Free Shipping on ALL Products
camera reviewsbest cameraslens reviewsphotography tipscamera forumvideo toursphotography bookssupport me
It is currently Sun Jan 22, 2017 12:57 pm

All times are UTC

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 4:17 am 

I need a slr camera and lens that will shoot great shots in low light/indoor , and outdoors. I will not take many sport shots. I am currently using my schools none slr, canon s5 is, and i am not even close to being satesfied with its indoor quality, outdoor is okay, but indoor sucks! so im loocking for something that will be millions of time better, Image stablelizing (or how ever you spell it) is a must, cause i will not be using a tripod,

i was considering a nikon d90 with a18-200mm lens, or maybe getting the 18-105 lens, and a 70-300mm lens.

Ive read so many reviews from this site, and from others that i am going to explode, i have spend most of my time looking at nikon, and i dont really know why, from what ive been reading the d90 preforms verry well at its price range, i just dont know if its worth the extra cash, and WHAT LENS TO GET WITH IT!

any help would be apriciated

feel free to ask any questions.


update:im also considering getting a a lens with less zoom capabillities and better low light, i was considering the nikon 50mm f/1.8D , it cost about 130 bucks in canada, but i was wondering, would i really get a preference gain from it (compared to the lenses above)? will low light shots look that much better?

update 2: well i just remembered that with the d90 it will be the equvelent of around 70mm, so i guess i should get the 28mm f/2.8 , is the preformence increase really worth it?

thank you..

any help would be apriciated.

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 8:11 am 
The lens your will end up buying is going to be based on the subject of your photographs, what is it that you take pictures of? Is it student portrait work or more architectural in nature.. some sports?

I have the 18-200 which has VR and i find it great as a walkaround lens but i have noticed in darker situations you do need longer exposures. And with any landscape or architectural shots there will be some post processing involved to deal with the distortion.

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 9:26 am 
well i will be doing alot of indoor and outdoor shots of people,

indoor: mainly when we have family and friends over, at restraunts, so alot of people shots indoors

outdoor: people shots and nature, not to much sports , nice to have the option, but mainly want good indoor quality,

I care about outdoor quality just as much as indoor, but its just that most cameras seem to do good at outdoors, its low light were they fall off.

But yea , im new to the world of photography, so i want 1 or 2 all round lenses, and maybe 1 indoor lens, but i dont want to many lense.

i was originally going to get the 18-200mm lense, but it dosent preform exelent in low light, so im considering getting a 50mm 1.8 lens, and since i could save a fair amount of money with the d90 18-105mm kit lens, i could put the rest of the money towards a 70-300mm lens, it would make me have to change lenses more often , but it would give me a longuer reach,

by the way, how would i get better quality, lets ignore the lens shifting, and the extra reach. which would give me a better quality?

and would getting a 50mm f1.8 for like 140 bucks be worth it? is it really better in low light conditions?

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 04, 2009 1:47 am 
nimer55 wrote:
and would getting a 50mm f1.8 for like 140 bucks be worth it? is it really better in low light conditions?

OMG :shock: that lens has saved my life SO many times! I used it for theatre photography and sporting events in indoor gyms and ice halls. I now have the 50mm AFS 1.4 which is like $450 and the 85mm f/1.8. A exposure of 1/100th of a second, ISO 1250, and a f/stop of 1.8 means serious low-light work.

Those lenses are also excellent in every other aspect, they're sharper, smaller, lighter, and cheap. They allow you to learn aspects of photography a lot faster, allow you to utilize the available light, the list goes on. Highly recommend one!

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 04, 2009 1:51 am 
thanks. i think ill get that,

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 04, 2009 4:07 am 

Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 4:06 am
Posts: 147
Location: Nowhere Wichita, KS
I would agree, if low light is your primary concern, get a really fast lens just like you are looking at, all else is secondary.

The D90 would certainly help though, as it does great low light already.

Nikon D7000
18-55mm VR
50mm 1.8
55-200mm VR
ML-L3 Wireless release


 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 04, 2009 9:13 am 
yea, i think ill start with a the kit lense, and the 70-300mm, the sigma 30mm, and the nikon 50mm 1.8f a flash (like the sb-600), and maybe a monopod.

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 

All times are UTC

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 2 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

All words, images, videos and layout, copyright 2005-2012 Gordon Laing. May not be used without permission.
/ How we test / Best Cameras / Advertising / Camera reviews / Supporting Camera Labs

Webdesign by Alphabase IT
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group