fredmiranda.com
Login

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2              4       end
  

Archive 2011 · Thoughts on a d5100 DX lightweight setup

  
 
millsart
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #1 · Thoughts on a d5100 DX lightweight setup


Andre, going with the 10-24 or 12-24 (actually ordered both today) and I'm going to see which one I prefer, both on the wide end, as well as the long end.

Paired with that I'm getting the 35mm f1.8 DX lens and then the 55-200 VR.

Basically should cover all the focal lengths I'd need, (15)18/24//28/35 with the zoom, then 50 with fast prime, and then 85/135 and up with the 55-200.

Might end up keeping the 18-55 VR even if I really like it, but if the wide zoom is good at 18-24mm, and I've got a 35mm prime, then really its sort of redundant and I'd certainly like to have at least one fast lens in my bag as I don't solely shoot tripod mounted landscapes.

Thinking maybe pairing the 35mm 1.8 with the 60mm f2.8 Macro for times when I might want a faster short tele over the 55-200, but given the weight and reported good optics of the 55-200 it seems nice for hiking and compressed landscapes etc.

I'll have to wait until it all comes on Wednesday but I think it should fit into my Domke F-5XB bag that I used to use with my Leica gear and actually not really be any heavier. One thing that always surprises people with a RF system is that while the lens are pretty compact, all the brass and glass makes them pretty heavy, as is the RF body itself. Far less than a D3 and F2.8 zooms of course, but not really featherweight either.

Hopefully it proves to be a pretty good overall system. Cost wasn't really too bad, at least coming from a Leica where a lower end lens like an Summarit cost more than the whole package together and I'm expecting to see some pretty good IQ and especially DR, at least compared to what I was getting with m4/3.


Now just for the long frustrating wait until UPS comes by on Wednesday with a few boxes!



Jul 17, 2011 at 08:11 PM
Andre Labonte
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #2 · Thoughts on a d5100 DX lightweight setup


millsart wrote:
Andre, going with the 10-24 or 12-24 (actually ordered both today) and I'm going to see which one I prefer, both on the wide end, as well as the long end.


AH! Please do share with us a good comparison of the two once you've run them through their paces!!!!

.....


Hopefully it proves to be a pretty good overall system. Cost wasn't really too bad, at least coming from a Leica where a lower end lens like an Summarit cost more than the whole package together and I'm expecting to see some pretty good IQ and especially DR, at least compared to what I was getting with m4/3.


Yes, it sure sounds like a great kit you put together. I'm green with envy at the idea of having a light-weight kit.

Just one question, why did you not go with an 18-200 and kill two birds (18-55 and 55-200) with one stone, expecially where you had a buyer for the kit lens? Continuity from 18-200 would be great.


Now just for the long frustrating wait until UPS comes by on Wednesday with a few boxes!


I have NO sympathy for you! You are getting new gear and I'm out of funds until next summer!



Jul 17, 2011 at 08:54 PM
millsart
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #3 · Thoughts on a d5100 DX lightweight setup


I actually tried the 18-200 a while back, when I had my D300, and just didn't really care for it. Sort of pricey as well for what I find to be a bit of a redundant focal length if I've got a wide zoom and a 35mm prime.

18mm just isn't wide enough for me overall as I specifically wanted a true wide angle and thats a whole I have in my FX lineup as well, so I can see occasional usage of the D5100 and UWA zoom for work even.

Given I'd want to have the 10/12-24 with me, and that being a bit of a heavy lens, plus a 35mm f1.8 as well, it would mean the 18-200 really would just sort of fill the 50-200mm range on its own in most cases.

Basically came to by my way of thinking to the 55-200 VR doing the same thing for 1/5th the price and less overall weight.

I think if someone wants just one, and ONLY one lens with them, something like a 18-200 makes sense, but then your giving up shooting wide, or shooting low light or shallower DOF shots, which to me is sort of part of the fun, and really the reason to carry the DSLR or m4/3 or Leica etc kit around in the first place.

