Any photographers here?

[Tanfodude]

The focusing capabilities are dependent on the lens. What lenses does she have? The resolution isn't that important unless you're shooting pics for posters. My suggestion is have her sell her lenses, keep rhe D3000, and just add your budget once she sells her lenses and get the 24-70.

Here are my sample shots with that lens

https://www.flickr.com/photos/happyd300/

 

[CHCRandy]

The focusing capabilities are dependent on the lens. What lenses does she have? The resolution isn't that important unless you're shooting pics for posters. My suggestion is have her sell her lenses, keep rhe D3000, and just add your budget once she sells her lenses and get the 24-70.

Here are my sample shots with that lens

https://www.flickr.com/photos/happyd300/

Awesome photos........but man them lenses are expensive! LOL.....are Sigma lenses any good? They sure are a lot cheaper than Nikon or Canon.....but I imagine you get what you pay for. I just don't think I can pay $1000+ for a lens for a camera. Is there any cheaper options to obtain same or near same outcome? What do them numbers mean anyway. 24-70 f 2.8?

 

[voidsherpa]

The focusing capabilities are dependent on the lens.

Focus speed can be limited by the lens, but is entirely dependent on the body (speed unless limited by the lens), accuracy, and low light focus ability, cross type points, layout, etc

 

[voidsherpa]

is there any cheaper options to obtain same or near same outcome?

If budget is a concern prime lenses are by and far cheaper, faster, and usually sharper when stopped down to their 2.8 zoom equivalents. Nikon 50 1.4 is fairly cheap, and 85 1.8 it's a great portrait focal length on a FF body.

 

[Wild Deuce]

*

 

[voidsherpa]

If you are considering all things, you are correct.

I was strictly talking gear.

Not that it matters, but in regards to the lens being the everything. My mentor made a comment about his lens being "too sharp" years ago (he was referencing a Nikon 85 tilt prime) and I thought it was a ludicrous statement. But he in fact was correct, retouching dust even at 50% deliverable resolution on product, you question if the client would even care. He also shoot's 50% of his work with a Nikon 24-120 f4 vr kit lens and makes more money than me.

 

[Tanfodude]

Awesome photos........but man them lenses are expensive! LOL.....are Sigma lenses any good? They sure are a lot cheaper than Nikon or Canon.....but I imagine you get what you pay for. I just don't think I can pay $1000+ for a lens for a camera. Is there any cheaper options to obtain same or near same outcome? What do them numbers mean anyway. 24-70 f 2.8?

If your budget is $800 + the amount if sell sells her lenses, as there are used 24-70 (lens zoom range), the 2.8f is the aperture of the lens. There are sigma lens of same zoom range are cheaper. There are sites tbat actually compare the nikon 24-70 vs the sigma version, almost comparable if I remember correctly.

Review: Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 IF EX DG HSM - Nikon - The Phoblographer

Sigma will be a good choice.

With the 24-70, It's an all around lens that you dont need to take off/on other lenses just to get a certain shot. On my photos, not all of them were 24-70, but majority of them were and still take good portrait shots.

 

[Tanfodude]

Here's a most recent comparison

Nikon 24-70 vs Sigma ART 35 & 50 - DIY Photography

 

[Dyerbill]

B&H photo out of New York has been good to me.... a refurbished 30d with 30/90 warranty $175. $25 extra for two years. I too would let her experiment with brands......most find Canon or Nikon. Lens make the picture.

 

[chocktaw2]

Nikon D7100 is in your range, and her lenses will be compatible with it.

Nikon D7100 | DX-Format HDSLR with Built-in HDR, WiFi & More

Yes, I'm partial to Nikon.

Family pic is outdated. D200 has been gone for a few years. Got new D500 last week.

I have seen this guy in action. And seen the end result. Outstanding! Take what he says for the gospel truth, you will not be disappointed.

 

[BugI02]

Awesome photos........but man them lenses are expensive! LOL.....are Sigma lenses any good? They sure are a lot cheaper than Nikon or Canon.....but I imagine you get what you pay for. I just don't think I can pay $1000+ for a lens for a camera. Is there any cheaper options to obtain same or near same outcome? What do them numbers mean anyway. 24-70 f 2.8?

