jemini_joseph

July 17, 2004

If the question is if you can use D70 for wild life photography, then the answer is yes. Sure, you will lose some shots because of AF compared to D2H or D1X. Otherwise why people are paying for those cameras. But I've tested the AF speed with D70 and F5 side by side on my Sigma 500/4.5 HSM lens. I could not find any problem with the AF speed. I'm sure this is because of the lens. If you use AF-S or sigma HSM lens you won't see any noticeable difference in speed. But there are times D70 hunts little bit. That depends on the subjects color and stuff. Anyway after using D70 for almost 2 months and 2000 shots, I never regreted buying this camera. One advantage of D70 over D2H is the higher ISO performance. Extra 2 Mega pixel also is an advantage that will let you crop little bit. So far the biggest disadvantage I've noticed is the weight and build of the camera. Since I have to move around fast to respond to birds's movements there are times I feel that I'm putting pressure on the body that it cannot take. But I cannot afford D2H anyway. So I have no complaint.

Here's a shot at ISO 560

Good luck

July 15, 2004

I'm sure you will eventually learn that you need a BH-1 or B1. I don't think BH-3 is not good enough. In other words you will eventually buy the best. I've been through these phases

and finally bought a used Kirk Bh-1 for $275. I'm sure I wouldn't be happy with

anything smaller. So try to get one of these. The 600 dollar head may be Wimberly,

that not a ball head, but even better Gymbal head. I also wish if I can buy it :(

Another thing you have to notice is that the published capacity of these heards/tripods are not very useful. What it says how much weight it can hold. But to support a 10LB camera+Lens combo vibration free (especially long teles) you will need much more capacity. BH-1's capacity is 90LB I guess. This is not an over kill at all. When you extend the lens with 2X or 1.4X, you will still notice the vibration.

<a href="http://www.color-pictures.com" target="w-2">www.color-pictures.com</a>

July 8, 2004

I've tried few things last night. I found what's the difference

between photoshop resize and Paint resize.if I use 'Nearest Pixel' option in resize

(I cant remember what was the label for that option) I get what I

'm getting in Paint. So that solves one problem.

But... this is too 'sharp' or unrealisticly sharp. I can use regular resize to 900X600

and then use this option to get to 600X400. Well, I should agree that this is not the

best way or photoshop way of getting best for web.

It've tried John's idea to use smaller radius. That's definitely better. I've tried

resizing in steps. Didn't find any difference. Greg, it may work for certain images.

Not sure. I've tried on above squirrel shot. I'll try the combinations. Steve, I'm

a novice at using photoshop too. I know enough to make the colors work for me. I guess

I should read more, definitely. I've tried the Fred Miranda's 10D sharpening from my friend

who has 10D. He's also looking to improve the sharpness and look of the images in smaller size.

One question though. Is it better to do the sharpening at the end? I mean after resizing?

Thanks Guys

July 7, 2004

Thanks Steve and Ken

I found the USM sharpness is worse than I see above. I'll try it again though. For my eyes USM is more 'digital'.

Ken

I've tried the save for web few times and could not get a great result. I will try this too.

July 7, 2004

Al,

Everything I left it as default. Nothing changed. I'm not sure how to convert NEF to small JPG and keep the quality. That's why I put this query. Any guide for processing for web?

Thanks for anwering

July 7, 2004

I'm new to digital but used the scanner for a while now.

I always knew that I'm missing something on the web. I'm happy with

TIF files I'm getting. Recently I

happen to notice that I'm losing lots of sharpness

when the images are presented on the web. I use Nikon D70 and it

has enough sharpness out of camera.

This is what I used to do.

1) Convert NEF to TIF

2) Color correct for my taste (only for some)

3) resize the image for web

4) Apply USM(For some)

I thought I was doing OK. But I've noticed that the

out of camera Basic JPG that we get when we choose the

option RAW+JPG in D70 apperas to be much sharper.

Here's the out of camera basic jpg. Sized to 600X400 and in html

resized to 570X380

So there's little shrinking in it. File Size is 60K

<img src="http://www.color-pictures.com/dsc_1354_small.jpg" width=570

height=380>

Here's what I get when I process the image from NEF and saved as

high quality JPG. File size is 150K. Actual file size and

presentation are same. 570X380

<img src="http://www.color-

pictures.com/images/animals/squirrels/1000_1354_groundsquirrelbaby_m.j

pg" width=570 height=380>

What am i doing wrong? How would get best out of NEF? Can somebody

help?

BTW - The actual NEF and TIF are much sharper than what I get at the

end as small JPG

I guess I should just use out of camera JPG for the web. D70's

internal processing is

better than my processing :)

July 3, 2004

Joseph

Yeah, I've posted this everywhere. I wanted to know all the aopinions. I guess we should utilize the wonderful world of internet in this matter..

Thanks for posting the reply again.

About your second opinion. I have Gitzo 1548 tripod which I believe the best in the category.

