Thread: total camera noob

Upon further investigation ...

The zoom version (left) holds just a shade under 300ml (filled to the brim). It has a transparent window that shows focusing distance, and focusing ring actually turns. But distance scale does not turn.
The M/A and M slider also moves.

The non-zoom version holds 400ml.
The focus distance window is printed, and the slider does not move.

My conclusion, the non-zoom makes a better mug.
The moveable bits on the zoom one do not inspire confidence as far as longevity is concerned.

Tea tastes the same in either, but non-zoom holds more, and does not spill.

pretty cool mugs, but i dont drink tea or coffee so they'd be useless to me.

If i was to get 2 lenses to start off with and planned on doing some landscape photography and then something for a bit closer photos of 4wd's and stuff off road what would be a decent compromise for price and quality and do a reasonable job?

Matt

Sorry about the hijack But they are pretty cool.

As for two lenses...

Disregarding price, the 24-70 f/2.8G is a fantastic lens, as is the 70-200 f/2.8G VRII and the 14-24 f/2.8G.

You could also go with the one of the wide zooms from Sigma or Tokina in the 10-24 range and there is a new Nikkor 24-120 f/4 which I think looks very promising and is less than $'s the 24-70 f/2.8.

A 24, 35 and 50mm prime set would also cover the landscape and car aspect.

Bloody hell Ace why did you have to go and talk about the D7000. I checked it out and now once again I am buggered if I know which camera to buy???????

The amount of angst and deliberation over deciding on the D300s only to now hunt down a comparo on both of them and I'm lost AGAIN!!! both have the magnesium body and the D7000 has higher resolution.......... Maybe I should just take up chess

Originally Posted by blitz

Bloody hell Ace why did you have to go and talk about the D7000. I checked it out and now once again I am buggered if I know which camera to buy???????

The amount of angst and deliberation over deciding on the D300s only to now hunt down a comparo on both of them and I'm lost AGAIN!!! both have the magnesium body and the D7000 has higher resolution.......... Maybe I should just take up chess

My vote would be D7000 and keep the saving for some better glass or a trip somewhere really nice to take pictures. Or knight to king pawn if you take the other option.

I'm hoping that DPreview will soon do a full review and include comparison pictures against the D300s. The numbers on the spec sheet are largely irrelevant these days.

Of course I've very high hopes for the D400 when it comes out in a year or two.

Cheers, Steve

unfortunately it's a bit like buying a computer - no matter how long you look there is always a better one coming out

Tax check isn't back yet so I have a bit of time, once I get that then it will be a burning issue

If you are looking for camera gear check out this site...some great stuff for reasonable prices

Camera Market - Classifieds | Used Cameras | Second-hand Lenses | Buy and Sell

Originally Posted by dmdigital

Sorry about the hijack But they are pretty cool.

As for two lenses...

Disregarding price, the 24-70 f/2.8G is a fantastic lens, as is the 70-200 f/2.8G VRII and the 14-24 f/2.8G.

You could also go with the one of the wide zooms from Sigma or Tokina in the 10-24 range and there is a new Nikkor 24-120 f/4 which I think looks very promising and is less than $'s the 24-70 f/2.8.

A 24, 35 and 50mm prime set would also cover the landscape and car aspect.

Hi DMDigital, thanks for that. Im hoping to have the cash to buy the camera before Christmas, then start looking at getting a collection of different lenses together.

I like the combination of having the 24-70 f/2.8G and the 70-200 f/2.8G, that would give me a range of zoom options.

Matt