Jump to content

heimbrandt

PhotoNet Pro
  • Posts

    643
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

590 Excellent

3 Followers

  1. Increasing image quality by allowing larger files is a good idea. After all, this is a photography forum, so quality matters. However, more photos does not automatically mean better photos. With one photo per post, a "like" means you like the photo. With two or more photos in a post, you may like one, two or all photos. How do you then interpret a "like"? That the person liked one, two or all photos in that post? Would a post even get a "like" if one photo is really good but the others are bad? Photo.net allows you to post as many photos as you like as often as you like, so it is not like this Nikon Wednesday thread is the only way to show off your best work. That is why I think it would be better if this particular thread would go back to a one photo per week limit, but allow for larger files.
  2. Erik, congratulations, I am sure you will like your new lens a lot! It is always interesting to read peoples' findings after testing equipment. There is sample variation, there are people with axes to grind and then there are the very few with knowledge and equipment to actually measure and test lenses in a meaningful way. I cannot say that I have found any in the last category, supporting the findings you quoted. I have no idea who you quoted and who that photographer's 46 professional photographers are, but the claim that YouTube and online forums are full with warnings and only praise from paid reviewers or users lacking experience of these lenses kind of says it all, does it not? As a side note, in Sweden, renting a lens for three months would probably cost more than buying it and re-sell it. I had the VRII version before and liked it a lot. I chose it because most all reviews and test made it clear that it was better for full frame use than the first version, which was developed for DX. My VRII was good, strong at all focal lengths and its focus breathing never bothered me. Using the D800E and D850, I did note that is was weakest at ca 135mm, consistent with most publishes tests, but still a very good lens at that focal length. The E FL is better in all aspects, but the zoom ring took time getting used to. Today, it only bothers me when I use my Elinchrom ring flash as that covers the entire zoom ring.
  3. Why not try the focus confirmation light in the viewfinder? It might be all you need. If not, here is a brief description of some of Nikon’s focusing screens for several of the cameras that featured interchangeable focusing screens: Support Articles Beattie Intenscreen also offered some good third party alternatives, icluding some options that Nikon never offered for certain cameras (split screen for the F/N90 for instance). I am not familiar with how ”old school” the modern Voigtländer is, but remember that the N80 does not meter with AI/AI-S lenses, only AI-P and newer.
  4. I do not recall which version of the Metz 60CT they tested but they noted that it measured around GN 50. They did all their flash tests at 1/250s and re-tested the Metz at either 1/60s or 1/30s (which also was the X-sync speed of my old Pentax67). Then it measured significantly better at around the claimed output, giving about a third of a stop more light. In addition to measuring colour temperature, they also compared the output just when the ready light came on to when it has been on for 30 seconds and also compared vignetting at the extreme edge to center for all flashes at various focal lengths (for those that came with wide-angle panels or zoom heads).
  5. Dinesh, I would not worry about three versus four leg sections with Gitzo tripods. I use an old three section G1325mkII carbon fiber tripod with a very heavy camera (a full frame camera with battery grip and a 600mm f/4 lens on a Wimberley head). A four section tripod would do the job just as well. The leg locks did take some time getting used to. I do prefer them to the Bogen/Manfrotto twist locks I was used to as the Gitzo locks are much sturdier. If you are buying used, I would suggest that you look for a carbon fiber tripod.
  6. It seems like the Z IIs are what the Zs should have been two years ago. I remember testing the Z7 at the launch event here in Sweden and immediately realising they would not be ideal for bird photography. Thus, I got the D850 with a grip and have not regret my choice. Now, though, I might have gone with the Z7 II (depending on its viewfinder and af-perfomance in the field) over the D850 but I see little reason to upgrade right now other than to use the 14-30mm f/4. Used Z6/7 will depreciate more than the D850. Is not that taking thinks a bit far, like the rumour sites usually do? What about slower PF lenses, perhaps a 400mm f/4 and 600mm f/5.6? I think there is a reason for Nikon not specifying the aperture of those lenses yet.
