The Official Head-Case Photography Thread.

[VPI]

VWs and Porsches

[VPI]

Suburus

Edited May 29, 2011 by VPI

[VPI]

Fords and Chevys

[VPI]

Minis

Edited May 29, 2011 by VPI

[VPI]

BMWs Part 1 Street Tuner Class

[VPI]

BMWs Part 2 GT Class

Edited May 31, 2011 by VPI

[Torpedo]

Let's see what the case photo experts would take:

- Nikon D300S body at 1262 euros. I could use it with an old AF Nikkor 35-80mm 1:4-5.6D that came with a F70 which is 14 years old now. I know the lens isn't very good, so other lenses may be considered.

- Nikon D7000 + AFS 18-200VR II kit at 1513 euros. Good reviews but concerned for the overexposing comments. The lens isn't very good for what I've read, so perhaps it's a better idea going for the body and considering another lens.

- Canon 60D + 18-135IS at 1123 euros. Despite Nikon is better regarded than Canon over here, for the pics I've seen I might end up liking the Canon's "warmth" better.

Makes it any sense going nuts for a D700? I could get the body at about 2500 euros, and see how it fares with the lens I already have.

I used to take lots of pics years ago and I've never found a camera that I loved more than the Pentax Super-A I got in the 80's. This would be my first DSLR camera, and while I know a bit about taking pictures with a SLR, I have 0 experience with DSLR. For digital I've only had a couple of P&S.

[Knuckledragger]

Carl Zeiss Planar 50mm F/0.7, as used by Stanley Kubrick in Barry Lyndon.

Carl Zeiss Super-Q-Gigantar 40mm F/0.33(!) Purportedly a one-of-a-kind prototype.

Seource.

[aerius]

Let's see what the case photo experts would take:

I used to take lots of pics years ago and I've never found a camera that I loved more than the Pentax Super-A I got in the 80's. This would be my first DSLR camera, and while I know a bit about taking pictures with a SLR, I have 0 experience with DSLR. For digital I've only had a couple of P&S.

Since you really liked your Pentax Super-A, I think it would make sense to stick with them on your first DSLR. I've tried out the Pentax K-5 for a couple hours at a recent photo show and really liked it, I was using it mostly with the 31mm f/1.8 FA Limited lens since that's what I'm most used to. What I like about the K-5 is that it's the closest in use to a conventional manual SLR; with most Canons & Nikons I can't figure out how they work without reading the manual while with the Pentax I could use all the basic functions just by playing with it for a couple minutes. I don't know what they cost in Europe but they should be in your price range, over here they sell for a bit more than the Nikon D7000.

If Fuji doesn't come out with an interchangeable lens version of the X100 in the next couple years, I'm getting a K-5 or whatever their next top of the line camera is.

[Torpedo]

I loved the Super-A for its small form factor, versatility and features (it even had a lever to close the diaphragm to the selected number so you could check DOF). I have 3 glasses, but they're not AF and are rated for FF, so I'm not sure how they'll perform on a new K-5. They say it sports a very good sensor, but it's also true the availability of lenses is very low, worse in Europe.

I got the Nikon for compatibility at work with the endoscopic optics adapter, which had a Nikon mount. They lost the adapter, so the Nikon didn't get much use.

Fact is that I enjoyed a lot going out to hunt pics, but for several reasons, being two of them the 36mm film being in disappearance, and the low quality of digital photos years ago. But now things are way different, hence my query. Thanks for replying Aerius

Hadn't ready your post Reks. Thanks. Looks like I mistook the 18-200 VRII for other of the kit zoom lenses they include with the D5001 and D3001 bodies. I've found a better price for the D700 body. Since I'm not in a hurry I could wait for a new "entry level" FF by Nikon. Any expected features that make worth the wait and probable price increase?

Edited May 30, 2011 by Torpedo

[grawk]

Full frame lenses work better on smaller sensors, because you've avoiding what is traditionally the worst part of the lens, the edges. You should be good.

[Knuckledragger]

Carl Zeiss Super-Q-Gigantar 40mm F/0.33(!) Purportedly a one-of-a-kind prototype.

Seource.

Eeenteresting. After doing some digging I found this page. It's in Italian, but a run through the Goog's translator yields this:

In 1966, when Canon had just introduced its 50mm f/0.95 and the entire photographic industry seem to be pursuing primates very attractive on paper but not very useful in practical terms, Herr Wolf Wehran, public relations officer of the Zeiss Ikon (at that time; now works as a consultant for Carl Zeiss) decided to point out in an ironic way this race to the record, emphasizing instead the philosophy Zeiss ("What matters is the absolute maximum aperture: the aperture has a goal that is able to play a 'image quality).

In short, this comedy of Wehran what it does, when he comes back in Oberkochen after Photokina '66 goes to visit a friend of the design department and lenses with him preparing for the hoax. Rummaging through the shelves are an old condenser lens, the dust, and working on can create a kind of grafting Contarex. They decide that the goal is a full-aperture 40mm f/0.33 (obviously this is totally fictitious values​​), then apply two rings appropriately tailored to Focus (1m to infinity) and diaphragm (from f/0.33 af / 5.6). Finally baptize the target, called the Super-Q-giant ... where the Q, he explained years later Wehran, is about to Quatsch, which in German means "nonsense. "

So it was an utterly nonfunctional prototype. I wonder if WestLicht disclosed that at the auction.

[aerius]

I loved the Super-A for its small form factor, versatility and features (it even had a lever to close the diaphragm to the selected number so you could check DOF). I have 3 glasses, but they're not AF and are rated for FF, so I'm not sure how they'll perform on a new K-5. They say it sports a very good sensor, but it's also true the availability of lenses is very low, worse in Europe.

