pcassity

There was no rotation of the 750. The lens was mounted to the tripod. I simply shot the first image with the 810, removed the camera from the lens, attached the 750 and shot the next image. I insured that the lens and tripod never moved. It was a very cloudy day so I a sure that small variances in available sunlight could change the white balance. The differences in viewing is much more pronounced when viewing at 1:1. Also, I made sure that lens profile in Lightroom was not selected.

<p>Thanks Ellis. As Shun mentioned, the white balance really doesnt make that much difference to me as I shoot entirely in RAW and and do quite a bit of post editing anyway. I was more curious about the angle of view. Especially since I was using the same lens on each camera.</p>

<p>Thanks Shun. I added 4 images to the same album. These were shot with my 70-200mm.</p>

<p>http://flic.kr/s/aHskC9Lzeu</p> <p>Yes. Both images are raw files. Please copy and paste Flickr link above. (I have never been very good at this!)</p>

<p><img src="https://flic.kr/s/aHskC9Lzeu" alt="" />I use both of these cameras in my real estate photography business. Recently I have begun to use the 'flat' picture control setting and I have noticed subtle differences between the two once I start editing. So, this morning I decided to do a test. I mounted my 200-500mm Lens on a tripod and made sure all menu controls on both cameras were exactly the same. Also, I made sure that the white balance, aperture, shutter speed and ISO were identical. I also made sure that my focal point was the same in both image. It appears that the D810 has a bit more contrast. What I found peculiar though, was that at the Auto1 white balance setting, the D810 was a bit warmer than the D750. I also noticed that the 750 appeared to have a slightly 'wider' result. I have attached screenshots from both images in Lightroom. I have made no adjustments to either image. Why would one camera focus closer with the same lens and at the same focal length as the other? Why would there be such a significant difference in white balance. These two images were taken withing seconds of each other. Thanks for your input!</p>

<p>Just for reference, this was shot with a D810 and the 200-500 at 500mm. Distance of approximately 100' and 35' in height. edited and cropped in LR. <img src=" alt="" /></p><div></div>

<p>I have had (and sold) both the 60mm and 105mm Nikon Micro lens. Both were great. If I had it to do over again, I think I would have gone with the 200mm so that I wouldn't have to get so close to the subject. That's just me though.</p>

<p>I agree. I use the Vello remotes from B&H on my 810 and 750. When a pin (or wire) breaks you can just replace the wire. I bought 3 sets of wires for each remote. They all wear out pretty quickly with repeated use.</p>

<p>Actually, nothing has been rotated. Lens profile was applied on all of the raw files as they were imported into LR. Perspective correction was applied equally to all images after they were converted to HDR. I was actually looking for the difference between the RAW and SRAW image. Each album has one each. The first image is the RAW file (processed and converted to jpeg) the second image is the SRAW file. Sorry for the confusion. I should have clarified that to begin with.</p>

<p>I am a real estate photographer. The photos I produce for my business are downsized significantly for local MLS listings. I recently purchased a D810 as I was intrigued with the possibilities of saving editing time with the use of the smaller SRAW format. Most of my work is processed as an HDR image with Photomatix. Recently I have been experimenting with Lightroom's merge to HDR option. Today I decided to run a test to compare a RAW HDR image with a SRAW HDR image processed with Lightroom. I ran the same test with Photomatix and have come to the conclusion that Lightroom produces a much cleaner and sharper image. However, when comparing the SRAW image to the RAW, there appears to be some type of perspective difference. I can find no noticeable difference in the quality of the images. Can anyone explain this difference perspective difference? I am including the Flickr links to the photos.<br> <a href="https://flic.kr/s/aHskkUMmN2">https://flic.kr/s/aHskkUMmN2</a> - Lightroom Merge to HDR<br> <a href="https://flic.kr/s/aHskkUMa3D">https://flic.kr/s/aHskkUMa3D</a> - Photomatix</p>

<p>"Another issue was , when at home I uploaded the images. One of the images wasn't loaded properly. In the LR I've got "an unexpected end of file occurred".<br> I had this issue as well when I first purchased my 750. However, it has disappeared with LR6 and the newest LR updates.<br> <br /> </p>