About the 3rd opinion..

I was using MF all the time. I know MF is very difficult with D70.

THanks again. Good luck with your works ...

July 2, 2004

Thanks Greg. I know that's a great lens. Sigma may not that sharp, but that's at least couple of 1000's less. Biggest advantage of f/4 lens is that you can use 1.4X with perfect AF. My lens won't be able to do that. Even though it does AF, it's not reliable. MF is better.

Unless I start making money out of this, the current setup is my Nirvana..

Cheers..

Jemini

July 2, 2004

Greg

Thanks for the idea. I've never tried higher ISO during day time. I'll try that today. I've tried neatimage demo on scanned images. My scanner was soft by itself. Neatimage softened it again. So I didn't like it. May be D70 would be better. I'll try that. That's a nice idea.

How's your new 500 AF-I? Is it sharper than 600/5.6? How's the AF performance? How's the performance with 1.4X?

Thanks

July 1, 2004

Doug,

I did a test last night again on a white board with lots of reflection to get the high shutter speed.. See what I found

I could not see any difference in quality. In fact Kenko brings more details because of higher magnification. Am I right? <br?

So the answer was shutter speed.

Daniel

I agree with you. This is the question of presentation. So the problem was always there. I didn't notice it in film because the way I looked at the slides.

If I could scan the images in the quality of digital camera and see them at 100% size I will see the same problem. Right? I know if you want to match apple to apple then you need a scanner that can scan the resolution of the sensor and get 3000X2000 after croping 33% from all sides. Right?

June 30, 2004

Thanks Walter for the comment and suggestions.

Ilkka,

First of all thanks for the response..

sorry for the confusion. I shoot RAW+JPG always because I can download and review the image anywhere if I have card reader. I said above picture posted from basic JPG. Even then the quality was very good.

So what you are saying is that, I always have these problems with the optics? Then Why I'm getting excellent images lens alone? Is Kenko TC that bad? If so why it was ok n film and got very good reviews??

Thanks in advance again..

June 30, 2004

While I'm surprised how much details D70+Sigma 500/4.5 HSM

can bring, I'm also surprised that the 1.4X (Kenko Pro 1.4x)

and 2X (TC-20E) teles are terrible with the combo.

I used to get excellent results with F5+500mm+Kenko 1.4X

and acceptable results with TC-20E.

Now D70+500mm+1.4X is acceptable and TC-20E sucks.

I'm using Gitzo 1548, so there shouldn't be problem there.

I'm getting acceptable result

with 1.4X, but the difference in image quality is huge

compared to lens alone. On film the difference is difficult

to notice.

These are the reasons I've in my mind. It can be either one of

it or a combination.

1) Teleconverter was always bad. But it was difficult to notice.

on film. Now it's easy to see since you can see 100% image on a

monitor

2) D70 is very light weight. Cannot handle a 700/1000mm lens.

3) D70's internal vibration caused by mirror slap is worse than

F5 or any film camera.

4) With 1.5 Crop factor, the lens should be considered as 750mm

considering the vibration/stability issue. This means

500mm+1.4X tele is actually 1050mm, not 700mm. I always believed

and argued that the crop should not affect the stability.

I still believe if I can hand held the lens at 500mm @ 1/500s

with film, I should be able to hand held it with digital too..

Anybody has similar experience?

I used to get real sharp images with lens+1.4X combo as slow as 1/30s.

So if I get same result with D70, then I should have the advantage of

200 ISO which can be translated into 2 stops when compared with

Velvia.

But no luck at all. Instead, I feel if I compare D70 with Velvia in

low light, say velvia exposed at 1/30s and D70 at 1/125, still velvia

would be sharper..

I'm adding one sample picture with D70 and Sigma 500mm alone just to

show that how much sharpness I'm getting. This picture was out of

camera basic JPG resized with Windows Paint. Still I'm happy with the

result.

<img src=

"http://www.color-pictures.com/dsc_1354_desktop.jpg">

All comments are appreciated. Thanks

<a href="http://www.color-pictures.com">www.color-pictures.com</a>

June 24, 2004

I'm sure it will work. This is more of a marketing Nikon doing. They want you to buy the new lens. All the AF-S TC's are compatible with AF-S lenses. The new 70-200 VR lens replaced this lens. I don't think they make this lens any more. That may be the reason they didn't put it in the list. I'm also waiting for this tele. Good luck

Good luck

<a href="http://www.color-pictures.com">color-pictures.com</a>

June 4, 2004

Ran

I haven't used both Wimberly or Nill-Head. But I've tried the manfrotto 349. This is NOT a good head at all. The major purpose of these heads should be keeping the lens vibration free. This head doesn't do it. This is very soft metal I guess. Even my 6LB 500/4.5 lens doesn't lock dead on this head. But this one also has the advantage of safety of big glass. Even if you take your hands of the lens and camera, nothing will happen. It's heavy too. I use Kirk BH-1 now and very happy with it. I wish if I could afford Wimberly.

