# Help/Doubts regarding my first DSLR for 35k



## windchimes (Jun 22, 2011)

Hello digitians

I 'm planning to buy my first DSLR asap. I'll be using the cam for all kind of photography say scenery,people portraits,macro,  low light etc. Also, I am fine with doing slight post works using image editing tools . The amount I would like to invest maximum would be around 35k.

After looking around I came to the conclusion that Nikon D3100 would be a good choice. One dealer offered the same for Rs 28.5k with the 18-55mm usual lens that is part of the package. And I am planning to buy a zoom lens ( 70 - 105mm ) which according to the dealer costs around Rs 6k.

( Another option I considered  was to look at  Canon 500D as well as 550D. The former comes for around 33k but came to know the manufacturing of the same came to a halt while the later comes for 35.5 k approx ). 

Is my choice good enough and will it serve my purpose? Or do you have any further suggestions? Also thought Nikon would be better since the majority said it is more user friendly for a newbie  or say who isn't a pro.


Looking forward


----------



## Sounava (Jun 22, 2011)

I haven't heard any 70-105 lens till now.
I will advice you to buy D5100 now with the kit lens. Save up and purchase more lenses later.

And 500D is not available now. 550D is also a good camera, but as far as I know its prices have increased recently due to the Japan earthquake.


----------



## windchimes (Jun 22, 2011)

Thanks Sounava!

How much D5100 costs?? (shows 38.75k in jjmehta.).  550D comes for around 35.5k. Even there are rumors that they are going to stop the production since 600D is here in market. 

So, 

a) how much difference is there between Nikon 3xxxD and 5xxxD series and is it worth the additional amount? 

b) Again I would like to get my hands on zoom lens as well since I want to try some macro and low light clicks. What would be the specifics of these lenses ? 

Having said these I was parallely having this afterthought since carrying lenses around is not something I am not comfortable with. ie of superzoom set of cameras. Just wondering 

c) is there any superzoom camera  that can help you in quality clicking of objects in motion as well as in low light with flaws that can be rectified later in image editing tools? 

d )Also do they allow you to save images in print resolutions (300 dpi).? ( There was a case where one of my point and shoot click was selected as a book cover , but since I only had the .jpeg image in 72 resolution it never turned a reality )

Looking forward to hearing from you all ..


----------



## sujoyp (Jun 22, 2011)

For beginers I would say D3100 is enough ...u can get quality shots from it

for 6k I can think of Tamron 70-300 DiLD may be

U have mentioned ur requirement which covers too much

I think for starters who want to get everything straight away the combo OP is mentioned is enough

D3100+18-55+tamron 70-300 DiLD

this is a cheap combo and would cover all except low light pics which is ok with 18-55 but superb with 50mm 1.8

Getting a 550D would invest his whole money in kit and body...and he would be left unsatisfied


----------



## Sounava (Jun 23, 2011)

windchimes said:


> Thanks Sounava!


Youre welcome.


windchimes said:


> How much D5100 costs?? (shows 38.75k in jjmehta.).  550D comes for around 35.5k. Even there are rumors that they are going to stop the production since 600D is here in market.


D5100 is available for 33k with kit. Max 34k. At that price it is a steal.


windchimes said:


> a) how much difference is there between Nikon 3xxxD and 5xxxD series and is it worth the additional amount?


So the difference stands at 6k and is definitely worth the additional cost.


windchimes said:


> b) Again I would like to get my hands on zoom lens as well since I want to try some macro and low light clicks. What would be the specifics of these lenses ?


I dont get you. What does zoom lens have to do with macro or low light?
For low light you need a lens with a wide aperture. For macro you need macro lenses or extension tube + lens with aperture ring. 


windchimes said:


> Having said these I was parallely having this afterthought since carrying lenses around is not something I am not comfortable with. ie of superzoom set of cameras. Just wondering


Yup do consider this before buying. There is no point going for DSLR if you will keep your cam in home and go out empty handed.


windchimes said:


> c) is there any superzoom camera  that can help you in quality clicking of objects in motion as well as in low light with flaws that can be rectified later in image editing tools?


