daniel rufer

Hello<p>

When you look at the distance markings from the top, you see that the zero markings do not start at the edge of the rail, and that the distance markings are reversed on the two sides. Now: the minimal extension the bellow is capable of is close to 50mm (you can eaysily check that by measuring the distance between a certain point on your lens and a certain point on your camera, e.g. the edge of the focusing ring and the front of the body or anything like that, once measured without the bellows and once with the bellows completely unextended).<br>

With that knowledge, you can easily see that if you move one of the units (it doesn't matter which one, the one with the lens or the one with the body) all the way to the edge of the rail, LOCK IT SO IT DOESN'T FALL OFF!! and push the other one all the way close to it (so that you have the minimal extension), you can read on one of the distance markings that you currently have about 50mm of extension (you see that on the sloped side of the unit that is not sitting at the edge).<br> Now you can simply move that unit and you always get the amount of extension by reading the marking the same way you just did.<br>

As you can position the body- as well as the lens-unit at the edge, you can avoid having the rail being in the way with objects that end up very close to the lens.<p>

Now something else: always make sure that the one unit close to the edge is locked (with the screw that tightens it), and that the little round plastic cap that screws into the ends of the rail sits at the opposite end of the locked unit. This way nothing can fall off the rail, which could happen if you look through the viewfinder and extend without knowing where you are, or if you mount the assembly vertically with a heavy lens and loose the tighten-screw and your lens is drawn downward. Lens or body "falling off" is a death warrant for the bellow, as it will most likely rip.<p>

The MIR site can be found at <a href="http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/" >www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/</a>.<br>

Also do a search here in the forums for pb-6, there is a wealth of information.<p>

Hope this helps!

I certainly do not want to discredit Shaw's book, as it IS very good.

But I would like to point out another very good book: "The complete guide to close-up and macro photography" by Paul Harcourt Davies. Even though it sports one of these somewhat dubious sounding "COMPLETE GUIDE TO..." titles, it really is a very thorough guide into the world of macro photography, covering many subjects without compromising on content.<p>

Shaw's book is VERY thorough on the technical side and explains the technical aspects in a great way, also covering important basic stuff like flash theory without TTL and going into many details over things like combinations of lenses, rings etc. So I suggest this book to get a thorough "technical" introduction to macro photograpy.<p>

Davies' book covers this technical side as well, but perhaps not into all the details and the same length as does Shaw. But it provides a lot more in terms of the non- or less-technical side: composition; working with patterns, color and texture, finding inspiration etc. He also provides "practical" information on how to work with certain subjects/situations and how to apply the stuff you learned in the field. And finally he provides information about macro photography "at home" or in the studio (stuff like "dark groud illumination", photographing objects like gemstones etc, buidling and usng an optical bench etc).<p>

While Shaw is an excellent technical study-book, Davies' book is the one that really got me going and provided ideas and inspiration. And it is also the one that I find myself going back to to flip through some pages.<p>

Great advice he? Not "buy this one" or "buy that one"... Well, buy both! =)<p>

Have fun in this new, small world!

"Betriebsk" most likely means "Betriebskamera" (which in english would be "factory camera") and thus designate - as written in the article - an internal (test) camera.<br>

An alternative would be "Betriebskontrolle" meaning "factory control" or "function control" (the word "Betrieb" can mean both factory or Use/Function), thus again designating a camera meant for (internal) testing and control.<p>

Daniel

For the film leader to be left "sticking out" after a rewind, the F100 needs a firmware change and only Nikon can do that. I had mine changed by Nikon Switzerland for a small fee of about 10 to 15 US$ if I remember correctly.<br> The alternative is a "film leader retriever" found in most camera shops (it is much easier the other way though).<p>

Hope that helps.<br>

Daniel

I have the Photo Secretary for the F100, but don't use it anymore. What I DO use though is the programm called Camera Companion (obtainable through <a href="http://www.holymoose.com" >www.holymoose.com</a> for 40 Euro (about 50 US$)). <br>

It does the same as the Secretary (setting the custom function with the PC, downloading shooting data), but has some distinct advantages over the Secretary: <p>

