at
-
Posts
235 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by at
-
-
<p>Quick answer: (all used if possible) D90, 28-105 Zoom, and an sb600. I am pleasently suprised by the 28-105 zoom.<br>
And is really has good macro capabilities. </p>
<p>The not-so-short-answer would be to read, google, visit local camera stores and try each brand.</p>
-
<p>Just another option...may sound crazy....but, If you want tremendous depth of field, check out a<br>
really good point-n-shoot. They have greater DOF. easy to carry and can perform very very well<br>
in the macro world provided you follow the same basic standards (tripod, plane of focus, lighting, etc).<br>
Now, I do have several macro lenses...one of my all time favorites is the Tamron 90mm, and the Tamron 180mm macros. Both are fantastic lenses. Sometimes you can get lucky and find a 90mm on ebay<br>
pretty cheap. Try the p+s idea, they really excel at (non critial) macro work.</p>
<p> </p>
-
<p>I just received my lens from KEH. So far its proven to be a real nice lens.<br>
But....(and we all know everything before the word "but" is meaningless)....I do notice<br>
some front focus on my d70, d60 and d300. Dont fire back about shooting wide open<br>
etc etc. I have been handling tlr's, 645's, polaroids, slr's, dslr's since I was 16.<br>
I know how to handle the hardware. But using several technics/focus charts available on<br>
the web I do notice front focus. At first I blamed the d60 as it has the least sophisticated<br>
AF system, then I tried the d300, lastly I tried my d70 which was repaired (BGLOD) and front focus<br>
repair (and its spot on with every lens I own). Just some quick testing but more detailed tests<br>
will follow in the near future. If needed I will send it to Nikon for review. <br>
Dont let this sway you...I do think its a very nice lens. It lives on the d60 quite a bit.<br>
I for one am very happy Nikon introduced this lens.</p>
-
<div>
</div>
-
<p>what f-stop are shooting at? if your f-stop is too small you may causing the flash to dump its<br>
entire reserves causing this pop noise you hear (which is the flash trying to recharge quickly).<br>
just a thought.</p>
-
<p>The photo Gods were certainly with you this past week! Now spread some of that good karma around.<br>
You've reminded me that I need to check out my local Ritz stores....you never know what goodies still<br>
wait. I think you made an excellent score. </p>
-
<p>Neat Image has a "free" version too. I have used it with great success. It is limited to 8 bit jpegs<br>
though. I have used it to clean up some 35mm scans and have been impressed. I will probably<br>
purchase the full version. PSP version X also does a nice job but it is super slow on my 3gig P4 cpu.</p>
-
<p>My suggestions are: Photoshop Elements, and PSP x or X2. These are much less expensive than CS4,<br>
and have pixel level adjustments that Lightroom does not. And the both support layers. PWP is neat too. I purchased it a long time ago but must admit it isnt getting much use any more. For a beginner<br>
I think PSP is the best. It has many useful "one button fixes" that work pretty darn good. It also offers<br>
some neat effects such as "infrared", skin smoothing (noise reduction), etc...and they work. But, PSP<br>
is slow...actions can take some time. </p>
<p>In short, get a pixel level editing program. Elements, PSP, PWP, Gimp, etc. Lightroom, Picasa, etc<br>
apply all changes at a global level.</p>
<p> </p>
-
<p>This may help...The scanner is designed to read the top slots of the various film holders. This<br>
calibrates the scanner and may even tell it what size neg holder you have in place.<br>
You can try putting your negatives directly on the glass and change the setting to<br>
"negative, no film holder" or some verbage like that. That should tell the scanner to focus<br>
on the glass verses the 1 or mm above the glass as if the neg was in a holder. You may even need to lay the 8x10 mask over the glass so the scanner can use the calibration slot at the top of the mask. I hope this works. Good luck.</p>
-
<p>Well, you could print the image (uncropped) onto an 8x10 sheet of paper but you would have uneven<br>
borders (top/bottom vs sides). Maybe some photoshop experts could help out with this suggestion...Would changing the canvas size help? Then shrink the image to fit within the canvas?</p>
<p>Just a thought. I never understood what the canvas size is used for. At least I never needed it.</p>
-
<p>If it was me...the 17-55 f2.8. Easy decision for me. I have little use for f5.6 lenses at any focal length...<br>
even if it has VR. But thats just me. I much prefer a large aperture lens (f2.8) thats gives <em>me </em>the control over the background. Any lens at f5.6 will just takes all that away from you.<br>
For me.....the 17-55 f2.8. I have never used either one but my reasons still stand. I have read that both<br>
are excellent lenses too. Of all my Nikkors I prefer the f2.8 zooms and fast primes any day.</p>
-
<p>Greg, <br>
Which Ritz store? I live near two of them (Water Works mall and Northway Mall). Was it either of them?<br>
Thanks.</p>
-
<p>Natasha,<br>
I'm sure you will get tons of better advise than I can offer but let me start out by asking/stating....<br>
1) Were you hired by the band to take the photos...if so they probably have usage rights.<br>
2) If answer to number one is "No". Copyright/register your image with the proper goverment authority.<br>
3) Contact an IP lawyer sooner than later. In the US registering your image carries more weight<br>
when you are seeking payment.<br>
Best of luck to you.</p>
-
Bower Lens
in Nikon
<p>Some more images...</p>
-
Bower Lens
in Nikon
<p>This lens seems to be gaining some momemtum though. I have seen several sites<br>
with examples. From what I can see it certainly produces some very very nice images.<br>
Excellent bokeh, sharp, good contrast. Check these links:<br>
Also "nikon rumors-dot-com" has some images made by this lens and they look very very nice.<br>
