Yep! And Walgreens carries those :)
LOL!! I still have AI-S Nikkor lenses from the early 70s that work great and see use on my FA. And they weren't even top of the line back then - I couldn't afford that 40 years ago!
Good lenses last, and hold value.
Photo-Jeff wrote:
Good luck! Hope those lenses are still applicable in 10 yrs!
And you just pay for them up front. ...
When does it make sense to buy super expensive lenses?
When you have a task that a cheaper one can't handle, or can't handle as well. And, obviously when you can afford it.
There are some incredibly expensive, not very generally useful lenses out there. But they all do have their niche.
aaronwolf wrote:
....
It was the first to offer 1/2000th second shutter speed.
.....
The Nikon FA with its 1/4000th says hello. :) It was a little later than the F3, but not much.
Found one right around the corner...
TLC Camera Repair
4554 Chestnut Street Ext.
High Point, NC 27265-8642
Gus Lazzari [thegreatgus@gmail.com]
Will let you all know how it goes; the price seems reasonable.
Dave
No, I was speaking about Kodachrome :)
amehta wrote:
Is that the "royal American"? :-)
Agfa was a German company.
A pity. Another American classic gone.
hannaco wrote:
I still have some in the freezer right next to the Agfa CT18, but can't use it because no one can develop it.
Brand new FM10s with a 35-70 zoom and a case go for about $320. A refurbished version is available for $149.
You can get a very decent FA for about $150 - make sure the light seals are good. The FA was the first Matrix metering Nikon; the F100 does all of that and autofocus, too.
I second KEH.COM as a source for any of these.
Yes, I'd have gotten a 50mm for the D90 if I had not gotten the D610, for sure.
Thanks, Man! I try and help whenever possible, you know!
I don't have an actual count, but I'd bet I've shot more with an 85 prime than with any other glass except a 24mm prime.
Dave
amehta wrote:
It's important for members o offer as much assistance as possible. Way to take one for the team, Dave! :lol:
Aww heck, he should just send it to me.
I could try it out in a bazillion different situations, and report back on the ones it was good for, and the ones I wanted something else.
It is a fantastic lens, and you use it when it is the right lens to make the picture you want. No different that any other lenses, but it takes practice and experience to know what to pull out of your bag.
I'd love to take it to a party or to a family reunion, or to a small club for a local band, or to a basketball game if I were on the sidelines.
One gets to know how each lens "sees" a scene, and once you are familiar, and know where you are going, a lens choce becomes easy. Most of the time. :)
Dave
For me, it is not just a budget issue, it is a WEIGHT and BULK issue.
I love my 600, but it is heavy and big . Light and small is better.
Therefore, I use my SB-400 when I can, which is 85% of the time.
Bugfan wrote:
Clearly there's a budget issue but for me if the solution is more than I can afford I just wait longer. I think for a first flash it's better to get a powerful one that can also act as a controller and a slave. That way as you later add more flashes you can add slaves and control it all from either the camera or your initial flash.
I have an SB900 which may be too expensive for you. I also have an SB800 that can likely be had used at a good price. Another choice might be the SB700 but I can't say, I've never used one. Anything less I don't think is a wise choice for a first flash.
Clearly there's a budget issue but for me if the s... (
show quote)
There is an SB-400 listed on Amazon right now - new for ~$140. 1 left.
dtparker wrote:
I have both SB-400 and SB-600. The 400 is what is on my camera most of the time; it is advantageous over the built-in because it will clear above a fat lens that the built-in cannot (resulting in a dark semi-circle at the bottom of the image). It is quick to recharge, and the batteries last forever.
The 600 is altogether more serious, heavier, and more capable. In addition to iTTL (the current Nikon method) it can do regular TTL, which is supported by my FA. Also a great unit, just bigger in every way.
I have both SB-400 and SB-600. The 400 is what is... (
show quote)
Get the FX lens. That 18-300 is not the sharpest Nikon in even the DX stble of lenses. Just did a similar move myself, but with an 18-200, which I traded in when I bought the D610.
Dave
Corsica fox wrote:
Thanks very much all. You've crystalized well what was roaming around my head. Soon as I sent it I thought, dummy, the D7100 will preserve the lens. Sets my plans back a bit but certainly on a better path either way, 7100 or FX lens. Thanks again.
I have both SB-400 and SB-600. The 400 is what is on my camera most of the time; it is advantageous over the built-in because it will clear above a fat lens that the built-in cannot (resulting in a dark semi-circle at the bottom of the image). It is quick to recharge, and the batteries last forever.
The 600 is altogether more serious, heavier, and more capable. In addition to iTTL (the current Nikon method) it can do regular TTL, which is supported by my FA. Also a great unit, just bigger in every way.