I have the Tamron f/3.5 28mm to 300mm AF zoom, the Nikon f/3.5 28mm to 200mm AF zoom, and the Nikon f/2.8 20mm to 35mm AF zoom. I am very happy with all of them. One would be really hard pressed to show a measurable difference between them and the fixed length lens on subjects; on test charts one can find a difference, but how many test chart photographs are you going to take. I have used all three of these lenses to make 24" x 36" color prints and I defy anyone to show me where there are optical problems on the print. [In their head is another matter.]
Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!
Nothing beats a great piece of glass!
I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.
What are the characteristics of a wide angle lenses, I mean what are they designated with ? Cause usually their are not called "Wide Angle" on eBay etc right ? Can you get a blurred background with a wide angle lens ? I guess you would need a f1.8 aperture on it right ? Is it possible to find a cheap second hand manual one that would fit my Nikon ? I think I should be set to begin with this one and the zoom i got with my camera.
Welcome to the rewarding possibilities of the manual film slr.
You are on the right track with Nikon but don't get too hung up on "blurred backgrounds".
read up on when to use it and why.
Kodak has a book called 35mm photography that came out in the 70s-80's. It has all the basics you will need and will give you a solid foundation so you will be able to make your own decisions on what gear will suit you next.
Shoot some film and start getting to know what different shutter speeds can be used for and what the different apertures will do for your artistic vision.
Welcome aboard and above all have FUN!!
Thanks Bruce, I'll check out that book ! Again you are right I should not get crazy on gear now, but if I could get a wide angle lens then I am fine for some time with what kind of photography I have in mind.
What about that lens do you guys think it could fit the FM10 ? How can I assess if a lens will fit in general ?
Yeah, no need to bulk up on all the gear now.
There is also a book called "Creative Camera Control" that is VERY short and very to the point.
About lenses for the FM10. Any lens that is AI or later compatiable that has an aperture ring (Non "G" lens) will work. Of course Auto Focus lenses won't AF on this camera.
Not sure if this was mentioned above, but have you thought about picking up a manual focus lens for this camera? (Do you plan on getting an AF body soon?) I ask because MF lenses have a better dampered feel when focusing. This would make focusing easier and more precise. Something like a 50mm 1.8 manual focus lens would be great for this camera.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
So...why do you need to go wider than 35mm at this time (which your existing zoom does)? There's a huge selection of awesome 20, 24 and 28mm lens out there but a wide angle lens wider than 35mm is not always easiest to use (of coarse some will refute me in this).
Again, use what you have, shoot, shoot, shoot, read, read, read, and soon you'll learn if and why you need something wider and better know which to get based on what YOU want not what others tell you works for them.
I've been shooting for 25 years, and can honestly say that the vast majority, probably 90%+, of my photographs were made with lenses between 28mm and 85mm. This is in spite of the fact that I have owned far more "exotic" lenses covering a range from 15mm (ultra-wide) to 600mm (serious telephoto), to say nothing of film formats beyond 35mm... don't get hung up on the gear. It's about the pictures!
In your situation, I would recommend getting the 50mm f/1.8 lens and then buying (and shooting and processing!) as much film as you can. My first couple years as a photo student, I burned through literally hundreds of rolls of film; most of them I would not show anybody now. But I learned a lot!
Originally Posted by rthomas
Everyone is different. I bet a sports photographer would have a different range that they shoot 90% of the time.
But I would probably agree. But then again, I don't have a 135mm f2.
Generally a wide angle will not give the blurry background that you want.
A relatively fast(f1.4 f1.8) normal lens will let you see the effect more easily and the 70-200 even more so.
There are always trade offs, The longer lenses may not focus as closely as a prime(fixed focal length) lens and longer is usually slower(3.5-4.5 >)
IMO keep the 35-70 add the 70-200 and live with that for a while.
A faster lens will allow you to take pictures in darker areas without flash or supplemental lighting.
Heavily sedated for your protection.
Thanks for the replies everyone !
May I ask why ? It would give me more bokeh and more flexibility to shoot at night without a flash right ? what are the other advantages of a prime lens like that ? It's a prime lens right lol ?
Originally Posted by rthomas
That's what I want also. I don't like using a flash even though I got one with the camera.
Basically I am at the moment looking at the Bokeh effect that I really want to achieve. It is my understanding that it could be possible with my actual lens and could be even more visible with a wider aperture, hence faster lens, of f1.8 right ? What would be the only benefit from that kind of lens compared to what I already have ? Just a more pronounced bokeh. However with the wide angle I would have more composing possibilities no ?
Originally Posted by John Koehrer
I also like taking pictures at night as I like artificial lights, but I am always afraid of camera shake so a faster lens could help fight this problem. However why did you recommend the zoom ? Just for the added zoom or the bokeh it would provide ? Would that bokeh be more than that of a faster lens like a f1.4 or f1.8 ?
I like the fact that it would provide me with more visibility to include more elements in my photo, albeit making it less intimate in some cases but it would halp for other situations I think.
Originally Posted by rich815
I will maybe buy a dSLR but that will be much later when I have more money as I am at the same attracted by photography but not by entry-level dSLRs. And the more I read and see pictures of analog cameras the greater my list grows to include crazy cameras that are as expensive as a 5D Mark II lol so if I do get the money one day there is a high chance that it will fuel my analog passion. I like photography but there is something about dSLRs that I don't like even if they can provide awesome results of course and flexibility. Therefore for now I wouldn't buy a ton of lenses for my manual, it would just depends on the good deals I would come across and the money i have just to have a little equipment to start with for now. Of course it would be great to be able to reuse all the lenses if I buy a dSLR. But then I would need a big dSLR since 35mm is considered large format when looking at sensors right ? Therefore I would need to buy very expensive lenses now am I correct ?
Originally Posted by mweintraub