carla_bryan

<p>Thank you so much to everyone for their input.<br> <br />For all I'd love to get the SB-5000 and WR-R10 setup, and realise the D7000 would control this remotely, if I understand correctly I'd still have a problem remotely triggering the SB-700 with the D500 (couldn't quite work out if the WR-R10 would trigger the SB700 - didn't look like it as it's radio not infrared from what I can see). But, anyway, it is a lot of money for a pair of amateurs by the time you add an SB-xxx to it too as has been pointed out. <br> <br />I've been looking at Yongnuo and their options seem to fit the bill - all the options I need, radio control and at a much more palatable price! I hadn't really considered anything but Nikon, so thatnk you for the suggestion - it looks like a good substitute from what I've read, so I think that's the way forward. <br> <br />So that's one dilemma with the D500 sorted (well, nearly). Now to work out the best remote shutter control for it (naturally, the one I have for the D7000 doesn't work with the D500 either!). <br> <br />Thanks again everyone!<br> Carla</p>

<p>Hello everyone!<br> I am now the (VERY) proud owner of a Nikon D500. My God, what a camera! I am an ameteur, but it makes my work look good!<br> <br />My question relates to my options regards flashes, specifically remote flashes. With no on-camera flash to act as a commander, I can only use my SB-700 on the hotshoe (as I understand it).<br> <br />To add the mix, my fiance has now decided he wants to get into photography (hence me getting the D500; he got my D7000 to start off with!). So, we will be getting another flash (I'm thinking SB-900? Thoughts welcome!), but I want both of them to be commanded remotely - by both the D500 and the D7000 - for situations where either of us want to use two flashes for lighting.</p> <p>So, from what I've ascertained (remember, I'm a novice - I know, I'm so very lucky to have a D500!) the D7000 can't control the SB-5000 remotely. And the D500 can't control the SB-700 remotely. So, if I got an SB-5000, we'd be down to each having our own flashes, but neither camera could control the other's flash. Not what we want - we've shelled out an obscene amount of money on photographic gear lately, and I don't use flash a lot yet (let alone my fiance who is still getting to grips with how to use the D7000, let alone introducing flash into the equation!). We need to be able to double up on flashes when the need arises!</p> <p>So far, I've come up with the SU-800 as a solution.....but just want to check it will work. I know the D7000 can control the SB-700 and SB-900 flashes, I'm pretty sure the D500 can with an SU-800 commander but I've heard the SU-800 is a poor performer outdoors.....<br> <br />So, my question is: will the SU-800 do what I want, assuming we buy a SB-900 (or the like) to supplement the SB-700 we already have, and are the any better options out there, ie that perform a bit better outdoors? I am a fan of the 'false black background' effect using flash to illuminate the subject..and I like doing it outdoors.<br> <br />Looking forward to the answers, based on the wealth of really useful information I got last time I posted on here!<br> <br />Kindest.....<br> Carla</p> <p> </p>

<blockquote> <blockquote> <p>nothing was really very sharp even when I managed to actually focus on them. I realise I probably can't afford anything that's really good at this sort of thing, but what do you think would be better than the 55-200 I have for this kind of thing?</p> </blockquote> <p>well, actually, i think the problem there might not be the lens' sharpness so much as technique.</p> </blockquote> <p>Yes, probably! I got a couple that were reasonable, but it wasn't the best light. I probably needed more ISO with hindsight, especially as I was using fast shutter speeds to try and capture the action!</p> <p> </p> <blockquote> <p>some of the D7000's had a back focus issue that required a bit of tuning.</p> </blockquote> <p>I have come across mention of this, but wasn't sure if it was a big enough issue to be of concern to an amateur at my level. Will print off some of the focus check sheets I came across and have a look into that. If it improves the lenses I've got, it could certainly help me with the way forward I'm leaning towards from the advice I have here.....</p> <p>I'm now thinking I will keep the 18-55, especially if fine-tuning the autofocus helps, but supplement with a 50mm f1.8G prime. If I find I'm looking for a longer prime, I'll look at the 85mm recommended later on when finances have recovered a bit (I have kit to buy besides lenses, I literally only have the body and lenses, a tripod and remote shutter release at the moment). I'll add an ultra wide, probably go for the Tokina 12-24, or maybe the Sigma (I would like to be able to do architectural interiors....we have some amazing opportunities for that in this part of the world!). Then I'll see what money is left, and replace the 55-200 for a 70-300mm - probably the Tamron unless I can squeeze the cash for a Nikkor. That should be plenty for the extra reach I've been wanting so no need for a teleconverter..... </p> <p> Thank you to everyone for the advice. It really has helped me narrow down what to do!</p> <p>All the best</p> <p>Carla</p>

