nigel_farmer

I recommend a UK company called Lens master, in very pleased with my gimbal - http://www.lensmaster.co.uk/index.htm

<p>At some point I may move up to full fame from my D7100, but now. But I do keep an eye on prices. I noticed in this weeks Amateur Photography magazine, price on some Nikon kit had gone up considerably in price at some of the reputable online dealers here.. Scanning adverts from this and last weeks issues, I see the price of a D7200 has gone up from £799 to £869, a D610 has gone up from £999 to £1299, a D750 from £1389 to £1699 and a D5 from£5199 to £5499.<br> Normally these sorts of price rises, 30% in the case of a D610, generates some noise on the web but I haven't come across anything. Anyone got any insight?</p>

<p>Personally I think a smaller camera is better for street photography. I have a D7100 but my street camera is a Fuji x100s. It has a fixed 35mm equivalent lens which takes wonderful pictures and is a joy to use and very discreet. The retro styling makes a lot of people think its a film camera. There are also wide angle and tele-converters which give you 28mm and 50mm equivalent respectively - 3 fixed focal lengths in a very small camera.</p>

<p>Thanks for the responses. The visible impact damage was only to the rear lens cap and not to the lens itself. It appears to functioning well but I will test it more at the weekend. If it seems ok,then as Shun suggests I'm likely to leave as is rather than service for any potential damage from the salt water, as I dont think the cost will be worth it.</p>

<p>The ML-L3 is a good option to use for a remote as you get access to it mode via the i button on the D7100, one of which is "Remote Mirror-Up". Im not sure if the D7000 has the i button though. Third party ML-L3's are a fraction of the price of Nikon ones.<br> One other thing to consider is VR, which should be switched off when using a tripod. I make this mistake frequently.</p>

<p>I'm usually very careful with my equipment, but I just came back from a fantastic trip to the Outer Hebrides, where my Nikon 16-85mm lens seemed to have a death wish. First of all a large wave took me by suprise and as I tried to move quickly, it fell out of my camera bag and into the sea. It didn't get submerged completely but did get quite wet. After drying it as best I could I drove about 20 miles to the nearest shop to buy some rice and sealed it in bag overnight to remove any moisture. The following day it seemed fine and AF and VR seemed to work ok, though Im not really sure how you can verify if the VR is working correctly or not, other than to listen for the noise. A couple of days later it fell out of my bag again and fell about 3 feet onto some rocks. As it happened it seemed to land flat on it side but there are impact marks on the edges of the rear lens cap,so that seems to have taken some of the impact. Again at first glance it seems to be OK and AF seems to be working. <br> I count myself lucky especially considering what else was in the bag, but was wondering how I can test that all is working as should be, or is that only possible with a service?</p>

<p>If more range is the main aim, I would consider keeping the 18-55mm for now at least and getting a wide angle and a longer tele, selling the 55-200mm. The Tokina 11-16mm has a lot of fans, but you may consider its range a little restrictive. A better bet might be the Sigma 10-20mm and you may be able to get a good deal on the older version (the newer version is f3.5 the older is f4.0-5.6). For tele, I would consider the 70-300mm VR which is an FX lens and is very good on DX.<br> At new prices those two will come just a little over budget (based on the newer sigma 10-20). If you can get the older Sigma or buy used, then you may have a little left over to get 50mm f1.8 which could be a useful addition.</p>

<p>His problem might of been that he had a fuji XT-1 with an Oly lens :-)</p>

<p>I meant to say the lenses were similar weights, I didn't look at sizes, but I believe you are right and they are probably smaller.</p>

