Lens question
in [Digital Cameras]
|
From: No spam please on 3 Nov 2009 08:37 "Neil Harrington" <secret(a)illumnati.net> wrote in message news:re-dnbHnqdTpqXLXnZ2dnUVZ_uWdnZ2d(a)giganews.com... > > "No spam please" <me(a)spamnotwelcome.org> wrote in message > news:hcn42h$2sum$1(a)adenine.netfront.net... >> "Neil Harrington" <secret(a)illumnati.net> wrote in message >> news:eaadnbNzo4OFZHPXnZ2dnUVZ_v-dnZ2d(a)giganews.com... >>> >>> "No spam please" <me(a)spamnotwelcome.org> wrote in message >>> news:hcmc90$1foi$3(a)adenine.netfront.net... >>>> "Floyd L. Davidson" <floyd(a)apaflo.com> wrote in message >>>> news:874opd25y5.fld(a)apaflo.com... >>>>> "No spam please" <me(a)spamnotwelcome.org> wrote: >>>>> Rog, it probably hasn't been all a waste for your friend, since she >>>>> has >>> learned something from buying the wrong lens anyway. If (as you >>> mentioned in a much earlier post) the D50 only works in certain modes >>> with that lens, I assume it is not an autofocus lens since I believe >>> that camera should work fully and properly with any autofocus >>> Nikon-mount lens. >>> >>> It would help a lot to know exactly what sort of lens she bought. Since >>> you indicate that she was primarily interested in keeping the cost down, >>> that suggests that what she *probably* bought was one of the many older >>> medium-range zoom lenses, presumably not autofocis ( ? ) since such >>> lenses are widely available and relatively cheap. >>> >>> If that is the sort of lens she bought, then she has probably discovered >>> that it is not only not fully functional on her camera, but also that it >>> isn't really long enough for birding anyway. People who are not used to >>> cameras and lenses often have a very exaggerated notion of what a zoom >>> lens will do. Unless she can get pretty close to the bird (or it is >>> pretty large bird), she most likely needs something a good deal longer >>> than the typical zoom lens. That may well be out of her price range. >>> >> >> Hello again Neil. >> >> I phoned my friend to-day. The lens is an autofocus lens but, if I >> understand things correctly, it needs a body with a focus motor in it and >> the D50 doesn't have this. > > Yes it does! The D40, D40x and D60 do not have the autofocus motor in the > body and so cannot use older Nikon AF lenses that require that > "screwdriver" coupling. But the D50 is basically a lower-priced version of > the D70, and it does have the AF motor in the body. It should work just > fine with any Nikon-mount AF lens. > >> She's using the 300mm end to photograph birds about 20 feet away. The >> photos are more satisfying than she'd get with the D50's kit lens > > Yes, I'll say! :-) > >> so she's happy for now. > > Good. Some people would not regard a 300mm lens as quite long enough for > bird photography, but if she can get within 20 feet and the birds are not > too tiny, that would be good enough. I had assumed from what you said > about cost being an important factor that it was not that long a zoom. > > Now what I don't understand is, since it's an autofocus zoom, what exactly > is the problem? You mentioned that you understood it would only work in a > couple of modes. It should work fine on the D50 in every way, though if > it's a low-priced lens without Vibration Reduction (Nikon's name for image > stabilization), hand-holding it would be a big problem at the long end. > Hello guys. Thanks for the information. The Nikon body definitely doesn't have the mechanical focus coupling so it may well be a D40 and not a D50. I've had a look at www.nikonians.org/nikon/slr-lens.html which also confirms that the D40 needs manual focus with some Nikon lenses. Regards, Rob.
From: No spam please on 3 Nov 2009 08:39 "nospam" <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote in message news:021120091703347883%nospam(a)nospam.invalid... > In article <hcnkdu$vmm$1(a)adenine.netfront.net>, No spam please > <me(a)spamnotwelcome.org> wrote: > >> As I said >> earlier, a friend who operates an airfield radio found that her own radio >> receiver upset the aircraft's systems. > > but you didn't say how she determined that. did she turn on the radio > and the plane suddenly dive or make a sudden turn? how did she rule out > some other effect? As I understand it, the pilots found a malfunction and asked cabin crew to see if anyone was using a radio receiver or transmitter. I don't know the aircraft type. Regards, Rog.
From: George Kerby on 3 Nov 2009 09:25 On 11/2/09 10:29 PM, in article 2qbve51o9b2bod0cpou82tvk4lgj4363hi(a)4ax.com, "John Navas" <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 18:57:46 -0500, tony cooper > <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote in > <ebsue594peulupu5l57sp3jca4rquh16ge(a)4ax.com>: > >> On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 15:16:23 -0800, John Navas >> <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 10:21:01 -0000, "No spam please" >>> <me(a)spamnotwelcome.org> wrote in <hcn098$2m11$1(a)adenine.netfront.net>: >>> >>>> I agree that a 3oomm lens isn't ideal for bird photography. Personally, I'd >>>> love a fast 400mm but the cost, size and weight are beyond me. ... >>> >>> Panasonic with optically-stabilized Leica super-zoom lens is >>> inexpensive, compact and light, excellent for birding. >> >> Chickens, perhaps. Turkeys, ostriches, emus, and caged birds maybe. >> Large birds that you can close enough to touch. > > Standard Optical Zoom "only" goes up 1o 480 mm, > and Extended Optical Zoom goes up to 860 mm, > quite sufficient for most birding, > but those ranges are easily extended with a teleconverter > to over 800 mm and over 1400 mm respectively. > > Much better than dSLR. :D Fix your clock, troll!
From: nospam on 3 Nov 2009 08:44 In article <hcpehb$vq0$2(a)adenine.netfront.net>, No spam please <me(a)spamnotwelcome.org> wrote: > >> As I said > >> earlier, a friend who operates an airfield radio found that her own radio > >> receiver upset the aircraft's systems. > > > > but you didn't say how she determined that. did she turn on the radio > > and the plane suddenly dive or make a sudden turn? how did she rule out > > some other effect? > > As I understand it, the pilots found a malfunction and asked cabin crew to > see if anyone was using a radio receiver or transmitter. I don't know the > aircraft type. malfunctions can occur for a variety of reasons. that's not proof that the radio was the cause.
From: nospam on 3 Nov 2009 08:44
In article <hcpegt$vq0$1(a)adenine.netfront.net>, No spam please <me(a)spamnotwelcome.org> wrote: > The Nikon body definitely doesn't have the mechanical focus coupling so it > may well be a D40 and not a D50. if there's no coupling, it's a d40, not a d50. |