ian_white2

Delete my account. If you had sensible software this would be an on-line option. In any case automatic "upgrades" for a fee is called "negative option billing" and is illegal.

Check out the very interesting piece on Bob Atkins’ site about focus errors due to varying amounts of IR in the ambient light. I was having problems with the 50 1.8G and the 85 1.8G on my D800. AF was very inconsistent wide open until I started using a B+W 486 filter which cuts off all IR (and UV). The thing which connects these two lenses is that they both have significant chromatic aberration wide open. As I understand it, the AF module in the bottom of the mirror box does not cut off IR because Nikon speedlights use IR in the AF assist light. The old F4 gave you the option of switching on/off an IR filter to avoid this problem.

<p>I think we need to step back a bit and remember that we are trying to help the OP get decent pics in his first attempt at a difficult gig.</p> <p>Eric, with your flamenco shot you clearly show the result of shooting in extremely low light conditions – they are probably around EV zero. If this is representative of what the OP is facing then he is probably wasting his time. I don’t think it useful to question whether blur is artistic or not when one cannot even see the dancer!</p> <p>We need to remember that the event is akin to ballroom dancing with spotlights according to the OP. Pics of night clubs with very low lighting are probably not useful. Jeff seems to say he prefers slow sync flash over blurred hands, well I disagree with him as his example shows huge flash halos around the dancer which I find far more intrusive than the occasional blurred hand.</p> <p>The point is moot in any case as the OP states that he is NOT allowed to use flash.</p>

<p>Craig, I appreciate your comments regarding figure skating but I would suggest that the speed of ice dancers is much greater, perhaps 3x greater, than ballroom dancers. Skaters zoom across the ice at very high speed and I would love to see someone try a triple axel wearing a ball gown and dancing pumps!</p>

<p>Jeff, in response to your request for samples I uploaded 4 pics to a gallery in one of my websites. I also gave the question of movement a good deal more thought. So here are my pics and comments:</p> <p>Firstly in this type of dancing, generally there are groups of six who stand in two lines of three. The first couple then cross to the other side, do some fancy twirls and then move to the end of the group then stop. The next couple repeat the process. I will be shot if any Scottish Country Dancer sees this description but it is just to give photographers an understanding that the frame will contain people standing still, and people moving around in circles or swapping positions. Every movement is with a skip step.<br> <br /> <a href="http://www.whitepixels.ca/p457276687/h4f4e0d61#h4f4e0d61">http://www.whitepixels.ca/p457276687/h4f4e0d61#h4f4e0d61</a><br> <br /> This should bring up Pic1 taken years ago with a D300, 34mm, 1/125 sec, F6.7.<br /> What is evident is that sharpness of the dancers depends upon how much they move across the frame during the exposure time. OK, we all know this but seldom think about it.<br /> The girl in the middle with the brown skirt is not in focus, but she is moving fast across the frame (see her hair). Her partner, the boy in the blue kilt has just about finished moving as far back as he can, so his relative motion with respect to the camera is essentially zero, so he is sharp. His kilt shows residual swing.<br /> The same thing applies to the couple immediately right. The girl in black tights has come towards the camera so relative motion is zero and she is quite sharp, but her partner in the white top is really active.<br /> The older lady on the right is moving much slower but also is moving directly towards the camera, so is sharp.</p> <p>Click on the next thumbnail and Pic2 shows three women dancing together. This is D800, 24mm, 1/100 sec, F4.<br /> The woman on the left is clearly moving as her dress has billowed out but the hands and faces are quite sharp as the movement is along the lens axis at this point. One can also see two men in kilts with their right feet sharp and almost touching the ground as they skip.</p> <p>The next image Pic3 shows a girl in red and a woman in dark blue. The dark blue dress flounces out as the woman curves in to meet her partner. In the middle ground, there is a woman in light blue who is sharp despite her launching herself into motion. She is in focus because her movement across the frame is still quite small given the midfield distance.</p> <p>Pic4 shows a pretty woman in dark blue who is really moving fast (see the lean as she dances in a circle), but the relative motion towards the camera is still quite small so she is sharp. The man in black is moving across the frame, his kilt really flying out, but he is quite blurred.</p> <p>So what does this mean to the OP? Shots should ideally be made at the peak of a movement, just before a change of direction since at this time movement of the body is relatively slow.<br /> In reality in the heat of the moment this is a lot to ask, so just fire away!</p> <p>But we have to ask ourselves what type of pic is wanted. In my opinion a shot of ballet dancers destined for a fine art print might demand cross frame sharpness everywhere.</p> <p>However with just about any other type of dance, especially if you want to show people having fun, you need to show movement of clothing and limbs to avoid a totally sterile image. Hence my selection of shutter speed but YMMV.</p>

