Warbird Information Exchange

If you cheap on anything, make it the camera body and not the lens. Because with a crummy lens, you won't get anything of value no matter which camera body you put it on.

I use a Nikon D50, which I think is pretty much discontinued now. Shame, it's a great body, especially for a starter. The D40 and D80 are good values though. I have mulled over a D200 and D2X, but realistically, the D80 give you more value, IMHO. Plus the D200 and D2X is in the same generation as the D50 and D70. The D40 and D80 are newer.

Canon or Nikon, or something else? I can only speak to the Canon and Nikon side as those are what I have experience with and are the most common on the air show circuit. Either Nikon or Canon will give you great results. It's a matter of personal taste and sometimes (dare I say) what is on sale!

Check out the forums at www.fencecheck.com

I think we've all pretty much answered Nathan's questions here. I still use a film SLR because it's what I have and I'm comfortable and experienced with it. DSLR is in the wings, I just have more pressing $$$ priorities in my life right now. One recent post here makes a real important point.....whatever you get, go with the latest edition of it. The way digital technology is advancing, things are changing pretty fast.
BTW the reason I actually bought another film camera body recently is that I couldn't even GIVE away a bag full of lenses, mostly zooms, without a body to shoot with. One body just wore out from use and another was bent irreparably when I fell off a gooseneck trailer and landed on it. Don't even ask....I DID GET THE SHOT.

Canso42-climbing out of the stone age.

Canso42 wrote:



And what exactly is wrong with the "old, film-era lenses"? Some of the finest glass Nikon ever produced, or ever will produce, were made for film cameras. And the current style of making lenses without aperture rings is crazy. That limits their use to only the new cameras.

Walt

Nathan et al--

I haven't anything much to offer in the way of advice; am still using 35mm 26 years after acquiring my first SLR...the three bodies I've got now are my fifth, sixth and seventh Minoltas (not content with being wildly outdated technologically, I have to have a camera brand that is no longer made at all!). Specifically, I have two X-9s and a genuinely-vintage SR-T200. They're what I'm used to...and until a digi SLR of decent capability drifts down into the price bracket (more or less) of my Jurassic Park cameras (when they were newer), they're what I'll continue to use. Maybe even a bit longer: a techie I ain't.

I realize film will become scarcer and costlier with time, but it's not too grievous yet. My SR-T, which I saw and bought for old times' sake in a Value Village thrift shop, is the unit I use most (and a twin of my first SLR, long since sadly stolen). It gives excellent results despite the fact that I've never had a live battery in it (the battery in an SR-T only runs the light meter, and I just guess f-stop/shutter speed and am almost never wrong). Try that with something all-electronic, eh...

Plus I find it's a real kick being on the line at an airshow toting an ancient metal-bodied all-mechanical SLR. People are amazed to see the thing. It's like arriving in a '62 Studebaker, or turning up with an antique pistol...and I intend to enjoy that kick, too, until digital becomes a legitimate option for this Luddite of modest means.

And when that happens, I'll probably get a mid-range digi Canon. But I think that won't be any too soon...

Cheers

S.

Rare Bear,
You are quite right about Nikon optics. What I meant was that in my opinion it would be better to match technologies. I.E., I doubt that I will acquire a digital Pentax to use my older lenses. It seems that too much capability may be lost in the transition. However, I'm open to being proven wrong on that. Whattya think?

Speaking of Nikon glass... I have a 23 mm Nikor that I bought used for an old Konica that I had a Nikon adapter for. Any Nikon users out there are welcome to it. I havent' owned a functional camera to use it on in 18 years. Everyone I know who could use it already had one!

Canso42

We only used old Nikon glass when we went digital, as there was nothing better made. As long as it fits the body, and the glass is good, I would say go for it. You'll prolly lose out on some fidgety cutting edge features like the one that mows your butt hairs every tuesday, but unless you're a real pro, I wouldn't be afraid of it at all. Just make sure it fits, and works, and you're golden.

Again, any digital connection between the lens and the body wouldn't work. But I wouldn't shoot with most of the features anyway. It al really depends on the camera and lens, eh?

_________________
"I knew the jig was up when I saw the P-51D-20-NA Mustang blue-nosed bastards from Bodney, and by the way the blue was more of a royal blue than an indigo and the inner landing gear interiors were NOT green, over Berlin."

I swore by 35mm slides originally and gave them up when I had to pay for both film and processing and moved across to 35mm prints.

I survived well on a second hand Pentax spotmatic 35mm SLR with screw mount super takumar lenses and was able to build up a great set of lenses second hand.

