roger_s

<p>Can actual users comment on the Lumix LX5 vs Canon S95, only in terms of focus speed and shutter lag, i.e. being able to press the button at the precise instant to capture the peak moment.<br>

Since I do photojournalism-style and street photography, these are two key aspects I am interested in.<br /><br />I do not want comments about image quality or any other feature, since those have been covered adequately in other posts and articles elsewhere on the internet.</p>

<p>Call me picky, but, on my D300, I really have come to rely on the two customizable right-thumb buttons of the rear panel, the AE-L/AF-L and the AF-ON button. I use one for locking exposure and the other for locking focus. That leaves the shutter button unambiguously for taking shots. And I can lift my finger off the shutter button with either losing the locked focus and/or exposure. It's just the way I like to shoot, personally. Hence, that's the reason why I would not upgrade from the D300 to the D7000. I'll wait for the D400.</p>

<p>Henri Cartier-Bresson explained his preference for Leica rangefinders because he felt these offered a more intimate interaction with the subjects he was photographing - the fact that he was viewing the actual subjects rather than peering through a semi-abstract darkened screen, plus the lack of mirror blackout at the actual instant of image capture.<br /><br />In other words, the structure of the camera affected the manner of seeing and interacting with the subjects.<br /><br />Now, for me, apart from a brief dalliance with M Leica's, I have always used Nikon SLRs and DSLRs for photojournalism and street photography.<br /><br />As Point & Shoot pocket cameras have developed, I've dreamed of a P&S that could focus as fast as a DSLR, and have as little shutter-lag as a … Leica, but never seriously considered them, apart for unimportant snapshots. (Even family photos are too important for these slow-focusing P&S's since kids expressions need fast focusing and reflex capturing of great expressions).<br /><br />Now, it seems, there appears to be a range of the latest cameras that could be fast enough in terms of focusing and shutter-lag that could be the modern equivalent of Henri Cartier-Bresson's Leicas for his generation of photojournalists and street photographers. (Well, maybe not the current crop, but the next or the next).<br /><br />I refer to the Lumix LX5/Leica D-Lux 5, and Canon S95. (The DPReview of the Nikon P7000 indicates it has slow focusing http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/q42010highendcompactgroup/page11.asp).<br /><br />However, most of these (apart from the Nikon P7000 and Canon G12) seem to omit a viewfinder (or charge extra for it, in the case of the Lumix/Leica).<br /><br />Therefore, my question in this post is, in the spirit of Cartier Bresson's above statement - how would using one of these LCD screen cameras affect the way a photojournalist/street photographer would interact with its subjects - as compared to a DSLR and rangefinder.<br /><br />I have never tried using a LCD-screen Point & Shoot for photojournalism and fast street photography because I do not yet own one of these modern generation pocket cameras. The pocket cams that I have focus too slowly and have to great a shutter lag to capture the decisive moment.<br /><br />I could imagine that these current LCD-Point & Shoots could provide an "intimacy" with the subject in the sense that, in peripheral vision, the photographer has an un-hindered view of the subject.<br /><br />Naturally, I would prefer these cameras to incorporate a viewfinder, but that doesn't seem to be the way manufacturers are geared up these days in terms of P&S's.<br /><br />I add that my preference for street photography is to shun anything longer than 35mm (or 28mm in DX/Half Frame). For me, street photography involves courage to get up close and personal, and the upper limit being Cartier-Bresson's 50mm normal lens (35mm DX). My favourite lens for this is the Nikon 12-24, used mostly in the range of 12-16mm.<br /><br /><br /></p>

<p>p/s when using the 12-24, I sometimes noticed that the distortion at the extreme 12mm sometimes yielded weird distortion, and I read other comments that indicated that other users experienced this too (I don't have an example handy). So I wonder if the 10-24 differs in terms of its performance at the widest extremes in terms of visual appearance of photos (i.e. as distinct from comments on barrel distortion, sharpness etc). I am more interested in comments on how the actual photos look like.</p>

<p>I own a 12-24 f4 Nikon, and am considering trading it in for a 10-24 Nikon.<br /><br />I have searched photo.net's archives, and am aware of and have read several archive threads that compare the 12-24 with the 10-24, hence, I am not after another general discussion on the merits of both.<br /><br />Rather, I am specifically wanting to get comments from people who have used BOTH lenses, and can give me feedback from actual use that can either persuade or dissuade me from replacing my 12-24 with the 10-24.<br /><br />Hence, I'd prefer if people who have not used BOTH lenses to refrain from adding comments to this post.</p>

<p>Shun, thanks for the details of your bird photography settings. These enabled me - without having had any prior experience in AF focusing of fast-moving objects - to get all my photos spot on in focus at the recent Duxford "Battle of Britain" Airshow here in the UK. See attached sample.<br>

Since I'm in the UK on holiday, and having to travel ultra-light, the only lens I'm carrying is a 16-85 VR, so the photos of Spitfires and Hurricanes had to be cropped from the center of the frame.<br>

Thanks for the tips, and everyone else's comments.</p><div></div>

<p>Question for Shun Cheung<br>

Hi Shun<br>

Can you summarise all the settings that you use for setting the D300 for bird-in-flight autofocus?<br>