<p>Grear, <br> This is not an easy gig and I have been sucked into doing it on four occasions for formal balls in the Scottish Country Dancing style. This is like American Square Dance with more formal clothing. The men all wear kilts and the women have ball gowns.</p> <p>You need a shooting list – the dancers in performance, the audience, the judges, dancers looking wiped out after the performance etc. This means you need a lot of freedom of movement. Being stuck in a chair in the front row is not sufficient. Get an “official” badge and move around.</p> <p>Typically I shoot with a D800 and 24-70 F2.8. Settings are F4 1/100 sec and auto-iso, spot metering, with a preset white balance. Your job is to focus on the dance so let the camera do its thing automatically. Do not fiddle with it during the session.</p> <p>Particularly referring to Eric’s response, I do not want to freeze motion. That might be fine for ballet, but in most dance I suggest that you need to have a balance between blur and the movement of the ball gowns. I find that 1/100 allows me to see the swirl of the kilt/gown to show there is active movement there yet freezes most hand and foot movement. YMMV. It also helps enormously with the lighting problem.</p> <p>You need spot metering because of the spot lighting, and F4 gives me wiggle room on the focusing side. I usually have lighting of about EV3 and end up with ISOs between 3200 and 12,800 -- all well within reach of your D700.</p> <p>The needed focal lengths obviously depend on the layout of the room, wherever you are located and your freedom to move. I used to carry a 70-200 f2.8 but did not use it much so I now use the 24-70 for all this type of work. 75% of the shots are 50 to 70mm and 25% are at 24mm.</p> <p>I hope you have a clear arrangement on the use and provision of the final images. People have some very strange ideas, especially when you are working for free!<br> Be prepared for people to expect huge prints for free and for women to complain bitterly that you have made them look ugly. There is no upside to taking on a gig like this.</p>

<p>This is one of those impossible questions which depend upon each person’s compromises and their shooting subject matter.<br> I shoot a D800 with the Holy Trinity. In an effort to reduce the weight of my camera bag I did a test with the four 24mm capable lenses I had. On a tripod shooting static subjects at about 100 feet distance using Live View etc, my results were:<br> Best 14-24<br> Zuiko 24mm converted for Nikon<br> 24-70<br> 24mm AFD a long way behind.<br> This was true at f2.8 and F5.6 for my lenses and this specific test. YMMV.<br> OK, so I could have sold my 14-24 and used the Zuiko, BUT, I also did an analysis of every shot I had ever taken with the D800 to see which focal lengths I actually used, and I encourage everyone to do this with the free software available on the web.<br> Only 5% of my shots were taken at 14mm, but essentially they were all keepers, which cannot be said of the rest.<br> So for now, despite its weight, I am keeping it.</p>

<p>The RB lenses have been used on view cameras for years and work reasonably well. The RZ is another story since you will have to learn how to cock the aperture and set it to your desired value. Overall I have found it to be a very clumsy system to use. Also you may be disappointed in the resolution of these lenses on a FX sensor.</p> <p>The Cambo unit looks very cute but also very expensive. You might try the Fotodiox RZ adaptor first before spending a lot of money.</p> <p>See my thread on Lula:</p> <p>http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=90136.msg734659#msg734659</p>