patriciomurphy

<p>I had the same problem with an original battery, used it one day, the next when i put it on the charger the light stopped blinking and turned off after a few seconds. The battery didn't work anymore. I still have another original battery and a Phottix EN-EL3e compatible that's been working flawlessly for more than a year first on a D200, now on a D300.</p>

<p><img src="http://www.patriciomurphy.com.ar/foros/20090703_012_700.jpg" alt="" /><br>

Nikon D200, Sigma 400mm f/5.6 APO @f/11 1/500<br>

One of the tests shots I made from my house the day I got the Sigma.</p>

<p><img src="http://www.patriciomurphy.com.ar/foros/nef/20080222_043.jpg" alt="" width="428" height="640" /><br>

Shot with Nikon D200 and an old AI Nikkor 20mm f/3.5.</p>

Waiting for our flight back to Buenos Aires.<div></div>

<p>Thanks Dave and Michael.<br>

I'll make some tests and try different settings.</p>

<p>Vinh, thanks for the input. I ruled out the lens because it happens with several lenses, from old AI lenses to a Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 or an 80-200 f/2.8. As of underexposing, I find my D200 underexposing for about 1 stop. Nikon supposedly calibrated the AE system, but I found no difference at all, so I just usually dial +0.7/1<br>

Les, thank you for taking the time to check the file out. I'll see if next month I can part with the camera and send it in to Nikon.<br>

Thansk everybody for the help</p>

<p>Thanke everybody!<br>

Les, I'm sending you a raw file. I have the latest firmware (2.01), is it possible to do a corrupt install?</p>

<p>Hi, thanks everybody for the helping hand!<br>

Les, I tried the different settings at the Camera Calibration Panel, some are better than others, but I still have to work on getting a usable image. Usually it's just a matter of moving the "tint" slider to the right, so it's not that bif of a deal, but I would like to get it right from the beginning, rather than fiximg it later...<br>

Mark, I'm shooting RAW, that's why I also think it has to do with WB, but what puzzles me is that most of the pictures come out bad, and it doesn't seem normal. I would expect the auto WB to be fooled every now and theh rather than getting it right every now and then...<br>

Robert, do you mean using one of the canned settings?<br>

Tobey, I did a bank reset for al the photographic options with the same results. With flash as key light and WB set to flash it's usually good enough, it's under the sun that it gets worse. Images show OK on the LCD, but on the computer no matter what program I use, I have to correct the colours. Using Capture One, I ended up letting the program choose the WB automatically and starting from there.<br>

Thanks again for the assistance!</p>

This one is from 20 years ago, shot with my good ol' Pentax SV fitted

with a Takumar 35mm f/3.5<div></div>

<p>I own a D200 since two years ago. I bought it used from a friend, a couple of months before the warranty expired.<br>

Well, everybody is happy with the D200 colours, and mostly everyone gets very nice ones indeed, but I was always dissatisfied with the camera output. I overcame the ugly colours with PP, but as I'm aware that I should get a reasonably good image right out of the camera, or at least a working image, I'm still trying to figure out what's going wrong. As of sending it back to Nikon, I want to avoid departing from my camera for not less than a month.<br>

The problem I find is a green/yellowish colour cast. I resetted one of the banks to factory defaults with equal results. This pictures are shot with Auto WB, Adobe RGB as colour space (converted to sRGB in Lightroom), mode II, Sharpening +1 and everything else on zero.<br>

Another thing I noticed is that the images look worse on Adobe soft.<br>

Some tests images as I see them on Lightroom. One thing, Lightroom usually shows me an image that looks quite good while a "loading preview" note is on the screen, but when it loads, it looks like these pictures. Looks like the raw data is good, but then it reads some data that makes the piture look ugly...<br>

<img src="http://www.patriciomurphy.com.ar/foros/pruebas_color/20090222_860.jpg" alt="" /><br>

<img src="http://www.patriciomurphy.com.ar/foros/pruebas_color/20090304_2432.jpg" alt="" /><br>

<img src="http://www.patriciomurphy.com.ar/foros/pruebas_color/20090304_2447.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p><img src="http://www.patriciomurphy.com.ar/foros/pruebas_color/20090516_004.jpg" alt="" width="482" height="720" /></p>

<p><img src="http://www.patriciomurphy.com.ar/foros/pruebas_color/20090516_018.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>Any advice, thanks!</p>

 

