Best night pics with D40? Hi! I'm getting the D40 with the 18-55mm kit lens and the 55-200mm VR lens! I'm new to DSLR's and learning as quickly as I can! My question is, what is the best lens to use in low light or at night? Outside? At Walt Disney World to be precise! LOL (night parades, fireworks, etc.) Will these lenses be good enough or should I get something else? I have read the 50mm is good, but I will have to learn to use it manually, right? B/c it's not AF? Sorry to sound like a noob...but I yam what I yam! :o) Best night pics with D40? Hi! I'm getting the D40 with the 18-55mm kit lens and the 55-200mm VR lens! I'm new to DSLR's and learning as quickly as I can! My question is,... » Read More Best night pics with D40? Hi! I'm getting the D40 with the 18-55mm kit lens and the 55-200mm VR lens! I'm new to DSLR's and learning as quickly as I can! My question is, what is the best lens to use in low light or at night? Outside? At Walt Disney World to be precise! LOL (night parades, fireworks, etc.) Will these lenses be good enough or should I get something else? I have read the 50mm is good, but I will have to learn to use it manually, right? B/c it's not AF? Sorry to sound like a noob...but I yam what I yam! :o) « Show Less
1029284
rule of thumb (or used to be in my younger days) the longer the lens the less light. Used to be curable using fast film but i dont that counts any more. Thats all i can add being an old dodger and so on. good luck
1029285
There is so much light at Disney you could use any lens you want.Pirates of the Caribbean cave is about the only place you would need a 1.8 or faster (1.2) lens.Have fun.
267125
Well I must say I love my G1!! I was thinking the pancake 20mm f1.7 should be my next purchase, it just hard to convince myself about cashing $400 for it, but for what I have read it's the most versatile of them all. Now that the EZ zoom is based on digital zoom right? I try not to use the digital zoom since I don't like the lost of quality. I'm not big into telephoto as of now at least, so I think I'll go for the pancake. It's suppose to be 40mm as equivalent to a 35mm camera. And the reviews say it's versatile enough for dimly lit scenarios.Thanks for your reply!!
680069
Thank you! You are right: I too realized the d40 did not have the VR with the kit (but did have the VR zoom). I ended up ordering the d60 for the duo VR lens for $662 from Adorama. Can't wait to get started. Your point about the sync vs dust reduction made good sense for my purposes.
21673
D40 has a faster flash sync speed (1/500) than the D60 (1/200). Fast flash sync speed is essential if you are taking fast action (think car race) pictures with the flash. Besides that D60 has better features - Active D-Lighting, Dust control mechanism and more megapixels. 6 MP is plenty for most of us, but the dust reduction mechanism on D60 might be useful if you are constantly changing lenses (like you will be doing). Active D-lighting might be useful in some circumstances as well. To me the biggest difference is the included VR kit lens in D60. Although some will question the usefulness of VR at such a short focal length, I think it makes a difference. D40 comes with a non-VR kit lens and is NOT sold as body-only in the USA. If you say the D40 kit comes with a 18-55 VR lens, then you are either looking at a gray market or a refurbished camera. Given D90, a mid level camera with excellent reviews, also has the same flash sync speed as D60, I'd get a D60 over a D40 if the price difference isn't much. Hope this helps.
465671
VR is handy in low light when your subject is relatively static because it allows you to shoot with a lower ISO, which theoretically delivers better color, less noise, etc. VR won't help freeze action, however, so your wiggly kids will still look blurry. I have VR on my 16-85mm DX Nikkor, which I only occasionally use indoors without a flash. Also, a basic relationship still exists between focal range and image quality. At a given price point, the lens with the greater range will deliver the poorer results; it's simply more expensive for a manufacturer to engineer the more complex optics and mechanics for a big-range lens, which leaves less money available to finely tune a more simple system. My 16-85mm zoom has notably better image quality than Nikon's 18-200mm, and they're nearly the same price at $600. Along the same line, 3rd-party vendors typically trade-off build quality for image quality. So you can find Sigma, Tamron, or Tokina lenses with pretty nice image quality at prices considerably cheaper than a Nikon or Canon lens, but they aren't built as well. And in the end, yes, a pro Sigma will look cleaner than an amateur Nikon, but the comparable pro Nikon will almost always perform better in every category than the pro Sigma. You get what you pay for.