I tried searching a few of your posts, and I gather that you use 21 AF points - and you've commented elsewhere on bird focusing. But can you summarise all the settings that need to be set, e.g. whether focus mode you use etc. and whether your current preferences have changed since any of those older posts, which date back to your first D300 review.<br>

Thanks<br>

Roger</p>

<p>Any comments about using active D-Light for sunrises and sunsets?</p>

<p>Joel, that's right. Alice Springs and Uluru. By the way, how do you go about picking the optimal aperture? For me, I roughly know the best aperture is around the middle of the range of the lens, but do you know a more precise way for a specific lens? I'm using the 12-24 Nikon, 16-85 Nikon and 18-200 Nikon.</p>

<p>I'm going to central Australia for a holiday taking my new D300 which I haven't had a lot of time to use.<br>

Can you experienced D300 users fast track me on this one?<br>

How good is the D300 at handling subtle colors like dusk and sunsets? Any tips on how to tweak the settings of the D300 to capture the subtle colors of sunrise and sunset, so that the colors aren't either washed out in the highlights or dumped into the shadows?</p>

<p>I've used SLR's and DSLR's while wearing spectacles with no problem.<br>

I'm contemplating getting rimless specs with seem more fragile. Does anyone have experience using SLR/DSLR while wearing rimless spectacles? Does it stress the rimless specs, even causing breakage?</p>

 

<p>Does anyone know of a photo-sharing website where the photos are presented with a look and feel of a fine art photography book.<br>

So far, all the other sites, such as flickr and picassa, and even our venerable photo.net display photos in a manner that looks like ... umm ... a webpage.<br>

In other words, the presentation of the photos has all the artistic flair of a computer geek.<br>

I'm looking for a website where the presentation of the photos would have the flavor of flipping through the pages of a fine art black and white photography book.<br>

Anyone know of such a site?</p>

I too have owned both the 50 mm 1.4 and 1.8

 

There's no correct answer. It depends on how much very low light work you do, such that the miniscule extra speed of the 1.4 is worth it for you.

 

In my case, I used the 50 for environmental portrait work and general photography. Low light work was not critical.

 

I started with the 1.8, and it produced brilliant results. I regret selling it for the 1.4 because the 1.4 was not as sharp or brilliant, and I rarely took advantage of the extra 1.4 speed. I found the 1.4 softer when it is wide open.

I've read it many times, that the D200, and now the D300, challenge a photographer's technique. Can

experienced-users of the D200 and D300 put into words, and expand, and explain just what that means, and why.

 

In what areas does it challenge a photographer?

 

What are the most common initial mistakes that a new D200/D300 user makes, until the challenge causes an improvement?

 

What improvements in personal technique are experienced by the photographer as a result of the challenge of using

these models?

 

Can a D200/D300 just keep using these models, being ignorant of the challenges inherent in these models, and

simply not rise to the challenge?

I had great hopes for 1.3.4. The reason is that I received a copy of NX with my recent D300 purchase. I downloaded 1.3.3 for Mac OSX Leopard, and got the error message. I thought 1.3.4 would solve the Leopard problems.

 

But I still get the error message "Information. Capture NX could not be found. This updated will now stop".

 

I have fully installed and registered version 1.3.0

 

Is there something I'm not doing? Do I have to installed earlier versions first, such as 1.3.1 etc?

In my subjective view, it seems that a sharper, more contrasty lens, also provides a sharper, more contrasty

image in the SLR/DSLR view finder. Do any of you agree with that? No one else seems to have mentioned that.

All I can is, with film, there did come a point where my technical needs were satisfied with a certain kit. I realised that, and for about a decade never felt the need for more gear. Sure. Maybe, famous last words. Perhaps a FX when it comes down in price to use my old Nikkor AI-S's, but that's probably it.

Steven, admittedly, I hadn't had the D300 all that long, but the D300 has a autofocus-mode where it uses the 51 sensors to decide where to focus. If reports are correct, the D300's ability to select the right focus means that I can compose, and the D300 takes care of the focusing. i.e. one step, rather than the focus-recompose two-step.

During the film era, I did eventually get to a point where I had amassed a kit that filled all my needs, and

thereafter I simply stopped buying more Nikon gear. For me, that enough's-enough kit was a 28mm, 35mm, 50mm,

105mm, 24-50mm, FE2, FM2 and F601.

 

Then digital came along, and I had to start from scratch.

 

I started with a D70, then D80, plus 18-200VR, 16-85VR and 12-24. I said, in a previous post, that I really felt

the D80 would be my resting place, but the focusing was too slow, and I could never reconcile the

focus-and-recompose routine, compared to the single step of compose and manually-focus on the ground glass that

could happen on the film SLR's.

 

With my new D300, I think: This is finally it.

 

No. I mean that. With film cameras, I did get to a point of having enough, and I think I'm there with the D300.

 

After all, we were saying that the D2X was producing images that were comparable to film, and if the D300 and D3

are even better than the D2X, isn't that really enough. Now we can get along and just make pictures.

