5711

<p>browsing the internet, readin up on the history of nikon's tele lenses, i found this:</p> <p>http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/05/the-damage-waiver-bearly-covered-this-one</p> <p>:)</p> <p>some ppl in the comments recomment wrestling the grizzly over the d4.<br> i do not want to see those photos....</p>

<p>that shot of the boy is out of focus, as mentioned above, focus is not on the eye ->crop.<br /> for photos like this set the camera to continous af, not single shot af and keep the af on button pressed.<br /> stay on the eye, take 3-howmany shots you want, use low fps, one burst - avoid weird eye lid positioning by bursting</p> <p>also, on the right ear of the boy (left in photo) you can see motion blur.</p> <p>so<br /> out of focus and motion blur.<br /> your other photosare sharp you say, here is your awnser.<br /> sorry.</p> <p>what you could try the next time.<br /> breathe out<br /> relax<br /> take a photo</p> <p>just like shooting a gun.</p> <p>those photos happen.<br /> its annoying when it does.<br /> get over it and move on :;))<br /> happy shooting!<br /> cheers</p> <p>edit:<br /> one more unasked for-advice.<br /> do not cut off feet like this.</p>

<p>i did use tamron 90, canon 100/100L and some old nikon stuff.<br /> those are all excellent.</p> <p>i like the canon 100L the most till now, havent used the nikon 105 though.<br /> the vr is quite usefull on the canon (guess that goes for all of them)<br /> vr comes in handy when shooting hand held.<br /> the vr on the canon is excellent.<br /> like with any vr, you have to wait a bit and the shot get stabilzed. you will see this as the frame doesnt shake that much anymore.<br /> vr only helps you with static objects.<br /> <br />as soon anything moves (grass moved by wind ) vr wont help you anymore.<br /> however, it will allow you to use longer shutterspeeds and you might be able to follow the motion of your subject.</p> <p>it depends on what you are shooting but i find the 100mm range to be quite nice.<br /> however as i am searching for snakes in lakes of vienna, i know there are some, i am thinking something longer might be better ;)</p> <p>i guess you cannot go wrong with any of those.<br /> however from your choices listed above i would recomment the tamron.<br /> borrowed it from a friend and found it to be at least as good as the canon L.<br /> it doesnt extend when zooming and that is very important.<br /> i dont know if the tokina does it.</p> <p>however compared to the canon L the tamron is build from cheaper plastic and does feel a bit "cheap-ish".<br /> not an issue one should be overly concerned with.</p> <p>go for the Tamron SP 90/2.8 Di VC USD</p> <p>enjoy</p> <p>this is me using the 1dx, canon100l and mr 14ex during the dayjob (selfportrait).</p> <p>:))<br /> <img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/18027964-md.jpg" alt="" width="453" height="680" /></p> <p> </p>