  7. You can trigger Elinchrom transmitters via PC-sync on your camera, leaving the hotshoe free for an on-camera flash. However, you will loose the TTL feature of the ELB500TTL as that requires the Transmitter Pro mounted in you camera’s hotshoe. Have you considered a flash bracket for your on-camera speedlite? The older Godox X1t will allow you control of other Godox flashes and offer a hotshoe mount on top of it for a camera mounted flash.
  8. David, I hope you have found a new tripod that you like. If you are still looking, I would actually advice against the Manfrotto 055 range - for your use. The added weight of a (400mm f/2.8 or a) 600mm f/4 over a 500mm f/4 is too much, especially when we are not talking about the current generation of lenses (which are substantially lighter than their older versions). The current 055 range (alu/cf) is specified to support 9 kg (19.84 Ib), the older 055CB was able to safely support 8 kg (17.64 Ib) if memory serves me right. You are about to place 20 Ib on it and go outdoors in the wind. I would say that Gitzo and probably RRS as well rate their products more conservatively than Manfrotto and many others do. The 055 is a very good tripod, I had a 055CB for about 20 years and never had any problems with it. I used it with my Pentax 67, DSLR with 300mm f/2.8 with a 2x teleconverter and it worked fine. I replaced the 055CB with a second hand Induro AT-303 a couple of years ago and added a Wimberley WH-200 head to it. The Induro was much more stable with both the 300 mm, my spotting scope and of course the 600 mm f/4 than the 055 was (I only tried the 055 indoors for evaluation with the 600mm - no wind to makes things worse). I sold the Induro to a friend who wanted the Beike gimbal it came with. He had the Manfrotto 055CXPRO4 and later said the Induro held his 300/2.8, camera and grip more stable when using teleconverters. I was fortunate enough to find an old carbon fibre Gitzo Mountaineer 1325 MkII (the predecessor to the Systematic 3 series) for a very good price, which I have used since with the Wimberley head. It keeps my 600mm f/4 and spotting scope stable in the wind. Bob Aktins concluded it was good enough for the same era of 600mm f/4 lenses: Bob Atkins - Gitzo Carbon Fiber Tripods - 1325 and 1227 Why not look for a second hand Induro alu/cf tripod or an older Gitzo cf tripod online?
  9. If the 300 PF is not within reach, get the 300mm f/4 AF-S. It is sharper and handles flare better than the PF. It does not work with the TC-14EIII, though. While bulkier and heavier than the PF, it is still not a huge and heavy lens. It does have a reputation for squeaky af, but some lenses only squeak when they have been on the shelf for a while. Nikon have told me that when there is dirt in the af motor, it will squeak all the time. If it only squeaks the first couple of times after periods of non use and then becomes silent, it is nothing to worry about. In both instances, they would recommend an new af motor. The 300mm f/4 AF-S should still be serviceable by Nikon, should you consider the cost and availability of new af motors. All 300mm f/2.8 Nikkors are excellent, but the AF-I motors are no longer repaired by Nikon and they are slower than the AF-S motors. Nikon do not guarantee parts for all AF-S lenses either, but odds increase the more recent the lens is. I have the previous version, the 300 mm f/2.8G IF-ED VR. Optically it is exactly the same as the current VRII-version (coatings and all). That is definitely one to write home about - absolutely stellar optics. However, between the AF-I and VR, Nikon did make two versions of AF-S lenses. When found, they usually fetch about the same money as the AF-I, so either one of those would be my choice if the PF or VR are too expensive.