1) the software is cheaper (but you still need the cable to connect the F100 to the serial port of you pc, it's the MC-33 if I remember correctly, or the alternative from <a href="http://www.cocoon-creations.com/COCOON-NiCommHarTALK.shtml" >Hartalk</a> <br>

2) the shooting data is stored in an access .mdb file and not in a proprietary fileformat as with the Secretary. This is a HUGE advantage! With the secretary you have to save it as textfile, import it excel or something similar, save it again as proper csv and finaly use it in Imatch, Access or whatever you use for catalogueing your pictures...<p>

I really recommend CameraCompanion.<br>

Oh, what it saves is: shutter speed, aperture, lens (i.e. 80-200mm), focal length (i.e. 135mm), max aperture, exposure mode, date, meter mode, exposure value difference (how much you are "off" to what the meter suggests, useful info im manual mode), exposere compensation (you +/- you dial in), flash type (TTL, automatic etc), flash compensation. Then you can also add a link to a file on your harddisk directly in the CameraCompanion^, to have the scanned pic shown in the application directly, though I prefer to use Imatch for that, as it offer a lot more in terms of picture management (CameraCompanion is NOT a picture manager), and importing the shooting data is easy as its stored as an .mdb by the Companion.<p>

Hope this helps! <p>

Daniel

Hello<p>

I own an Explorer for almost 2 years now, and I even tried to use it without a ballhead (my ordered ArcaSwiss B1 was delayed for ages) but quickly gave up on that. One problem is, that the tilting of the center column happens in small steps (there are 2 plates with little nocks and grooves to prevent twisting when it's tilted), and the other - most important one - ist, that you have no way to get your camera level except to level the whole tripod. Now even though he does have one of these air-bubble leveling indicators (sorry, don't know the english expression) it is EXTREMELY difficult and troublesome to do so in the field (move you tripod only a little on uneven terrain and there goes your horizontal adjustment).<p>

I find the large freedom of movement of the tripod most useful in macro photography, where it allows you to get your camera in almost every position, even if you cannot really place your tripod legs everywhere you want. The other advantage ist that you can tilt the center column 90 degrees and get shots that would otherwise require that you tilt your ballhead into the groove on the side and thus limit it's movement; with the tripod tilted you still have the whole freedom of movement of the ballhead, though the whole thing get's cantilevered out to the side and is a bit more shake-prone (a L-plate would be the best solution).<p>

Now: you might get away without a ballhead if you consider buying a leveling base. These are small panning-base-looking things that are usually used to allow you level a ballhead with panning base if you want to shoot panoramas (so you don't have to fiddle with your tripod legs allt he time as I said above :)<br>

With the Explorer and a leveling base you have sort of a very limited ballhead-functionality which might be sufficient for your kind of shooting you intend to do. But a leveling base might cost nearly as much as a ballhead so...<br>

Oh, and of course: if you end up buying a ballhead: don't skimp! Buy a good one that's suitable for your needs (if you want to use heavy lenses, get a rock-solid) and thats larger than a marble as this makes your life sooooo much easier than a crappy ballhead. (I paid much more for my ballhead than my tripod, but it's worth every single penny!).

Generally good ballheads come from ArcaSwiss (expensive but - in my opinion - indistinguishable from perfect), Kirk (The BH-1 is said to be a very good alternative to the ArcaSwiss) and Markins (the M10 is siad to be comparable to the other two here).<p>

Hope this helps, you have a very good and versatile tripod, go and have fun :)

<p>

Daniel

Hello<p>

I guess the culprit for the blur is a much too long exposure time (based on how "bright" the branches appear and how overexposed the moon is, I assume you used no flash but a very long shutter time).<p>

Some points:<br>

- the moon moves rather fast (about 15 degrees/h, which means that in only a few minutes he moves his whole diameter, which again means, that every exposure longer than about 5 seconds or even less starts to blur more and more).<br>

- the surface of the moon is grey dust, somewhat like concrete in color, and the sun shines directly down on it (at full moon its frontal lighting, at crescent its sidelight), and what is the correct exposure according to sunny f/16 for a frontlit concrete wall (around 1 stop brighter than 18% grey)? Bingo, f/11 (as it's 1 stop brighter) at 1/film speed -> with a 100 ISO film it would be around 1/125 @ f/11 (or anything equivalent) <p>