<p>Wow, lots of food for thought there. Thank you!</p> <p>Although I want some extra functionality, I definitely don't want to replace the mediocre lenses I have with similar quality. So it sounds as if keeping one at least and adding to it with the best I can get for my budget may be the way to go. </p> <p>The ultra-wide is probably a given, so I'll look into the suggestions for that. I find it's the 55-200 I use most away from landscapes, and mostly at the longer range so I'll probably look at that and maybe see if I can squeeze some cash for a prime in between. I doubt if I'd miss the focal lengths I didn't have in those too much, and I'd still have my 18-55 if push came to shove.....</p> <p>I do have a dream of one day managing to shoot the red arrows. Ambitious, I know - I had a go when they came to our town this summer, with a some reasonable results but nothing was really very sharp even when I managed to actually focus on them. I realise I probably can't afford anything that's really good at this sort of thing, but what do you think would be better than the 55-200 I have for this kind of thing?</p> <p>Thanks again.</p> <p>Carla</p>

<p>Thank you both! All food for thought. I tend to avoid using Liveview to focus for landscapes (never really tried it!) because I find I can't see it in brighter light (discovered from trying to get video of the dogs with the D7000). I'll look into it as an option, though, so thank you again.</p> <p>I'll also have a look at the lenses you suggest. If I got a Sigma 70-200, would I need a Sigma teleconverter, or would the Nikon one work?<br> <br />All the best<br> Carla</p>

<p>Hello to you all<br /> I have a Nikon D7000 and two kit lenses: Nikkor 18-55 f/3.5-5.6G, Nikkor 55-200 f/4-5.6 ED. In the few years I've had this, I've run into limitations which have made me want to upgrade the lenses:<br /> <br /> * Neither of my lenses have a distance scale, so getting hyperfocal distance for landscape work is difficult (I have read it's impossible, in reality). Would also like a bit wider for some of the shots I find I want to take, inside and outside. Probably also quite fast, to give me scope to explore inside, and outside in lower light.<br> <br /> * I take a lot of portrait shots of my dogs, and want a faster mid-range and telephoto lens for more bokeh opportunity close up and further away.<br> <br /> * I also take a lot of action shots of my dogs, and other fast moving things, so I need quick autofocus for this. I'm usually using the longer end of the telephoto for these, so sharp and good contrast at this focal length is important but I haven't felt limited with 200mm in most situations.<br> <br /> * There have been a few occasions where a maximum focal length of 200mm has been a bit limiting, though. Not enough to get a lens that's too heavy to carry around with me, so I have been researching getting a teleconverter for this. I believe this means I will need an FX lens, at least for the telephoto, as Nikon say teleconverters cannot be attached to DX lenses. Not a bad thing as it gives me the flexibility to go full frame when I do eventually upgrade the body.<br> <br /> Although I know the sort of stuff I've been shooting so far, this has been a bit limited by the kit I've had and I do plan to try all sorts of new things. So I am looking to get a set of lenses, hopefully 3 zoom lenses to cover all ranges, that give me all round flexibility but still good quality. My plan is to supplement these with primes as and when I establish the need, or that they'll be used enough.<br> <br /> I don't have an enormous budget, probably about £700 (just over $1000), so I'm looking to buy second hand. I'd love Nikkor for all of them, but I don't think I'll be able to afford that even second hand. I've heard that some third party lenses can outshine kit lenses but I'm driving myself crazy trying to work out which ones. For example, I was looking at the Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 until I heard it can cause errors on the D7000....<br> <br /> Any help or advice would be much appreciated.......or I fear I might never decide (and I've already spent around 7 days or so researching this, over several months!).<br /> <br />Many thanks<br /> Carla</p>