Originally Posted By: steelfrog
Thnaks a bunch, Peter. This is very helpful. So, if I go with the 18-55 and 55-200 VRs, with the D2Xs body, will that give me a lot more depth of field etc. than my P&S? And the ability to do night shots of the Milky Way, etc.?


depth of field is a function of a few factors - sensor size, focal length and aperture. Basically, the wider you go, the more depth of field you have. At 18mm and f11, you have stuff in focus from 1 foot to infinity, while at 200mm and f5.6, you will have only a very shallow focused area. The latter is the stuff point and shoot cameras cannot easily do.

milky way - yes - it is that blurry patch in the middle of the star tracks. This is a 11 minute exposure at 18mm and f16



full sized image
http://didnt.doit.wisc.edu/outdoor/gallery/JMT2010/20100713/DSC_1177.jpg

same lens shooting on a D40 (and out of focus - I hate AF cameras in the dark)
http://didnt.doit.wisc.edu/outdoor/gallery/JMT2009sept/20090918/slides/DSC_1549.jpg


Originally Posted By: steelfrog

It doesn't sound like you have found the ultra wide angle lenses to be all that useful?


not in the mountains, but I used a 14mm Canon on a film body a lot in the past - great stuff you can do with it if you want to emphasize perspectives, etc - some examples:

http://www.speedcenter.com/Gallery/gallery99/best_of_1999/planet_fontana_big.html
http://www.speedcenter.com/Gallery/gallery2000/03longbeach/deep_in_the_tub_big.html
http://www.speedcenter.com/Gallery/gallery99/12michigan/sittin_on_the_wall_big.html
http://www.speedcenter.com/Gallery/gallery98/best_of_1998/andy_warhol_does_cart_big.html


but in the mountains, you really need something in the foreground to make sense of this, since the 110 degrees this $2500 lens covers I can cover with 3 overlapping images taken with the $100 used 18mm as well, stitch together in free software and bingo. Bonus is that it also has a higher detail resolution in the distance then, because you are suddenly working with multiple 12mp images, not just one. Basically, the wider the lens, the smaller everything more than a few feet away from you will get. Look at the helmet shot above - that lens was sitting on his chest in front of the steering wheel, but it looks like it is feet away from the helmet. Real distance was probably more around 8 inches.

If you want really crisp and sharp images, forget about zoom lenses altogether and try a fixed focal lens. There's a reason Nikon just relased a $1500 35mm f1.4 fixed focal for the DX and FX sensor cameras. A used 24 mm f2.0 manual focus lens will blow any zoom out of the water in terms of image quality. Too bad all these lenses aren't wide enough for DX cameras, which is why I will probably go to whatever replaces the D700 with a higher resolution sensor when it arrives.

One thing about really wide lenses - you don't need AF at all, because you can pretty much shoot them at infinity all day long and everything is in focus. So if you're looking for super wide, I'd really look at a 13mm f5.6 manual focus lens on ebay. The newer 14mm AF is ok, too, but more expensive.

Originally Posted By: steelfrog


BTW, I think last year I bought Clair and Damien's Big Adventure, and my 14 y.o. daughter has it in her room. She and I went on her California Adventure this past August, spending 5 days in Yose backcountry, and several days in the Bishop Pass area, and I intend to make a similar book using blurb.com to memorialize her adventure. I have 6 kids so i'm doing a similar adventure with each in the summer before they start high school.


wow - cool. High school is still 2 years away for my twins, but they are already becoming less and less willing to do these things. Damien wants to do something with a mountain bike next summer, probably just hang around Mammoth. We may do some peak bagging and overnight hikes in between endless mammoth mountain downhill runs smile

Meanwhile I am having the crazy idea of picking up skiing again and doing the JMT in winter... maybe I'll get over it once I add up how much I'd have to spend on new gear alone.

Originally Posted By: steelfrog

If you haven't been there, I recently went to the North Cascades and they are fabulous. Kind of a narrow weather window--best shot is late July to mid-August.


I've been there in 89 and 90, but the climate reminded me too much of the Alps, which means it can wreck your whole vacation if you hit it bad.