So you see, these 2 points go in the same direction, fast shutter speed, which eliminates blur and prevents severe overexposing of the moon.<br>

This of course means you loose the "bright" branches unless you use flash to illuminate them. The problem is quite simply the tonal range: the moon needs 1/125 @ f/11 while the branches would need something like say 30sec to 2 minutes @ f/11, so thats a difference of 12 or more stops, no film can handle that. Result: one part of our picture is correctly exposed, the other is completely dark or completely overexposed (and in case of the moon, severely blurred). The only solution is to expose for the moon and fill-flash the branches.<p>

Hope this helps<p>

Daniel

Hello<p>

As for your first question: to lock the focus, you have the small button labeled "AE-L, AF-L" at the back of the body (directly left of the "AF-ON" button). That's the exposure- and AF-lock.<br>

As far as I remember, it is set do lock exposure AND focus by default, but can be reprogrammed with the custom settings to only lock one of the two. Check your manual for the custom settings and set them as you like it, sorry, don't have mine with me, so I can't tell you which one it is.<p>

As for the second question: the AF assistor cannot "move" it cone of illumination, therefore if you don't have enough light to focus on a non-center AF-spot you have to switch to the center spot or use an external lightsouce (i.e.headlight) as assistor-light.<br>

But if you set the F100 to AF with the "AF-ON" button only, lock exposure with the shutter release and lock focus with the "AE-L, AF-L" button there should be no problems using the center spot, AF and lock, meter and lock, reframe and shoot (locking the exposure might only be necessary if you use non-matrix metering).<br>

Train to use a consistent "workflow" like this for different shooting styles (tripod-based macro or landscapes etc and handheld non-moving stuff are things where you have plenty of time to go through several steps, using spot metering, metering corrections etc, while action-, street, concert-photography etc may require a "faster" approach), it helps you get routine and not forget important stuff like resetting an exposure correction :)<p>

Hope this helps<p>

Daniel

Hello Gianfranco<p>

The problems with AF not focusing properly with slower lenses is not a problem of the TC as such, but of the camery body. <br> If you try to focus with very little light, AF starts to hunt and has problems focusing, this is due to the fact, that there is not enough light reaching the AF-"eye" for it to properly decide when something is sharp or not.<br>

Now: when your largest aperture gets smaller you loose light and the AF might have problems, as AF always focuses at wide open (thats what you see in the viewfinder). If you go down from 2.8 wide open to 5.6 wide open you only get 1/4 of the light to the AF-"eye", combine this with a not very bright situation (dawn, interior etc) you quickly end up with verly little light in your viewfinder and AF-"eye".<p>

And thats exactly what happens when you add a 2x TC: your max aperture goes from 2.8 to 5.6, but if you had a max aperture of say 5.6 to start with, this goes down to f/11 (you loose 2 stops). With an 1.4x TC you only loose 1 stop but with an f/5.6 lens you end up with a max aperture of f/8 anyway. Result: the AF doesn't have enough light to focus properly.<br>

Thats why the manufacturers say you need a f/2.8 lens (which gets a f/5.6 lens with a 2xTC). You might still be able to AF with lower max apertures but you need enough light to start with to compensate your light loss of the TC and the slow lens.<br>

With my 70-300 f/4-5.6 and a Kenko Pro 300 2x TC on a F100 (not sure if the AF in different bodies have different capabilities concerning focusing with low light), I am usually able to AF at f/4 (with the TC this is effective f/8) even indoors or on heavy overcast days, while at f/5.6 (effective f/11) I do need the sun to get enough light.<br> Another point is: if there is not enough light, often the AF just doens't work (focuses all the way in and out with no result), but sometimes he "focuses" on something but this focus might be somewhat off and this can be seen in the viewfinder (especially if the contrasts of the point you are focusing on is not very good). So be careful.<p>

Generally I would say up to f/4 it works (though with an AF-S lens this might already be too dark, as this lens has a faster focussing motion? I don't know). If you have to use a lens with a max aperture of f/5.6 this is probably a long tele anyway (300mm or such) so that with a 2x TC you have a lens that you cannot handhold (600mm would require about 1/500sec to handhold, and at an effective apperture of f/11 this can probably only be achieved by shooting into a nuclear blast or something similarly stupid which you won't try :) and therefore you shoot with a tripod and should have the time you need to focus manually.. so the problem of the long and slow lenses with TCs not focusing properly often negates itself all by itself :)<p>

