thomasherren

<blockquote> <p>When using external editor the TIFF file is save where defined on <strong>Preferences (Ctrl+K) / Place Open With File in</strong></p> </blockquote> <p><strong><br /></strong>Thank you very much, now I have found it.</p>

<p>Do you know where Silver Efex Pro2 saves the TIFF opened from CNX-D on Windows7 when no particular folder was indicated. I worked on a NEF in CNX-D for the first time, opened it with Silver Efex Pro2, clicked on save but cannot find the TIFF anymore.<br> Thanks in advance</p>

<p>When I had the D700 (now it's a D750), I bought a used 35 - 70mm f/2.8 and a 24mm f/2.8. The zoom had a very good optical quality, pictures were sometimes flat with a soft haze. This could be easily corrected in RAW-processing. I did not like the push-pull mechanism as I felt it quite hard and not sensitive enough for small corrections of focal length. I sold it for about the same price as I had bought it before I got the D750. So I cannot rate it on the new body. I now have a 24 - 70mm f/2.8 which has equal sharpness at the most but much more disortion. The 35 - 70mm is virtually free of distortion, but a bit prone to flares.<br> The 24mm is optically okay on the D750. I take it when I want it light, in combination with a 35mm DX (yes, it works on FX with slight limitations), a 50mm f/1.8 and a 70 - 200mm f/4</p>

<p>I have the old version which I bought used from a fellow member of my photoclub. It is a lens with superb quality overall, but too big and too heavy for me to feel comfortable with. I also have a 16-35mm f/4, so an overlapping in the 24 - 35mm range.<br> I am thinking about selling the two zooms and to replace them by the 20mm f/1.8, 35mm f/1.8 and a 85mm f/1.8 (a 50mm f/1.8 I already have). The 24-70mm VR version is definitely not an option for me due to its (over)prize, size and weight. Walking around with such a lens (already the old 24-70) is in many situations simply too intimidating.</p>

<p>Thank you for your comments.<br /> I don't understand why I would loose one stop with DX format.</p>

<p>I had one together with a D700. Performance was varying from mediocre to excellent, but rather unpredictably. I don't know why. In the meantime, I sold both and replaced them by a D750 and 70 - 200mm f/4VR. At f/4, it was quite soft. Compared to the 70 - 210mm f/4 - 5.6 it was noticeably better. But the 70 - 210mm f/4 E series was at least equal in IQ, but much heavier (and MF of course) and with less light transmission.<br> A very good lens was the plastic 80 - 200mm f/4.5 - 5.6 with 52mm filter. Small, light and sharp. I regret I sold it.<br> A source of further information might be: http://www.jsvfoto.com/NikonZooms</p>

<p>It still seems strange a bit. I have the 70-200 f/2.8 VRI and the 70-200mm F/4 VR and both don't produce flares to the extent you experienced. But as Chuck pointed out, it is probably the redesigned lens hood.</p>

<p>Hi, I am considering buying this lens for my D750. It is very sharp and light, but a bit pricy. Therefore, I am considering an option, i.e. a D7200 with the 70 - 200mm f/4 VR I already own. This my sound strange to some, but Nikon has a cash back program, so I could get a D7200 for about CHF 700.-- instead of CHF 1'800 for the 300mm f/4 VR.<br /> Does anyone have experience in either option (D750 with 300mm f/4 or D7200 with 70-200m f/4 VR)?<br /> <br />Best<br /> Thomas</p>