RaymondC

<p>I got the 35-70mm F2.8 (non D) cos I don't do people shots a lot, and if I do they pretty much just want tit on Facebook. F2.8 as people do things indoors at cafes and restaurants so I need the fast aperture. I don't use it much myself to warrant the 24-70. I had the 50/1.8D before the 35-70mm but the zoom for people and children stuff was a lot more versatile. </p>

<p>Hi, just curious to know. The packs are typically 1200, 1600 etc. The heads can output a lot more power (some of them). Unless one have multiple packs. Most people don't use the them at full power then?</p>

<p>Without getting into the particulars. I would have thought undoubtedly SLRs are more versatile and for action subjects. With my camera club a good few people have gone from full frame dSLR to the Olympus OM-D. Not so much are with Fuji's or Sony's though maybe price, maybe lense availability, not entirely sure. One guy does more street documentary style ie he travels to Myanmar and does a lot of the local city with the same theme. Not that it matters but he won bronze or silver in our country's photography club competition on one of the categories. He said that since he went with the OM-D he hasn't used his full frame dSLR. </p> <p>I know some people who got into the dSLR when mirrorless wasn't so popular this was like 2006 or something and has reverted back to compact cameras and now they are thinking of going to mirrorless but they do cost more than the cheapest dSLR and the size might not be such a big reduction from cheaper kit lenses (as opposed to F2.8 glass). If I had a family maybe I might move to mirrorless but for now I just use my film or digital SLRs with pretty much F4 zooms cos I do scapes. </p>

<p>Thanks all guys. The 508 and 585 are particular interest. </p> <p>As we are on this topic. Do you need to adjust it to a digital camera versus say a 10yr old dSLR or film? I find that a modern D600 provides a better illuminated file than my D70. </p>

<p>Started taking my camera out to work with me now ...</p> <div></div>

<p>FWIW the AF-D 80-200/4.5-5.6 AF fine on my D70 but the 35-70 AF-Non D does not. But the 35-70 works fine on the F100 and D600. </p>

<p>How are the external light meter like when you compare its spot meter to a modern dSLR? I find that the FM2n's meter isn't as sensitive as the F100 or the D600. But the latter two are sufficient for myself with some interpretation. Going forward to 6x6 I would be needing a external meter anyway :) But yes for night photography I have resorted to some of my own laminated cards I have made myself re: aperture and shutter speeds at least made by my dSLR.</p> <p>Not rural outdoor twilights. But with the city, I could meter off some mid tone buildings for example lit by street lights. </p>

<p>Hi all</p> <p>I am finding the Nikon FM2n limited with outdoor night photography and the meter doesn't work too well after twilight. Any suggestions for a nice light meter? Like it to have a spot meter and an incident for the odd portraiture. But I mostly do scapes. In the future I might get into big lights - triggering them but how much would this feature cost? I could just trigger the lights manually right?</p> <p>In the near future I hope to shoot my slides off 6x6. </p> <p>Cheers.</p>

<p>If I ignore the 80-200 F4.5-5.6. The 70-200 F4 is on par / better than my 35-70 2.8 non D and my 85mm F1.8D (non G). So yeah .. that kinda makes sense. Maybe I am expecting too much? With the coffee jars up close the plastic 80-200 is better but from a far yeah the F4 is better. I have tried doing a bit last weekend, will try more this next weekend. The lens was maybe slightly more focus further away from the camera but the sharpness wasn't that much different. </p> <p> </p>

<p>I am not sure why the link isn't working for you. </p> <p>I tried it at work which I am not logged into Dropbox and it works. </p> <p>I will try this in the weekend with a faster shutter speed and I will fine tune the focus.</p>

<p>How does one AF fine tune with a zoom lens? I could go thru the 70mm and the 105mm, 150mm and 200mm and try all the numbers out, find out what is best. But then how do I select one value for the different FLs? </p>

<p>Hi guys,</p> <p>Focussing - AF-S, single centre area and pressing the AF-L/AE-L button which has been set to as "AF-ON". Aperture priority, 3D matrix. </p> <p>I have only used AF tuning with my prime lenses and not with any of my zooms. The thing is that if I take the cheap 80-200mm out, this 70-200mm is better than my 85/1.8D and my 35-70/2.8 (non D) at the 70mm mark. I had one 80-200mm before sold it, and rebought it, cos I found it is quite sharp. </p> <p>My D600 2yrs ago was checked in Japan under warranty at Shinjuku Service Centre re: focus accuracy and came back fine (or within tolerance). And the fact that the 35-70 and my 85 doesn't have as much raw sharpness as the plastic 80-200 - surely can't be that both of those lenses and my 3rd 70-200/4 are all off (?). </p> <p>I am in New Zealand, winter, indoors so the shutter speeds were like 2" or 4". Maybe I can try faster shutter speeds?</p>