<p>I agree with Shun - its the format that makes the difference, not whether or not the camera has a mirror. I did quick comparison of some nikon DX v Fuji lenses since they both share the same sensor size, and fuji is the system other than Nikon that I know the most about, since I have a fuji x100s and have been considering switching from a nikon D7100 to the XT1.<br> There is not actually that many lenses that you can compare easily, mostly due to a lack of DX lenses from Nikon, but are a few near enough like for likes<br> Fuji - 10-24mm f4 - £709, 410g<br> Nikon 10-24mm f3.5-4.5 DX - £639, 460g or Nikon 12-24mm f4 DX £839, 490g<br> Sigma 10-20 f3.5 (for nikon DX) - £384, 465g</p> <p>fuji 16-55mm f2.8 - £753, 655g<br> Nikon 17-55mm f2.8 DX - £979, 755g<br> Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 (for Nikon DX) - £309, 595g</p> <p>fuji 18-135mm f3.5-5.6 - £579, 490g<br> Nikon 18-140mm f3.5-5.6 DX - £429, 490g</p> <p>With the exception of the Nikon 17-55mm which is quite old now and which I'm sure Nikon could make lighter if they ever bother to make a new version, the weights are pretty similar. I included the two sigma's primarily to highlight that fuji does not have the benefit of many third party lens options and as such the lens line up appears expensive. Fuji should take a lot of credit for building up a system of lenses very quickly including various primes, whilst Nikon still have to complete the line up, which I presume they would have done by now if they were going to. On the other hand you can take advantage of the FX lens set, which is particularly useful at the telephoto end which is where fuji are missing at the moment. Credit should also go to fuji for publishing and regularly updating a lens roadmap - I wish Nikon would do this.<br> Comparing the XT-1 to the D7200, and the price in the UK identical at £849, whilst the XT1 is 225g lighter and quite a bit smaller thanks to the absence of the mirror.<br> I perhaps could have come up with more lenses to compare (i have better things to do with my time), but it showed me at least that the majority of the weight gain is in the camera. You may have to carry a few more spare batteries for the XT-1, but you would have to have about 12 to make up the weight difference and that would seem to be extreme.<br> When it comes to switching to mirrorless, there are benefits that have been discussed in this thread, but when it comes to comparable formats, I think that two important questions, at least for Nikon are<br> 1)why would a Nikon FX user move to fuji instead of to DX<br> 2)why would a Nikon DX user switch to fuji<br> For 1) we have established that the fuji body is lighter and smaller, but lenese are a similar size. But fuji (exluding telephoto end for now) has a large range of lenses, whereas Nikons range of DX lenses is poor and you have to substitute with bigger, heavier and perhaps more expensive lenses.<br> For 2) I am one person who has considered it - I have an X100s which I love. The handling is fantastic, the dual EVF is great and has massively improved my ability to see in b&w. But above all, its the image quality which is stunning, with much lower noise at higher ISO's than my D7100. However its a big expense to sell all of my 8 Nikon lenses and switch to fuji. Equally its a big expense to switch to Nikon FX which is my other consideration - I have less lenses to replace (sigma 10-20mm, 35mm, 16-85mm, the others are FF) but to more expensive equivalents, but also to a much more expensive camera. I'm kind of stuck where I am for the time being, but will no-doubt reconsider my options when the D7300 comes out or the legendary and mythical D400 :-)</p>

<p>I have been patiently waiting for the replacement to the 16-85mm for some time,as im not particularly happy with my copy.Its now finally here, but I can't see me buying it any time soon. Its looks a good upgrade, but its double the price - The (uk) price of the 16-85 is £429 and the 16-80mm launch price is £869. Compared to the old model and the ff 24-120 (£749) and ff 24085 (£549) it seems very expensive. Perhaps pricing dx lenses high is the new strategy for moving people to full frame - "I AM Out of your price range".</p>

<p>What sort of horse show? I have shot three day eventing where you can get fairly close to the horses particularly during the cross country and have used a variety of lenses on DX including 35mm, 16-85mm, 10-20mm, 70-300mm and 70-200mm. your 50-200mm fits in this range too.<br> I have shot 2 or 3 such events with a D7100 and the autofocus is great with a high percentange of shots in focus. The events I have photographed have been outdoors in good light. Indoors would probably require different kit with faster lenses, but then Im just an amateur so probably would not go to such an event.</p>