<p>andrew garrad put all this very well together.<br> sound advice.</p> <p>the thin dof ...lenses shot wide open usually have a steep learning curve. easy to learn, hard to master.<br> you can get to a high number of keepers but into this goes a lot of training.<br> in my private time since 2010 i shoot at least 60% on 1.8 or 1.4 just to nail critical focus and even though i have<br> seen quite a lot of weird stuff over the years where autofocus fails..i still have quite some wrongly focused shots.<br> especially if it has to get really really suprisingly fast.<br> in adition to that i have to add that i use canon 1d series and nikon d3 series cameras.</p> <p>so<br> really.<br> ppl get those lenses because sometimes the prospect of those wonderfully smooth backgrounds with the isolated subject is so promising..all is good untill they realize that they cannot nail focus.<br> the funny thing is..i have seen this with professionals also.<br> people shooting portraits of girls and then give out the images in a small resolution because obviously the eyes are out of focus which to be honest in some cases only a photographer sees..ppl tend to over look stuff as they do not know what theyre looking at in the first place.</p> <p>in conclusion, you will have to give it some time to get used to a fixed focal length comming from zooms.<br> most of the times you use a fixed focal length because of its optical quality, the open aperture or the distincitve look it produces.<br> the only thing you will have to do besides beeing patient really..is to practice..simple as that.<br> nothing worth having comes easy, and good photographs are no exception to this rule.</p> <p>andrew put the thing with the prize in a way more positive way i did.</p> <p>however i think you planned this through and unless something unforseen happenes (as it did to me) you will not have to sell any lenses, body fluids or parts.</p> <p>quite a number of friends decided to get kids too, over the last 2 years or so.<br> lots of them bought cameras and lenses and stuff..none of them uses a fixed focal length lens.<br> if you do not know what you are getting into, buying a lens simply because you want to use it, maybe, is the wrong approach.</p> <p>know what you want to do with it, know how to use it (which you dont unless you take it out, quite often) and know if you can afford it.</p> <p>if you still feel like getting something, i also recommend the 35 1.8 dx, as written above also, it just gives you photos with more sense of place unless youre away far enough and then use a 50.</p> <p>but in between all those questions the only thing that stands out for me since ten years or so (when i bought my first prime):<br> i do not regret it and it was one of the best decisions i made concerning photography and it helped me to get to where i am now..the fast 50 and the ultra wide angle lens.</p> <p>if you have the money...put aside any doubts..buy it.<br> period</p>

<p><A HREF="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/images/images2500x2500/nikon_mb_d16_multi_power_battery_1082612.jpg"> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/images/images2500x2500/nikon_mb_d16_multi_power_battery_1082612.jpg</A></p> <p><A HREF= "https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQkW79rtG69Sshw00UipUlnRVmcd4k_mRKWyHJ8HRK93ksydDCt"> https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQkW79rtG69Sshw00UipUlnRVmcd4k_mRKWyHJ8HRK93ksydDCt </A><br /> yes it is.</p>

<p>the seinfeld joke is quite acurate :)</p>

<p>any advice on testing a lens in a shop, to find out if it is well centered.</p> <p>thank you</p>

<p>you are correct</p> <p>the smaller the f stop number, the thinner the dof..especially as on a tele this is magnified by the compression of a tele lens.</p> <p>so..lets say f 8 would have been "more sharp", as in more of the subject in focus.</p> <p>it seems to me however, that the photo is slightly blurry?<br /> or do i already need glasses.</p> <p>as the aperture number gets higher, smaller aperture, less light comes in and thereby you have to adjust the time of exposure to counter that.<br /> so as this shot is blurry already id recomment to crank up iso too, so your shutter speed stays the same.<br /> in addition i would suggest to use the same technique as when shooting a gun. breathe out...hold still..shoot.</p> <p>good luck</p> <p>edit..started writing this...went for coffee..now i am too late to the game. but youve already gotten all the info you asked for</p>

<p>a bit of a misunderstanding here.</p> <p>okay, you use that for weddings and this is your style of shooting.<br /> cool, got it.</p> <p>the sports thing...i was reffering to the three kilos in one hand and the flash in the other hand as sport.<br /> heavy lifting all day if you want :)<br /> i use this under very stressfull situations in between riot cops or metal concerts in the moshpit and i had been fine, so i guess your weddings are safe too ;)</p> <p>i totally get you when saying ajusting the head takes too long,..thats the reason why i use it off camera on a chord as i dont want to use remote control as it always runs out of battery when you dnt need it..i can rely on the chord<br /> bounce it off the wall, the ceiling..straight in the face..from the site..zoom it in or out adjust ev..all with one hand while the other one can shoot, pressing the surpress flash button all the time (custom setting).</p> <p>if set to master, your cls system will work also, su4 for that matter too.<br /> but this again is only for the static motives you were talking about, like families and stuff.</p> <p>i would hardly suggest to not open a flash but use it on a chord or remote.<br /> <br /> as far as i can see it, what you are doing really is a very specific style of shooting and you shouldn deviate from it.<br /> that brings me to the sb700..<br /> you said the head doesnt lock..that could be because something at or near the lock button-mechanism (lets call it that) has snapped out of position and wont hold it.<br /> if you still have waranty, send it in. sounds like somethings broken..or as you mentioned above open it up.because as it seems youve got some experience in that already.<br /> your call i suppose..<br> pete s. suggested a method..that seems really blunt to me, and ruins the good flash..but why not. wedding shooters got the money anyway :))</p> <p>good luck</p>

