rob_malkin

In the uk, the jessops price is 3.5k. The staff/semi trade price is 2.7k. It will do doubt drop to about 2.5k in about 1 year.

Its what all the other nikon dslr's have done so far.

rob

leslie cheung

"The truth is d70 have the worst finder of all dslr"

not as bad as the 300d, not as bright. but it is pretty shit.

"but it's saving nikon"

most of nikon's income is from its non photography departments, I think. I may be wrong but I am sure that I read a press release or something on the stock exchange about it.Maybe somebody could clear this up for me?

"because most of its sale is to people whom *fortunately* never seen a pro nikon finder before"

I worked for a company called jessops in the uk, its the biggest photo company here. And during my time with the company I must of sold at least 50. And when they were looking at other cameras and stuff I would always get my F100 and show them what a good viewfinder is like. (I think that the F100 has the best viewfinder I have ever seen, I think for me that its even a bit better than the F5's. But I dont own an F5 just use one a lot, so maybe I am wrong)

But the point I am trying to make is that most people dont care. I have a D70 and I dont care. I look at my pictures when I print them, I dont need to have a super accurate representation in the viefinder. It would be nice sure, but then again if you were to make the D70 have a great viewfinder you would bring the price up a lot too. So I guess you can never have everything.

rob

I think the 1200mm f5.6 made by Canon is. Drop it and I think the ground may break, not the lens.

I saw this thing at a Canon demo day once, it was so big it had its own timezone.

rob

If you look on their website it tells you that they use,

velivia 35mm and Nikon or Canon SLR, (mainly Nikon) and 35mm rangefinders. I am sure that this is not the only thing they use!

but a few months ago I did see one of their photographers using a Canon EOS 10D + 16-35mm f2.8 L.

rob

the nikon camera which has double exposure is the nikon d2x, which as i type is still not in the shops.

rob

sigma 20mm f1.8.

good lens, fast, cheap.

rob

Too young to get married,

but in the past the bin has been given all the photos of my ex lovers.

I sometimes wish that I did not have a camera when I am around my girlfriends.

rob

I think its called War Without Heroes, by David Douglas Duncan. From what I have been told its one of the best photo books man has ever made

rob

thanks guys,

I will give your ideas a spin and tell you how i got on.

rob

I did think about this, but f2.8 is just that bit too slow for the work I intent on doing.

If Nikon made suck a thing I would strap a 14mm f0.7 on my F100 ion a flash :-)

rob

Hello everyone,

I am planning on taking some pictures where I really do not want to

be seen to have a camera on me. It will mainly be very low light

work, street lights only I would guess.

I will be using a Nikon F100 with,

20mm f1.8 or a

50mm f1.8 or a

85mm f1.8.

I was thinking about cutting a hole in a camera bag and having the

lens point thru. I was then going to trigger the shutter with a

Nikon MC-30 remote.

My question is...

Does this sound like a good way of getting under cover pictures,

what lens would make the most sense.

(I am guessing as it will be street photography that the 20mm will

be best)

Should I use AF, if so what mode would be the best?

Film suggestions.....

Do any of my fellow Nikon users have an such experience of using

such a thing.

Rob

tri, i think he is simply saying that the number of imigrants or illegal aliens (in us terminology)is increasing with each year. and as most of them do not speak english..........

is there a problem with stating the obvious or were you trying to say that he was being un pc.

rob

hello,

i know the photo you mean. its amazing! i have a copy of it saved at my home computer, i got it from nikon.co.uk. i just had a look and its not on there anymore.

in about a week i should have the net up and running at home and would be more than happy to email it to you.

rob

ps.

i dont think it was a desert. i think it was a war photo taken in africa. the steel sheet was used to shield the photographer from rocks being thrown at them.

hope you have better luck finding it.

hello,

I did have a look to see if this has been posted before but I did

not see anything. So sorry if it has.

I played with the 200mm f2 lens today. First impressions were....

1) It was way way way too big. For 200mm it just does not feel

right. It was on a F5 and it was still too big. It was very heavy

and just too much of a hand full. Now I know that the f2 will make

it big, but its just too big!

2) It feels very very well made, as good as if not better than the

300mm f2.8 AFS mk2. It looks to be better sealed than the 300mm.

3) The VR works pretty well. And it needs to if you are hand holding

this thing. It so heavy that after just a few minutes of hand

holding I started to shake.

4) Auto focus was a bit slower that the 300mm. Now I know this may

sound odd, but it just felt a bit sluggish in comparisson. Now I am

not saying that it was slow but it was just not as 'zippy'.

5) Shot wide open the out of focus looks very very soft and almost

beautiful. I think this will be a winner for portrait work. But the

photographer better have a good tripod or the build of Mr.T.

Well thats pretty much it. I have not gotten any slides back from

the lab but I think that its safe to say that it will be an amazing

lens in terms of image quality.

But I did notice one thing.

Its a 200mm lens. So 300mm on a Nikon DSLR. And due to its weight it

was really hard to hold for any length of time. So I think that

making it an f2 lens, thus making it very heavy, is in a way counter

productive to the VR.

Maybe Nikon just wanted to introduce the 200mm f2 and threw in the

VR because thay could.

I guess you dont need to use the VR.

I know this does not make sense! I just guess its an odd lens to

make, I cant see it being all that popular.

So first impressions are good. If I get my slides back soon I will

post.

rob

ps

oh and its available from jessops uk for ?3300, it will then drop to

?2700 in about 4 months. And if anybody is in Nottingham in the UK

the store on Cheapside (in the council House) has one.

