"Found this on the net: Minimum Aperture: f/32; approx. 105-315mm for APS DX format DSLR.
Is this fast enough or can be ASA compensated? Found this on the web:
The great news about digital is that the fast ISOs usually excuse you from the need for an expensive f/2.8 lens. The f/4 - 5.6 lenses above are usually fine even in less than optimum light. (http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/nikkor.htm)"
Absolutely right, the new dslr sensors, even the beginner ones, are now so good at controlling noise that you can shot at comparatively silly iso speeds and get very usable images compared to what you could with film. Couple that with the anti shake of many of even the cheapest camera kit lenses and you have a big range of light conditions that you can effectively shoot in.
The problem you'll have with the lens you mention is focal length. It will work really well for close/macro photos and some portraits/grip and grin shots but you'll miss a lot of the sense of space and the environment around the angler. Wide lenses also make for interesting shots from different angles. A 17-55mm on a cropped frame camera works out to about 28 - 80mm so wide to medium tele. The kit ones are very light (which does tend to mean less sturdy) but are mostly designed for the cropped sensors and produce good results at least for a fare while until you decide whether want to invest in better glass. Oh, and they're very cheap especially with a package.
Jan recommended it ages ago. Totally awesome. Mine takes a regular dunking and the camera stays dry.
Believe it or not, I'm still using my original one that I bought in 2005. It has been in many, many countries and have saved my camera several times (including when falling off a skiff in Cuba ) and looks pretty worn but it's still waterproof. May replace it soon :-)
Yes, I was planning to get a Nikon DSLR body with the 18-100mm lens (if this option is there), and then use the 70-210 (105-315 equivalent) for more crowded in feel.
I like spaciousness in a good composition. Some of pyko's photos exemplify this. Truly stunning. I wonder what is his setup (Pyko, are you there?).
Go with the DSL Trev. The rest is all in your head. If you want good images you have to take them and that means working out how to fish around them.
I carry my gear in a waterproof canyoning backpack that I fitted a Lowepro padded divider into. Its been going very hard for probably 6 years now(saved my life in NZed when I trod in some quicksand) and has finally split some seams.
If you want good pics you need the gear and the attitude. The attitude says that whatever you're carrying must be used every day. There's nothing in my daily kit that is excess and any situation I come across will be covered.
Jan recommended it ages ago. Totally awesome. Mine takes a regular dunking and the camera stays dry.
Believe it or not, I'm still using my original one that I bought in 2005. It has been in many, many countries and have saved my camera several times (including when falling off a skiff in Cuba ) and looks pretty worn but it's still waterproof. May replace it soon :-)
Hi Jan ,
you better should have had your voice recorder in that bag!? :p
Greets
Bernd
I think Pyko uses a Canon G10. Like a lot of guys here, it wouldn't matter what kind of camera he used, he is a good photographer.
The guys on this Board set me up proper, Trev. I can vouch for the Canon 7D being pretty bombproof. Mine rides in an Ortlieb bag on the floor of many boats. Pounding up the Detroit River to Lake St Clair in a 20 Skiff in 3-4 footers is a pretty good test.
Morsie uses his gear harder than anyone I've seen. He's also meticulous about cleaning it up.
) and looks pretty worn but it's still waterproof. May replace it soon :-)
,
:p 