<p>a friend of mine got pregnant and i decided to take her job as a clinical photographer for one year...that was a bad decision as i feel my life is flying by and 12 hours a day are wasted, but i had to switch to mac and partly canon too.<br> however, i take macro shots all day.<br /> all day long...operations..blood...bone..screws...saws...you name it.<br> <br /> i use a 1dx and a 100 f2.8L macro with ring flash mr 14 ex</p> <p>i use autofocus.<br /> always</p> <p>prefocus<br /> autofocus on seletced point...reframe - shoot.</p> <p>ppl who say auto focus on macro lenses is useless, are useless.</p> <p>you will eventually end up doing mf only very very often..but to avoid af just because..is wrong.</p> <p> </p>

<p>i am not so sure if that actually is a good idea because i think the other flashes might have more friction in the joints as a nikon flash will have after disabeling the lock.<br /> <br /> might be wobbeling all over the place.<br /> <br /> i also find it a very interesting concept.<br /> <br /> what do you need the wobbling head for?<br /> <br /> the lock button on the sb800,900,910 are easy to operate.<br /> actually you only need one hand to operate the sb 910.<br /> so what do you use it for?<br /> im curious to know</p> <p>thanks in advance</p> <p>edit<br> if i need a flash to be mobile, i use an ettl chord.<br> as a d3 with a 14-24 is a heavy thing..this is more sports than photography but great results.<br> so i dodge the wobbly head because a d3 can be operated with one hand..</p> <p>how do you apply this system of yours..i am curious ;)</p>

<p>the most unique selling point of primes these days is the big aperture wide open.<br /> 1.8 or 1.4</p> <p>does produce some good looking photos,..</p> <p>on another site note..do never sell lenses, unless you have to pay for something and just dont have the money right now..like it happened to me in 2012. luckely one of the local camera stores likes me and kept my equipment untill i had bought it back in full.<br /> besides that, there are no other reasons to sell lenses, unless you switch entirely to full frame and need the money.</p> <p>dont<br /> sell<br /> lenses <br /> !!</p> <p>you will miss them!<br /> trust me!</p>

<p>you have a dx camera.<br /> that means you have to mulitply the focal length by 1.5 to get to the fx length.<br /> a 50 1.4g is an fx lens.<br /> on your camera 50mm would be 75mm.<br /> <br />35mm would be 52.5 mm.</p> <p>when ernst leitz invented the leica in 1914, or something around that time, to use it to expose stripes of film to check exposure for filming, he was using something around 45-50mm as a standard as far as ican remember.<br /> that is the reason why the 50mm (on full frame) is called standard from time to time.<br /> <br />the focal length just feels right, it has this feeling you basically get when closing one eye and then focus real hard on something.<br /> it is said 50mm is pretty much what you see with your eyes, but that isnt true, really.<br /> but somehow this focal length gets across that feeling really well.</p> <p>it is very versitile and allows you to capture landscape, portraits, action, architecture, whatever there is, rly.</p> <p>a prime lens will make you think about your composition more activly as you are restricted by not beeing able to zoom.<br /> see, you will have to walk in order to zoom and you probably will think twice before heading off in the wrong direction.</p> <p>also it forces you to work with what is in your frame.</p> <p>so your friend might have learned that and that is the reason why she suggested you to get a prime.</p> <p>the 50 1.4 g is the expensive model of the almost not really worse, 50 1.8g<br />as far as colourfgringing, softness, resolution and price are concerned, the 50 1.8g is actually the better deal.</p> <p>however, on your camera you will have to buy a 35 to get to that 50 we are talking about here.</p> <p>i would also recomment the sigma 35 1.4 something.<br /> does take good photos, although it is heavier.</p> <p>the larger the aperture, the more glass, the heavier thelens will be.</p> <p>check out your options. maybe rent them.<br /> as far as i am concerned, do not sell your lenses, get a fast 35 prime in addition and use it as often as you can.<br /> i would not recomment a 50 on dx, as it is quite along focal length and not so easy to use in everyday situation, especially as a beginner.<br> but then again this las statement really depends on your style of shooting, wether or not it is worth conserding.</p> <p>i want to get wide, as wide as possible but be as close as possible, if i don't...i take the 50 (35 on dx).<br> it gets me close, but allows me to show a bit of scenery, giving the photo more than just a face, as it would be with 75.</p> <p>very dependend on the style you shoot.</p> <p>go to a store, test a 35 and a 50.</p> <p>if you want the 50<br />, get the 50 1.8g, half the price, almost as good.<br> as good as the 50 1.4 in very geeky terms, that i wont go into, unless you want me to :)</p> <p>best of luck, enjoy photography</p> <p>cheers</p> <p> </p>

