A noticeable difference?

[KmH]

RTFM = Read The F**king Manual

And I always thought it meant - Read The Furnished Manual.

 

[Nikon_Josh]

RTFM---I certainly intend to spend a good deal of time reading the manual of a camera I've never used before to learn all I can about it. Then I will take a lot of test shots and learn even more. Your saying KickStart DSLR=RTFM. I don't see how reading the manual can compare to a good class/workshop with a compitent teacher? The manual will tell you all about the camera. A class will teach you about photography, not to mention good feedback and new perspectives from other students. There is a difference. The best camera in the world in the wrong hands is still just a expensive paperweight.

I also don't see how reading the manual answers the original question: Is consumer grade glass a lateral or improvement to the images taken with the FZ100?

If I'm understanding correct, NikonJosh is saying that with a d5100 a Tonika 11-16, 35mm 1.8 prime, and a 55-200 or 70-300 will round out a good kit? These three in addition to the standard 18-55 that ships with the camera? I have a good tripod already, so add a remote shutter and I'd be happy as a clam?

Yes Marc, that would be a great set up if you can stretch to it! Forget the 18-55 if you get the 35 1.8 though, I don't think you will need it. The 11-16, 35 1.8 and 70-300 will make a great kit for you I'm sure. All three have one thing in common, great value for money!

Just to make sure though, you are aware of the effect of the DX crop factor on lenses?

 

[fjrabon]

RTFM---I certainly intend to spend a good deal of time reading the manual of a camera I've never used before to learn all I can about it. Then I will take a lot of test shots and learn even more. Your saying KickStart DSLR=RTFM. I don't see how reading the manual can compare to a good class/workshop with a compitent teacher? The manual will tell you all about the camera. A class will teach you about photography, not to mention good feedback and new perspectives from other students. There is a difference. The best camera in the world in the wrong hands is still just a expensive paperweight.

I also don't see how reading the manual answers the original question: Is consumer grade glass a lateral or improvement to the images taken with the FZ100?

If I'm understanding correct, NikonJosh is saying that with a d5100 a Tonika 11-16, 35mm 1.8 prime, and a 55-200 or 70-300 will round out a good kit? These three in addition to the standard 18-55 that ships with the camera? I have a good tripod already, so add a remote shutter and I'd be happy as a clam?

1) Most of those beginner classes, the problem isn't the teacher it's the other 'students' The class can't get much past 'here is how you change your aperture' because most of the people taking it aren't ready for anything past that. Most people who take those beginner classes are viewing it as a substitute for reading an intro book. You'll probably get a lot more out of Dennis Thomas' D5100 'field manual' than you will that intro class.

2) The kit lens that comes with your D5100 will be leaps and bounds better than the FZ100. Whether that shows up in your pictures mostly depends on you. The sharpness, low light ability and lack of distortion will all be substantially improved. That's not even taking into account how much better the D5100's sensor is.

3) Yeah, that's basically the setup Ken Rockwell recommends. Wide angle- 35mm prime - mid range zoom (kit lens) - Telephoto zoom. That's what I have (or more accurately will have, after I pick up my 10-24 Nikon Wide angle on monday). I probably use my 35mm 90% of the time, but I almost never use the telephoto. THe midrange zoom is nice for like birthdays or just walking down an unfamiliar area (though I actually use the 35mm prime in those situations most of the time).

 

[fjrabon]

Yes Marc, that would be a great set up if you can stretch to it! Forget the 18-55 if you get the 35 1.8 though, I don't think you will need it. The 11-16, 35 1.8 and 70-300 will make a great kit for you I'm sure. All three have one thing in common, great value for money!

Just to make sure though, you are aware of the effect of the DX crop factor on lenses?

eh, I think with as cheap as the 18-55 VR is, it's a nice one to have. THere are a few situations where it's really come in handy (limited range of movement, needing a range of focal lengths). THough, I will agree, that in 90% of the situations I'd use the 18-55 I just use the 35mm prime anyway. It's certainly not a lens you need but for as good of a value as it is, I don't see any reason not to get it. It's solid glass for the $150 or so it adds to the cost of the camera. The only time I'd advise not getting it is if you are already going to invest in a really top of the line zoom that covers that range.

 

[Nikon_Josh]

Yes Marc, that would be a great set up if you can stretch to it! Forget the 18-55 if you get the 35 1.8 though, I don't think you will need it. The 11-16, 35 1.8 and 70-300 will make a great kit for you I'm sure. All three have one thing in common, great value for money!