<p>I'm in the UK and I got my Sigma 150-600mm Contemporary 2 days ago. I put myself down on the waiting list about 2 months ago hoping to get it in time for a rapter workshop a couple of weeks ago but it wasn't to be(I hired a Nikon 8-400 instead). The guy in the shop said it was the first Nikon fit he had seen, so I'm guessing supply is very short I must be one of the first to get it. <br> My first impressions are good. Beforehand I was a bit worried about the weight as its almost twice the weight of my previous heaviest lens (70-200mm f4)., but its quite hand hold-able.The build quality seems very good for this price point, it comes with a nice enough back and a separate strap to attach to the tripod collar foot. I Haven't tested the OS/VR thoroughly but initial thoughts are positive and it seems quieter than the VR on my nikon lenses. Focus is pretty fast and and even in poor-ish light inside the shop when I tried it out I was impressed at how well it was focusing.<br> The shot below was taken in my back garden with my Nikon D7100 on a tripod - ISO 400, 600mm, f6.3, 1/200th of second. I have done very minimal changes to the exposure, noise and sharpening in LR. <br> <img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/18038823-md.jpg" alt="" width="680" height="453" /></p>

<p>I have had a x100s with the wide angle converter and the tele-converter for just over a year. Its a wonderful camera, that has tempted my quite a bit to sell all my nikon gear and switch to an XT-1, but I cannot really justify the switch.<br> I have used the x100s primarily for street photography and it is great for this. Small and quiet, it does not attract attention, apart from the odd person who thinks its a Leica. The hybrid viewfinder is great and has really helped me be able to see in black and white. It also takes wonderful pictures.<br> The only negative is the battery level, which goes from full to empty very suddenly. A spare battery is a must.<br> For the last year and I bit I have been doing a personal project to photograph every street in the city of London. The x100s has been used for about 98% of the shots. If interested you can take a look <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/baltibob/sets/72157643570975674">here </a></p>

<p>I have had an Epson R2000 printer for a few years, which has had feeding problems and has gradually been getting worse. I first noticed it with 6*4 inch paper, but did very little printing on this size so wasnt too bothered. Recently it has started getting much worse with A4 and A3 paper also. Its not feeding paper very often and spits out or damages the edges of the paper and simply feeds the paper through without printing.<br /> According to the manual the remedy should be to use cleaning sheets. However I cannot find these anywhere, not even on Epson's uk website. I can find what could be them <a href="http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B0000ACCR4/ref=s9_simh_gw_p229_d0_i1?pf_rd_m=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE&pf_rd_s=center-2&pf_rd_r=0ZAPSCFMZDVR07SBS088&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=455344027&pf_rd_i=468294">amazon</a>, but it is japanese import and their is no description and the writing on the packet is not in english so I cannot be sure. Can anyone confirm?<br /> In the meantime I have cleaned as carefully as I can the printer not touching the feed roller and have (perhaps not recommened) hoovered the print feed area with the hoover on a low setting, to pick up as much dust as possible. This does seem to have made a big difference but A4 paper is still getting damaged ever so slightly whilst 6*4 paper still gets spat out.<br /> I have also seen this a <a href="http://www.redrivercatalog.com/infocenter/tips/how-to-clean-and-maintain-your-inkjet-printer.html">web page</a> which suggests using alcohol and pads to clean the rollers.<br /> Would this be recommended or not?<br /> Thanks in advance</p>

<p>Thanks for the responses. I have got them reasonably matched and have profiled the monitors seperatley in the manner described in my original post. Spyder 3 Experss does seem to be loading the profiles for two monitors - it pops up a dialog on each monitor with the name of the profile loaded. Ideally I would have two of the same monitors and perhaps a better calibration tool, but I will be using them as Howards suggest ie only one monitor (the new 24") for critical colour work. For now things seem ok, but I havent tried printing yet, so that will be the real test.</p>