<p>i haven't been shooting for almost 10 days.<br /> my left foot up to my knee was a swollen blobb.<br /> i posted this once before, but here is why:</p> <p><img src="http://36.media.tumblr.com/fe5cd02c58756017cd304e3f69b2a785/tumblr_n9sywc5GjP1tipmvdo1_1280.jpg" alt="" width="1280" height="852" /></p> <p>nikon d3, pk13, micro 55mm 3.5 @f11,sb 910, ettl chord, iso 2000</p>

<p>: ))<br> alright. i see.</p> <p>just in case i get the chance to test it, i will post some images.<br> i will then zoom to 15 also, 17 is not going to stop me this time!</p>

<p>i made a seperate post to discuss the tamron 15-35</p>

<p>just solved the filter issue.<br /> <a href="http://lucroit.com/SHOP/">http://lucroit.com/SHOP/</a> has some</p> <p>perfect..</p> <p>so who owns this lens and can tell us something about it.</p> <p>thanks in advance!</p>

<p>Howdy!</p> <p>As i had a somewhat profound hatred for my Nikon 16-35's F4 setting my subconcious must have figured it<br> would be best to let me have it destroyed.<br> So after losing my 14-24 to riot cops ealier this year i now had my 16-35 go to a happy place too.</p> <p>As i was thinking about going for the 14-24 again i found out that Tamron released the 15-30<br> some months ago which for whatever reason has not reached me till now...i just forgot about a video i saw by that nikon guy on youtube when killing time at a boring job; i had a lens at that time.</p> <p>The test i found to be most promising is this one here:<br> http://www.dpreview.com/articles/4651324149/tamron-15-30-f2-8-vs-nikon-14-24-f2-8-shootout</p> <p>A lot of different people say different stuff about this lens and as this forum has a huge amount of over the top crazy, erm..interested, sophisticated and curious, i mean ofc, geeks in it :))) , i was wondering if anyone of you guys has a tamron 15-30 and can compare it to the nikkor 14-24.</p> <p>This focal range is probably my most used one, probably overused, and i really want to make sure if<br> the tamron is what people say it is..better than the 14-24 ! (how is this even possible? :) )</p> <p>I cannot rent the lens..atleast not till now, so i am very very curious to find out more about it and get your oppinion on it!<br> What i could not manage to find actually is a filter adapter.<br> I found one from a company i haven't heared about till right about ..now..and i naturally do not trust them.</p> <p>In addition to all that i have to mention that i never really used 14mm a lot.<br> For whatever reason my most used wideangle setting is 17mm ... so 14 is not something i "must" have, but is<br> nice to have...14,15,16..idc too much, really.</p> <p>Any information, shared experiences and such are highly appreciated.<br> Thanks in advance!</p> <p>cheers</p>

<p>spent some time reading and searching stuff.<br> http://www.dpreview.com/articles/4651324149/tamron-15-30-f2-8-vs-nikon-14-24-f2-8-shootout</p> <p>opinions please.<br> do you know any other tests?<br> thanks</p>

