The Camera Thread

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo
Nikon D300, 17-55 2.8, 180 2.8, 100-300 f4 (sigma) 11-16 2.8 (Tokina) bunch of other stuff Love the 180 for aquarium shots, nice low aperture and crystasl clear glass, one of the highest rated for lowest cost pro lenses out there.

Pic take w d300 180 at 1600 iso hand held:
picture.php
 
Santa brought me a Canon t2i with the stock 18-55 lens, some filters, several books about it and other cameras, and some other bits and pieces. I'll be buying my own remote flash asap.

Time to start learning, and when I return home in a few days, I will start annoying you all with a million photos of my fish as I learn. Fun.
 
Thanks. I'm only a bit of the way through the literature for it (there's a "Field Guide" book that is much more useful than the actual manual) but even without that, it's astonishing how much better this is in med-low light, or even with the standard flash. Everything just seems so much better, as if I suddenly became a pro photographer. (Of course, this has a lot to do with the fact that my last pns didn't even focus anymore.) I can't wait to learn the real stuff.

What speedlite should I get? I am guessing I don't need the 430+ ones for anything I'll be doing, right? I'd prefer not to spend anywhere near what they cost new...
 
Definitely going to get the Canon... I think they'll even work without another trigger. Just not sure how much I need. If I can get away with maybe the 2nd model (270 I think) that'd be perfect. I'd rather spend money on another lens or some discus than like 4-500 on a flash.
 
DaveB;4742742;4742742 said:
Definitely going to get the Canon... I think they'll even work without another trigger. Just not sure how much I need. If I can get away with maybe the 2nd model (270 I think) that'd be perfect. I'd rather spend money on another lens or some discus than like 4-500 on a flash.
Click to expand...
I don't know the Canon lights very well, but with Nikon, the cheaper model flashes aren't compatible with Nikon wireless lighting. And definitely stick with genuine speedlights. Nobody knows TTL metering and flash output like Nikon or Canon do. When it comes to stuff like this that is software-driven, definitely go with the name brand.

As for speedlights vs lenses, I say spend the money in speedlights before you spend it on lenses. I have $700 invested in two Nikon speedlights and don't regret it at all. In fact, there are times I wish I had more speedlights. They're a great tool, and an even better investment.
 
flashes from your camera manufacturer work best but third party flashes can also be used as long as they are matched to your brand of camera. I have 4 Nikon speedlights for my D300 and one day I'll get off my lazy butt and set them up for the tank. all of my pics are without flash but I use a 70-200 mm 2.8 lens on a mono-pod. have to disagree with jcardona. good glass is a priority, before flashes and even before the camera. maybe I would agree if all your doing is aquarium photo's. his pics are top notch and being in the photography hobby for 40 years I can tell he knows what he's doing, but I don't think he's doing it with a fifty dollar lens. you don't need super expensive lenses, but good glass if far more important than flash or camera.
 
A speedlight will do far more for your aquarium photography than any lens.
 
I am torn here b/c being a professional (meaning doing for money) for 20 years, glass has always been the first priority. But the fish tank HAS to have flash light to look it's best. I think that if you have the flash you can stop the lens down and it will perform at the specific model's best, even if it's a kit lens. You would get better results like this with a kit lens than the 70-200 with the hood light, mainly because of full control of the light. Light being the most important factor in photography, thats my two cents. Of course, having both pro glass and speedlight is ideal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
MonsterFishKeepers.com
Top Bottom