nick_davis

The F4s is a beast of a camera. I still use both of mine to this day. It is a good time to be a film shooter because the all-time great cameras are available at an all-time low price. I have considered buying another F100 just because they are so cheap.

Here is a scan of an image done with the TC-17EII at F/6.7<div></div>

No doubt that the quality of this combo is not even close to the 600mm F/4, but, for someone like me who lacks the funds, there are no other options.

I have read contradicting statements many times on this site about the autofocus compatibility of teleconverters

with the 300mm f/4 AF-S. I just wanted to post this to let interested people know that the 300mm f/4 AF-S WILL

autofocus with both the TC-17E and TC-20E teleconverters. I have used both combinations with the following list

of cameras, N80, F100, F4s, D70s, and the autofocus works fine under all but the dimmest lighting conditions. The

TC-17E works pretty much as along as you can still see an image in the view finder. With the TC-20E, autofocus

starts having trouble when shutter speeds begin to fall below the usually useable range with a 600mm equivalent

lens; typically around 1 second at f/8 for example. So if there is anyone out there who has been hesitant to

purchase a teleconverter for this lens, I tell you they do work.

I own the 20mm f/2.8. I wish that I had the 24mm as well since I think that sometimes the 20mm is too wide. If you are buying used you may be able to afford both.

I've been a Nikon SLR user since 1990. Back then Nikon was the King of 35mm. However, it didn't take long before Canon was releasing one breakthrough after another, such as IS and Ultrasonic focusing and quieter drives. But by then it was too late for me to switch brands because I had a significant investment in Nikon equipment. I usually recommend Canon to people who are just starting out. I don't want them to make the same mistake I made 18 years ago.

<div></div>

<div></div>

I believe that the grip will still attach with the broken battery door. On the N80/F80 the battery door is completely removed from the camera before the grip is attached. I bought mine so that I could use AA batteries instead of the CR2's. It also gives the camera a better feel without adding much weight. A friend recently bought an MB-18 off ebay for $16 so they are available cheap every once and a while.

If you want great manual handling along with mirror lock up (which the F100 lacks) look for an F4s. The are a steal these days at $200 on ebay. I know it is an old camera but, unless you need the better and faster autofocus of the F100, it is still a great camera.

I have been considering selling mine. I don't really notice any problems with softness with it but I rarely use it so I considered letting it go. If you'd like maybe I could shoot a couple photos with it of a test chart and post the results here. I'd have to do it after work so it would be later tonight.

My hands shake terribly so I need a tripod most of the time. I found that I need to shoot at least a stop faster than the reciprocal of the focal length of a lens to get sharp hand-held shots. Since I shoot ISO 100 film often in dimly lit forests or overcast conditions I need the tripod.

In my experience they never ever look the same. I use two monitors at home. The one built in to my laptop and a mitsubishi diamondtron CRT monitor. The same image displayed on both monitors will look completely different. If I open that photo on my computer at work it will also look different than the ones at home. I use photoshop to open them on both machines. My prints match the mitsubishi monitor the closest so that is the one I use to proof color on my scans.

I used to watch Canon Photo Safari and recently discovered Art Wolfe's Travels to the Edge series. Are there, or

were there ever, any other shows similar to these? I have always watched a lot of National Geographic Films but I

really enjoy things that are more specific to photography, like the Art Wolfe series. By the way, I do own Jim

Brandenberg's Chased by the Light so please don't recommend that one but any other recommendations would be

appreciated.

I have occasionally used my SB-26 and SB-24 on Auto mode with my D70s but unless you can get one of these really cheap (and that may be a challenge, especially for the SB-26), I'd recommend saving for the SB-600. The lack of TTL metering with the older speedlights is a serious enough reason to buy a newer one.

"when the Loch Ness monster surfaces "

Well said John, well said. Digital technology is advancing at a rate that is much faster than the rate at which the AF film SLR's used to. These days it is easy to lose focus what really makes a photo, especially when we spend too much time reading about the latest camera body releases on the internet.

I agree with Frank. The 50mm f/1.8 is a great bargain but it won't be long enough for photographing most sports. I would look at a mid-range zoom like the 70-300mm AF-S VR, or, if you have the budget for it, the 70-200mm f/2.8 and teleconverter like Frank mentioned.

The 80-200mm will probably stay in production as long as they can sell them cheaper than the 70-200mm. If the price on the 70-200mm drops drastically then maybe the 80-200mm will be discontinued. The price on the 80-200mm is pretty good on the used market. They occasionally dip below $500 on ebay for the non AF-S version, and even lower for the push-pull model. I think that people prefer to use the 70-200mm on DX bodies because the smaller imaging surface eliminates the vignetting that I have heard plagues that lens (I don't really know how bad it is on a full 24x36mm frame because I don't own one).

I worked for a very successful commercial photographer who, despite having his own professionally made hisname.com website, still used his hisname@mac email address. I don't think it mattered much to his clients because mostly they would hire him based on his physical portfolio, not his online gallery. But, that may not be how the business works anymore.

I like using the 24-120mm AF-S VR as a general purpose lens. I know it has had many mixed reviews about its performace at the 24mm end, but have been happy with it and I use it mostly at the wide end too. It focuses fast and covers a nice zoom range. I have heard that the 28-105mm is sharper at the extremes but I have no personal experience with it and I'd think that 28mm would not be wide enough on a DX format camera.

The 80-200mm is a fast lens and it is not very heavy so hand-held shooting can be done under most lighting conditions. I have owned the second generation AF (not the AF-S) version for 11 years and I love mine. If you feel that you absolutely need to be able to shoot hand-held under 1/125th second then the VR feature may be worth the extra money. I shoot over 90% of my photos on a tripod so if I had to decide which one to buy I would go with the 80-200mm, since it is only 60% of the price, and use the extra money for another lens.

I usually keep my film advance set on continuous-high, however, I rarely fire off a burst of shots. Most of the time I make single exposures but that can be done just as easily with the camera set to continuous as it can when set to single shot. That way if I need the speed I don't even have to think about changing anything I just hold down the shutter button.

Not sure. My photos don't get rated even while they are in the critique forum.

4x5 will give you a fantastic transparency or negative to use for enlarging but they are expensive to operate. 4x5 sheet film costs about $2.00 a sheet before processing. 120 film for a medium format camera costs less than $1.00 per frame. That was the difference maker for me! I have wanted a 4x5 camera for 15 years but the costs of actually using one drove me to buy a Mamiya 645 Pro TL instead.

Shun, I do have bodies that are compatible with the G series lenses. If I were to purchase the 600mm I would certainly use it mostly with my F100, or maybe even my N80, but it would be nice if it also worked with my F4s' because even though the F4s is old it focuses quite fast with AF-S lenses. I won't argue that most of Nikon's customers are purchasing the lenses for newer cameras that are G compatible but there still must be a great deal of people who are not. It seems like a poor business decision to purposely alienate a portion of your customers (users who PREFER the older bodies like me) unless there were some financial benefit to doing so. I just wonder what that could be?