Equipment advice

[kundalini]

What is so obvious?

A 7 year old body with one kit lens. Nothing wrong with that, but it does speak volumes if you're intuitive. General photography.

I don't go back and troll other peoples posts to see what they like to shoot.

Never seen this person post a thread until now.

They should be up front about it. The long distance lens, was an example of how a flash wouldn't be the best choice in that specific case. Which shows the need for a more specific question.

Good advice for all that pose questions about 'wish lists'.

As for my lens recommendations, I chose those, because they are good all around lenses. Their is a reason why the kit lenses are typically 18-55. I am sorry that YOU can't see the obvious.

Absolutely nothing wrong with the 18-55mm lens. Given enough light, it is quite capable. In fact, it is very sharp from f/4 to f/8.

Also, had the OP been more specific, we would know whether she prefers to shoot indoors or outdoors, low-light or normal daylight. As for my recommendations, they are both very fast lenses that would still be relatively versatile in low light situations.

Yet you were shooting in the dark because you had no idea what the OP's intentions were. Did you consider that the OP had no use for shooting in low light situations? Why is a 50mm f/1.4 a better option the the f/1.8 without any prior knowledge? so you're saying that spending and additional $205 is the right choice under these circumstances? Or spending $550 for a lens that may not have any impact for the OP? Get a grip..... general photography is in order.

Nothing in their original post screams "I need a flash".

I'm an advocate for flash photography. 40 lashes with wet noodles enough for you?

How about a decent lens and a reflector so that they can learn how to manipulate light and use what they have available to them. Then when they dive in to strobes, they will have a better understanding of light in general? My guess from their original post, is that they are not going to have any knowledge of this, or of how to use a TTL flash ( whether off-camera or not ) any better than they could use the pop up flash already available to them.

That is the entire point. The 18-55mm lens IS decent. The built-in flash is CRAP. Having an external flash only accelerates their knowledge of the study of light.

So, dipstick, before you start ragging on me, and before you start blurting out your wet dream camera gear list, why don't you shut your mouth and actually give some thought of what the BEST next step would be given the info that we have ( which isn't very much ).

:lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:

I wasn't the one suggesting the OP to spend nearly $900 on lenses. My suggestion was bottom end about $220 for a good flash and another $30 for a reflector. Let's see, that's a difference of about...... a helluva lot more money.

Villiage Idiot ......

VI can and will fend for himself, if he deems it worthy, of course.

My first post was posted prior to the OP stating that they shoot people 99% of the time. With that new info, I would still recommend one of the two lenses, in addition to a used ( cheaper ) bounce flash.

And I would still, even more so now, recommend a flash. In regard to that slight dig..... the only way you can get a SB-800 is on the Used Market since Nikon foolishly discontinued production. Once the annoucement was let out, I bought another two used units. They have yet to fail under a fairly heavy amount of use. There is nothing wrong with profiting from someone else's poor choices.

Now, with all that being said.......... bo11ucks, sir/madame.

 

[burstintoflame81]

What is so obvious?

A 7 year old body with one kit lens. Nothing wrong with that, but it does speak volumes if you're intuitive. General photography.

I don't go back and troll other peoples posts to see what they like to shoot.

Never seen this person post a thread until now.


Good advice for all that pose questions about 'wish lists'.





Absolutely nothing wrong with the 18-55mm lens. Given enough light, it is quite capable. In fact, it is very sharp from f/4 to f/8.


Yet you were shooting in the dark because you had no idea what the OP's intentions were. Did you consider that the OP had no use for shooting in low light situations? Why is a 50mm f/1.4 a better option the the f/1.8 without any prior knowledge? so you're saying that spending and additional $205 is the right choice under these circumstances? Or spending $550 for a lens that may not have any impact for the OP? Get a grip..... general photography is in order.


I'm an advocate for flash photography. 40 lashes with wet noodles enough for you?


That is the entire point. The 18-55mm lens IS decent. The built-in flash is CRAP. Having an external flash only accelerates their knowledge of the study of light.


:lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:

I wasn't the one suggesting the OP to spend nearly $900 on lenses. My suggestion was bottom end about $220 for a good flash and another $30 for a reflector. Let's see, that's a difference of about...... a helluva lot more money.

Villiage Idiot ......

VI can and will fend for himself, if he deems it worthy, of course.

My first post was posted prior to the OP stating that they shoot people 99% of the time. With that new info, I would still recommend one of the two lenses, in addition to a used ( cheaper ) bounce flash.

And I would still, even more so now, recommend a flash. In regard to that slight dig..... the only way you can get a SB-800 is on the Used Market since Nikon foolishly discontinued production. Once the annoucement was let out, I bought another two used units. They have yet to fail under a fairly heavy amount of use. There is nothing wrong with profiting from someone else's poor choices.

Now, with all that being said.......... bo11ucks, sir/madame.

First off, no one was crushing the flash recommendation, I was trying to get more info from the OP, and explaining that while a flash might be a good recommendation, there is no way to be sure.

What world do you live in that these lenses cost $900? I recommended one or the other. On a canon you can pick up a 50mm F/ 1.4 for $350. Thats comparible to your flash price. The 16-50mm from Tokina is a little more price ($550 ish, but you can also get a comparable Tamron for a little cheaper ) As of now, BHphoto has a Nikkor 50mm f1.4 for $324. A reflector can be had for $40 bucks. And you can't compare a lens costing more than a flash when a flash is MUCH more limited than a lens would be in terms of uses ( unless we are talking about tilt shift or some goofy lensbaby crap ) Again though, this was prior to the last post. Also, how can you sit there and say that the kit lens is a good lens? Its garbage and you know it. I bet not a single person that is handing out advice here uses their kit lens other then for maybe reverse mount tinkering. But its OH SO GREAT!