Just to make sure though, you are aware of the effect of the DX crop factor on lenses?

eh, I think with as cheap as the 18-55 VR is, it's a nice one to have. THere are a few situations where it's really come in handy (limited range of movement, needing a range of focal lengths). THough, I will agree, that in 90% of the situations I'd use the 18-55 I just use the 35mm prime anyway. It's certainly not a lens you need but for as good of a value as it is, I don't see any reason not to get it. It's solid glass for the $150 or so it adds to the cost of the camera. The only time I'd advise not getting it is if you are already going to invest in a really top of the line zoom that covers that range.

I don't think its a necessity though, if he has money for it then he should get it aswell as it is useful.

 

[fjrabon]

I don't think its a necessity though, if he has money for it then he should get it aswell as it is useful.

True, not a necessity. Though I personally use the 18-55mm a lot more than my 55-200 telephoto. It's always hard to tell what you'll end up liking in advance, which is why I kind of like the 18-55mm, it gives you a good idea of which direction you want to go most next.

Though really, what I'd do if I were him is force myself to really get to know the 35mm with nothing but it for like a solid first month. Then, you'll have an idea of what you want next, based on what you sometimes wish it would do.

What really told me I wanted to drop $650 on a wide angle was the fact that I was always finding myself wishing the 35mm was wider. Even the 18-55mm at it's wide end I still often wanted wider.

I definitely wouldn't buy a telephoto and a wide angle right off the bat. They're big investments if you want quality, and even though their value holds up well, it's a big cash outlay if you realize later on you don't really need them.

 

[Nikon_Josh]

I don't think its a necessity though, if he has money for it then he should get it aswell as it is useful.

True, not a necessity. Though I personally use the 18-55mm a lot more than my 55-200 telephoto. It's always hard to tell what you'll end up liking in advance, which is why I kind of like the 18-55mm, it gives you a good idea of which direction you want to go most next.

Though really, what I'd do if I were him is force myself to really get to know the 35mm with nothing but it for like a solid first month. Then, you'll have an idea of what you want next, based on what you sometimes wish it would do.

What really told me I wanted to drop $650 on a wide angle was the fact that I was always finding myself wishing the 35mm was wider. Even the 18-55mm at it's wide end I still often wanted wider.

I definitely wouldn't buy a telephoto and a wide angle right off the bat. They're big investments if you want quality, and even though their value holds up well, it's a big cash outlay if you realize later on you don't really need them.

Oh yeah this goes without saying for me and I had a similar experience myself to yours, I was simply stating that these three lenses could be all he might need if he wanted a comprehensive set of lenses! As we all know, you can't really make huge mistakes when buying lenses because if you need to sell it.. chances are you will sell it for the amount you paid for it! So it's hard to lose when purchasing lenses.

 

[fjrabon]

Oh yeah this goes without saying for me and I had a similar experience myself to yours, I was simply stating that these three lenses could be all he might need if he wanted a comprehensive set of lenses! As we all know, you can't really make huge mistakes when buying lenses because if you need to sell it.. chances are you will sell it for the amount you paid for it! So it's hard to lose when purchasing lenses.

Yeah, though the one issue for a newbie often is that they don't actually know how to sell their gear effectively, haha. It's the old catch 22 of selling lenses. Usually by the time you know where and how to get the most for what you're selling, you don't want to sell anything you have (unless it's financing an upgrade to the same thing, but better).

 

[Marc32]

1) Most of those beginner classes, the problem isn't the teacher it's the other 'students' The class can't get much past 'here is how you change your aperture' because most of the people taking it aren't ready for anything past that. Most people who take those beginner classes are viewing it as a substitute for reading an intro book. You'll probably get a lot more out of Dennis Thomas' D5100 'field manual' than you will that intro class.

I see what you are saying. Might be a review of what I already know. They offer an 'Intermediate DSLR' but I'm not sure if I can take that without the KickStart as a prerequesite. The FZ100 is suprisingly robust considering all it's complaints about IQ. It has a full manual mode where you can adjust aperature, shutter speed, iso, etc. It's good practice and the term 'bridge camera' suits it well. I've had good luck with it, but I'm starting to realize it's limits. I'm also familiar with Dennis Thomas 5100 Field Guide on Amazon. I believe he wrote a similar book for the D7k?

I think I will order the 5100 with the 35mm prime up front. I'd really like the Tonika wide angle, but I've gotten fairly proficient at stitching with the FZ100 and Panorama Maker 6. That could easily do what I'd get out of the Tonika without outlaying $700. The only tradeoff would be something like ocean shots where stitching the waves could be a problem, but it's not often I shoot something like that. If I really wanted to, I could take a pants load of shots and find the ones that line up. Or even better, rent the Tonkia for the days I want it.

I guess the only real thing now is to get around to ordering it! And Nikon has the 55-200 for $150 until the 26th...that might be too good a deal to pass up at that price.