Sadly, no.


windchimes said:


> d )Also do they allow you to save images in print resolutions (300 dpi).? ( There was a case where one of my point and shoot click was selected as a book cover , but since I only had the .jpeg image in 72 resolution it never turned a reality )


This is a common misconception. 
When you have an image, it only has pixels, and no dpi. What the "Properties" tab shows is just misnomer. 
Suppose you have a 4000x3000 image and you print it to 8"x6". Then the image will be 500ppi. PPI = pixels per inch. DPI is a specification of the printer. DPI = dots per inch. It means the capability of the printer - how many dots it can print in 1 inch space. 
Now suppose you print the same 4000x3000 image to a size of 40"x30". Then the image will have a PPI of 100. 
I hope you get the point. 
Now you may ask then why is it shown? It is shown for aid in softwares like Adobe Illustrator where there are some ways to work with virtual image print dimensions etc.
That means, you can open any "72dpi image" (in your words) in Photoshop, and convert it to 300dpi or any dpi you wish. Nothing will change. 
If you want I can provide you with links.

Anyway, so why was your image not printed? Because of the thing called spatial resolution - the ability to resolve lines. It depends on the capability of the sensor. For example, if you print a 12" length photo from a 12MP point and shoot, it will not look nice coz of poor spatial resolution. But from a 12MP DSLR will look awesome.
So just the number of pixels do not matter, the spatial resolution matters. 

And dpi does not matter in this case at all.


----------



## windchimes (Jun 23, 2011)

Thanks Sujoy and Sounava! Yes D3100 is an option .  




Sounava said:


> D5100 is available for 33k with kit. Max 34k. At that price it is a steal.



I did check D5100 which is offered for 34.5k. But I read that Nikon D5100 supports only F mount lenses . Now what does that mean? I won't get any 3rd party lens for the model??



Sounava said:


> I dont get you. What does zoom lens have to do with macro or low light?
> For low light you need a lens with a wide aperture. For macro you need macro lenses or extension tube + lens with aperture ring.



Oops. Somehow it crossed my mind that higher zoom calls for macro stuff. Pardon my ignorance, but got to admit I have little idea on lenses except for the basic idea of tele, normal and wide angle. And I am yet to understand the numbers associated as well.
How much a basic macro lens cost?



Sounava said:


> That means, you can open any "72dpi image" (in your words) in Photoshop, and convert it to 300dpi or any dpi you wish. Nothing will change.  If you want I can provide you with links.Anyway, so why was your image not printed? Because of the thing called spatial resolution - the ability to resolve lines. It depends on the capability of the sensor. For example, if you print a 12" length photo from a 12MP point and shoot, it will not look nice coz of poor spatial resolution. But from a 12MP DSLR will look awesome. So just the number of pixels do not matter, the spatial resolution matters. And dpi does not matter in this case at all.



Thanks for the details, but if I am not mistaken blowing up an image as you said would make a change since all changes either scaling it up or down calls for a change in number of pixels per inch. So on a specific sheet of paper if you want to get an image printed at its best quality isn't it a norm to have 300 resolution? yet to understand there.

And why image wasn't printed..? This was an online enquiry from an Argentinian Poet since he wanted the  picture for his new anthology. And me having this 300dpi impression in mind  told him that it wouldn't be fitting well for the print. This is almost a 10 month story and as fate has its way now I was checking for the large size original file I had and it is missing from my HDD 


Again I'll stay away from superzoom if it won't help me to take pics of objects in motion fairly or in low lights.  Finally, I am looking for a cam that can help me in capturing images under most common light conditions including dawn and dusk as well as one lens with decent zoom option for around 35k ..


----------



## Sounava (Jun 23, 2011)

windchimes said:


> I read that Nikon D5100 supports only F mount lenses . Now what does that mean? I won't get any 3rd party lens for the model??


