canon 35mm camera or new lenses?

Discussion in 'Beyond the Basics' started by thebeginning, Jun 17, 2005.

  1. thebeginning

    thebeginning TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2005
    Messages:
    3,795
    Likes Received:
    29
    Location:
    Texas
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    I'm going to be taking a photography class where an all-manual camera is required. I have a nikon f3, which i love (i actually spent very little money on my lenses, and i'm having to pay for it. my photos are consistently soft, and I'm pretty darn sure it's not because i'm focusing wrong [​IMG] ). I'm saving up for a 20d and a couple lenses, so i'm wondering if after the class i should buy a nice autofocus (which i know is partly the lens and the camera), but nothing too pricey, probably something under $250 or $300, so probably not a professional camera, just a sturdy one. Do you think i should save up for that so i can use the lenses I buy for my 20d with it or do you think i should just sell my bad manual focus lenses and get 1 or 2 nice ones for my nikon?
     
  2. DocFrankenstein

    DocFrankenstein Clinically Insane?

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Messages:
    1,646
    Likes Received:
    6
    F3 is a very nice camera and I'd try to stay with it if at all possible.

    There are many reasons for this, mainly:
    1) For film shooting, F3 can do everything you need
    2) AF nikkor lenses are expensive and poorly made compared to all metal MF wonders. (even the +1K lenses)
    3) Consumer/cheap bodies don't focus accurately enough for me. My Drebel rarely nails exposure exactly where I want it using AF, and I can't MF successfully because:
    4) In consumer SLRs the viewfinder is DIM and SMALL and there's no focusing aids. It's also likely that it's a pentamirror and not pentaprism.

    And if you get the AF body, you'll have no decent AF lenses. 35-70ish POS kit lens is going to be soft and low contrast. AF primes cost around 200-400 bucks and decent AF zooms are 1000+

    But that's just me, and limitations like that may never bother you.

    I have shot with Drebel, Elan, Zenit and now got a MF canon A1 just because of the bright viewfinder.

    Cheers
     
  3. thebeginning

    thebeginning TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2005
    Messages:
    3,795
    Likes Received:
    29
    Location:
    Texas
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    yeah, i'd like to stay with the f3 if i can. I've noticed pictures taken by people that i know that arent into photography, they just have pictures for memories, etc. (which is photography, but not like...intentional photography. whatever. you know what i mean) and their pictures from like canon regel G2s are quite sharp and the colors are spot on, even with flash, and they have no idea what they are doing, and i'm pretty sure they're just using kit lenses. so that is one thing that has got me into wondering what i should do. If i can find lenses that can give me good contrast and sharpness, i'll just use those. Does anyone know of some good MF lenses for nikon? I've looked at the 85mm f2 quite a bit. I'd like something in the wide range (28mm or so, lower would be better, like 20-25, but those are much more expensive) and something in the light telephoto range (like 90mm or 135mm for portraits). I'm not really into that whole 50mm thing, whenever i use one i always find it is either not wide enough or too wide. the main reason i would buy one of those is for the 1.4 or 1.8 aperture.
     
  4. DocFrankenstein

    DocFrankenstein Clinically Insane?

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Messages:
    1,646
    Likes Received:
    6
    Don't compare Canon's G series to full frame cameras. On G series the frame size is really small, so it's easy to design a zoom lens which will cover it with good quality.

    On film frame, it's different. And you either need a 100 + dollar zoom with lots of glass or primes for good quality. And primes usually win anyways.

    I was shopping around for a camera and went again with canon instead of nikon. Nikon's glass may be better, but I can't justify 300+ dollars for an old manual focus prime. On the other hand, with canon, I got an A1, 50/1.8 and 28/2.8 for about 260 american. Now all I need is a short tele, and my system is pretty much complete... and I'll be able to focus more accurately than any consumer AF body and the sharpness will be there too.

    But that's just me, I'm sure there's a reason besides brand as to why noink glass is more expensive.
     
  5. thebeginning

    thebeginning TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2005
    Messages:
    3,795
    Likes Received:
    29
    Location:
    Texas
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    yeah, i would go look for a canon, but i really like my f3 and i think i'm gonna stick with nikon for my film shooting. what do you think about these lenses (for you nikon film users, like railman :)):

    http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=48556&item=7522955347&rd=1

    http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=48556&item=7524078364&rd=1 (this is not a nikkor lens, but i've read reviews that said it was just as good if not better than nikon's 2000 dollar 15mm.

    http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=48556&item=7523357919&rd=1

    http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=48556&item=7523922194&rd=1
     

Share This Page