After using a cheap digital compact camera for happy snaps I decided to splurge on a new digital SLR camera to retire the Spotmatic to the pasture and get back into airshow and aircraft photography.

I chose the new Canon 400D, as against the superceded 350D, I havent mastered it yet but have found it to be an excellent camera and am unlikey to return to 35mm film at all.

I can't comment on the 30D as I havent used it, however I went for the 400D as it is 10.1 MPixel as against 8.2Mpixel and cheaper than the 30D.

I am not sure why the 30D is selling at a higher cost or what its full feature set is compared to the 400D, but for me it was a $1000 AUD saving on RRP just for the camera body, and I put that into lenses, memory cards, batteries* and carry case.



* the 400D uses a proprietry Canon rechargeable battery, not normally sold seperately at "department stores" and only at specialist camera houses, unfortunately the camera does'nt give you a warning of battery charge and when the screen goes "black" you cant bolt to a chemist to buy a button battery for the light meter or some AA's for the flash unit, so either make sure you keep your battery charged, carry the charger with you, or invest in an after market second battery!

Other than still being on "L" plates driving it, I would certainly recommend the 400D for consideration.

regards

Mark Pilkington

_________________
20th Century - The Age of Manned Flight
"from Wrights to Armstrong in 66 years -WOW!"

The D50 is not made anymore? I just bought one a few months ago! It is still a great camera.

_________________
Chris Henry
EAA Aviation Museum Director

I think it is. If you go to Nikon's website and look at the photography section, the D50 and D70 are on the product list anymore...

http://www.nikonusa.com/template.php?cat=1&grp=2

Canso42,

I'll take the lens. Send me a message or e-mail as to how you want to handle this.

Any Nikon lens made starting with the AI series in the late 1970's will work and meter on the current digital cameras, although you obviously won't have autofocus on the non-AF lenses. This does not include the IX lenses made for the Pronea series cameras. You will have the 1.5 focal length factor to contend with, but that's only a real problem on the wide-angle lenses. The earlier Nikon lenses will physically mount on the digital cameras, but you will lose the metering capability.

The opposite problem is that the newer Nikon G-series lenses will not work on most of the older Nikon bodies, such as the N90, F4, N70 as these bodies don't have the Command dial to change the aperture setting.

Walt

I'm about to splurge some tax-free combat zone income on a Nikon D80. I was considering the EOS Rebel XTi and the D80.

I'm a completely amateur photographer who just happens to have some neat opportunities to photograph military jets because of my job. I've been surviving off a 2001-era 2.1 MP consumer camera until now, but I just HAD to upgrade.

The EOS had the edge on price and size/weight, but most of the photographers I talked to (and some aviation-enthusiast friends, too) ALL recommended the Nikon. So...I'm going with their recommendation.

It's a whole pile of $$ to drop on a camera, but what the heck. It's only money.

Me? Well I'm another Kodak user. A Z-740 to be precise. I know not about bigger and better cameras, but I have to say that my little Kodak has so far done everything I have asked of it in the nearly two years I have owned it. I have done no aviation photos with it, but I have done race cars, trains, stills and video.

I really need to get to an airshow soon.

_________________
It's you and me against the world.

We attack at dawn.

As someone stated earlier in the thread, pick the lens system you like best and buy the matching camera body. My photographer friends convinced me that Canon has the best lenses, so that's where I went when I moved out of my AE priority, film Minolta into the Digital/Autofocus age.

I think the Nikon/Canon thing is akin to high/low wing or Ford/Chevy, although the differences between the camera brands are more subtle..

These days I'm contemplating a $1300 Canon 100-400 "L" series zoom lens. Great lens, but hard to put at the top of my priority list when the RV-6 wants a wing leveler and an XM weather GPS. RV-6's are greedy that way...

I am not convinced that Canon, or Nikon has the best lenses. I have seen great shots from both, and have shot with both. These days, my main lens is a Sigma! The old Nikon glass for their film cameras was awesome.

I have taken air to air shots with the 28-80 kit Nikkor lens that I have heard some people refer to as a "crap lens". Well, you all have seen the results, I either got a really good one, or the people complaining that the lens is junk would complain with the high end ones as well. When it all comes down to it, like airplanes, it's who's at the controls that will make the biggest difference. And what makes the difference is practice, practice, practice. That's the real beauty of digital.

Randy, enjoy that Nikon, buddy! I would love to have the opportunities to take the pictures that you will have. Many moons ago, I walked all over Lakenheath, Europe and a lot of the world with my old Minolta X-370. You'll look back on the shots you are taking now, 20 years later and really be thankful you spent the money. I know I have no regrets, even though it took me forever to pay it off with DPP!