A few years ago I was using a rented 16mm Nikkor fisheye on a rented F100. I was taking some pictures of BMX and stuff. You have seen the kind of things there people get up to.

Well due to the fish-eye effect i had to get close to the bikes. This one time a BMX'er did what is called a turndown. The kind of move that is difficult to anticipate and one that makes taking pictures very difficult.

Well to cut a 16mm story short, the back wheel hit the lens and.....

the lens broke clean off. All that was left was me being rather pissed off and a rather useless Nikon F mount in the camera.

the F100 was ok, the lens was another story.

The insurance paid up so it was ok. But I dont think any lens is made, or should be made, to hold up to severe shock.

rob

As I have no idea how much you know about cameras and things please do not be offended if I say something which may be obvious to you.

The lens you have at the moment is a 18-70mm lens. Due to the fact that the Nikon CCD is smaller than a 35mm frame the focal length gives a field of view that you will come to expect from a 28-105mm lens on a 35mm body.

(18-70 * 1.5 = aprox. 28-105mm)

The same will apply with the 24-120mm. It will give you the field of view of a 36-180mm lens on a 35mm body.

So you will loose the wide-angle if you sell your 18-70mm lens. It will depend on what kind of work you do too. I am a big fan of wide angle lenses. So I would not sell the 18-70mm lens. On the other hand there are a lot of people who prefer to see the world thru a telelphoto lens.

So that part of the decision will be yours to make.

As far as lenses go, the two are similar in that they are of similar build quality. They both use Nikons AFS system, giving you silent fast focusing with manual over-ride on the focusing.

The 24-120 has VR. From the short time I have used this lens I was not too impressed with it. I did not find that it worked very well. I also did see some optical distortion at the wide angle setting and the telephoto.

But I must say I do not have the lens and did only use if for a few days.

On the other hand the 18-70 is a DX lens. So if, and I hope you do, decide to use film you will not have a lot of use for this lens. The 24-120 on the other hand you can use on both digital Nikons and well as their 35mm SLR's.

Not sure if this will be of any use.

But I am sure you will be able to sell the lens very easily. There are a lot of d100 users who would like to have one.

rob

A great loss to the world.

His work will live on for eternity.

rob

Hello,

I do a lot of low light photography. I use;

Nikon f100, Sigma 17-35 f2.8-4.

I dont like to use flash as a lot of my work is documentary. I use

colour print film pretty much all the time and it tends to be 800 to

1600 speed.

I would like your advice on what to do next.

I love a wide angle lens and love the f.o.v. of a 17mm lens. But I am

still getting light levels that are too low. Do you think it would be

a good idea to get a Sigma 20mm f1.8?

I would prefer to buy the Nikkor 20mm 2.8 but 2.8 is a bit too slow.

I could really use that stop and a bit.

Hope my question makes sense.

rob

ps. as stupid as it sounds image quality is not crital to me. I would

be using the lens wide open most, if not all of the time. I would

simply prefer the Nikkor due to its size and smaller filters. And I

really like the look of some of my pictures that have a little light

fall off.

Nikon F100.

Sigma 20mm f1.8 AFD.

High speed colour print, Superia 800, 1600.

Lens set to f1.8 95% of the time.

and a torch

or you could look at it this way.....

sb-80dx discontinued by nikon

sb-800 still in production by nikon

rob

Thanks for the idea so far. sounds like the Quantum might be on its way to my house.

the only reason that I shoot in C mode is if I am doing a sequence of stuff. In bmx a lot happens in a very very small space of time. So its possable to shoot a single frame but you only get part of the story.

thanks again

rob

Hello there, I am having a small problem with my Nikon flash guns.

So you know, I am using;

Nikon F100+MB-15, Nikon SB-80DX (I have two, but use one), SC-17, SC-

19, all with a Sigma 15mm f2.8 full frame fish-eye, or 17mm non-

fisheye.

Last night I was shooting some BMX sports in a skatepark inside. The

light reading I got from my handheld meter was 1/2 sec @ f8 with

800ISO film.

I had my SB-80DX off camera with my SC-17. The flash was set on TTL

and the metering mode on my F100 was on matrix. All 10 batteries were

new Duracell 1.5V. The flash worked fine most of the time but when I

wanted to do a sequence, about 10shots, the flash gave up half way

thru.

note: when I was doing the sequence I had my camera on 1/60 @f4.

The flash had enough juice to give be about 6 shots and then gave up.

So my question is......

Should I...

a)

Use my other SB-80DX by having the first one on camera and having the

second one hooked up to the first via the SC-19. I would assume that

this would reduce the needed output from the flashes to about half of

the first one.

b)

Buy a Nikon SD-8A power pack and see how that goes. Only problem is

that @ 150 British punds its not cheap.

c)

Buy a Metz hammerhead flash with a greater guide number and see how

that goes.

d)

Buy a third party flash power pack, Quantum? And see if this is

better.

So, as you can see I would like to spend as little as I can. But

would like to sort this out.

Hope somebody has some good ideas. Thanks for reading.

rob

ps. on the flash I did have I had the supplied deffuser on the flash.

I know that this cuts the output and drains more power but is it

something I should not worry about?

Nikon have not confirmed that they will be pulling out of 35mm. They have just said that they might.

rob

so wide it will make your head spin.

try walking with it and looking thru the viewfinder. it might just make you throw up.

rob