<p>Have the 800 and bought the 750 with the 50mm f1.4 lens this weekend. Love the size! Wanted something smaller for traveling. Got really tired of lugging the 800 and the 24-70 while hiking. Love the 750's bracketing features too.</p>

<p>Hi Dave,<br> I would really be interested to see examples of (uncorrected) distortion from this lens. I do quite a bit of architectural work and recently replaced my Sigma 12-24 with the Nikon 18-35mm. Although the 18-35mm is much sharper, the Sigma 12-24 has much less distortion. I seldom need to go wider than 20mm so I am hoping this might be a less expensive alternative to springing for the Nikon 14-24.</p>

Thanks Jim. Will check it out tonight. Now that you mention it, I remember my D200 had the same problem. In fact, it got to the point that I could barely turn the rear dial.

The control dials on my 3 year old D3S are becoming stiff. Any suggestions on how to restore them to their original condition without sending the camera in for service?

<p>I second Kent's advice regarding the 24mm PC-E. It never leaves my D3S and I use it for 99% of all my work. For those times that I need a wider shot I use the 18-35mm on my D800. Its almost as sharp as the 14-24. However, it too has quite a bit of distortion. But now (from all the great advice I received on photo.net) I have been able to correct the distortion easily with a combination of DXO and LR.</p>

<p>Shun, You are right. Some of those issues I have learned to live with. What I really need is a 17mm T/S lens. Ill just keep dreaming.</p>

<p>The DXO Viewpoint Software took care of my problem. Thanks for everyone's help and input. Elliot, Thanks for the DXO tip!</p><div></div>

<p>Dan, Do you know which software recognizes the tag when shooting RAW?</p>

<p>Dan, thanks! But to be honest there really is no comparison of distortion from 24mm compared to 18mm. LR and, I am sure DXO as Elliot pointed out would have no problem at all correcting the minimal distortion at 24mm. Elliot, I have downloaded the trial version of DXO and am going to play with it as a stand alone and as a LR plugin. That could be a much less expensive remedy! Thanks!</p>

<p>Shun, I rarely shoot wider than 18mm. My experience has been that the distortion is much worse than your example. You are correct about the hardest part is keeping the camera level. This is a unedited recent example at 18mm with the same lens.</p><div></div>

<p>Patrick, I shoot quite a bit HDR. As a result there is a significant difference in the final sharpness in shots using the Sigma 12-24 and the Nikon PC-E. My final output is also for the web but I have found that the MLS service significantly compresses the uploads with what I suppose is their intent to save bandwidth. I have spent hours trying to insure that my photos are as sharp as possible before I upload to the MLS service so that whatever compression they use has a minimal effect. My workflow includes shooting in RAW and using LR to convert to TIFF before exporting to Photomatrix and exporting as a jpeg, in order to preserve the sharpness of the HDR image.</p>

<p>I am a real estate photographer. I am currently using the 24mm PC-E lens for about 90% of my work, mounted on a D3s. However, there are times when I need a wider angle lens for that remaining 10%. I started out using the Sigma 12-24mm f4.5-5.6 DG EX but I found it to be seriously lacking in the area of sharpness when used on a D800. I replaced it with Nikon's most recent 18-35mm. Its much sharper but it also has much more distortion than the Sigma. In fact, I have found that when shooting wider than 20mm I have to completely avoid verticals being on the edges of the frame. According to the DXO tests, the only lens that matches the Sigma in distortion control is the Nikon 14-24 (at .4) and the 17-35 (also .4). However, and again according to their tests the 17-35 is slightly better in sharpness (11) compared to the 12-24 Sigma (10). I attempt to correct the distortion in LR but find that very frustrating and not always completely accurate, especially knowing that it is not necessary with the Sigma. I trying to get the biggest bang for my buck. Has anyone use the 17-35 with a D800 and if so, what are your opinions in regards to sharpness? Is my only recourse the 14-24?</p>

<p>Thanks Ilkka. I does appear to be rotational play.</p>

<p>Phil, Is there play between the camera mount and the lens without using the RRS collar?</p>