Yeah, that's the exact same reason I love my Olympus OM-1 and Pen-FT, it's really hard to find a nice small high quality DSLR that does all the stuff I need while being easy to use.

For lenses you should be fine, I was using the fullframe 31mm and 77mm FA Limited lenses when I was testing out the K-5 and both lenses worked fine. I did mess up the focus a few times when using manual focus mode but once I got used to the focus confirmation lights it was pretty straightforward. Not as easy as on my OM-1 since it has a way better focusing screen and more viewfinder magnification, but probably around the same as my Pen-FT.

[Torpedo]

Would old Pentax lenses send a correct aperture information to the modern K5 body?

[aerius]

I don't know, depends on how old it is. I did a quick search and it looks like anything that's A-series or newer will work just fine if set to the "A" setting on the aperture ring. Anything older and it gets messy.

http://support.pentaximaging.com/node/5

Edited May 30, 2011 by aerius

[Torpedo]

Yep, but K-7 isn't the newer K-5. I've searched Pentax site and they don't clarify it. My guess would be that it should, but still it's just a guess. Problem is that having AF would be nice too, and here is where Pentax has little offer nowadays. Their glass was good back in their heyday, but I don't know today how it compares to Nikon's or Canon's.

[Salt Peanuts]

Speaking of Pentax, you should get one of these.

[aerius]

Yep, but K-7 isn't the newer K-5. I've searched Pentax site and they don't clarify it. My guess would be that it should, but still it's just a guess. Problem is that having AF would be nice too, and here is where Pentax has little offer nowadays. Their glass was good back in their heyday, but I don't know today how it compares to Nikon's or Canon's.

The K-5 and K-7 are the exact same mount & system so you'd think that it would work, but yeah, it never hurts to get an official confirmation. With regards to lenses and AF, I'm not a zoom lens person so I know absolutely nothing about them other than they're too slow, but with primes I think Pentax still has the best ones. Their DA and FA Limited lenses are IMO unmatched by anything short of Leica or Zeiss glass, the build quality and feel makes all the Nikon & Pentax stuff look like junk. Unfortunately the price tag matches the build quality.

The rest of their lenses don't look like they're anything special though.

[grawk]

pentax makes pentax look like junk?

[aerius]

pentax makes pentax look like junk?

Brainfart. It should say Nikon & Canon, but the Limited series lenses do make the rest of their own stuff look like junk.

Now if only they could make a camera that looks & feels as good as their Limited series lenses, it's kinda silly having a plastic & rubber camera fitted with a tiny all metal lens. It works great but it just looks wrong.

[revolink24]

I own a few limited Pentax lenses, as well as the D FA 100mm WR Macro, which is a limited in all but name, and I can attest to the fact that their primes are absolutely stunning. Never tried any of their better zooms, so I can't attest to that.

Old Pentax glass is awesome. Old screw mount lenses, like the Super tak 50 1.4 are awesome but fully manual. I think K mount lenses can have auto aperture, but it doesn't hurt to check after all.

[VPI]

Let's see what the case photo experts would take:

- Nikon D300S body at 1262 euros. I could use it with an old AF Nikkor 35-80mm 1:4-5.6D that came with a F70 which is 14 years old now. I know the lens isn't very good, so other lenses may be considered.

- Nikon D7000 + AFS 18-200VR II kit at 1513 euros. Good reviews but concerned for the overexposing comments. The lens isn't very good for what I've read, so perhaps it's a better idea going for the body and considering another lens.

- Canon 60D + 18-135IS at 1123 euros. Despite Nikon is better regarded than Canon over here, for the pics I've seen I might end up liking the Canon's "warmth" better.

Makes it any sense going nuts for a D700? I could get the body at about 2500 euros, and see how it fares with the lens I already have.

I used to take lots of pics years ago and I've never found a camera that I loved more than the Pentax Super-A I got in the 80's. This would be my first DSLR camera, and while I know a bit about taking pictures with a SLR, I have 0 experience with DSLR. For digital I've only had a couple of P&S.

I think some of the more important factors in choosing a camera cannot be determined without actually getting out to a store and experiencing the bodies in-hand. Once you have decided if you prefer one make's bodies over the other in form factor, control placement and choice of controls then there is really not a significant difference in the end result with the bodies you have listed if you are simply looking to get out and take pictures.

I am not sure about the 18-135IS but the 60D has beaten out the D7000 in every write-up and yearly contest I have seen so far and you state you prefer samples from the Canon camp so I certainly would not lean towards Nikon simply because you have an old lens lying around.

Out of the ones you have listed I would definitely choose the D700 as it is a much better camera than the others and I have no aversion to spending money. Of the others, the D300s seems to be very popular amongst the pro-sumerish market but I have never actually used one so I cannot comment. Everything else I am just going by all the reviews and the Camera of the year competitions that seem to be going to the 60D over the D7000s in saying I would choose one over the other as I have only used both a few times and mostly remember not liking button placement of the D7000.

Oh, for clarity, I am definitely not one of the crew that regards Nikon about Canon here and I am not sure I would even agree with it after spending a lot of time in this thread.

[VPI]

Pics from the Rolex Grand Am Cup from Monday. I actually have posted the extent of the pictures on a link at the Rolex Grand Am Cup FB Page and have sold over 100 of the shots to fans and even a few drivers whose names I recognize. Actually more than covered my expenses when I was really there to watch the race more than shoot pictures so that worked out pretty well.

Goofy Celeb Pic

[agile_one]

Jeff ... great panning on those moving car shots. What were you using for tripod and head? Nice you made some $$$ from having fun.

[VPI]

Thanks Gene, they were all handheld.

Edited May 31, 2011 by VPI