quote:

---

Product Overview
Di II: Lenses are designed for exclusive use on digital cameras with smaller-size imagers and inherit all of the benefits of our Di products. These lenses are not designed for 35mm film cameras and digital cameras with image sensors larger than 24mm x 16mm.

At Tamron, our quest has always been to make the ideal zoom lens. As a result of this ongoing challenge, we have introduced the concept of our high-power zoom lens in the new AF18-200mm XR Di II for exclusive use with digital SLRs. Tamron's original development of proprietary core technologies such as Aspherical element production, Multiple Cam Mechanism and Integrated Focus Cam design lend to the creation of the world's lightest, most compact 11.1X zoom lens made for digital SLR cameras.

The 18-200mm (28-300 when converted to 35mm) provides the digital photographer with the versatility of a true wide to ultra tele zoom in an amazingly easy to use design.

---

Hope this helps.

Steve Brown
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 03-28-2005, 07:47 AM:
 
The longer-range zoom lenses are almost never very sharp. An 18-200 sounds nice on paper, but is probably going to be very heavy and large and less sharp than primes or shorter zooms. If you want to get this, try to use it in a store or buy from somewhere with a liberal return policy before you commit to it.

You'll probably have to figure out what focal lengths work best for you. For 35mm, I use 24mm, 50mm, 200mm, and a 35-105 zoom. I'm happy with this mix (and would like to get a 20mm and 35mm), but it may not work at all for you (and you'll need to convert the focal lengths to ones appropriate for the smaller sensor size for digital cameras).
 

---

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 03-28-2005, 09:49 AM:
 
For 35mm 8 perf I use a 90mm lens the most especially for portrature It has almost the same convergance of lines of perspective as the human eye so it gives images a natural perpective
 

---

Posted by Larry Myers (Member # 738) on 03-28-2005, 10:14 AM:
 
Well most normal lenses for 35mm have a focal length around 52mm. This gives a 5x7 print with the correct perspective at 10 inches of view distance. With older SLR cameras, the same combo will give a 1:1 same size image when one eye is looking through the view finder and the other eye is looking at the subject. This doesn't work with newer cameras as the viewfinder itself is visually smaller due to the optics in the view finder.

Zoom lenses generally are about 1/2 to 1/3 the resolution of prime lenses. This will show up in larger film prints but might not show up at all in digital. This is mainly due to built in image sharping software in digital cameras.

Larry
 

---

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 03-28-2005, 10:22 AM:
 
Larry said "Well most normal lenses for 35mm have a focal length around 52mm. This gives a 5x7 print with the correct perspective at 10 inches of view distance."
It will give the same coverage angle but not the same convergance of lines of perspective to the vanishing points
 

---

Posted by Larry Myers (Member # 738) on 03-28-2005, 03:02 PM:
 
It should. In other words, if you made a 5x7 transparancy from a 35mm negative using a 52mm camera lens, the vanishing points should line up with the original scene at 10 inches of view distance. It's more or less how depth of field tables are calculated and what is ment by a normal lens all with this 10 inch view distance in mind. A 90mm lens would never be considered normal with a 35mm camera but would be close to normal with a 6x9 folder. Actually the calculation would be 2.2x or 2.2 times 35mm equals 6x9 and 2.2 times 52mm is 114mm. So that 90mm lens would be slightly wide for a 6x9 camera.

Larry
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-28-2005, 07:32 PM:
 
Actually I would go with a Nikon F and 28 to 85mm Nikor zoom lens. Nikon made a dynamyte small zoom that is sharp as a tack, keep plenty of Tri-X on hand and push it to ASA 2000 for those grainy award winning shots you will be taking. That Rebel is for weenies! The main reason for the F is so you have something substantial to hit back with and then just pick it back up and keep shooting away! Award winning shots often happen this way .

Mark

P.S. I used to work for Canon factory service and would never own anything they make....... at least todays products. They suck big time. The old Canon stuff was great though....... When the Canon Autofocus(otherwise known in the shop as outafocus)appeard that was the beginning of the decline for expecting anything good from Canon.
 

---

Posted by Will Kutler (Member # 770) on 03-28-2005, 11:39 PM:
 
Mark and I are in agreement about Nikon! For many years, Nikon and other quality 35mm SLR cameras/equipment were really holding their prices. It had been a while since I had gone to a camera show or looked around for stuff, but my jaw dropped to the floor when I saw how the prices have fallen, thanks to digital cameras! Look around for Nikon equipment, as your bound to find quality stuff at reasonable prices.

The Nkion F4 will suit both digital and 35mm film photography. I remember when that camera first came out, and it's price. The military was one of the first customers. I saw many operations in the early 1990's where a photo was taken with an F4 and was at the Pentagon via computer download in a matter of minutes! I have lately seen these cameras reasonably priced.

Nikon F series equipment is quality, rugged dependable and reliable!

Cheers

K.
 

---

Posted by Christopher Duvall (Member # 284) on 03-29-2005, 03:05 AM:
 
Thanks guys. You gave me some ideas. If anybody else has anything...keep it coming.
 