Again, nothing wrong with the lens, or against anyone who shoots with it, but I'm just hoping with the kit I put together I can get a little more creative with some shots by having more unique angles, FOV's, lower light natural shooting etc.



Jul 17, 2011 at 09:31 PM
RRRoger
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #4 · Thoughts on a d5100 DX lightweight setup


Try the 18-55 before selling it, you may be pleasantly surprised.
I used one at Pt Lobos today with my D5100
http://assuredphoto.com/Images/071711r0040w.JPG


If you want to see the FullSize image remove the w



Jul 17, 2011 at 11:58 PM
rico
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #5 · Thoughts on a d5100 DX lightweight setup


Hmm, the D5100 has gone on a diet since the D5000, and weight differential versus D3100 is about nil. Interesting. Low weight is nice when climbing over furniture to get the following shot (taken yesterday). The flip-out screen would also be helpful (I took several shots with the Hail-Mary-overhead method).
http://patternassociates.com/rico/photo/misc/jamie1.jpg



Jul 18, 2011 at 05:47 AM
jhinkey
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #6 · Thoughts on a d5100 DX lightweight setup


I handled the D5100, D7000 and my D700 today at the local shop. They are each a step down in size from the next to the point where the D5100 is significantly smaller then the D700. It's also feels very much lighter than the D7000 (due to the increased use of plastics in the body). The viewfinder is dark and dim, but what can you do?

The flip out LCD would be very handy for video for sure.

John



Jul 18, 2011 at 09:49 PM
Dan Rode
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #7 · Thoughts on a d5100 DX lightweight setup


The 55-200 is a rather slow lens but otherwise it performs well. At comparable focal lengths and apertures it was as sharp and sometimes sharper than my 80-200. I'd rate it close to the sharpness of my 70-200. The bokeh on the 70-200 is nicer, tho.

I had a little D40 a while back. It was small, light and took great pictures even with cheap (but sharp) lenses like the 18-55 and 55-200.

IMO, every camera and lens Nikon has introduced since that time is capable of producing fantastic images in the right hands. As long as you're aware of the limitations of the hardware, I think you'll be very happy with something like the D5100. Pixel peepers and measurebators may disagree with me








Jul 19, 2011 at 10:51 AM
Doug Weasner
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #8 · Thoughts on a d5100 DX lightweight setup


D90 and D40 here, as well as 18-55 II, 55-200 VR, 35 1.8, and 85 VR Micro.

I miss the second command dial that the D40 doesn't have. Changing ISO is also a pain on the D40.

As for the lenses, the 18-55 II (I've never used the VR version), the 55-200VR, and 35 1.8 are all wonderful. The 85 Micro is expensive for what it is, but has great ergonomics (working distance, constant physical length, etc) and uses the 52mm filters of the other three lenses. It is definitely easier to shoot with than the Sigma 105mm macro I had when I shot Canon.

I haven't figured wide out though. All of the DX super wide zooms seem big and clunky (I had a Tokina 12-24 when I shot Canon). My initial inclination is to repurpose a full frame 15mm or 16mm fisheye as a wide angle on DX, but I haven't tried it. Hopefully Nikon will make this a non-issue with a rectilinear DX 15 or 16mm prime of a reasonably compact size and price. I think that is a question of when, not if, given that a pretty steady stream of DX primes have been coming from Nikon lately.



Jul 20, 2011 at 09:41 AM
jhinkey
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #9 · Thoughts on a d5100 DX lightweight setup


Doug Weasner wrote:
D90 and D40 here, as well as 18-55 II, 55-200 VR, 35 1.8, and 85 VR Micro.

I miss the second command dial that the D40 doesn't have. Changing ISO is also a pain on the D40.

