Need DSLR help.. lenses from film days, etc.

[Platypus]

Hello D&VC

I was very much into photography 10+ years ago and have quite a bit of equipment, however I know next to nothing about digital SLRs, what is compatible, etc as I am coming from a purely film background. I've got a digital P&S but that's hardly the same thing. Anyway... I just found out today after visiting a local shop that my lenses are essentially worthless at this point when it comes to autofocus technology in these cameras. The lenses themselves dont have motors, that was done by my old trusty Nikon N80 in the past. Now.. it seems they mount but everything is manual about them.

I want to get an entry level DSLR that isn't too crazy, I was looking at the Nikon D3100. I am thinking about ~700-800 is my range for it. I really want to make my existing lenses work, and they still do to some extent, but was wondering if anyone had tips for me on how to get the most out of them.. or if I should just try to sell that stuff.

I've got a Nikkor AF 28-105 D macro and a Nikkor AF 75-240 D

Would the Canon t3i be a better buy if the lenses I have are going to be fully manual anyway? Is there any quality issues I should consider due to the fact that they're not going to autofocus?

My main motivation to replace the N80 is the film aspect.. just too expensive and unwieldy compared to firing off 50+ shots at a time onto flash memory. Any help would be appreciated, I am completely out of touch with digital as I've come from a strictly film background. I don't mind doing everything myself but was hoping maybe there was some possible way to salvage these lenses.

 

[ElFenix]

according to nikonians the meter should work in PASM and do things for you. you'd only need to focus. for nikon lenses prior to AI-P (1987 or so), a canon will at least turn on meter, which inexpensive nikons won't do.

 

[foghorn67]

If you get the Canon you would have to figure in the Canon EOS to Nikon adaptor. I don't know how much they run these days.
Get the model and serial numbers of your lenses to see if they play nicely.
I would also factor in viewfinder size and brightness for MF. Unless you go live view all the time.

 

[foghorn67]

Btw. I would keep the lenses unless you have a "minimalist" lifestyle or you don't have room. I would love to get back into my film style of shooting, even if it is digital. I have my favorite FD lens ready to go.

 

[Kaido]

I'm into vintage and alternative-mount lenses. I have a T2i and love it - I'd definitely suggest the T3i if you're looking to buy a new camera. Canon has the biggest variety of adapters available (on eBay for cheap). You can't have full control on every lens out there, but if you already have lenses to tinker with, a $12 investment in a mount isn't too bad. This is a quick snap from my old 50mm Takumar today, love the DOF, color, smoothness, etc.:

http://i.imgur.com/DypeK.jpg

My two favorite lenses are my 35mm f/2.8 Zeiss Jena (lets in an incredible amount of light) and my new (old) 50mm f/1.4 SMC Takumar (the Zeiss actually lets in more light, believe it or not). Both use M42-to-EOS screw-mounts. I really like manual lenses a lot. I have a ton of old & new Nikkor glass, a few Zeisses, a Takumar, and a couple other oddballs and really enjoy them a lot. There's a good review site & forum for Manual Focus lenses over here:

http://www.mflenses.com/

 

[Platypus]

I am leaning heavily towards the nikon d3100 because my existing lenses definitely fit out of the box and it comes with a 'decent' 18-55mm with autofocus if I absolutely need it. I would much rather use my 28-105 macro though so I'll prob just carry both with me. Does anyone have experience with that camera in particular? I don't need anything amazing but something that will be a good foundation if I intend to buy more lenses. Is the t3i worth the extra ~150?

 

[AkumaX]

how about the d5100?

 

[Platypus]

how about the d5100?

Was looking at this as well.. besides the pull out viewfinder, is it really worth the ~150 price difference? Anything I should consider feature wise that it has over the 3100?

 

[Platypus]

Someone on another forum recommended the D90 and D200, saying they have motors in them for lenses. Will those be compatible to make AF work for my existing lenses?

 

[Sid59]

D50, D70, D80, D90, D200, D300 will AF your lenses.

D90 and D300 have the best IQ with the D90 being the most recent DSLR.

If you can find a used D90, that's the way to go. If you careless about video and can find a D300 cheaper than a D90, it's an excellent camera but i doubt you'll find a used D300 cheaper than D90. Even cheaper option is a used D50.

 

[Platypus]

D90 looks like a winner.

Do you think that the 18-105mm kit lens is worth the extra 200 bucks if I already have a 28-105? Or should I get the body only?

 

[Sid59]

D90 looks like a winner.

Do you think that the 18-105mm kit lens is worth the extra 200 bucks if I already have a 28-105? Or should I get the body only?

too much overlap and i dont know how sharp the old 28-105 is? your 28-105 is effectively 42-157, pretty good for a travel, outdoor lens. 200 buys you an updated design, VR and a bit wider. I'd pass on it. I have one and never use it but i lent it my friend and it's pretty sharp.

 

[Munky]

LOL at recommending canon for Nikon lenses. Get a Nikon D3100, D5100, or even a used D90 if you can find one for a reasonable price.