1381524
Like any tool, it depends on what you want to use it for. This is probably the best lens out there for wide angle, night sky photography (although the 35mm 1.4 is very good too), and will be good for a wide variety of applications. Either one will do well in low light, but since I usually take photos of people, I have a preference for the 35mm. Either lens, when used in bright light, loses a lot of their advantages unless you intentionally place your camera in aperture priority mode and keep shooting in wide apertures.
990751
I just bought the 5100 Nikon and the 55-300 lens, but I shoot birds, wildlife type things so I am wanting to know which lens do I need to zoom in on birds, ect. I cannot get much of anything with the 55-300 , flowers, humans, ect...not a good buy for me but I will keep it a bit longer-
986525
Hi Rick, i have a d600 and Works!, take a beautifull pictures, a Little slow to make focus, but take a beautifull pictures, great luminosity, great cristal clarity, a great one to small budgage! i love it! Juan Cisternas, sorry for my english, spanish are my native language!, Im from Chile! God bless you!
1088239
No, I haven't used the scope at night. I wouldn't recommend any 40mm scope for night hunting. A 50mm would gather more light but even a 50mm is not the right scope for night hunting. You would need a night vision scope for this.
2078344
I own both. Bought one of first 18-200s made in Japan to go with my first dslr: D50 that I got for a trip to the Bahamas. Have wonderful images I still enjoy. Now have lightweight D5000 and super D7000. Bought 18-140 for light weight to hike w/D5000. Use 28-200 w/D7000 otherwise. Both focus quickly, iq is similar. Both have VR but 200 has active mode for shooting while moving, which I love. So 140 wins on weight, price, while 200 adds focal length and versatile VR.
763550
Hi, actaually I have this lens and had the 16-50. I got the nex 6 last year and sold the 16-50 lens because I felt the pics came out better in the 18-55. The focus was better and pics seems crisp to me in 18-55. Yes it's much heavier and the smaller to travel with. 16-50 made it really nice to go our the city with.... But I just couldn't take a good pic with the 16-50. I got the 18-55 for about $100 used. So I'm happy.
848890
Ok, great info as usual! I'm not going to be taking many close up "macro" type shots or shots with focused forground objects w/ blurred backgrounds to start off, and I really like the 24-105 f/4 L IS lens, would that be probobly the best "walk around" lens for the XSi then? Also, can a 2.8 lens take landscape / scenic shots where the foreground and background are both in focus? I am confused about that with the f# & lenses.The night railroading shots I posted before are a main priority and I have seen some excellent night / low light posted images under the 24-105 f/4 L IS lens here on Amazon.I have a question on the 50D kit lens quality but I'll try to post that under the 50D discussions. Thanks again for all your input. Ok, great info as usual! I'm not going to be taking many close up "macro" type shots or shots with focused forground objects w/ blurred backgrounds to start off, and I really like the 24-105 f/4 L IS lens, would that be probobly the best "walk around" lens for the XSi then? Also, can a 2.8 lens take landscape / scenic shots where the foreground and background are both in focus? I am confused about that with the f# & lenses.The night railroading shots I posted before are a main priority and I have seen some excellent night / low light... » Read More Ok, great info as usual! I'm not going to be taking many close up "macro" type shots or shots with focused forground objects w/ blurred backgrounds to start off, and I really like the 24-105 f/4 L IS lens, would that be probobly the best "walk around" lens for the XSi then? Also, can a 2.8 lens take landscape / scenic shots where the foreground and background are both in focus? I am confused about that with the f# & lenses.The night railroading shots I posted before are a main priority and I have seen some excellent night / low light posted images under the 24-105 f/4 L IS lens here on Amazon.I have a question on the 50D kit lens quality but I'll try to post that under the 50D discussions. Thanks again for all your input. « Show Less
910058
Photofun123-I am in a similar situation. What did you decide on and what do you think of it? I will be getting a 50d and only one lens. My main subject will be my toddler. I am considering 24-70 and 24-105. Thanks.