--also I'm aware of the 1.5x crop factor of the 5100 as opposed to the full frame fx sensors. fx is out of the budget right now.

 

[fjrabon]

I see what you are saying. Might be a review of what I already know. The FZ100 is suprisingly robust considering all it's complaints about IQ. It has a full manual mode where you can adjust aperature, shutter speed, iso, etc. It's good practice and the term 'bridge camera' suits it well. I've had good luck with it, but I'm starting to realize it's limits. I'm also familiar with Dennis Thomas 5100 Field Guide on Amazon. I believe he wrote a similar book for the D7k?

I think I will order the 5100 with the 35mm prime up front. I'd really like the Tonika wide angle, but I've gotten fairly proficient at stitching with the FZ100 and Panorama Maker 6. That could easily do what I'd get out of the Tonika without outlaying $700. The only tradeoff would be something like ocean shots where stitching the waves could be a problem, but it's not often I shoot something like that. If I really wanted to, I could take a pants load of shots and find the ones that line up. Or even better, rent the Tonkia for the days I want it.

I guess the only real thing now is to get around to ordering it! And Nikon has the 55-200 for $150 until the 26th...that might be too good a deal to pass up at that price.

Yeah, he's written field guides to all the primary Nikon models. I have and love his D3100 guide, I've read it cover to cover twice (once to figure out kind of sort of what's going on, and then again, once I had a basic idea, a lot of his more subtle points came out).

The one issue with the 55-200 is that since it's so common, it's one of the few lenses you usually take a loss on if you resell it. The only people that really buy it are beginners and beginners almost always buy new, so it has a very limited range of people looking to purchase it, yet at the same time it has a lot of people who are moving up to one of the really nice telephotos trying to get rid of it. I see the nikon 55-200 on craigslist pop up at least once a month here in Atlanta and it always seem to sell for around $100 or less. Not trying to dissuade you there, if you want a telephoto, it's a nice starter telephoto, and definitely a good value. Just beware that unlike most lenses, if you sell it, you won't get back full value, most likely. You'll likely lose around $50 on the deal. If that's not a big deal to you, sure, go ahead.

 

[Marc32]

Used is a bit scarry for me when it comes to photo equiptment. I am just not far enough along to really know what I'm looking at. Hate to fork over the cash and find out there is something wrong that I missed. For the cost of the 55-200, even at full price, I'd rather go new and buy from a reputable dealer. A 200 lens vs a 2000 lens are two different sums of money to be thinking about.
I suppose I could bypass the 55-200. If I wanted that much reach, I can reach for the FZ100. Anything that I'm zooming that far on probably won't get any bigger than 8x10 tops, and realistically it's going to be a 4x6. Would it be better to wait a bit and see what lens I'd go for in a few months or redeploy that cash toward a good flash or other accessory?

 

[mrpink]

Would it be better to wait a bit and see what lens I'd go for in a few months or redeploy that cash toward a good flash or other accessory?

Buy out of need, not want. Your wallet will thank you.

 

[fjrabon]

Would it be better to wait a bit and see what lens I'd go for in a few months or redeploy that cash toward a good flash or other accessory?

Buy out of need, not want. Your wallet will thank you.

ha, if we bought out of need instead of want, unless you're an actual, legitimate professional, we'd all be shooting P&S's.

 

[Gaerek]

Just so you know, "Zoom with you feet" is a myth. a fixed (prime) Lens has the same angle of view whether you are 1 foot or 20 feet from your subject

I think the point of this statement is being missed. If you have a 50mm and you simply back up to twice the distance from a subject, is not the same as using a 25mm from the original position. So if you only have a 50mm prime, you cannot phyisically get the same composition of a scene that you could with a 25mm regardless of where you are standing. A zoom lens gives you a broad range of focal lengths so you have more freedom when composing. It has nothing to do with laziness, or rather, it shouldn't. Unfortunately, some simply zoom in or out as a substitute for standing in the right place and choosing the best focal length to use.

While this is true, it's the word zoom that used in the phrase that is causing the confusion. Most everyone is well aware of the fact that a 50mm and 25mm will look different even if shot in a way that makes the subject the same relative size. That phrase is meant as a tongue in cheek response to people who say, "Why would I want a prime since I can't zoom?" Can a single prime replace a single zoom? Not at all. But that's not the point. The point is, if you can't get the composition you need, regardless of what lens you have, then you need to make due with what you have, and move to get the composition you need.

Zoom with your feet is misleading, but most people (including yourself) understand exactly what it means, even if you can't truly replicate the FOV of a zoom with a prime.

 

[Marc32]

ha, if we bought out of need instead of want, unless you're an actual, legitimate professional, we'd all be shooting P&S's.

Boy ain't that the truth!