(photo.net rules prohibit linking to that site so you will need to key it in yourself).<br>
If I didnt love AF so much I would consider this manual focus lens. </p>
-
<p>I have used this lens for many years now. Its optical performance has been fine...I'm not a hugh fan<br>
of wide angle lenses. Its very sharp. Excellent contrast. Consistent with "Nikon color".<br>
AFS is very fast. Build quality is very good. But...they do sqeek. Of all my AFS lenses this is the only<br>
one that sqeeks. It usually does this on the first dozen focus cycles then gets quiet as you would<br>
expect from an AFS lens. Mine just developed one tiny little problem. When I zoom from 17mm to 35mm<br>
it will make a very (very!) slight "click" noise just as I pass the 24-28mm area. Its no big deal...its just a very very faint click sound. Nothing is loose, all works fine so I will probably never address it.<br>
All in all its very worthy of its internet fame.</p>
-
<p>Well...i have tried a few (free trail periods) and like them all. Each has some area where they<br>
excel over others. Try: Bibble, Corel Paint Shop Pro, and Picture Window Pro. Corel has many<br>
"one button fixes" that work pretty good. It also supports layers. Picture Window Pro is more<br>
like the traditional dark room...dodge, burn, masks, etc. Bibble (when I tried it) made only global<br>
adjustments...no pixle level corrections. I also have cs3 and elements 5 (my favorite). My other fav is<br>
Paint Shop Pro. At the moment I own Elements 5, PSP, PWP and CS3. I never purchased Bibble.<br>
I too was once on a "something other than photoshop" journey. </p>
<p> </p>
-
<p>Matej....Sorry I really dont have direct answers to your questions but I just wanted to share that i too<br>
made my own IR filter. I purchased my material from Edmunds. I just wanted to pass this along in<br>
case you needed another source for IR optics/sheets. Link is:<br>
-
<p>Many thanks to all that have answered! I appreciate all the input. I need to sit down<br>
and experiment a bit more with epsonscan, vuescan and the coolscan. Thanks again!</p>
-
<p>Hello Photo.net'ers.</p>
<p>I have an Epson 4990 and v700. Both of which I plan to use in batch scanning 35mm negs (24 at time).<br>
I plan to batch scan the "everyday" snap shots, family pics, vacations pics, etc. <br>
I also have a Coolscan V for the "good" negatives in which I wish to extract a bit more detail.<br>
So....I understand the flatbed vs. dedicated scanner issue. Epsonscan does a wonderful job<br>
scanning 24 negatives at a time and creates 24 individual jpegs or tiffs. I have searched photo.net (and<br>
googled the web) to see if Vuescan can do the same and I think the answer is "no"...unless you<br>
input the x any y offsets to tell vuescan were each individual negative is. This seems too clunky.<br>
But, you would only need to calculate these offsets one time. My question is: Does the latest version<br>
of vuescan do this automatically like Epsonscan? Will it scan all 24 negatives and create an individual file<br>
for each? Thanks in advance. BTW. I know many will disagree but I have been doing alot of test scans<br>
and must say I am impressed with the Epson 4990 and v700 VS. the Nikon coolscan V. The Nikon<br>
beats them both but the flatbeds can do a very nice job with a good negative. No arrows please.</p>
-
<P>I vote for the 18-70 AFS. it focuses quick, Good coverage, excellent sharpness and contrast.</P>
<P> </P>
<P>Ross, if your lens <STRONG>vignetted at apertures and focal lengths you got a bad copy, had too many filters</STRONG></P>
<P><STRONG>attached at one time or an incorrect hood, etc That lens in good working condition does not do that.</STRONG></P>
<P> </P>
-
<p>It may work. I have a 4990 and a v700. Last night I tried to scan a 35mm strip directly on the glass<br>
using the 4990 and epson scan. It scanned it but then gave me an error that it was unable to find the<br>
film strip. I then tried the scan using vuescan and it worked...sort of. I had nothing but a cheap hunk<br>
of plexi-glass to hold the negative flat. I suspect the v700 may work the same. If I get a chance I will<br>
try it tonight. So...it may be possible after all. You might even try cutting out fake mask with the calibration slot out of black poster board and use vuescan. Hope this helps.<br>
Augie</p>
<p> </p>
-
<p>I have the same epson 610....as well as a v700, and a 4990. For scanning prints the 610 does a great job. It has great optics, great depth of field for scanning 3d objects. At 600dpi<br>
all of my print scans are very clean, sharp and with very accurate colors. While you may<br>
gain some d-max with a newer scanner it may not be as great as you think. Each time I break out the 610 I am amazed at how good it scans for a 600 dpi scanner. If you are set on d-ice, etc, then yes the newer scanners can help. Again, the old 610 amazes me each time i use it.</p>
-
<p>The 17-35 f2.8 afs seems to be the biggest culprit of this. Its harmless as far as I can tell....mine<br>
has been doing it for years. But, I would not accept this from a brand new lens...an expensive one<br>
too. Return it. Hopefully your next sample is better. But again, my 17-35 has been doing this for years<br>
and gets much better as the day goes on...maybe its old and needs some ben-gay to loosen up<br>
its tight muscles after it sits for a couple of weeks.</p>
D90/16-85: Protection needed while ocean sailing?
in Nikon
Posted
<p>Stephen,<br>
I dont mean to scare you at all...but...all it takes is one drop of salt water in the wrong spot to do<br>
damage. Knowing this I still took my d70 (still going strong) and my 18-200 vr lens to Gulf Coast.<br>
I kept my camera bag very close by along with a towel. I would even stuff the camera under my t-shirt<br>
when I wasnt shooting. Just be very careful but also understand that a few drops of salt water<br>
can be very harmful. I just read a review of the Canon dp10 (?) and it seemed to a real neat<br>
p+s for just such a trip...you may wanna look into it.</p>
<p> </p>