I've also tried King Cobra. That's a good option if you want to have both ball head and Gymbal head. Otherwise for the total price (ball head and King Cobra) and weight I would rather go for Wimberly. Good luck.

May 26, 2004

Alan

This is one of the reason I bought F5. Just for MLU and Color Matrix metering. Now that I bought Gitzo G1548 tripod, I don't use MLU that often. I'm sure better tripod will help. Here's a shot taken with 500mm+TC-20E at 1/10 sec without cable release or MLU. This is not the sharpest shot. Please be aware that this is scanned with LS-30, a very soft scanner and Velvia 100, which itself is little softer than Velvia 50

Good luck

May 26, 2004

Leonard

Coolscan should be much better. Even 4000 was better than 5400 in color and dynamic range. I've tried 5400 and many times it was impossible to get the color that matches the slides even with Photoshop. This is my experience. I could have tried the wrong sample. 5000 is a professional scanner. The coolscan that competes with 5400 should be Coolscan V

<a href="http://www.color-pictures.com" target="w-2">www.color-pictures.com</a>

May 19, 2004

I agree with Bob. Even if the tripod can hold the weight that doesn't mean it can handle the vibration caused by long focal length. If you have Image Stabilization, that's a different issue. I believe even the IS lenses perform better with IS off on a stable tripod. I've proved it to myself using my friends 100-400IS and 10D camera on 1340 tripod. Anyway the deciding factors are many

1) Are you happy with the sharpness you are getting

2) How much shutter speed you get

4) Can you use MLU and cable release

5) How much you can afford...

Bigger the tripod better anyway.

Posted May 19, 2004 · May 19, 2004

Manuel

I read somewhere that, the old lens is same as new optically, but slow autofocus. I'm not sure though. I also have the new one. Cheers

<a href="http://www.color-pictures.com">www.color-pictures.com</a>

May 18, 2004

"What helps is that the D70 has a minimum of ISO 200 setting. You are automatically using "fast film" such that you can use higher shutter speeds."

Shun, this is what attracts me most about digital. Convenience of changing ISO and higher ISO to start with. ISO 200 is almost same as 50 ISO slide. 400 is better than 200 film.

May 18, 2004

With my sigma 500mm + F5, metering is .7 stops off. In reality the teleconverter should show the shutter speed 2 stops down (2x). But it's showing only 1.3 stops. So when ever I use TC I'll give +.7 compensation and it works great. I use F5 always with Aperture priority. If you use it with AF-S lens it will show you the accurate effective aperture and metering will be perfect too. But 'P' lens I believe it should be same as mine. But not sure. Anyway the aperture information will rech the camera. So all the modes will work fine.

May 18, 2004

Casey

Here's the site I've used to modify TC-20E. Worked for me. You don't have to do anything to the lens

<a href=" http://nikonpages.heymanphotography.com/tcmod/"> http://nikonpages.heymanphotography.com/tcmod/</a> Good luck

<a href="http://www.color-pictures.com/">www.color-pictures.com</a>

May 17, 2004

Manual

You are right. If you do lots of hiking this is not practical. 1228 is ideal for you. I was mentioning that Tripod is equally important as lens. I've tried 3 different tripod before this. Manfrotto 3205G, Manfrotto 3001 and Gitzo 340 (which is same capacity as 1228 I think) For me tripod is equally important as lens.

May 16, 2004

Manual

Thanks for visiting my site.!! Also thanks for the comment on the review. I thought that would be useful for low budgeted nature photographers like us.

About using 1228 with Sigma 500. I very well agree with you. There are many things I had in my mind, but didn't say. First of all, if the shutter speed is around 100 or more, 1228 is more than enough. Second thing is the wind. If it's quiet, it's fine. For me the most important thing was the 1000mm, when I use the lens with TC-20E. When the Foclal length is 1000mm either you need a shutter speed about 200 or so or you need a better tripod. This image was taken at 1/10s (yes 1/10) with TC-20E and 50% crop. I wouldn't be able to get this with a 1548, the best tripod around :)

May 13, 2004

Alan

I've modified TC-20E to use with my Sigma 500/4.5 lens and has the same effect. I don't think there will be any downside except if you look at the shooting data it may not obey the sunny-sixteen rule.

<a href="http://www.color-pictures.com/" target="w-3">Color-Pictures.com</a>

May 12, 2004

I agree with Manuel 100%, especially with his statment "I would recommend you to save your money untill you can get something better such as a Gitzo 1228 or 1227. They are the best of the best and you would never need to buy another tripod again."

with a correction "Unless you go for longer lense". 1227 and 1228 are more than enough for 400/5.6, but may not be enough for 500mm or 600mm. Good luck

<a href="http://www.color-pictures.com/">www.color-pictures.com</a>

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Events

Downloads

Gallery

Store

Posts posted by jemini_joseph