<p>i have shot with 17-35,16-35 and 14-24 on a d3 and a d3x.</p> <p>17-35 on a d3 is fine, on the d3x not so much.<br /> 16-35 on a d3 is really good, on the d3x it is good.<br /> the 14-24 is outstanding..</p> <p>i would not recomment the 17-35 as it does not have weather protection although<br /> it has outstanding center performance.<br /> i found the corners to be not so good on the d3x.</p> <p>the 16-35 is a bit soft in corners but for that you want a tilt shift anways.<br /> softness can be seen on a d3 also..i found it to be a big improvement over what i had, but i wasnt too pleased with it..<br> when shot at around f5 or f5.6 up to f8 it is amazingly good. <br> architecture was...well..quite okay id say.<br> i wasn't too happy with it to be honest..</p> <p>do you have 77mm filters?<br /> go for the 16-35</p> <p>want to invest, get the 14-24 and buy filters. you will not regret that.<br> expensive, but great.</p> <p>the vr on the 16-35 is great, btw</p> <p>tamron or tokina just recently released a ..idk..15-30? anyone got some experience with that one?</p>

<p>dark trees, swampy water, white grey bird, after sunset, blue hour.</p> <p>i am not talking sun.<br /> my setting was forced by light.<br /> period.<br /> if you have to go to iso 2.5k to get 1/100@-2.3EV @ f2.8 @ 400mm what do you do.<br /> animal stands still and barley moves...and yes..it is dark in between dark trees and there is a white bird.<br /> expose for the bright parts, lose all the detail there is to the dark ones...well..go somewhere in between and go for -2.3 EV instead of -4, which would have been good rendering of the white feathers, as the historgam suggested.</p> <p>i do know what i am doing...<br /> and i do know about the sunny 16 rule, too</p> <p>i do not like to shoot full out sun because usually it just does render stuff deifferently and therefore does not look<br /> good enough...i am looking for moody stuff. of course i do shoot fullout sun..i shoot everything..<br> <br /> quality of light..blablabla whatever.</p> <p>in any case...with the 300 f3 pf df whatever thingy the vr probably would have f-ed up the imaged.<br /> awesome.</p> <p>considering a 70-200 instead would be my advice.get a 1.4 and images will be better.<br /> almost<br /> ..sharper</p> <p> </p>

<p>firmware.<br /> it got better, alright.<br /> with all that in consonsideration.</p> <p>yesterday i was out taking photos of a grey heron at dusk.<br /> let me check my stats.<br /> iso 2.5k, f2.8, 1/100, -2.3 EV.<br /> switching to f4 would give me 1/60<br /> <br />half an hour before that i am at 1/160..<br /> so basically for one hour a day you are in the sweet spot of this lens. ha ha ha.</p> <p>considering the entire package would mean to me, as it is now, this lens is not a worth consideration...at all!<br /> sorry..</p> <p>a used 200-400, which might have its issues too and comming at a higher price and weight is a different topic,it however still seems to be a better choice overall. at least to me.</p> <p>and no, i am not saying what lens it was as it is not mine and i now got reallllly long teeth...really...jeez.</p>

<p>lightning trigger.<br> the d700 has a shutter delay of 45ms, that right?<br> with light traveling at 300 000km/s i am going to try this. and say you got the same delay as you normaly would have.<br> 45ms.</p> <p>because light.<br> thank you.</p> <p>lightning trigger.</p> <p>someone test it already :D</p>

<p>as you are using studio flashes, you could try lightning triggers.<br /> i haven't actually tried this myself, but i guess this could work and there will be no delay or whatsoever.<br> it'S a wild guess, might work though</p> <p>http://store.lightningtrigger.com/<br /> http://www.aeophoto.com/</p> <p>maybe this too:<br /> http://miops.com/</p> <p> </p>

<p>thank you for this.</p> <p>does not look good, at all...</p>