[TimperleySaint]

Re: Photography thread 11.02 : Fri Nov 01, 2013 11:18 am  

I have asked this before, but have slept since then and don't fancy trawling back thru 69 pages.

I'm looking at getting a prime lens, primarily for shooting in low light/night photography. What focal length is best to go for, 35 or 50mm, and is about £120-140 enough to pay for a lens like that?

It's for a Nikon D5000 btw.

Re: Photography thread 11.02 : Fri Nov 01, 2013 2:23 pm  

Mike Oxlong wrote:

I have asked this before, but have slept since then and don't fancy trawling back thru 69 pages.

I'm looking at getting a prime lens, primarily for shooting in low light/night photography. What focal length is best to go for, 35 or 50mm, and is about £120-140 enough to pay for a lens like that?

It's for a Nikon D5000 btw.

Plenty of bargain 50mm f1.8 lenses around mate, usually quite cheap

Re: Photography thread 11.02 : Fri Nov 01, 2013 3:02 pm  

Mike Oxlong wrote:

I have asked this before, but have slept since then and don't fancy trawling back thru 69 pages.

I'm looking at getting a prime lens, primarily for shooting in low light/night photography. What focal length is best to go for, 35 or 50mm, and is about £120-140 enough to pay for a lens like that?

It's for a Nikon D5000 btw.

On film SLR cameras, a 50mm lens was considered to be about the same angle of vision as the eye would normally see, a 28mm was considered "wide angle" etc etc.
On digital cameras though, the ratio is 1 : 1.6, so a 35mm lens for digital would be nearer to the normal "eye" angle of vision.

For low-light use, you need to think more about aperture size, i.e. the lower the f-number of the lens, the wider its maximum aperture (to let more light in).
You can get a Nikon 35mm f1.8 for the money you're talking about.
Any bigger aperture and you are then paying a lot more ... or looking at other lens manufacturers.

Re: Photography thread 11.02 : Fri Nov 01, 2013 3:07 pm  

For B&W fans or, like me, admirers of Tony Ray-Jones or Martin Parr, this exhibition at the Science Museum (of all places) is superb. http://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/visitmu ... tAod-HgAeg

For B&W fans or, like me, admirers of Tony Ray-Jones or Martin Parr, this exhibition at the Science Museum (of all places) is superb. http://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/visitmu ... tAod-HgAeg

Re: Photography thread 11.02 : Sun Nov 03, 2013 8:14 pm  

IMG_3094 by mortonstalker, on Flickr IMG_3097 by mortonstalker, on Flickr IMG_3095 by mortonstalker, on Flickr IMG_3094 by mortonstalker, on Flickr IMG_3090 by mortonstalker, on Flickr IMG_3072 by mortonstalker, on Flickr IMG_2867 by mortonstalker, on Flickr

IMG_3094 by mortonstalker, on Flickr IMG_3097 by mortonstalker, on Flickr IMG_3095 by mortonstalker, on Flickr IMG_3094 by mortonstalker, on Flickr IMG_3090 by mortonstalker, on Flickr IMG_3072 by mortonstalker, on Flickr IMG_2867 by mortonstalker, on Flickr

Re: Photography thread 11.02 : Mon Nov 04, 2013 3:54 pm  

After being Pentax since 1974 through various film and then digital I have switched to Canon after my Pentax K7 packed up, I have got the 60D with a lens (18-55mm), I would like a zoom up to 300mm, any recommendations out there (up to about £400)

Re: Photography thread 11.02 : Mon Nov 04, 2013 8:29 pm  

rover49 wrote:

After being Pentax since 1974 through various film and then digital I have switched to Canon after my Pentax K7 packed up, I have got the 60D with a lens (18-55mm), I would like a zoom up to 300mm, any recommendations out there (up to about £400)

The EF-S 55-250mm f4-5.6 IS II is a decent lens for walking about, costs around £160, the EF 75-300mm f4-5.6 USM III will set you back a little more but no IS.

Re: Photography thread 11.02 : Tue Nov 05, 2013 9:25 am  

Big Graeme wrote:

The EF-S 55-250mm f4-5.6 IS II is a decent lens for walking about, costs around £160, the EF 75-300mm f4-5.6 USM III will set you back a little more but no IS.

Cheers BG, will look at some reviews of them, might get two lenses
for my budget by the look of it.

Re: Photography thread 11.02 : Tue Nov 05, 2013 3:39 pm  

If anyone is using CF, then there's some new 16gb Sandisk Extreme for sale here on a cycling forum I frequent.. £30 posted http://www.lfgss.com/thread116603.html#post3912265 My old Fuji S602 only recognises 2gb otherwise I'd get one for myself

If anyone is using CF, then there's some new 16gb Sandisk Extreme for sale here on a cycling forum I frequent.. £30 posted http://www.lfgss.com/thread116603.html#post3912265 My old Fuji S602 only recognises 2gb otherwise I'd get one for myself

[TimperleySaint]

Re: Photography thread 11.02 : Tue Nov 05, 2013 4:41 pm  

El Barbudo wrote:

On film SLR cameras, a 50mm lens was considered to be about the same angle of vision as the eye would normally see, a 28mm was considered "wide angle" etc etc.
On digital cameras though, the ratio is 1 : 1.6, so a 35mm lens for digital would be nearer to the normal "eye" angle of vision.

For low-light use, you need to think more about aperture size, i.e. the lower the f-number of the lens, the wider its maximum aperture (to let more light in).
You can get a Nikon 35mm f1.8 for the money you're talking about.
Any bigger aperture and you are then paying a lot more ... or looking at other lens manufacturers.

Would a Nikon 35mm f1.8 drastically reduce the need for a tripod for night shots, and reduce the amount of blur caused by any slight shakes while holding the camera instead?