Hope this helps, and as I said: testing is the key! Take your lenses to a store which has the TC you want and test them...<p>

Happy shooting!<p>

Daniel

Hello

I am also currently looking to buy a 24-85 lens but for me it has to be the 24-85 f/2.8 AF-D as I also own a FM2. <br>

That said, I nevertheless did some sort of a test with both 24-85 lenses (no scientific test-target-shooting, but identical shots taken with both lenses from a tripod). And it was really hard to tell the difference. Both lenses are somewhat soft wide open and perform best at around f/8-f16 but concerning sharpness or color rendering they seem to be more or less the same league.<br>

It has to be said, that the G version features one ED glass, while the D version doesn't, but I couldn't see a difference that could easily be ascribed to that fact. The G version has a 7-blade and the D a 9-blade diaphragm, so you get rounder flares with the D as they both tend to flare extensively =)<p>

So the non-optical reasons might be decisive:<br>

MAX APERTURE: well, 2.8 or 3.5, both are soft at that aperture so that leaves you with a slightly brighter viewfinder with the 2.8. I liked the bokeh somewhat better at the f/2.8 but its probably biased as I tend towards this lens anyway :)<br>

MINIMAL FOCUSING DISTANCE: here is a difference! The D goes to 1.6' and has a "macro"-mode with 0.7' and a magnification of 1:2; the G goes to 1.2' but has no "macro"-mode and therefore a mag of 1:4.8. I cannot comment on performance of the macro-mode as I didn't test it.<br>

Both lenses are IF, which is good for the polarizer in landscapes, for nitpicking it can be said that if you get them new, the G has the new lenscaps which are easier to use with the hood attached ;-) but I digress...<br>

FILTER SIZE: the D has 72mm while the G has 67, which is quite an uncommon size (I also own a 20-35 f/.28 and a 80-200 f/2.8 which use both 72mm, so I already have the polarizer for 72mm, and polarizers for 67mm might not be very cheap either if you need one)<br>

SIZE AND WEIGHT: well, usually these lenses are bought to provide compact and leightweight travel lenses (perhaps in addition to a 70-300 or something like that). The G version sure is a little more compact and has only about 2/3 of the weight of the D-version (0.88 lb vs 1.2 lb) so for leightweight the G fares better.<br>

AF-SPEED: well we compare an AF-S vs an AF... <p>

So to conclude all this yakking: <br>

reasons to buy the D-version:<br>

- IF YOU HAVE AN OLDER BODY WHERE YOU NEED AN APERTURE RING!!!!<br>

- If you will use a polarizer and already have a 72mm one (though the price-difference will get you that 67mm pol)<br>

- The scyscraper-like pics of mushrooms up close might get you larger mushrooms due to the 1:2 magnification ;-)<br>

- If you absolutely MUST shoot as wide as possible (though I wouldn't recommend it).<p>

reasons to buy the G-version:<br>

- Faster AF-speed (AF-S), might be especially useful on a N80.<br>

- price.<br>

- size and WEIGHT!<p>

For me my FM2 body decided, otherwise I might look for a G-version due to the weight issue (I need it as leightweight travel lens together with the 70-300 whenever I can't haul tons of 20-35 f/2.8, 35-70 f/.28 and 80-200 f/2.8 :) <br>

BE ADVISED THOUGH: you are going for weight vs optical quality compromise! A 17-35 f/2.8 AF-S or 20-35 f/2.8 AF-D and a 35-70 f/2.8 AF-D will get you recognizably better results! But they are expensive as hell and heavy as hell...<p>

I will stop rambling now and hope this helps a bit...<p>

Daniel

The MC-7 is MF and AF (there are not 2 versions), but the AF-coupling is AF only, so you don't get AF-D and as far as I know AF-S doesn't work (properly) as well.<br>

If you want to retain the D(istance) information with an AF-D lens, you will need the Pro 300.<p>

I own the Kenko Pro 300 1.4x and 2x and use them with an F100 and an FM2 together with several AF, AF-D and MF lenses and I even tried them several times with AF-S lenses. They all work perfect and I am very pleased with the image quality (both the Pro 300 and the MC-7 are multicoated).<br>