Since this post started, another interesting lens to arrive on the scene is the 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6 VR. It has a

3.5 maximum aperture. If you want faster, you're going to have to spend much more for the 17-55mm f/2.8 or use

fixed focal-length prime lenses.

 

I bought the 16-85 because I like the wider angle.

 

For street photography, in my personal opinion, it's good to get in close, rather than hide from afar using a

telephoto -- which can be the gutless approach to street photography. If you scan the photos of magazines such as

TIME magazine, or National Geographic, ask yourself whether most of the people-photos, in the photojournalistic

style, use wideangles or long teles? Getting in close, in my view, gives the views of your photos a sense of

"being there" and can create more of a sense of intimacy or involvement with the subject. Whereas, street photos,

made with telephotos have a feel of a peeping-tom taken from afar. That's why I like the wider angled lenses.

 

I started off with the 12-24 for street photography, and I loved it. When using a 12-24 for street photography,

you take photos of people standing just a few meters away from them. I love street photos that are made that

close up.

 

However, I found the 12-24 to be too wide for those instances when I wanted to do portrait-style photos. Hence, I

thought the 16-85 was a good compromise -- it gave the wide-ish 16mm for up-close street photography, while the

85 was sufficient for portraits.

 

Some people argue that the 18-200 VR is a great walk-around lens. But for my style of shooting, where I like to

get in close, hence, the extra 16mm was what I preferred. Ken Rockwell argues that there's not much difference

between 16mm and 18mm, but, for me, the extra 16mm gives that extra wide-angle atmosphere that I love.

 

Your choice has to come down to personal preference for street photography. Do you like the wide-end, or do you

prefer the long tele's?

I cannot install Nikon Capture 1.3 on Mac Leopard 10.5.3.

 

If I buy Capture NX2, can I get an upgrade version, or do I need the full version.

 

I ask because, if the upgrade NX2 looks to find an installed version of NX 1.3, then it won't see it.

 

i.e. will it suffice for NX2 upgrade to merely type in the serial number that came with NX 1.3, even though I

could not install it on Leopard?

 

The NX version 1 was the copy that came with the D300.

Well, I downloaded Capture NX 1.3.3 from www.versiontracker.com. When installing, it gave this error message:

 

"Capture NX could not be found. This updater will now stop."

 

I assume this is the same error everyone else had a few months ago.

 

I'm using Leopard 10.5.3, and the latest version of NX 1.3.3.

 

So the problem was not fixed fully.

p/s having said that, the D70s viewfinder is really small, as others have said. (It drove me nuts). Hence, you might try getting a D80 second-hand on ebay rather than new. I can predict that, once the D80-replacement is announced, there will be quite a few second hand D80's on ebay.

My suggestion is totally based on your comment that you have "NO photography experience".

 

Therefore, I suggest getting a 18-200 VR zoom, and get a 2nd-hand D70s from eBay.

 

Here are my reasons:

 

As others have said, it takes time to ease into DSLR photography. Often, what people find is that, after an

initial period of learning, they outgrow their earlier simple DSLR and become ready for a more full-featured

model. This will probably be your experience too.

 

Therefore, knowing that your first DSLR purchase might only be for a year or two, why spend big bucks on a

current model. Get a 2nd-hand D70s -- which, in its day, was a great camera - and play around with a 2nd-hand

one. The original owner took the hit of depreciation, so you enter the world of DSLR's at minimal cost. Then,

when you're more experienced, you can re-sell that D70 as 3rd-hand on eBay, and you won't have lost that much.

 

By the time you're ready for your second DSLR, the current models will have been improved on vastly, and you'd be

ready to pay top-dollar for something you'd actually use immediately, rather than paying lots of money now for

features that you might not be ready to use for 1-2 years.

 

Don't get a D80 since it will be updated very soon, since the D80 is around 2 year old already.

 

Don't get a D300 since you won't use most of the features immediately, and it could freak out a beginner with "NO

experience

in photography".

 

Perhaps get a 18-200 because, in one lens, you get all the focal lengths you're ever likely to need. And,

moreover, as

a beginner, you're unlikely to justify two or more lenses for quite a while. Therefore, the 18-200 will serve

your needs for quite a while. (As an alternative to the 18-200, you might consider the 16-85 if you like

wideangles, and don't foresee needing very long telephoto shots).

 

So, my 2 cents worth are:

 

- buy a 2nd-hand D70s to gain experience, and then re-sell it on ebay in 1-2 years time, and get a better DSLR then.

- get a 18-200 or a 16-85 lens now, which you can keep using even when you upgrade your DSLR.

 

You say you have $3,000 to spend. Don't feel the need to spend it all now. Doing it in the above stages makes

more sense to me.

Now in late June 2008, what's the latest with Nikon Capture 1.3 and its ability or inability to work with Apple

Mac OSX Leopard 10.5?

 

I searched Photo.net's archives, but the discussions -- about it not working -- are a few months old.

 

I realise a new version of Capture NX has just been announced, but I need to know the status of 1.3 with Leopard

10.5.

 

Now that there's a new version of Capture NX, I hope Nikon will still get 1.3 to work with Leopard -- if it

hasn't already -- rather

than forcing us Leopard users to buy the new version.