Forget the name F mount. It is just a name. Of course you will get third party lenses.
Suppose I launch a camera company. I need a specification of the back of the lens as well as the mount portion of the body to match right? Otherwise how will the lens fit there?
Nikon calls this the F mount.
Canon, Sony, etc etc all have different names for their mounts. 



windchimes said:


> How much a basic macro lens cost?


A true 1:1 macro lens will cost 18k. (The Tamron 90mm 1:1 lens).
Of course there are cheaper ways to achieve macro too. 
Extension tube (500/-) + Reversal ring (200/-) + any manual wide angle lens mounted reverse (say 3k) will give you more than 1:1 ratio. Infact it will give you around 5:1 ratio. But the disadvantage is you will have to set the shutter speed aperture and ISO manually. 



windchimes said:


> Thanks for the details, but if I am not mistaken blowing up an image as you said would make a change since all changes either scaling it up or down calls for a change in number of pixels per inch. So on a specific sheet of paper if you want to get an image printed at its best quality isn't it a norm to have 300 resolution? yet to understand there.


Re-read what I said carefully.



windchimes said:


> Again I'll stay away from superzoom if it won't help me to take pics of objects in motion fairly or in low lights.  Finally, I am looking for a cam that can help me in capturing images under most common light conditions including dawn and dusk as well as one lens with decent zoom option for around 35k ..


How much zoom is decent to you?


----------



## sujoyp (Jun 23, 2011)

I dont understand y do u neglect the Tamron DI LD 70-300 macro lens....its a good option for starters..its sharp and have macro option

I would say if u really keep on investing upto 35k more in comming days then go for 

D5100kit+Nikkor 55-300 Vr+Tamron 90mm macro

and if u r not planning to spend soo much in next 1 year then go for a cheaper combo

D3100 +18-105+ 50mm1.8+ reverse

at 35k u r going to spend the whole amount on just a Body + kit lens which is not good

@sounava...y do you want to spend soo much on body alone...I have always heard that the budget should be made 50:50


----------



## Sounava (Jun 23, 2011)

Actually the problem is, the Tamron DI LD 70-300 is almost same as the Sigma DG 70-300. It is not at all suitable for low light - look at the aperture. Plus it lacks any kind of stabilization. The macro is 1:2 and not true 1:1 also. Instead of getting this lens at 7.4k it will be wiser option to go for the 55-200VR @ 10k although it lacks macro.

Also, 50mm reversed will not give much magnification. One needs a wide angle lens. Extension tubes give good results with 50mm though. During this weekend I will make some tests on how much magnification is achieved under various setups and post the  results here  [Yes I received the extension tube and reversal ring on Monday  ]

And there is a reason why I asked him how much zoom is "decent" to him. Coz I had the 18-105 in my mind too. Lets see whether he needs more zoom than that.

Also, I believe spending 5k more on the D5100 body is worth it. I can point out the plus points here. Although it will be perfectly ok if he goes for the D3100 though.

Btw D3100 + 18-105 + 50mm 1.8 = 23 (probably) + 15.5 + 5.6 = 44k plus cost of filters etc. So it is far exceeding his costs.


----------



## sujoyp (Jun 23, 2011)

yaah u r right in all your comments..but the thing is he have to anyways exceed his budget

The cheapest I could think of was 
D3100+kit = 28k
Tamron Di LD or sigma Dg 70-300 which ever is cheaper = 7k

Soo at least it covers your 

18-55+70-300 range

and gives you 2:1 macro

all at 35k

The D5100 will alone cost 34k

If he is ready to spend at least 20k more in comming months then my recommendation will be similar to sounava's

D5100 kit for now and nikkor 55-200 or nikkor 55-300 according to ur budget later


----------



## windchimes (Jun 23, 2011)

Thanks Sounava and Sujoyp for the help! I am also learning a lot here 

Since you asked on decent zoom , it is something like where I can click the closeup of a bird sitting on a tree or a boat which is say a hundred plus meter in the sea.. ( something like 10x to 12x in common terms..is that right?)