As for the lenses, the 18-55 II (I've never used the VR version), the 55-200VR, and 35 1.8 are all wonderful. The 85 Micro is expensive for what it is, but has great ergonomics (working distance, constant physical length, etc) and uses the 52mm filters of the other three lenses. It is definitely easier to shoot with than the Sigma 105mm macro I had
...Show more

Actually, I was in the same boat with DX as you - all the wide angle zooms (because there were no DX wide primes) were large and clunky, even with respect to my D300.
So I ended up using my 16/3.5 AI fish eye for a light weight/compact prime that had an effective angle of a 14mm prime once a small amount of distortion correction was applied. Many times I didn't correct any of the distortion and it was just fine.
The DX sensor crop cropped out the extreme distortion and left me with a nice wide angle.

Nikon really needs some compact wide angle DX primes, even if they are f/4 (f/2.8 would be great), to get me back to DX again (maybe they don't want me to go back to DX and want my cash for FX stuff).

John



Jul 20, 2011 at 10:03 AM
Smiert Spionam
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #10 · Thoughts on a d5100 DX lightweight setup


A compact 14/4 DX would be a fantastic addition to the Nikkor line. I would carry a DX camera more often if it existed.


Jul 20, 2011 at 10:08 AM
RRRoger
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #11 · Thoughts on a d5100 DX lightweight setup


I like the 10-24 Nikkor. It is not large and clunky and uses a 77mm filter.

You can always try the Sigma if that is not wide enough.
NEW!8-16mm F4.5-5.6 DC HSM

Price:
$1,100.00 MSRP



Jul 20, 2011 at 02:19 PM
millsart
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #12 · Thoughts on a d5100 DX lightweight setup


Well camera came today so thought I'd share some first impressions of the overall handling and what not before anything about image quality, specific lenses etc

Remember I never looked at any models in the shop first as well so my first hands on was literally pulling it from the box.

Overall it seems both big and small to me. Having been shooting m4/3, Leica's, X100, various compacts like the LX5 and G12 and also my NEX system, it seems all and all pretty big. Certainly a rather thick overall camera body if your used to NEX or a GF1 etc, yet, at the same time, sitting next to a D3 it does appear quite tiny for a DSLR and quite light.

While "small" luckily the grip feels pretty comfortable. Might not want a SB900 and 24-70 mounted on it all day, but certainly feel I've got plenty to hold onto, which isn't always the case with smaller DSLR's I've found. Pretty ergonomic for my average sized hands.

Viewfinder also seems a bit small from what I'm used to as its certainly not FF, nor even up there with what I remember form my D300. Useable though, I mean its not great, but its not the worst I've ever seen either. Focus points are very small little dots though, hard to see and I'm sure glad they light up. I'm used to the big light red squares on the D3 so these are awfully small, but again, they do light up and as long as use the center one its pretty easy to figure out what your doing.

As for the LCD, well frankly its just AWESOME! Great image from the 912K pixel display and being able to flip it out is really handy. Whats even cooler I found is that if your shooting vertical, the info on the LCD flips around to match the vertical framing. Really Right Stuff even has a L bracket that will work with the LCD so this is going to be fantastic for landscape shooting I think.

Also good news is that the contrast detect AF is pretty quick. Not as fast as something like a GH2 in m4/3, but much, much, much faster than the 5-10 seconds I'm used to live view AF taking to work. Just testing indoors this seems to work in about 1 second or so, about as fast as a point and shoot more or less. Probably not great for moving subjects but for static stuff I can't see it holding me back any.

One thing Im not used to is that after you press the shutter it takes a few seconds to take the shot and the screen blacks out. Just how it has to work on a DSLR I guess, but certainly different again than m4/3, NEX etc. Again, for tripod shot hardly a dealbreaker.


The controls I have found a little confusing as well since there aren't dedicated buttons like on the D3 and no top LCD etc. Kind of confusing as the interface and menu buttons etc are all different than the D3/D300/D700 layout but doesn't seem too bad, not like I'm really going to be changing most of that stuff very often.

