guts80

As I was falling asleep a couple days ago I suddenly felt a craving for a beauty

dish. Since my "studio equipment" only consist of hot shoe flash I set about

trying to find info on DIY beauty dishes. I came across this little tutorial: <a

href="http://www.diyphotography.net/studio-lighting-flash-mounted-homemade-diy-beauty-dish">[link]</a>

<p>

However I decided to make a few modifications to it. I used a much larger

secondary reflector and used metal wires (uncoiled from an old spiral notebook)

to suspend the primary reflector. The largest circular aluminum pan I could find

was an elliptical aluminum pan that was 1.5 feet on the major axis and 1 feet on

the minor axis. To secure the primary reflector onto the secondary, I punched

holes on the base of the secondary reflector threaded the wires through it, and

created little hooks on the end of the wire to hook onto the side frame of the

aluminum pan.

<p>

What's great about this setup is that it's VERY light so it can be attached onto

your hot shoe with a rubber band without any extra support. The flash (SB-800)

is also able to sufficiently balance the dish as seen in the picture.

Here's a picture of the final completed contraption: <a

href="http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/49893054/">DIY Beauty Dish</a>

<br>

The above link also has links to a sample/comparison picture and a 100% crop to

show catch lights.<div></div>

When it comes to portable lighting nothing beats hot shoe flashes; no cords no power packs, and best of all small and very light.

<p>

I've gotten pretty good results with my Nikon SB800, SB600 and SB-25 fired remotely on light stands with 30" umbrellas. A stand, umbrella and cheap used hot shoe flash (Nikons and Vivtars are popular choices) may cost a bit more than a continous flood light but I believe the benefits far out weight the slight increase in expense (not to mention you won't be restricted to wall sockets!)

<p>

Check out <a href="http://strobist.blogspot.com/">Strobist</a> for more information

 

I've attached an image which I've shoting using only hot shoe flashes and umbrellas<div></div>

The cavet with using the Kenko tubes is their plastic construction. When using heavier bodies (such as the F4,F5 or D1/D2 or even the F100 or D200 with grips) flex will occur. When shooting in the "dangerous shutter speed zone" (1/2 - 1/60) the extra vibration due to the flex will be problematic. Furthermore when stacking the tubes you can not mount a heavy lens such as the 80-200/F2.8D. The tubes can not maintain linkage properly due to the flexing.

 

I really wish nikon updated their tubes and add CPU contacts!!!

Are you saying the display gets fainter once get past 1/30th? If so you may have a faulty printed curcuit which will require replacing.

I agree with Chris.

 

I bought a bunch of Wein peanut slaves and they all failed on me after a while; not really the most reliable things. However when they work they're great (particuarly considering the price). I would test the synchs at a store before purchasing to make sure they are working.

 

If you bought the slaves reccently see if the store will refund or replace them.

Thanks for the link! That photoflex boom is precisely what I need.

Is there any contraption or method that can allow easy manipulation and angling

of expandable reflectors on an indepedent platform (ie light stand)?

 

I tired searching for it on photo.net but not sure what terms to use....I found

a lot of post containing the word reflector but nothing on how to hold them in

place. Any help would be appreciated.

Okay the image should display inline now....

Sorry forgot to attach the image

Combined with Nikon's CLS system I've got a fantastic portable on-location studio setup.

 

The attched image was shot with a single SB600 camera left w/ Phofoflex 30" silver umbrella at TTL+0.3 ISO 400, 1.6" @ F/5.6. On-hoteshoe SB800 acting as master. The power was probably at around 1/8 or 1/16.

 

However the issue with using hot shoe flash is the reduced power. Lights can not be placed too far from the subject. ISO 100 F/5.6 at full power with the umbrella is only about 7 feet max when outdoors.

The main advantage to using portable strobes is that you aren't limited by an AC outlet. I currently use an SB800 and SB600s as a mobile shooting kit. I don't recommend using softbox (unless you're lighting small objects) as they eat up far too much light. Reflective umbrellas and snoots are the most common light modifiers I use with these strobes.

 

As for the issue of consumable batteries, purchases some Ni-MH rechargeable batteries! Not only do they decrease recycle time, but are less environmentally damaging and in the long run, save you money,

As far as I know, the only difference between the BR2A and BR2 are clearance with AF contacts on the BR2A.

 

Nikon recommends (well...vehemently state) not using the BR2 on AF lens and bodies as it could damage the CPU contacts. The BR2A was created with AF lens and bodies in mind so thus will have clearance for the CPU contacts, making it safe for use on AF lens and bodies.

I think you should try using your on-camera as a master to slave the studio strobes. You don't acutally need to tape the flash. Just go to the menus and set the flash to M and select the lowest output value (1/128th if I recall correctly). Such a small flash at @ 1/128th will contribute an insignificant exposure to the shot. It's worth a try before spending money on a wireless system.

Just wanted to update everyone on my final decision.

 

Well today, taking advantage of the 4 day holiday, I went to my trusted store and got to handle all four the lenses I was considering! After much consideration and deliberation I finally went for the Nikon AF-S 28-70/F2.8

 

On the bright side at least I am lighter...in a sense.

 

Anyways for those considering between the sigma 24-70, tamron 28-75, and tokina 28-80, I highly recommend the tamron unless the extra 4mm on the wide end or 5-10mm extra on the telephoto range (which truth be told is essentially insignificant). The physical construction and movement of the rings is far better than either one. For the sigma, not only do the rings bind (the zoom ring in particular) but the touted push-pull AF-M is pretty much a gimmick. Switching between AF and M with this lens will require some taking used to. So in my humble opinion, you should either go for the Tokina and Tamron. Can't speak much about optical performance though.