----------



## Sounava (Jun 24, 2011)

Then the 18-105 only will not cover your needs. So you may better go for the kit lens + the 55-200. Or you can also consider the Sigma 18-200 OS version, at around 16k I guess. It will save you the hassle of changing lenses, but do note that there will be compromises when going for all-in-one zoom lenses.


----------



## sujoyp (Jun 24, 2011)

I really wish nikon have 18-135 type of lens....18-105 is bit less

forget everything
Straightaway get my combo...its great and I get quality pics in day as well night...but still exceed ur budget

I have D3100+18-55+55-200 = 28+11=39k

or if changing lens is too much hassel then as sounava said...get sigma 18-200

D3100 without kit+sigma 18-200 = 25+16 = 41


----------



## windchimes (Jun 24, 2011)

Thank you both once again!! Sounds good.




Sounava said:


> but do note that there will be compromises when going for all-in-one zoom lenses.



What exactly are those compromises when going for something like Sigma 18-200??

Off from the topic, you may check the link for  something new
Start-Up Lytro Aims to Sharpen Focus of Entire Camera Industry - Ina Fried - News - AllThingsD


----------



## sujoyp (Jun 24, 2011)

Thanks for the link...

The compromise are
 - low light capability
 - No VR
 - maybe bit poor built quality
 - poorer optics


----------



## Sounava (Jun 24, 2011)

^ Um actually the Sigma 18-200 I was talking about _is_ optically stabilised (OS), which is another name for Nikon's VR.

Anyway, the compromises are,
When you view at 100% zoom the images will look less sharp than that taken by a lens which is not a superzoom.
There may be some chromatic aberration (purple fringing that is), though those can be easily corrected in photoshop.
There may be some amount of barrel distortion or pincushion distortion at the extreme wide and extreme tele end respectively, though if you shoot RAW, they can be corrected in Adobe Camera Raw inside Photoshop.

The lens I am talking about is this: "Sigma 18-200mm f3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM". 

Though I would say it is better to go for the 18-55 VR + 55-200 VR combo.

And @sujoy: There isn't much perceptible difference between 105mm and 135mm. 
Try this: Nikon | Imaging Products | NIKKOR Lenses Simulator


----------



## sujoyp (Jun 24, 2011)

u get sigma 18-200 OS for just 16k... thats a nice one then


----------



## windchimes (Jun 24, 2011)

Thanks guys!! Now the good news is, I got a chance to increase the budget to around 45k if needed!! What kind of improvement should I make in that case ??


----------



## sujoyp (Jun 24, 2011)

D5100 kit + Nikkor 55-200 VR is a great combo at your budget...check the price in market


----------



## Sounava (Jun 24, 2011)

Body + Standard lens - D3100+18-55 = 28k
Telephoto - 55-200VR = 11k
Macro - 50mm f/1.8D = 5.6k and Extension tube = 0.5k

Protection of front glass of lens - Hoya HMC UV Filter = 0.2k each for the 18-55 and the 55-200VR

Total = 45.5k


----------



## sujoyp (Jun 24, 2011)

hey this is not fair Mr.Sounava untill now at 35k budget I was giving him D3100 combo and u were suggesting D5100

Now for 45k budget situation just reversed


----------



## Sounava (Jun 24, 2011)

Until 35k, whether he was taking D3100 or D5100, the full setup was exceeding his budget anyway. But in 45k, with the above setup everything is fitting nicely. Thats why 

I will still say if he can extend his budget to 50k then take the D5100 combo


----------



## sujoyp (Jun 24, 2011)

Ok for this time I agree with u  coz macro season is on with rains...people should try macro in this season


----------



## windchimes (Jun 24, 2011)

Thanks guys. Let me see whether I can get a hand on D5100 along with the telephoto and macro lenses along with the extension tube specified above.