The first numbers are the focal length of the lens. That it indicates a range means its a zoom (variable focal length) lens. A 'normal' lens is around 50 so at the low end of this lens' range it is a very wide angle lens and at the high end it is a very mild telephoto, so mild it would mostly help in portraiture or close in work. The lens is capable of varying smoothly all across that range of values to give her exactly the focal length she needs (within that range)

The second number, f 2.8 is a measure of the lens' maximum light gathering ability. A lower number is better as the less light lost the better ( it gives a broader range of shutter speeds for lower light conditions ). A great deal of the cost of a lens will be caught up in this light gathering efficiency and the quality of the optics. The rest is in the electronics that allow for fast autofocus and auto-irising

 

[CHCRandy]

Just wondering what makes a 24-70 better than say a 24-135 like this? I guess is what I am asking is if you can buy one that is good from 24-70.....why not have it go from 24-135 or 50-200.........is bigger not better?

Brand New Sigma 24-135mm f/2.8-4.5 Autofocus Lens 85126667443 | eBay

Thanks

 

[Tanfodude]

That one you posted has a variable aperture, the 2.8f is only at 24mm, the more you zoom in, the bigger the f number is (bigger means lesser light, inverse proportional), at 135mm, the aperture is 4.5f will be the lowest it can get. the 24-70mm has manual/fixed aperture can stay @ 2.8f regardless of you zoom range between 24-70mm, which means same light input. You need adequate lighthing for better picture or for bokeh effect.

Aperture = the smaller the number, the bigger the opening (which means more light can go in to the sensor, which also means better picture in low light settings)

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Sigma-24-70...445107?hash=item1a0050cd33:g:JZoAAOSwBahVWidw

http://www.ebay.com/itm/NEW-Sigma-A...615352?hash=item3d1c3ab838:g:gBUAAOSwqBJXUVjS

The way you described how your daughter shoots, she doesn't need >70mm. Unless she's shooting from a distance.

 

[Tanfodude]

Before you decide, here are more reviews:

Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG HSM Lens Sample Pictures

Sigma AF 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG HSM (DX) - Review / Test Report - Sample Images & Verdict

 

[Tanfodude]

If meeting price halfway w/ good performance

https://www.slrlounge.com/tokina-24-70-f2-8-beats-nikon-canon-sigma-models-price-performance/

And is full frame ready. The Sigma is Crop frame.

http://www.lenstip.com/471.12-Lens_...O_FX_SD_24-70_mm_f_2.8_(IF)_Sample_shots.html

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3964110

 

[Tanfodude]

Keep in mind that since she shoots a DX sensor (cropped), the full frame lens of 24-70 will be equivalent to ~ 35-100mm. So the Sigma might be better suited since it's a 24-70mm for a crop sensor.

Will this be a surprised gift? Coz if not, have her go to a store and try the lens itself on her camera. Kinda like buying a firearm.

 

[gopher]

I was just wondering if any of you could give me advice on a good camera to purchase for my daughter for Christmas? She is kind of a semi-professional...no formal schooling and self taught. She does outdoor photo sessions for people and probably does 40-50 sessions per year. She now uses an older Nikon D3000 and I need to get her a better set-up. Been looking at Canon T6 or T6i or something in that price range. I can get a bundle package for around $600-800....just wondering if anyone here knows of a better deal for similar technology. To be honest, I don't know the difference between a T5 and T6i or D3300 or SLR........other than hundreds of dollars. I just would like to stay under $600-700....but even cheaper would be fine if same specs that matter(which I don't know what is and isn't)

Thanks

If your daughter is self taught, the BEST investment you can make in helping her to improve her photography (besides her just going out and taking as many photos as possible and asking friends and other photographers to critique the results) is to take some photography courses. Here in Indianapolis, I can recommend either of the following:

• Indianapolis Art Center
• Lightbox Photo Academy

I've taken courses from both of these (Lightbox as it's previous incarnation "Indy Photo Coach") organizations. Learning proper technique, composition, lighting, etc. will improve your daughter's photography more than any single piece of equipment. BTW, I'm not affiliated with either of these organizations in any way.

Really good photographers can take impressive photos with just about any camera. The equipment isn't as important as the knowledge and skill of the gal/guy with his finger on the shutter release. Great photos can be made with crappy cameras. The point is, if you can't recognize the great shot it doesn't matter whether your camera costs $5k or $5.

A gift certificate to Indianapolis Art Center, Lightbox Photo Academy or any other similar photography class would be my number one recommendation.