---

Posted by Stephen Brown (Member # 292) on 03-29-2005, 06:37 AM:
 
I shoot with a Nikon D70 DSLR (yes digital I know, I can hear the groans but it has its advantages) and use a Tamron 70-300mm lens as well as a 28-80 Nikor. The Tamron actually is quite light and quite quick to use. Even out on the end of the lens it produces nice sharp results. The new Tamron 18-200 looks like a good universal lens for shooting where you need to have a wide range of focal lengths.

I'll certainly be getting one.

I'll upload a picture from the camera in the random pictures 2 thread.

Steve Brown
 

---

Posted by William Hooper (Member # 71) on 03-29-2005, 06:51 AM:
 
I don't know much 'bout them devilish digital cameras; yours may have anti-shake, autofocus, etc., & you may be specifically needing to use a digital camera for speedy export not requiring scanning, taking a bunch of pictures many of which you may want to throw away, etc.

Longer lenses have a problem with exacerbating lens shake. As light levels get lower, any blurring from longer exposures piles on top of lens shake to make things worse.

A flash is always irritating to subjects & other folks in the room.

If you want these long lenses in these small rooms so that you can pick out 1 or 2 faces from the back of the room, a flash won't help anyway.

If you get a faster lens (most longer zooms are slower, & much more expensive if faster), you start having depth of field problems & have to constantly ride focus. This may be less of an issue with autofocus cameras if you devise a technique that makes the autofocuser happy & always point where it wants to focus.

Zoom lenses with huge ranges (like 28-210) are always mch mushier-looking than primes. It's less of an issue with smaller zoom ranges (28-50, 110-250, whatever).

If they're small rooms & you want paparazzi-style photos of 1 or 2 individuals in the crowd, I think you don't need a wide lens like a 28mm or less, unless you're right up on them. With a f2.5 lens around 35-70mm & a bit of distance, if the light is decent, you won't need a flash. You will need to be steady, but that's a given with anything, & not as big a problem with longer lenses.

If it's got to be digital, I'd say a 35-70mm lens about f2.5 & a high resolution camera (4 megapixels, I dunno from megapixels), & crop out what you don't want.

You'll have problems if you get further back, have to stand on chairs, etc. to shoot over a crowd, etc.

If lighting gets low, then you'll need a flash, so you'll have to get still further back to keep from bugging folks, & so need a longer lens & a more powerful flash.

--
My pictures are different, & I'm primarily interested in wide spectacle shots in theaters with & without crowds. I'm have only been taking the Nikon FG out for a long while, & I've bought another.

:
http://mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/emfgfg20/fg/index.htm

They're the lightest, smallest Nikon made, use Nikon AIs lenses, & don't call attention to themselves. I do get some wandering through crowds shots, & the size makes pitcher-taking non-distracting or even unobserved. They're stupidly inexpensive, because they don't look like the dadgum space shuttle camera, but have TTL flash, excellent metering & autoexposure modes. There's something a little different about the center-weighted metering on the FG, but it adapts well for the big auditorium shots I do where the hot spots are scattered away from the center. You'll often find people selling them because they mistakenly think they're broken: the AE readout doesn't work until the frame counter is advanced to 1 (no freebie AE shots before frame 1).

Light, rugged; I have no straps on mine (except wrist straps) & instead have one of those spring-loaded belt loop clips like you put on huge keyrings. EASY for going up ladders & through crowds!
 

---

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 03-29-2005, 09:25 AM:
 
I still use my old trusty exacta 1953 model SLR with a set of matched zies lens
noisy heavy but very reliable
 

---

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 03-29-2005, 09:50 AM:
 

quote:

---

Next year, I will be in a situation where I will be doing press style and paparazzi photography. The room(s) I will be in will not be too large and I will have good access to the subjects so I will not not need anything major.

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

Here is the first picture I shot with it, on "full auto"

---

Cool picture. Is that your screening room? To get some other pictures for variety, you might try one with a light coming from out of the frame like DS left or right raking across the seats at some diagonal. I find that architectural stuff with lots of edges & shapes, especially repeating ones (like seats, drapes, plaster frou-frou on the walls, etc.) often get cool effects with just one light raking across an area of them at some odd angle, pulling out contours to different degrees as the light falls off, the same shapes are positioned differently in the cone of light, etc. A separate, isolated, directional light source also makes the depth pop more. In an auditorium, I usually find an old lighting instrument, hide it behind something, throw a slash diagonally up a wall, across some seats or the stage (wherever there's a sizeable dark area to isolate it) & adjust the output & try a couple of different color gels to find a cool one. Sometimes it's a color that goes with the room, sometimes an oddball color; I'm no designer, just a critic.
 

---

Posted by Ron Yost (Member # 1850) on 03-30-2005, 12:35 PM:
 
You're right, Tao. I remember seeing a photograph of one of ILM's 'early' motion-control rigs and, if I remember correctly, they had a Micro-Nikkor f3.5 55mm on the camera. I've owned one for years (the lens, not the m.c. rig).