<p>Yes VR was turned off. I ran a second test to ensure that specifically.</p> <p>I could throw in the 70mm tests with my 35-70mm F2.8 (non D) or the 85mm F1.8D if if you want. </p>

<p>From my own tests the 70-200mm while not so good as the 80-200. It is still better than my 85 1.8D and about par to my 35-70mm might be slightly better than it. So makes me think that the plastic 80-200 is an exception? Sounds strange. </p>

<p>I just got myself a 70-200mm F4 and ran some tests on a tripod inside. The file names are self explanatory. I compared it to my 80-200mm F4.5-5.6D. I also tested my 85mm 1.8D and my Tamron 90mm F2.8 macro but those were not uploaded. I can if you want ...</p> <p>Is my 80-200mm F4.5-5.6 really this sharp or is my 70-200mm F4 not quite right?</p> <p>I tested the 80-200mm at 80mm and 200mm. The 70-200mm at 70mm and 200mm. I also tested the 70-200mm at 85mm which might be better than at 70mm? Anyway, the images are here, love to hear your assessment.</p> <p>I added 2x far away test images also. The far away images, the 70-200mm is better. Maybe at closer distances the 80-200mm has some credit?</p> <p><a href="https://www.dropbox.com/sh/lnvcy3mzb69jvmc/AADFrvrK7UWFq4yG-8eEpMfBa?dl=0">https://www.dropbox.com/sh/lnvcy3mzb69jvmc/AADFrvrK7UWFq4yG-8eEpMfBa?dl=0</a></p> <p> </p>

<p>Thanks. The difficulty I find is that if I had to focus quicker b/c there are people around and find things in the VF to do it correctly. If I was outside after twilight, I could set it up slowly take my time and ensure the building is really focused. Take 3 or 4 tries I required but then again I am shooting at F11 mostly myself. I just don't want to get a manual lens for when I do my own photography small and light and maybe with a AF body and a MF body other times and when need to get a AF 35mm for other occasions involving people. Or simply convert from MF to AF film bodies.</p>

<p>I shoot film still and one of the body is a FM2n. </p>

<p>I have a AF version 50 and 85. Should I go for a 35mm it might be manual focus. Is there difficulty to focus with this lens with a AF body with its AF confirmation? Or is the viewfinder bright enough? Situations where I would be using a fast lens is maybe around a dinner table in a cafe / restaurant etc. Equally are they ok to focus outside like at a night market? </p>

<p>A no. of my photography club friends have moved from full frame dSLRs to the Olympus OM-D setup. For images where it might not be sports or (ISO) real low light are there any drawbacks? Apart from I guess portraiture if one has an focus on DOF and one could use a tripod for static images. </p> <p>Thanks</p>

<p>Hi, as this camera doesn't have a hotshoe accessory, how successful is the builtin flash with your typical holiday night portrait photography? Does it get in the way and is the power sufficient? </p> <p>The Ricoh GR etc .. might have a hotshoe flash but again this can be cumbersome if one was wanting a compact camera. </p> <p>Cheers</p>

<p>Cheers for that.</p> <p>The question really is, taking a larger wattage flash outside is not that user friendly. Hence the reason I was talking about a Profoto B1 or a B2. With this in mind, would you suggest a speedlight Lastolite softbox approach and maybe move away from the harsh light and maybe use proper strobes for indoors only?</p> <p>Should I have a really important function I could maybe once a year just hire a juice box and run AC powered strobes outside. </p>

<p>Can anyone tell me what the shot would look like if one had a 500W monolight with a battery pack and shot a subject under a harsh summer 12pm? So what's the difference towards a speedlight? </p> <p>I am thinking if one then moves the subject to the shade, maybe a speedlight Lastrolite Ezybox would be a alternative for outdoors and then stick to a AC powered strobes for indoors .... </p> <p>Views?</p>

<p>Going the other away - plug in strobes and add in a Lastolite hotshoe softbox with a grid? A softbox and grid would have be more creative than just a reflector (white/black) brolly right? </p>

<p>Thanks for the thoughts guys. Maybe that was a reason the 2x B2 video's I have seen on Youtube were all shot at night / cloudy / indoors.</p> <p>@Michael. Well you can carry multiple juice boxes - hahah. </p>

Does HSS help? Yes 1/250 sync usually.