  10. You must not have a 35mm DX lens (50mm for FX). There is a reason they sell quite well, they are fairly low cost and have quite good optics - but mainly because many "experts", "pros", teachers and dealers say that is where any serious photographer should start. There is also a reason for the large second hand market for those lenses, a lot of people end up never using them. I have a 50mm for my D850. It is the cheapest lens I have ever bought new, but considering lens cost per photo taken with it, it is the most expensive lens I have ever owned. (Even my very expensive super telephoto lenses come in at a much lower cost per photo taken.) So do not get a 35mm DX lens just because others say you must have one. Like any other lens, only get one if you have the specific need for it. The Nikon 18-200 lens was well regarded and loved back in the day of <10 Mpix DX cameras. When the D7100 and its 24 Mpix sensor arrived, many people began to notice that the lens really was not optimized for those high resolution cameras. The same has been said about the 10/12-24 mm Nikkors. The D7000 is 16 Mpix and when I had it, I really loved using the 10-24mm lens on it, thus you might very well be happy with the 18-200 as well for travel. If anything, a wide-angle would add more opportunities to take photos otherwise not possible than a 35 mm lens would. The Nikon 24-120mm f/4 VR could serve as a do-nearly-all-lens, but like Andrew wrote above, it is a heavy lens that does not go wide on DX. As a DX lens, it makes no sense compared to the smaller, cheaper and sharper 18-140 VR DX lens. I also have the 24-120mm lens, and it does see some use, but I prefer using the 16-35+70-200 combo most of the time when I travel. Since it seems you look at the 70-200mm lenses, why not have a serious look at the Nikon 70-200mm f/4 VR? It is smaller, lighter, optically better than the first two versions of the 70-200mm f/2.8 lenses. The 70-200mm 2.8E FL VR is another beast, but it does require the specific need for f/2.8 and a willingness to pay for it. If you, in the future, desire to take up bird photography, I would advice against the 70-200/300mm zooms for that purpose. Get a Nikon 200-500mm zoom, a Tamron G2 or Sigma 150-600mm for wildlife, once you decide to cross that bridge. For birds, you will almost always be focal length challenged and 300mm is just too short.
  11. Like others have mentioned, the free update of Adobe Camera Raw for Adobe CS6 does what you want and does not require you to learn new software. Personally, I am somewhat sceptical when it comes to converting RAW-files to Adobe's DNG-format. I prefer to keep the native formats for as long as possible.
  12. 2Oceans, I know there are exceptions to that rule, but I do not not exactly which lenses lack a special US stamp even though they are imported by Nikon USA. Good to know the 70-200 E FL is on of the lenses that has the US stamp - or did you check three other lenses (assuming not all three where 70-200 E FLs)? Nikon Camera Serial Numbers | DSLRBodies | Thom Hogan
  13. Do you really need multiple cameras? If not I would sell them all and get a D850 with the grip and D4/5 battery. Almost as fast a D4/D500, same DX resolution and AF as the D500 (to all practical uses at least), faster, better AF and higher resolution than the D810. If you do need multiple cameras, I would suggest you, save some more money. The when budget allows, sell the D800 and pair your D500 with a D850 (without the grip and D4/5 battery to begin with). The D500 and D850 are very similar in terms of ergonomics and it would not feel awkward switching between them. Getting a D810 may very well still keep you lusting for the D850. If so, the D810 is more like a costly stop along the way, which while it will be an improvement will still end up costing you more than getting what you really want to begin with. If you do not need every image file to be 45 Mpix, you could shoot Medium or Small RAW with the D850. It does not make the camera any faster, but it gives you smaller files and lower resolution files to store. Yes, the dynamic range is limited compared to Large RAW at the same ISO, but then again so is DR from a D4 compared to a D850 as well. I have owned the D800 and the D800E and used the D810. All three are excellent cameras, but there is a much larger improvement in all alreas going from the D810 to the D850 than it is going from the D800 (especially the D800E) to the D810. In that respect, it makes sense that the name first changed by 10 and then by 40.
  14. If the seller does not have the paperwork to prove it, why not give Nikon USA a call with the serial number(s) and ask them about the lens(es) in question?
  15. I also recall seeing reports about failed Sony XQD cards. Most, if not all, where about the 120 GB version when last I looked. I have the older 128 GB 440/400 version and have not experienced any problems with it in my D850. However, I do recall an oddity, when formatted (in camera) it shows a slightly different remaining recording time in video mode than my Sandisk SD card of the same size. It would be interesting to see if others with multiple cards of the same size would also be shown different available remaining recording time in video mode.
×
×
  • Create New...