d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > Graphic Design > Photography > Suggest Us A Lense > D3200 Body
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 41,749
Joined: Nov 1 2008
Gold: 0.82
Mar 30 2014 01:25pm
I have the kit atm and would like something that works better with lowlight photography (milky way kind of stuff).

So far I've reviewed AF-S NIKKOR 28mm f/1.8G and it seems alright. Though it's pricey and has a 35/1.8 cousin that's a lot cheaper. Let me know folks
Member
Posts: 6,956
Joined: Feb 21 2008
Gold: 115.70
Apr 1 2014 01:45pm
Quote (SC_Leader @ 30 Mar 2014 20:25)
I have the kit atm and would like something that works better with lowlight photography (milky way kind of stuff).

So far I've reviewed AF-S NIKKOR 28mm f/1.8G and it seems alright. Though it's pricey and has a 35/1.8 cousin that's a lot cheaper. Let me know folks


sorry what camera will be behind the lense? what kind of pictures are you planing to do? how do you want them to look? what lenses did other use, who did similar pictures? what is your budget?
Member
Posts: 41,749
Joined: Nov 1 2008
Gold: 0.82
Apr 1 2014 04:33pm
Quote (Nutribert @ Apr 1 2014 12:45pm)
sorry what camera will be behind the lense? what kind of pictures are you planing to do? how do you want them to look? what lenses did other use, who did similar pictures? what is your budget?


D3200 nikon

Landscape/skyscape

Assume no budget but cheaper is better. I'm using 18-55 (kit d3200)

I basically want a lens that'll allow me to not rely so heavily on ISO for good quality low light pics
Member
Posts: 6,956
Joined: Feb 21 2008
Gold: 115.70
Apr 1 2014 05:14pm
i was looking for some lenses though - i also think the nikkor you picked seems to be quite ok.
i you want to go for a low budget solution i would recommend you buy a fisheye adapter. Funny thing to have and brings in more light
for more lenses see:
http://de.pixel-peeper.com/lens-finder/?qv0=1&qv1=1&qv2=&qv3=50&qc4=0&qi4=1&qv4=&qc5=0&qi5=2&qv5=&qc6=0&qi6=1&qv6=&qv7=&qc8=0&qi8=0&qv8=&qc9=0&qi9=0&qv9=&submitted=1&sortlf=13

This post was edited by Nutribert on Apr 1 2014 05:25pm
Member
Posts: 41,749
Joined: Nov 1 2008
Gold: 0.82
Apr 2 2014 10:38am
Quote (Nutribert @ Apr 1 2014 04:14pm)
i was looking for some lenses though - i also think the nikkor you picked seems to be quite ok.
i you want to go for a low budget solution i would recommend you buy a fisheye adapter. Funny thing to have and brings in more light
for more lenses see:
http://de.pixel-peeper.com/lens-finder/?qv0=1&qv1=1&qv2=&qv3=50&qc4=0&qi4=1&qv4=&qc5=0&qi5=2&qv5=&qc6=0&qi6=1&qv6=&qv7=&qc8=0&qi8=0&qv8=&qc9=0&qi9=0&qv9=&submitted=1&sortlf=13


Great website, ty. I'll get out sigma 1.8/28
Member
Posts: 41,749
Joined: Nov 1 2008
Gold: 0.82
Apr 2 2014 01:41pm
Quote (SC_Leader @ Apr 2 2014 09:38am)
Great website, ty. I'll get out sigma 1.8/28


Check out*
Member
Posts: 29,057
Joined: Aug 3 2005
Gold: 13.37
Apr 3 2014 09:25am
You wont be shooting milkyway with that body unless you remove the aa filter infornt of the sensor. but for low light general lens something around 28-35 is good, i would say that nikkor you mentioned or sigma 30mm 1.4
Member
Posts: 41,749
Joined: Nov 1 2008
Gold: 0.82
Apr 4 2014 03:01am
Got a 35/1.8

Ty friends

Quote (Antichrist- @ Apr 3 2014 08:25am)
You wont be shooting milkyway with that body unless you remove the aa filter infornt of the sensor. but for low light general lens something around 28-35 is good, i would say that nikkor you mentioned or sigma 30mm 1.4


Is that something I can do? I've gotten Milky Way shots before tbh but if there's something I can do to help thts be awesome

This post was edited by SC_Leader on Apr 4 2014 03:02am
Member
Posts: 29,057
Joined: Aug 3 2005
Gold: 13.37
Apr 4 2014 08:29am
Quote (SC_Leader @ 4 Apr 2014 12:01)
Got a 35/1.8

Ty friends



Is that something I can do? I've gotten Milky Way shots before tbh but if there's something I can do to help thts be awesome


Its something that you can do at home if you know what you are doing, if you dont, youll brake your camera. Also this is something that cant be reversed, so your camera wont be filtering out UV and infrared anymore, which affects the normal shots.

The problem with shooting stars is that most of the light coming there is UV/IR and DSLR sensors has a filter to eliminate these light wave lengths(and moire), so if you use a dslr with that filter on sensor, you wont get very good shots. If you want to get good star/milkyway shots, i would suggest getting some older dslr from which you can get the AA filter removed from(if i remember right it costs around 80 bucks) or buy some already modded cheap/old dslr. Removing the filter also allows you to get better shots with infrared filter on the lens.

This post was edited by Antichrist- on Apr 4 2014 08:30am
Member
Posts: 41,749
Joined: Nov 1 2008
Gold: 0.82
Apr 4 2014 12:51pm
Quote (Antichrist- @ Apr 4 2014 07:29am)
Its something that you can do at home if you know what you are doing, if you dont, youll brake your camera. Also this is something that cant be reversed, so your camera wont be filtering out UV and infrared anymore, which affects the normal shots.

The problem with shooting stars is that most of the light coming there is UV/IR and DSLR sensors has a filter to eliminate these light wave lengths(and moire), so if you use a dslr with that filter on sensor, you wont get very good shots. If you want to get good star/milkyway shots, i would suggest getting some older dslr from which you can get the AA filter removed from(if i remember right it costs around 80 bucks) or buy some already modded cheap/old dslr. Removing the filter also allows you to get better shots with infrared filter on the lens.


Awesome, I was not aware of this. Tyvm
Go Back To Photography Topic List
Add Reply New Topic New Poll