If you really want to get her a piece of photography equipment, then as others have said, find out if she wants to stick with Nikon or not. If she has more than a couple of lenses for her D3000 or some other accessories, then getting her a Canon will mean re-investing in lenses and accessories. Nikon lenses and accessories generally won't work on a Canon.

For portraiture, she may find a full-frame camera better than the crop-frame D3000. "Full-frame" cameras have a full-sized 24x36mm sensor (the same size as 35mm film stock); crop-frame or crop-sensor cameras have a smaller sensor (Nikon calls their full-frame cameras "FX" and their crop-sensor cameras "DX"). Full-frame cameras generally (but not always) have better low-light capability and will create better out of focus backgrounds ("bokeh") than will a crop-sensor camera. Full-frame cameras can also have higher resolution (the "megapixels" or MP) but pixel count isn't really as important as most people think.

Full-frame digital cameras are expensive and you will only be able to afford a used one in your budget (check out Roberts Camera used photo section; they aren't the cheapest around, but they are local). Adorama and B&H also have used photography equipment and are reputable dealers. If you get a new or "new to you" used camera, you may be able to trade in the D3000 your daughter currently has for a few dollars, too.

Portraiture often benefits from large aperture lenses (aperture is described by the "f-ratio", e.g. f/2.8; lower f-ratio means a larger aperture). Large aperture/low f-ratio lenses make it easier to throw the background out of focus and draw attention to the in-focus subject of the photo. Most people also like the out of focus background ("bokeh"). Similarly, a medium to long telephoto lens (even one not especially large aperture/low f-ratio) can also be used to throw the background out of focus provided the background is sufficiently far from the subject of the photo. Something in the range of 70-100mm or so is considered the "sweet spot" for portrait lenses.

Personally, if she does primarily portraiture, I wouldn't recommend the 24-70 f/2.8 lens that has been mentioned. She will likely be using it mostly at the 70mm end and that lens is VERY spendy as you may have already discovered (WAY out of your price range). Short focal lengths (<50mm) and portraiture don't usually get along well; the short focal length will distort facial features and make people look slightly odd. That's not to say that you can't do good portraits with shorter focal length lenses, just that it's more difficult.

In my opinion, good portrait lens options from Nikon and in your price range would be:

• Nikon 50mm f/1.4g ($400ish)
• Nikon 50mm f/1.8g ($200ish, this is a great lens at a great price)
• Nikon 85mm f/1.8g ($400ish)
• Nikon 105mm f/2.8D Micro ($400ish, "Micro" is Nikon-speak for a "Macro" lens or a lens that will focus very close to the subject and give an enlarged image [don't worry, it also works just fine for photos at normal distances as well]; you'll have to get this lens used as it is no longer sold new by Nikon; the newer 105mm f/2.8 Micro lens is out of your price range; I have this exact lens and it is no slouch and extremely sharp; this lens will also open up the possibility of "macro photography" for your daughter)

If your daughter stays with the D3000 camera body, all of the above lenses will have an "effective focal length" 50% longer than quoted. For example, the 50mm lens (considered a "normal" lens on a full-frame camera body) will frame a subject the same as a short 75mm telephoto lens on a "full-frame" camera. Perfect for portraiture! This is due to the "crop sensor" in the D3000; the sensor is physically smaller than the standard "full-frame" sensor size. This is often called "crop factor".

The above is a whole lot of information that I hope is helpful. If you (or your daughter) wants to read more from a pro photographer that happens to be something of a cheapskate, take a look at Ken Rockwell's website. He is BRUTALLY honest about pricey lenses that aren't worth the money, cheap lenses that perform way beyond their low price tags, used equipment that is worth buying, etc. Ken's advice is usually spot on.

 

[CHCRandy]

Thanks everyone for all your advice and help. I ended up buying her a D3400 with 2 lenses in kit. She now says she wants another lens for portraits. She likes her camera, but she is now wanting to be able to have her portraits be blurred in the background (Is that Bokeh?). She mentioned someone told her a good lens would be a nikon af nikkor 50mmf/1 autofocus......would that be like the one gopher mentioned above 50mm F/1.8G?

This stuff overloads my mind. She has also been talking about lighting. That is a whole new topic though.

One other thing. This new camera she has problems getting it to take multiple pictures with one push of button (full auto, lol) is there a trick to that stuff?

Thanks again everyone for your help.

 

[nipprdog]

The 85 1.8 is a great portrait lens.

 

[nipprdog]

View attachment 52307