I recently tested my Pro 300s on a D100 with AF-D and AF lenses and this works as well, though AF-speed can be pretty slow (due to the inferior AF-motor of the F80/D100 body compared to the F100).<br>

If you are going to buy one of these TCs, be sure to test it with an AF-S lens, as I heard/read reports of people sometimes having trouble with AF-S lenses.<p>

In general, the Pro 300 TCs are very well regarded concerning optical quality. The Nikons might or might not be better (never tested one thorougly).<p>

Hope this helps, for more info here is a site: http://www.thkphoto.com/products/kenko/kenko-03.html

Hello

I have been using the Kenko Pro 1.4x and 2x TCs extensively with my 80-200/2.8 on a F100. The Kenko TCs are very good concerning image quality an compatibility (full functionality with either AF-S lenses and MF lenses). <br>Autofocus speed is a bit slower with the TCs compared to the F100 alone but nothing to be too worried about (if you need the ultimate autofocus speed, buy an AF-S).<p>

Now you have an N80: I was able to test a D100 (which has the AF of the N80) and it works as well with the Kenkos and my other lenses as they work on the F100... with the exception of autofocus speed. AF speed with a D100/N80, 2x TC and the 80-200/2.8 AFD is on the slow side and prone to hunting (even more than when used with the F100). <br>If you need fast AF with TCs I think you have to switch to AF-s. Otherwise you have a nice solution.

<p>

A little advice: TEST the TCs you are going to buy with YOUR lenses and at least an AF-S lens to see whether AF really works. I read comments of people having trouble getting their AF-S lenses to AF with one Kenke TC but it worked with another.. so test it.<p>

Hope this helps somewhat<p>

Daniel

Well, if you consider purchasing a D100 you get one of the sharpest 300mm lenses for free: your 80-200 AFD :)

Of course you will still have a gap. it will be between 300mm and 900mm (420mm to 900mm if you add the 1.4x to the 80-200)...

Well.. I throw in the standard answer concerning books: John Shaws "Closeups in Nature". It thoroughly covers most that you will need for macrophotography, although it has seen a few years already.<br>

As for lighting: I was able to test a ringflash once and I really didn't like the no-shadow flat look it gives (perfect to shoot coins or stamps, but not nature closeups or anything not 2D), so I built myself a flash bracket somewhat similar to the one in Shaws book and mount a small lightweight TTL-flash on it... gives nice lighting with adjustable position and frees my hands. I can always add a second flash (holding it in my hand) if I need very little shadow, but usually I shoot with the one flash and a diffusor only.<p>

Hope it helps.

Hello

As as been said over and over: it depends on what you want to do most.

I own a F100 with an SB80DX and thats a really great combo (I got a DX flash because I have easy access to a D100 to use). But if I want to use that Flash on my FM2 (no TTL-flash) or my friends FM3A it gets rather top-heavy.

Also: if you do a lot of macro work, you won't necessarily need the power of an SB80DX for the fills and in case you have some sort of homemade flash-bracket (I use one somewhat similar to the one John Shaw describes in "Closeups in Nature") you will find the SB80DX too heavy for the bracket to hold it in place (and due to the lever: for you to hold the entire assemblage :)

So, for the macro work I bought a SB23 which has TTL, is very compact and light and can be bought rather cheap second-hand. But its not very strong.

If you want to do birds or other "far-away" stuff, use a flash extender or do a lot of indirect flash over not very reflective surfaces (caves, mineshafts etc) go for a powerfull flash. A SB28 is also a good alternative there if you don't need the DX.

Only one flash? Hmm... I wouldn't miss the lightweight SB23 on a extended hike where landscape and the occasional flower or critter-closeup is the main interest... a SB80DX is about 350-400g with the batteries. And having a SB23 AND a SB80DX lets me use the SB80DX as a wireless slave (built into the SB80DX, no SU-4 required), which can be nice, but then you have to carry 2 flashes... argh ;-)

One more thing: the SB80DX no longer has the screw-down locking mechanism to secure it on the hotshoe but some sort of extending holding-pin. Nor sure where or if this might cause a problem, but be aware of it.

Well.. hope it helps.

Daniel