557615
I've stopped using the kit-zoom-lens (14-42). I have a 14-mm and a 20-mm prime lens ($300). I like night-photography too; I mostly use the 20-mm-lens, however. I like the 14-mm lens though, since it's small ... if you only want to get one more lens, get the 20-mm prime lens. It's worth it. If you don't wanna spend 300, spend the 150 or so (ebay) on the 14-mm lens ... it's small and good for night shots ...
1037163
I have to respectfully disagree with the recommendation for a 16-85mm VR. I have that lens, use it with my D90 and it's great for outdoor situations. Indoors, the 16-85mm is fine if you are using a flash. I can see using the 16-85mm for some interior church shots, but most of wedding shots are going to be of people. things, little details like bouquets, etc. You will want a lens that can handle low-light and can isolate a subject well (subject in focus - remaining areas blurry). You should check out primes. Fast zooms are nice, but they will defintiley set you back a lot of money. Look into these lenses: 1. Nikkor 50mm 1.8 - The poor man's lens for low light, decent bokeh, depth of field interestingness. $100 Everyone should have at least one fast lens and since this one is cheap, it's a good place to start. 2. Sigma 30mm 1.4 More money, but since it's wider than the above lens, a little more versatile, especially with DX sensor. $300 or more 3. Nikkor 85mm 1.8 - Like the 50mm but is more telephoto, so this is good if you are standing far from your subject but want to fill the frame with your subject. Good for concerts, theater, etc. 5. Nikkor 85mm 1.4 - This is a money-making lens for pro wedding photographers and portrait photographers. People fall in love with and worship this lens. Do a web search and you'll find out why. Very, very pricey. $1K but worth it. One thing about primes is that there is a definite learning curve to using them - especially at the wider apertures since the depth of field is SO narrow. You have to really work on learning to use them to maximize the number of keepers you have. BUT, these fast lenses help you to examine more work more critically, to look at your composition, technique, etc in ways that your kit lens never will :) Good luck with your photography!
170019
Jason, I am a newbie to taking pictures using anything other than a point and shoot!! But, I love this lens. I used it last night for my grandchildren's Christmas program at church. The church was dimly lit with the stage lit. I used no flash with it set on night scene. The pictures are great, even for an amateur like me. As far as the motor, all I know is that I just screw it on the body and start taking pictures. I love the range of the zoom. I could zoom out and get the entire group or in and get my precious ones. I would buy it again with no hesitation. It is much lighter than my Tamron low light lens, so if either will work for the situation, I choose this lens. Jason, I am a newbie to taking pictures using anything other than a point and shoot!! But, I love this lens. I used it last night for my grandchildren's Christmas program at church. The church was dimly lit with the stage lit. I used no flash with it set on night scene. The pictures are great, even for an amateur like me. As far as the motor, all I know is that I just screw it on the body and start taking pictures. I love the range of the zoom. I could zoom out and get the entire group or in and get my precious ones. I would buy it again with no hesitation. It is much lighter than my Tamron... » Read More Jason, I am a newbie to taking pictures using anything other than a point and shoot!! But, I love this lens. I used it last night for my grandchildren's Christmas program at church. The church was dimly lit with the stage lit. I used no flash with it set on night scene. The pictures are great, even for an amateur like me. As far as the motor, all I know is that I just screw it on the body and start taking pictures. I love the range of the zoom. I could zoom out and get the entire group or in and get my precious ones. I would buy it again with no hesitation. It is much lighter than my Tamron low light lens, so if either will work for the situation, I choose this lens. « Show Less
1910673
I've got a 18-55 that came with my D40 and I bought the 55-100VR. I don't really miss VR on the shorter lens. I love my D40 bur an itching to step up, so a body only option is welcome. Why is it camera companies assume people are always buying their first camera instead of stepping up? I'd look at the 3200 but it lacks support for the wireless remote, which I have found invaluable for getting into family shots or for long exposures. Cable release just doesn't cut it.