I suppose a dedicated ISO button etc would be nice, and maybe for more pro work it would get annoying, but again, given I'm probably going to do mostly tripod shooting I'm sure I'll just be at base ISO. Its really just a button push and then a menu selection away, but still, not quite like the direct controls of the D3

Phase detect AF seems quite good, no major lag, nor with the shutter and shot to shot times just messing around seemed good as well. Pretty responsive camera. Slower than a higher end model no doubt but I think under most circumstances it wouldn't leave anyone feeling the camera is slowing them down.

Overall it seems pretty nice for the money though I'd have to say. Again, not as compact as I'm used to but its not really like a GH m4/3 body fits into a coat pocket either, espcially with a couple of lenses so both would require a small bag.

Hopefully the better IQ, DR etc will more than make up for the added size/weight of the system.

I really think that the LCD display articulating alone is going to make it worth any tradeoffs this would have with any other body though. Again, can't stress how nice it is being able to comfortably see and compose on the LCD screen from any angle.

Worth mentioning that when in M mode the LCD doesn't reflect any adjustments in exposure though, which is kind of weird, but in Av mode, as you dial EC up or down, the display does get lighter darker so you can judge the exposure. Will have to test how well it matches my monitor.

I'd say bottom line so far, if you want a compact DSLR with a good sensor and will be doing lots of landscapes, tripods shooting etc, D5100 seems like the one to pick

If your more into doing PJ work, sports, weddings, etc, then D7k or even a higher end body still holds some advantages for that type of shooting.

More to come.....



Jul 20, 2011 at 05:08 PM
millsart
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #13 · Thoughts on a d5100 DX lightweight setup


Well.....after shooting a bit things aren't looking so good

For some reason my Tokina 12-24 II doesn't want to focus about 75% of the time, even in perfectly good light, center AF etc. Just does nothing.... throw the 10-24 on and it works just fine.

Bigger issue is the overall IQ, even as base ISO just seems really soft and lacking any fine detail.

Did some comparison shots with my D3 and while only a 12 vs 16meg sensor the D3 is just a lot sharper looking. Though some of it could be the lens so I put the 24-70 f2.8 on the d5100 as well and still doesn't compare.

I know the FX sensor should be better at really high ISO but I'd really expect the d5100 with its 16meg sensor to produce a better and more detailed file at base ISO.

I've been trying to shoot some raw files and develop in LR3.4 as well and they look slightly better but still sort of a letdown.

I pulled up some shots from my Sony NEX taken from my balcony as well and even with the Sony kit lens, they are a bit sharper and punchier looking as well, and thats a 14meg sensor.

Granted I wasn't expecting the per pixel sharpness that my 18 meg M9 had with no AA filter, but I'm at base ISO and sharpened I'd of thought the d5100 would still deliver a better file.

I'm going to have to do some more in depth test with tripod etc before I post any comparison shots but does anyone have any thoughts on this ?

D3 just shouldn't look that much better because I know my D300 at base ISO was just as sharp. Files looked near identical.

I really expected the new sensor to be clearly better and it seems a step in the opposite direction here.....

Anyone heard of any issues with d5100's or anything that might explain this ??




Jul 20, 2011 at 09:00 PM
M635_Guy
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #14 · Thoughts on a d5100 DX lightweight setup


I've seen a few D7K owners have had soft-focus issues here. If you send it in for service, it will likely come back very sharp.


Jul 20, 2011 at 09:34 PM
Avi B
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #15 · Thoughts on a d5100 DX lightweight setup


No it should be sharp out of the box. Perhaps there's something wrong with it? You could try the microadjust and see...
Also did you try shooting in RAW? Any difference vs JPEG?



Jul 20, 2011 at 09:53 PM
millsart
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #16 · Thoughts on a d5100 DX lightweight setup


I don't think its a focus issue either because I shoot some subjects at a decent distance away and tried the lens stopped down to f8-11 as well so that should cover any focus errors.

Shooting RAW did help a little but really just a result of added sharpening I think, and the lens correction profiles in LR.

I'm somewhat surprised by the amount of visible noise I can see even at base ISO as well. I really was expecting totally clean files, unless I was expecting too much

I made sure to turn off the D-lighting modes etc as well so nothing like that should be having an effect either.