Back to the subject of this thread: I'd advise you get a Canon 28-135mm IS lens, put it on your DRebel, and you'll be all set! A very useful, relatively sharp lens, for the $$. Even for use in low light.

Ron Yost .. former Nikon-F user, now largely gone over to the dark-side of Canon digital. Still have my F's and lenses, tho.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-30-2005, 07:55 PM:
 
Ron,
Its unfortnate that its dark over there with the Canon, I bet its brighter over by your Nikon though. Things were beginning to get just slightly dim when I left Canon right after the intro of the Autofocus and that was long ago so I guess it has probably gotten dark there by now.....

Mark
 

---

Posted by Martin Brooks (Member # 1269) on 04-02-2005, 10:06 PM:
 
I’m also now shooting with a Nikon D70 digital (and I also have the N80 film body, but don’t use it much anymore.)

With the film body, I used to shoot with the 70-300 f4.5-5.6 and the 28-105mm 3.5-4.5 lenses. They were great lenses, but I always got frustrated with the slow speed, even when using flash, especially when shooting concerts from a distance. If you buy the Nikon D70 as a kit with the lens, it comes with a 18-70mm 3.5-4.5 (acts as a 27-105mm) on the digital body.

So even though they’re expensive and even though on the digital, you can crank up the ASA to 1600, I went with the 70-200mm f2.8 and the 28-70mm f2.8 AF-S series lenses. I find that I mainly use the 70-200 (which acts as a 105-300mm on the digital body, since the digital imager is smaller than 35mm.) The lens is very large and heavy, but I love that lens. It’s very sharp, focuses very quickly and is easy to switch to manual mode. Only downside is that because the lens is so large, it’s not a good lens to use when you don’t want to be obvious. (I was shooting in a club and management told me that they permit amateur photographers, but not pros. Luckily, I was on the band’s VIP list that night, so they still let me shoot.)

If you’re going to shoot with flash, get a bracket for the camera and flash, like the Statos1035. That will get the Flash higher, reducing shadows, and is also better if you’re indoors and want to bounce the flash. You need a special Nikon cable to use the bracket.

One other note: get filters to protect the lenses and don’t cheap out. People spend hundreds or even thousands of dollars for lenses and then put a $10 filter on it…ridiculous.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 04-03-2005, 09:15 PM:
 
Yes, I am in the digital thing too. Was out hiking todaynear Farmington, UT and caught this overgrown barn with my small Nikon 2200 thats almost always in my pocket....


 

---

Posted by Tracy Bellar (Member # 3049) on 04-06-2005, 01:47 AM:
 
I use a Nikon F3 lenses are all fixed length. I got rid of my zooms. I carry a Nikkor 28mm 2.8, Nikon series E 50mm 1.8, Nikkor 105mm 2.5, and a Nikkor ED 180mm 2.8. If you are doing jornalism work in tight around 28mm-35mm is good. Portrait between 55mm-135mm. I love the 180mm. When you need it it comes in handy and nothing else will do. 180 is a very useful lens in jornalism. I did some fashion work with medium length lenses. Landscapes and really good fashion or portrait and landscape should be medium format or 4x5 and plus.
 

---

Posted by Tracy Bellar (Member # 3049) on 04-06-2005, 08:55 PM:
 
Tamron or vivitar had a lens with a locking zoom I think it was a 28-210mm. I do miss the locking zoom after I sold it. Came in nice when you wanted to set your zoom and then it gave more ease to focusing and working other stuff without worrying about the zoom moving.
 

---

Posted by System Notices (Member # 2357) on 08-05-2007, 02:22 AM:
 

It has been 850 days since the last post.

 

---

Posted by Allison Parsons (Member # 2728) on 08-05-2007, 02:22 AM:
 
Not really a lens question but...

So I dusted off my old Minolta SRT 200 SLR camera this week. To make a long story short, I've used this camera once (I've used my Dad's old Pentax 1000's of times) so I don't know too much about this one.

This camers has a 'stop down' button on it. What is it for, and am I going to need to use it everytime I take a picture?
 

---

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 08-05-2007, 02:36 AM:
 
A "stop down" button allows you to preview the depth of field prior to taking the shot. Normally the iris is wide open, regardless of the f-stop selected on the lens, in order to give you the brightest viewfinder image. When you fire the shutter, the iris stops down to whatever is set on the lens. Using the stop down button allows you to see beforehand what will be in focus at the aperture setting you've set.
 

---

Posted by Allison Parsons (Member # 2728) on 08-05-2007, 02:41 AM:
 
thanks paul! Do you get more artsy-fartsy pictures if you hold down the button while taking a picture? I'm going to try this beast out tomorrow. Hopefully my manual camera knowhow will come back to me quickly.
 

---

Posted by Stephen Brown (Member # 292) on 08-05-2007, 07:07 AM:
 
Allison,

When you hit the shutter button the iris closes to the setting that is on the lens, the step down is just for previewing the depth of field (by closing the iris to the lens setting) through the viewfinder before taking the picture.
 

---