Also I got  a 2005 model vivtar slr (not digital) camera kit  for sale
Any idea how much can i grab from the same? The camera is functional.

The components are;

Vivitar V3000 CAMERA 

Vivitar Flash : 2000B

Mikona Flash MV123 ( a smaller one)

A syncro eye slave unit ( a small electronic ciruit;  no idea what it is and where it is used)

A cell charger for four AA sized batteries

One rubber lens hood


check your pm inbox soon. will share a few photos i clicked so far. Let me hear from you there as well  ( clicked using Sony Cybershot DSC W220 and edited using PS )


----------



## sujoyp (Jun 24, 2011)

50mm + Extension tube is a setup for macro...u can not take one and leave other for taking macros

Increase ur budget to 50k or get the remaining 5k thing next month...that will fullfill all ur needs

will check ur pics from home


----------



## Sounava (Jun 24, 2011)

There is no point going for a film SLR now. Keep it out of your mind.


----------



## sujoyp (Jun 24, 2011)

Sounava said:


> There is no point going for a film SLR now. Keep it out of your mind.



he wants to sell it


----------



## Sounava (Jun 24, 2011)

Oh 

In that case ask for a probable price in jjmehta forum.


----------



## windchimes (Jun 24, 2011)

Sounava said:


> There is no point going for a film SLR now. Keep it out of your mind.


Yikes!!!




..And today I went to 2 different dealers. The last price for D5100 is 34.3 and D3100 is 28.5k

Now,coming to lenses, couldnt get further details of all the ones you specified since they didn't have the stock. For  zoom one party suggested "SIGMA 70-300 Macro". The name itself created a confusion since they were of the opinion it can be used for macro photography.Got in touch with some other guy over the phone who asked me what I really wanted and  whether it is to click butterflies and ants  . I said "yes" for which he said this can be used for that but won't be as good as the macro lenses. I really didn't understood that part and am confused what exactly the lens does. It costs 8.5k and later another dealer said that this Zoom lens'll give a blurred background except for the first subject matter that it focuses. You can't get the whole frame into focus with this zoom (or macro)lens?


Also,the term conversion tube is something alien to all the dealers here and they were asking whether it is is  "reverse ring" . Is it the same? And one dealer said that his brother is using standard 13-55mm along with reverse ring for macro photography.Any idea on the same

And he suggested me another lens which was in his stock.Nikkor 55-300 for 16k ( 2 years warranty).Coming to the all in one sigma lens 18-200 it comes for around 14+ . But dealer was saying the Sigma lens had complaints with autofocus though he wasn't so sure about which sigma lens.

If sticking all "Nikon" it is 34.3 + 16 = 50.3!! and can I use a conversion ring and get a macro out of 18-55 ?? With so much appreciation flowing for D5100 somehow I don't feel like looking at D3100 now


----------



## sujoyp (Jun 24, 2011)

Look bro everything depend on ur budget....its not a good idea to invest all your money just to get a slightly upgraded SLR...Anyways D5100 is a great SLR no doubt

Also as I already said in some above post that Tamron 70-300 and Sigma 70-300 can be a very cheap option for zoom + macro...but they are somewhat jack of all master of none
They just fail miserably in low light...in terms of autofocus and distortion

If u are getting Nikkor 55-300 for 16k then its a good price...grab it

If u want everything from starting itself then get what sounava suggested

D3100 kit+55-200+50mm 1.8+ *Extension tube* (not conversion ring)

Actually the above combo is my own one


----------



## Sounava (Jun 25, 2011)

sujoyp sumd it up nicely. I will just add some points. 

I already mentioned earlier about the Tamron 70-300 and the Sigma 70-300. And said that you will not get true macro but 1:2 macro. And the lens costs 7.3k not 8.5k.



windchimes said:


> this Zoom lens'll give a blurred background except for the first subject matter that it focuses. You can't get the whole frame into focus with this zoom (or macro)lens?


Thats not true. You will come to know when you study about aperture. 