 

Just thought everybody would like to know and once again, thank you for all your comments and advice. What a great community we have here

Well, there seems to be two camps: the Nikon die hards who believe OEM is the best, and those that think high end 3rd party are comparable at a lot more affordable price.

 

I did get to try out the 28-70 AFS that a friend of mine owned. Yes it is mechanically smoother and better constructed than the the Sigma or Tamron (haven't got the chance to physically handle the Tokina yet) BUT it is also significantly heavier. I do understand that (even for today's entry DSLR) the sensor will in most cases, out resolve the lens, thus the reasoning behind getting a mediocre body and a good lens than vice versa. That being said, I do believe the pro series lens from 3rd party companies are of comparable optical quality to their Nikon counterpart. The macros are a testament to this statement.

 

I'm not talking about a measly $100 here and there; we're talking about a significant chunk of money. Would the difference between a Nikon and 3rd party be significant enough to justify such a price delta? Nonetheless, we are entitled to our own opinion and for that I will not argue against who is right and who is wrong, for both have their merits.

 

I would have sprung for a D200 if it was on offer when I purchased the D2x, but alas it was not. Furthermore, the cost to benefit of selling my D2x now (particularly here in Hong Kong) is not worth it. That being said, I do not wish to enter yet another flame war. I would appreciate real life experiences with these lenses. For those that have responded as such, thank you.

I know posts of these kinds are plentiful in this form but I'm looking

for real life experience, especially those that have used these lenses

with a D2x.

 

After looking at the shocking price tag of the Nikon AF-S 28-70/F2.8 I

decided a 3rd party alternative would be more fitting for my budget.

 

After doing some preliminary research I came up with these three

options (prices for B&H)

 

Tamron

Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF)

Autofocus Lens

Price : $ 379.00

 

Sigma

Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto 28-70mm f/2.8 EX DG Autofocus Lens

Price : $ 329.00

*G lens ?? (I saw this lens that did have an aperture ring...)

 

Tokina

Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto 28-70mm f/2.8 ATX Pro-SV Autofocus Lens

Price: $249.95

*Non 'D' Lens ?

 

Although the lens will be mostly used on D2x, it would best if I could

also use with my F3HP (in which the sigma would not be viable).

However this is a minor point. In terms of priority: Contrast,

Sharpness, color rendition, aperture ring.

 

It seems like the Tokina has the best build quality and cheapest, but

it is the oldest design. My experience with the D2x is that it is VERY

demanding on lenses. Autofocus is a must, but doesn't have to be

exceptionally fast. I don't really want to get a DX lens (I may wind

up getting an AF film body) but if they provide better sharpness and

contrast at these focal lengths then I'll consider it.

 

Appreciate any feedback

So would this proccedure apply to the newer SC-28/29 cords too? From what I see of the 17/18 cord, the outer covering seems to made from a harder rubber such as those found on telephones, whilst the rubber on the newer cords are more, for a lack of better words, rubbery and softer and also have a matte finish.

 

If this observation is correct, would these difference affect how one should straighten the newer cords?

 

I think not, but better safe than sorry!

Thank you both Lex and Richard!

 

That was the exact posting I was refering to Richard. Thank you for helping me find it! I greatly appreciate it.

 

Thank you!

I was searching in particular for information on uncoiling the cord :/

 

If i recall correctly it invovled soaking the wires in fairly warm water for a period of time and then sretching them taunt. I would like to know the exact procedure before proceding as to not let 55 USD go to waste.

 

I tired google searching again to no avail...I really ought to have bookmarked that page!

A while back I remeber a post detailing how to uncoil the SC-17/28

flash synch cord to gain maximum distance with the cords. I think it

also included external links which showed how to shorten the cords too.

 

Can anybody provide the link for this post? I would highly appreciate it!

Just wondering for those shooting digital w/ the 85PC:

 

Do you sometimes wish you had a greater degree of tilt/shift since the 1.5x crop factor means one can tilt/shift more while still using maainting image quality (a majority of the image ciricle is still composed of the center)?

 

Also, does anyone know if nikon will modify the 85PC to accomdate greaer tilt/shift?....or possibly...a DX PC lens with greater tilt/shift!

Check your manual specification to see what the highest flash voltage it can safely handle (if you can't find it do a quick search on google).

 

From what I recall, I believe all modern Nikon DSLRs have a rated saftey voltage of 250V. In that case, the newer 283 SHOULD be useable without frying your camera. However to be on the safe side a wienz-safe synch is in order.

 

I'm just recalling this from memory so best to check with another source.

Do you believe in purple?

<p>

It turns out that purple isn't a real spectral color, mearly an illusion our mind creates.

<p>

<a href="http://www.davidberryart.com/articles/purple.html">Do You Believe in Purple?</a>

<p>

One of the reason why not only digital sensors, but also film have a hard time reproducing the 'color' purple.

As mentioned above, the multiple exposure feature can be found via the menus. It functions exactly like the multiple exposure function on a film camera. You can take multiple images on the same frame resulting in multiple images superimposed onto one image.

 

With film, this could come in handy in certain areas, but with DSLR it seems more of a gimmick as photoshop and layers is a much better option for super imposing images.

...and now natural light is the prefered light source...

<p>

<u>The evolution of medicine</u>

<br>

I have a headache...

<p>

2000 BC - Eat this root

<br>

1000 AD - That root is infected. Say this prayer.

<br>

1850 AD - That prayer is superstition. Drink this potion.

<br>

1940 AD - That potion is snake oil. Swallow this pill.

<br>

1985 AD - That pill is ineffective. Take this antibiotic.

<br>

2000 AD - That antibiotic is artificial. Eat this root.

<p>

Humans...lol.