<p>I have searched, but apologies if this has been asked before. I have had a dell 19" 1908FP monitor for some time, which I have calibrated with Spyder Express 3, and have been happy with the prints from my Epson R2000. I have now bought a dell 24" U2415 monitor, and now have a two monitor setup.<br> Spyder 3 Express does not support dual monitors, but I found a way around it, by calibrating one monitor, copying the profile, calibrating the second monitor and then manually setting the profiles (http://robertrath.com/gadgetzone/archives/19-Using-the-Spyder-Express-On-Multiple-Monitors.html).<br> The new 24" monitor will be my main editing screen, but I will make use of both monitors in lightroom. I want both monitors to look similar but at the moment the new 24" one is quite a bit brighter. Should I reset both monitors, and set to use the default profiles, then adjust brightness to match, before re-calibrating both monitors? Or is there a better/different way?</p>

<p>What if the canon lens robots are not made in Japan, but the Nikon lens robots are made in Japan :-)</p>

<p>Inspired by the novel "Bleeding London", the (uk) Royal Photographic Society is running a project to try and photograph every street in Greater London. I have my own project within this, to photograph every street in the City of London or "Square Mile" of which there are at least 400. Its a bit of a challenge but fascinating too and I am seeing a lot more of the city than I otherwise would,and am learning a lot too. I am doing a presentation at my local camera club in January, so need to complete the project by the end of the year. Anyone interested can check out my progress at http://bleedinglondoncity.blogspot.co.uk/</p>

<p>Ilkka - I love my D7100 and it is a big improvement over the D90 which i had before. IMO the x100s has the edge in image quality. I don't think there is much in it, but noise is less with the x100s, perhaps as a result of 16MP v 24MP on the D7100 - below ISO 800 I rarely bother with noise reduction from with images from the x100s. Straight out the camera, the images from the x100s are lovely; there is just something about that sensor. Of course the x100s is a completely different camera to the D7100 and doesnt compete against it, nor can it in some areas eg AF. I use my x100s mostly for street photography, but it has also become my family outing camera (along with the wide angle converter) , whereas before I would take the D7100 with 2-3 lenses. Where i need telephoto, super wide angle, zoom, macro or sport/action then I will use the D7100.<br> From fuji, the D7100 is more likely to compete against the X-Pro 1 or the XT-1. I don't know much about these, but maximum credit to Fuji for developing their range of (so I hear very good) lenses, so quickly. They didn't have any FF lenses to fall back, and they still have some gaps, particularly at the telephoto end, but take a look at how they have supported the system - prime lenses at 14/18/23/27/35/56/60 (micro) mm. That's 7 prime lenses compared to Nikon's 4 DX primes, and four of them are wider than 35mm compared to Nikon's 1 which is a fisheye! How long have people been screaming for wide angle DX prime lenses from Nikon?<br> i have never got on with live view even with macro, but one thing I love about having an EVF is the ability to see the shot as it would be exposed live, and see it change as I adjust exposure compensation, without taking my eye away from the viewfinder. You can't do that with a mirror.</p>

<p>Lex - You should take a look at the fuji x100s, which with the wide angle conversion lens will give you 28mm and 35mm fov (in 35mm terms). Its a fantastic camera, a pleasure to use and the image quality is superb. It has both OVF and EVF, both of which are very good. i have a D7100, so am on the latest generation of APS-C nikon camera, and I would say in noise terms the x100s is at least a stop better. If I didn't have quite so much invested in Nikon glass I would seriously consider the XT-1.</p>

<p>Hi, I have had my d7100 since the end of march. I don't know right this minute how many actuations, but on checking the battery level this morning, the battery age was showing as 2. I probably am shooting more than with my previous d90 but after 3 1/4 years its two batteries still had a battery age of 0. A battery age of 2 after five months is a bit concerning. Could it be the battery or the camera - obviously I would rather send the battery back for a replacement.<br> Thanks in advance.</p>