 

[ElFenix]

D90 looks like a winner.

Do you think that the 18-105mm kit lens is worth the extra 200 bucks if I already have a 28-105? Or should I get the body only?

you will find yourself wanting much more wide angle lens if your widest is 28 mm.

if you can get a D90 and then get the 18-55 separately and total a couple hundred less than a d90 with an 18-105 then do so. if not, just get the 18-105.

 

[Platypus]

you will find yourself wanting much more wide angle lens if your widest is 28 mm.

if you can get a D90 and then get the 18-55 separately and total a couple hundred less than a d90 with an 18-105 then do so. if not, just get the 18-105.

I've never had a camera with anything lower than 28, my other lens is a 35-70mm. Is there a different consideration due to the lens not being full frame?

 

[foghorn67]

I've never had a camera with anything lower than 28, my other lens is a 35-70mm. Is there a different consideration due to the lens not being full frame?

Yes. The D90 is a 1.5x crop. 28x1.5=42. APS-c sensor.

 

[virtuamike]

I've never had a camera with anything lower than 28, my other lens is a 35-70mm. Is there a different consideration due to the lens not being full frame?

It's due to the body not being full frame. You'll notice it in the viewfinder and in your images.

 

[Platypus]

so what does that mean for me? That a 28-105 isn't a good lens to have? That I need a diff one in addition?

 

[foghorn67]

so what does that mean for me? That a 28-105 isn't a good lens to have? That I need a diff one in addition?

I misread your question.
Most consumer digital cameras are not the full 35mm frame. Known as FF.
They have a smaller sensor. Most being APS-C. Which is 1.5x smaller.
The frame of the image does not occupy the full circle of the lens. It sits in it with room to spare.
Picture a rectangle in a circle dead center with rectangle's four corners touching the circle. That is a FF sensor with a FF lens.
Picture a smaller rectangle with it's corners no where close to touching the circle that surrounds it. As a result, it's a forced crop.
Hence, 'crop bodies'.

There are lenses specifically designed for crop bodies. For example the 18-55 mentioned above. It's to mimic a 28-80ish mm's on FF camera.
However putting on a non-crop lens on a crop body yields multiplication factor. You loose it's wide end,but gain some reach. Simply because it's a forced crop.

 

[Platypus]

I misread your question.
Most consumer digital cameras are not the full 35mm frame. Known as FF.
They have a smaller sensor. Most being APS-C. Which is 1.5x smaller.
The frame of the image does not occupy the full circle of the lens. It sits in it with room to spare.
Picture a rectangle in a circle dead center with rectangle's four corners touching the circle. That is a FF sensor with a FF lens.
Picture a smaller rectangle with it's corners no where close to touching the circle that surrounds it. As a result, it's a forced crop.
Hence, 'crop bodies'.

There are lenses specifically designed for crop bodies. For example the 18-55 mentioned above. It's to mimic a 28-80ish mm's on FF camera.
However putting on a non-crop lens on a crop body yields multiplication factor. You loose it's wide end,but gain some reach. Simply because it's a forced crop.

Ah, I see. Well realistically is it going to effect me that much if I just use my 28-105 and not bother with the 18-55? I am trying to save money by getting body only but I don't want weird looking pictures.

 

[ElFenix]

Ah, I see. Well realistically is it going to effect me that much if I just use my 28-105 and not bother with the 18-55? I am trying to save money by getting body only but I don't want weird looking pictures.

you'll find yourself having to back up much further than you would with a film body because you'll have no wide angle at all. that's ok if you have another lens and don't mind switching, but from experience even that is a pain in the rear (my lenses on my canon crop are a 10-20 and a 28-75, i have a big gap there).

you can try it for a while to see how you like it, but i'd make the decision before the return period is over so that you could exchange for a camera with an 18-55 or 105 lens.

 

[Platypus]

you'll find yourself having to back up much further than you would with a film body because you'll have no wide angle at all. that's ok if you have another lens and don't mind switching, but from experience even that is a pain in the rear (my lenses on my canon crop are a 10-20 and a 28-75, i have a big gap there).

you can try it for a while to see how you like it, but i'd make the decision before the return period is over so that you could exchange for a camera with an 18-55 or 105 lens.

Bleh.. don't really want to spend the $ on a full frame body... is there a comparison picture or two you might have handy to show me how much of a diff we're talking about?

 

[foghorn67]

I have something bookmarked at home that is perfect for your question. If nobody chimes in by tonight, I'll post it.

 

[Fardringle]

It's not the exact zoom ranges you're discussing here, but this is an example of roughly how the wide angle on your 28-105mm lens (42mm on a crop frame camera) will compare to the 18-55mm (27mm on a crop frame).

Shot at 36mm (so cut off the dark brown buildings on the left and right, the balcony on the white tower at the top, and part of the word "Parking" at the bottom to get about what you would see at 42mm):

Same shot at 27mm:

 

[Platypus]

I have something bookmarked at home that is perfect for your question. If nobody chimes in by tonight, I'll post it.

thank you