> Also,the term conversion tube is something alien to all the dealers here and they were asking whether it is is  "reverse ring" . Is it the same? And one dealer said that his brother is using standard 13-55mm along with reverse ring for macro photography.Any idea on the same


There is nothing called converison tube. I said "extension tube". If the dealers haven't heard about it, buy from eBay. 
Reversal rings are not the same. For reversal rings to work you need a wide angle lens with manual aperture ring. 



> And he suggested me another lens which was in his stock.Nikkor 55-300 for 16k ( 2 years warranty).Coming to the all in one sigma lens 18-200 it comes for around 14+ . But dealer was saying the Sigma lens had complaints with autofocus though he wasn't so sure about which sigma lens.


I think this Sigma is the NON-OS version. 



> If sticking all "Nikon" it is 34.3 + 16 = 50.3!! and can I use a conversion ring and get a macro out of 18-55 ?? With so much appreciation flowing for D5100 somehow I don't feel like looking at D3100 now


Look D5100 is totally worth the money, but there is no point spending 6k extra on a better body if money is your concern. If you can live without macro, then its alright. Then buy D5100 + 18-55 + 55-200. 
And 18-55 cannot be used reversed because it does not have any manual aperture ring.


----------



## windchimes (Jun 25, 2011)

Thanks a lot people! Probably stick to D5100 + 18-55 + 55-200. Will keep you updated once I pick it!


----------



## sujoyp (Jun 25, 2011)

good we will wait...if u can extend a slightly more get 55-300mm from gray market...its worth..

I have 55-200 and feel that its bit less for birding


----------



## Sounava (Jun 25, 2011)

Actually availability of "good" grey markets are a problem in some places. Otherwise the 55-200 is available @ 9k in grey I think. Or maybe 8.5k.


----------



## sujoyp (Jun 25, 2011)

Sounava said:


> Actually availability of "good" grey markets are a problem in some places. Otherwise the 55-200 is available @ 9k in grey I think. Or maybe 8.5k.



Right...even in nagpur its difficult...I was getting a 55-200 6 month old for 8k in jjmehta...superb deal with 1.5 year warunty

But dad insist to get these sophesticated things new.


----------



## Sounava (Jun 25, 2011)

In Kolkata the grey market is very famous and reliable 
Heck one shop also has their own Facebook page 

If the item develops some fault within few days, they will replace the item!

You can buy from then With Bill and Warranty too (sealed pack and all) and they charge considerably less than other shops. I bought my 50mm f/1.8D @ 5.4k with Bill and Warranty.


----------



## sujoyp (Jun 25, 2011)

Sounava said:


> In Kolkata the grey market is very famous and reliable
> Heck one shop also has their own Facebook page
> 
> If the item develops some fault within few days, they will replace the item!
> ...



Thats good...I have no other choice but to get lense from jjmehta...


BTW if anyone have budget get the 55mm 2.8macro from buysell section...

Also kenko auto extension tube is for sale for 4k

both are nice deals...


----------



## windchimes (Jun 27, 2011)

Hey guys, finally,here it is! I purchased D5100 for 34k and Nikkor 55-300mm for 16k. Love it and is slowly getting a hang of it!!Thanks for all the help 

Cheers!!


----------



## sujoyp (Jun 27, 2011)

congrats...very good deal...and great combo...

shoot some birds and general shots for now...keep interest in macro pending for some days


----------



## Sounava (Jun 27, 2011)

Hey congrats


----------



## dinupoy (Jun 30, 2011)

windchimes said:


> Hey guys, finally,here it is! I purchased D5100 for 34k and Nikkor 55-300mm for 16k. Love it and is slowly getting a hang of it!!Thanks for all the help
> 
> Cheers!!



Hi Windchimes, Can you please advice where you baught Nikon D5100 camera? i planning to buy one next week. you get manufacturer warranty for that?

