starting strength gym
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 21

Thread: Question about camera to Tom.

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    10,378

    Default

    • starting strength seminar april 2024
    • starting strength seminar jume 2024
    • starting strength seminar august 2024
    Here's another consideration, and this is one of the many reasons why I strongly recommend sticking to Canon or Nikon–you can rent lenses. If you have a game coming up that you really want to shoot, rent the 70-200. That way, you can have the cool photos, but you won't be out so much cash.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    358

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Campitelli View Post
    If you want a dSLR, the only real games in town are Canon and Nikon. They have full systems instead of just a well-specified camera body. The mirorless cameras are compelling in their own right. In fact, the Panasonic Micro Four Thirds cameras are generally more competent video cameras than their big brother dSLRs. The dSLRs, be they crop sensor or full frame, will always outperform micro 4/3rds and smaller sensor sizes because of physics. However, as everything gets better, the smaller sensors produce better and better images.

    If your wife wants to take pictures inside where the light is not very good, likes portraits with a sharp subject and a pleasantly blurry background, or wants to take any action shots, get a dSLR. If video is her jam and she wants something smaller, consider a Panasonic m4/3. If she has a lot of money invested in Sony lenses, I might stay with Sony. By a lot of money, I mean $500 to $1,000. I am biased here, but I think Nikon's crop-sensor, lower-priced dSLR bodies exceed the Canons as far as menu organization, feel of the camera, and availability of useful lenses goes. Reasonable people will disagree with me on this. As you get into the $1500+ bodies, especially full frame bodies, it becomes murkier. Both Canon and Nikon have great stuff. I still prefer how the pictures look out of the camera on the more expensive Nikons as well as the Nikon lenses, but Canon arguably has a better lens mount and does video better.

    In the realms where most people are willing to buy, I think the Nikon D5600 is a pretty compelling camera. If she doesn't want to be able to wirelessly send images to her smart phone, she could save a few dollars and get the D5500.
    Thanks for the information, Tom. Appreciate it!

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Los Alamos, NM
    Posts
    3,239

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Campitelli View Post
    I have bad news for you. If you want to make good shots in those conditions, you are going to have spend a lot of money. A lot. You need a 70-200 f/2.8. The previous generation Nikkor, which happens to be the one I use, goes for $2,100. My apologies. On the bright side, that is about $300 less than what I paid for mine over 6 years ago. Amazing. Same great lens, six years later, $300 less. The new version of the 70-200 goes for $2,800. Your pictures will not be $700 better, so I would get the older one. In another plus, if you put the 70-200 on your D5500, it has an effective reach of 300 mm due to the crop sensor. The 70-200 is an absolutely amazing lens and even after owning it for 6 years, I still marvel at how awesome it is. Unless photography is really your jam, however, it is probably too pricey.

    In the realm of what semi-reasonable people might consider, there is always the 85 mm f/1.8. It is faster than the 70-200, but it doesn't zoom, and does not have the same reach. It costs $475. It will get you a little further down the ice than the kit lens, blur the background, work well in low light, and will look great.

    As I said, there is no one lens to rule them all. Pick your poison.
    The 85 1.8 is a maybe. Old school fixed focal length. Good for portraits too! Thanks!

    One last question, which lens is best for increasing my squat max?

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    10,378

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bcharles123 View Post
    The 85 1.8 is a maybe. Old school fixed focal length. Good for portraits too! Thanks!

    One last question, which lens is best for increasing my squat max?
    For that, you need the Nikkor 600 mm f/4.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    72

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bcharles123 View Post
    Lately I've been taking a lot of youth hockey photos. I'm often a score keeper, penalty box, or help on the bench, so I'm usually not shooting through dirty plastics glass. Just tyring to take advantage of my vantage point. The low and artificial light is ok with the new digital gear. But the background behind the player is annoying. I've been zooming in to get the least depth of field but then the aperture gets smaller. So a fast zoom lens at the longer range (not wider). Fast lens are sooooooo freaking expensive. I read somewhere that you can use a short fast lens (cheaper) and expand the crop latter?

    Thanks! (the moms always buy the commercial photos regardless of what I do. The pros always shoot through the plastic/glass but they have big racks of lights bounce off the ceiling, and multi thousand dollar lenses).
    Disclaimer: I'm by no means anywhere close to having the knowledge and experience that Tom has and his recommendations are way superior to mine.

    If you don't mind 3rd party lenses, you could consider the Sigma 50-100mm f/1.8 DC HSM Art. You'll get a reach of 75-150mm, which should fit your needs. I'm using the 18-35mm f/1.8 for my 80D and pretty happy with it. Just my 2 cents.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    South Korea Incheon
    Posts
    586

    Default

    Tom,what do you think about Nikon ME-1 for microphone? Do you know somhething good microphone with cheaper price?

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    10,378

    Default

    I have not used one. I think it would depend upon what you are filming as to whether you need a mic or not. The mic on a dSLR sucks. However, if you are not filming interviews, it may not matter much. Rode would be my go-to mic recommendation. Their Video Mic Go is widely liked and used.

    Amazon.com: Rode VMGO Video Mic GO Lightweight On-Camera Microphone Super-Cardioid: RODE: Musical Instruments

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Oakland and Los Angeles
    Posts
    1,160

    Default

    If you need a long-ish lens for sports use and don't want to spend a fortune, you can find one of these for under a grand and it's what I use for lots of things (weddings, sports, editorial, portraits, etc.): Access Denied

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    South Korea Incheon
    Posts
    586

    Default

    I got D5600 yesterday and did some shoot and record the video of lifting.It's very easy to use for a newbie and i'm very satisfied of the quality of pictures and videos.
    Thank you very much Tom.I will shoot you next time better!

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    10,378

    Default

    starting strength coach development program
    Excellent. Glad to hear it, MJ.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •