Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Nikon dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 18, 2012, 11:18 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
Scouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Camano Island, WA.
Posts: 2,328
Default

Thanks you guys, really appreciate the feed back it helped a lot. DigMe's lens designation got a cynical smile

Seems the D600 is to good to pass on, (Only because the 800 is outta reach) that is going to be a really popular camera.

So far the Costco package looks good. Ken Rockwell's write up on the 28-300 has put me off that B&H package.

I'm off on vacation now so I'll have time to think about it.

Got you restless again have I Zig? Good luck on your sale. I'd be interested to know what lenes you decide on.

All the input has been a great help, Thanks. I may even get to be a really annoying poster in here..
__________________
Ken.
"You are who you pretend to be."
Kurt Vonnegut Jnr.
Scouse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 18, 2012, 11:35 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,157
Default some things to consider

Hi Ken,

Since you're in the process of considering a new system, it would be highly advisable for you to sit back and evaluate wether the full frame path is the best choice for you to take. I say this because you're currently using and have been accustomed to a cropped sensor with a 2x factor. The largest benefit, of course, is that it essentially doubles the focal length of any given lens as opposed to using that same lens on a full sized 'full frame' sensor.

While you will gain a great deal of improvement in low light-low noise-high ISO situations, you will definitely see a significant reduction in focal length. Your 70-300mm lens on the E500 gives you an equiv. length of 600mm. On the D600, it be 300mm.

The cropped (approx1.5)sensor "DX" cameras from Nikon would provide you with a major gain in all of the shortcomings of the E-500. Auto Focus,low light performance, low noise, highlight clipping, and frames per second performance. While not entirely sacrificing too much focal length. My 70-200mm is an 35mm equiv. of about 300mm when used with the D7000.

The price of a new D7000 is a lot easier on the piggy bank, roughly half the price.

Some additional food for thought.

Zig
__________________
http://scortoncreekgallery.smugmug.com/

So you want to be a better photographer? Open your eyes and take a look at what is all around you.
zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 18, 2012, 1:50 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
Scouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Camano Island, WA.
Posts: 2,328
Default

Yeh, that's the first think I thought of and the biggest thing Ill miss. I use that 70-300 more than any other. The 14-42 has been handy for real estate work and general use. The other kit lens is so soft I just ignore it.

Got lots to think about Zig and thanks for the reminder. As of the moment I'm still thinking that full frame D600....but...?

One reason for upgrading is the useful ISO. I've been shooting planes in flight and with my E500 I can't push, if that's the term, more than 300. Yes, I know

https://picasaweb.google.com/CamanoR...44971983055282
__________________
Ken.
"You are who you pretend to be."
Kurt Vonnegut Jnr.

Last edited by Scouse; Nov 18, 2012 at 2:00 PM.
Scouse is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 6:56 AM.