Thanks in advance for your response

Dinesh


----------



## windchimes (Jul 1, 2011)

dinupoy said:


> Hi Windchimes, Can you please advice where you baught Nikon D5100 camera? i planning to buy one next week. you get manufacturer warranty for that?
> 
> Thanks in advance for your response
> 
> Dinesh



Dinupoy, I got my cam from Kerala and yes with 2 years warranty. They did quote around 36 initially, I waited a couple more days and checked prices from many other dealers and then went back and again asked for the last price. By that time most were ready to offer it for 34.5 k. Then I told the guy that someone else offered it for 34k in the city and if you can give me for the same I'll purchase it then and there. Then he said yes and I grabbed the 
cam


----------



## windchimes (Jul 1, 2011)

And here is my second click with the cam. [ First was of my mom  There is extensive compression here though


----------



## sujoyp (Jul 1, 2011)

ur pic can not be viewd...please post pics in right thread so that we can comment


----------



## Sounava (Jul 2, 2011)

windchimes said:


> And here is my second click with the cam. [ First was of my mom  There is extensive compression here though



It is a nice capture. But why did you use f/5.6? You could have used a wider aperture to blur the background more. You shot it at 24mm so I think it would have been possible to go till f/4. 

Composition is nice. If this is your second photo then you are sure going to improve


----------



## windchimes (Jul 4, 2011)

Thanks Sounava. Well, there I didn't really bother on the aperture size . I just checked whether the flower is in focus and then clicked. Yet to get a firm understanding on clicking a pic to its best by understanding the aperture size, distance and lighting condition. If you can lead me to any simple locations where these are explained then plzzz.. 




Sounava said:


> You shot it at 24mm so I think it would have been possible to go till f/4.



How you made this comment and the equation of the two?? Seeking pardon in any stupidity in the query 


Secondly, I am having an issue with shooting in dark. I guess there is some glare from the lens that is captured on image.Please find the image in the attachment. How this is happening and hard to take it as an issue in cameras? Or, is it common? Really bugging it is. How can this be rectified?

Looking forward..


----------



## sujoyp (Jul 5, 2011)

strange...never seen this issue before


Ok here is the table for Nikkor 18-55 VR aperture vs focal length


Maximum Aperture
18mm           f/3.5

24mm           f/4

35mm           f/5

45mm           f/5.3

55mm           f/5.6

If by any chance u r still confused f/3.5 aperture is bigger then f/11      
the bigger the aperture ...the more light comes in..
The more light comes in ...you can use lower ISO(100,200) and faster shutter speeds(1/320, 1/400)
The lower the ISO the cleaner the picture and faster shutter speed helps in taking hand holding shots...


----------



## agyaat (Jul 5, 2011)

windchimes said:


> I am having an issue with shooting in dark. I guess there is some glare from the lens that is captured on image.Please find the image in the attachment. How this is happening and hard to take it as an issue in cameras? Or, is it common? Really bugging it is. How can this be rectified?
> 
> Looking forward..



The ghost or flare can have some causes such as:
a. filter attached in front of the lens (I suppose you did not have the hood on the lens as well). Example
b. another source of light other than the wicks? Even if it is the flame from the wicks causing it, it could have happened, I believe, as you perhaps were reasonably close to the thing.


----------



## windchimes (Jul 5, 2011)

Thanks Sujoy for the chart. Yeah I know the fundas you mentioned.




agyaat said:


> The ghost or flare can have some causes such as:
> a. filter attached in front of the lens (I suppose you did not have the hood on the lens as well). Example
> b. another source of light other than the wicks? Even if it is the flame from the wicks causing it, it could have happened, I believe, as you perhaps were reasonably close to the thing.



Thanks agyaat.

a) I have a Marumi UV Haze filter attached. And there wasn't a hood attached ,but the wicks were the only light source present. Thanks for the flickr link you provided. But can a filter create such an issue? 

b) The issue has nothing to do with the distance I guess, since I clicked a pic of a halogen bulb on the wall  which was at a fair distance and the flare was again there


----------