Jul 20, 2011 at 10:06 PM
RRRoger
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #17 · Thoughts on a d5100 DX lightweight setup


What I am hearing is familiar to a new user of the 16mp DX Sensor who shot a D3 before.
99% of the time it is user error.
The D3 is much more forgiving.
It also comes with a sharper default setting.

1. Go to Picture Control and increase sharpening.
2. Get a TriPod. It took me a month before my sloppy hand holding technique improved enough to shoot with out at least a MonoPod.
3. Try using the + in LiveView to zoom in, then focus, before you shoot.
4. Set the AE-L/ AF-L button to AF-ON, and use it to focus.
5. Increase the shooting speed in proportion to the increase in megapixel.
I usually shoot stills at 1/640s and Video at 1/60s. A lot of photographers have to increase to 1/1000s for action.

If none of that helps, send it in or exchange your camera.
I have the D5100 and D7000. I think the D5100 images are better, but nearly the same.



Jul 21, 2011 at 12:12 AM
millsart
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #18 · Thoughts on a d5100 DX lightweight setup


Thanks for the tips Roger. I know the errors aren't the result of technique though. I've been earning a living as a photographer for the past 7 years now so know my way around a camera. I've got the camera mounted on a rock solid CF tripod setup with a ArcaTech head, using the self-timer, VR is off on the lens etc.

I think there must be some sort of issue with how the film er, sensor plane is aligned or a film across the sensor or something, just very smeary looking details.

DX sensor or not, what I'm seeing doesn't seem reasonable to expect when shooting at base ISO and with a good quality FX coverage 24-70 lens mounted.

Additionally, why the Tokina can't even focus is making me think its the camera as well, because when I mounted that lens on my D3, it focuses just fine. Surprisingly doesn't vingette past about 17mm either. At any rate, why a lens won't focus or shoot about 75% of the time makes zero sense either. Perhaps something electrical or damage to the mount ?

Got to call B&H for a RMA tomorrow it sounds like.



Jul 21, 2011 at 01:02 AM
RRRoger
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #19 · Thoughts on a d5100 DX lightweight setup


Do you have a Best Buys or local camera store nearby?
Take your Tokina, charged EN El - 14 battery, and flash card with you and try their demo D5100, or even a D7000.
Compare the results.

PS I've been shooting Professionally for 12 years,



Jul 21, 2011 at 01:37 AM
theSuede
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #20 · Thoughts on a d5100 DX lightweight setup


I've been shooting professionally for 0 years (zero), but work in the industry, and have a working grasp of most things that goes on in a camera. I've designed camera systems costing up to a few 100k $.

:-)

Sorry to hear about the perceived softness. Can you show us the results?

I know you shoot from a solid support, and that you (probably) have both the D3 and the D5100 with you at times. A good test would be to shoot the 24-70 on both cameras, small(ish) apertures and a slight zoom in with the D3. Something like this:

Scene: landscape
Tripod.
24-70 @ 30mm F8 for the D5100 - at ISO100
24-70 @ 45mm F11 for the D3 - at ISO200

Then you'll basically have something to compare with "equal opportunity" comparison parameters. Scale the D5100 down to 12MP (or scale however you want, as long as the two pictures have the same pixel dimensions!). Shoot jpg+raw to give you even more to compare.

I have the 7000, which I found to be as equal as can be seen/measured to the 5100 as can be. And at base ISO I find the files (in good light!) to be better than those from the D3 and the d700. Mind that the base jpg setting in the D3 is a lot more contrasty than that of the D5100.

IR did the comparison for you:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D700/FULLRES/D700hSLCON4.HTM
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D5100/FULLRES/D5100hSLCON4D.HTM

Both cameras here at base ISO, with lenses that are "more than sharp enough", with basic "zero" camera-jpg settings.



Jul 21, 2011 at 05:50 AM
1       2              4       end




FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2              4       end
    
 

Welcome back
Log in to your account