can turn on/off as desired

 

[chrisbassist]

yep, even if the 2 of us agree on a set-up thats perfect for taking fish pics and general other snaps, then you may not get on with it and want something different.

i don't have a tripod atm, used to have a cheap one but for all it was doing i could have balanced it on a table or ledge, wanting to get a half decent manfrotto now...

 

[kaivalagi]

yep, even if the 2 of us agree on a set-up thats perfect for taking fish pics and general other snaps, then you may not get on with it and want something different.

i don't have a tripod atm, used to have a cheap one but for all it was doing i could have balanced it on a table or ledge, wanting to get a half decent manfrotto now...

Right on, another good option before buying an expensive lens is to rent it out for a couple of days first and get a feel for it...


I went a bought non brand tripod (with tilt/pan) and monopod (ball joint), the make was "red snapper", all in for about £110 incl postage I think it was. They came highly recommended from various photography forums and are a lot cheaper than the highly rated alternatives such as Manfrottos etc. You can see them here: http/www.aldine.co...pper/index.html. They even do carbon fibre ones if you want that...I just went for the standard ones and am very impressed, they are nice and sturdy...but I may buy a brand name head at some point as it will make a difference i am sure.

 

[markandhisfish]

Looks good. Worth maybe 300ish the lens will be a similar zoom range to most compacts.

But since it's eBay you'll want to try and get it less than 250

im not going any higher than 200 tho as i dont want to eat into the tank budget . hiring a macro lens to get a feel for it is an excellent idea , i didnt realise you could do that .

in hindsight i may go a little higher than 200 , i can always get 5 discus instead of 6 i guess

 

[chrisbassist]

there will be other deals though, and you may be lucky and find something better later. but if you get it at 200 then fantastic.

i would imagine 200 would be a sensible price to pay for a Nikon D40 kit. for some reason canon are a little bit more pricey. so all is not lost. I have a D40 and even though i want to upgrade and get a canon, at the lower level it won't make much difference. having said that, sticking with one brand can be better so you can still use all your lenses with your new cam. but i'm not worried there since i'll still keep the d40 and it'll prob end up being my wifes.

then again,theres nothing wrong with Nikon at all.

 

[markandhisfish]

im watching a 350d too just in case