<p>I agree with James with the problem being more the marginal shutter speed than the TC. I've shot a tennis tournament (you can see the pictures here: http://www.patriciomurphy.com.ar/galerias/tenis/index.html) using an 80-200 f/2.8 with and without TC, and was surprised by the quality. I expected to notice a big difference between the TC vs non-TC shots, and for the most part I forgot about it, if there was any difference it was negligible.</p>

<p>I've seen an ad yesterday that hits the nail in the head: it all comes down to whether you prefer to be sitting in front of the computer or out shooting in the field. it's a matter of taste, I think both ways are valid.<br>

I prefer using filters, ND and CPL. I find "obsolete" now shooting raw the colour correction filters, since I can tweak colour temperature with more precision in post-processing, but OTOH trying to replicate the effect of a CPL in software is just too much work for me, it's much more logical to me to get it done at the take.</p>

 

<p>LOL! I also never felt the need, but now that I get the point I think of a couple of times when I could have used it...</p>

 

<p>Thanks everybody!<br>

I get it. I was sort expecting (don't ask me why, since now that I think about it, it doesn't make too much sense...) this thing to work like some sort of focus limiter, so I completely missed it, and actually thought that click I felt while I focused was something going wrong with the lens! :P<br>

I'll be photographing birds this weekend, so I may now see if I find it useful.<br>

Thanks again!<br>

Pat</p>

<p>Hi! Perhaps someone is able to help me on this one.<br>

The 400mm f/3.5 has a "pre-setable focusing ring for rapid refocusing to a specific distance and full-aperture" (taken from http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/telephotos/400mm1.htm). However, I can't quite get to understand how should it work. Perhaps mine is broken, or I just don't get what it's supposed to do.<br>

Can someone enlighten me? How should this thing work?<br>

Thanks!<br>

Pat<br /> </p>

In the D200, there's a Custom Function un der the titel "AF-C Priority Selection" that let's you chose between three options. One of them is "FOCUS: Photos can only be taken when in-focus indicator is displayed". Not sure about the D40x, but if that function is vavilable, perhaps you have that option checked, and shouls check the option that lets you fire even when focus is not achieved.

Thanks August

I'll test the voltage, but most probably I'll have a safe-sync shoe made by a tech, so I don't have to worry at all...

Suntax is sold in the USA under the brand Phoenix. I'll probably buy a Nikon Ringflash in the future, but I'm not quite sure if I like ring flashes at all, so this one, coming for free to test, sounds like a chance to test that particular type of lightning.

Thanks again.

Pat

A friend of mine, who is not fond of ring flashes, gave me her flash, the model

that's on the subject. HOwever, she's a Canon user, and I'm not pretty sure if I

can mount the beast on my Nikons.

I know I will just have to work in manual, that the flash will fire full power,

but I'm not sure if it's safe to mount, and if the Canon contacts may harm in

any way my cameras.

Does anybody know for sure?

Link to the specs:

http://www.suntax.com.sg/product_display.asp?inproducttype=Auto-Focus+TTL+System

Thank you very much,

Pat

Another vote for Lightroom.

My bad: the manual es clear in that the r09 is the remaining shots the camera can store in the buffer. I still don't know why in scene modes in AF the camera won't shot, I put it in MF and it does. I get out from any scene mode, and it works OK. Perhaps it worked like this from day 1, since I haven't used any of those modes ever, and was just showing how it worked to my girlfriend, but it sounds like something isn't working as it should...

I'm getting the same error message on a D70. It's not the remaining shots, since I'm using an empty card, and when I put the camera in MF I can get as many pictures as I can. It's surely some kind of error message.

You already received some good advice, and I agree that the need should dictate the purchase but... If you get a good deal on a 80-200 you won't be dissapointed, you can't go wrong with it in terms of image quality.

Now, you ask if you *need* it. If you actually have to make that question, you already know the answer: no, you don't. An 80-200 will probably make you feel and look more like a pro, but won't turn you into one, so if that's the goal, just save the money and wait until you know what you want. Then go for it.

I jump rather late on this one, but I recently bought a D70, and am looking for a flash. Down here in argentina de SB-800 is outrageously expensive, and the Sigma is an option, but noone (including the salesmen, go figure) can't tell me if it will work under Commander Mode.

Will it? TIA

Amazing pictures. Machete, the man without an arm and the man with the "machete" is outstanding. Mogote is just perfect. Great shots. I like the way you approach people...

I agree with the advice given. I have a 75-300 that works great with my D70, giving me the field of view of aprox a 450. For birds and wildlife, I bought a used 400 f/3.5

Bat, believe it or not, for birds most of the time it's still short. Anyways, whatever your choice of lens, if you want to avoid blurred images, you need a tripod.