mike_halliwell

<p>BeBu, I like the thinking..:-)</p>

<p>I suspect if you fed a RAW version of John N's shot into something like DxO, it would remove the slight curvature distortion, the vignetting or darkened edges and de-distort the couple of people at the extreme edges. It can do it with a JPEG, but RAW's always better.</p> <p>As the OP is shooting outdoors, main light shouldn't be such a problem, but a suitable sized flash to fill-in harsh sun-shadows is more tricky, so positioning is crucial. Having somewhere helpful to arrange height variation makes a tiered set-up the best option.</p> <p>There was a similar post about 6 months ago, but I'm not sure the OP came back to show the results. </p> <p>Maybe Shun knows where it is?</p>

<p>BeBu, is that <em>'I</em>'<strong>d</strong><em> Get</em>' as in a preparation for a future purchase or '<em>I</em> <em>G</em><strong>o</strong><em>t</em>' as in a past purchase?<br> <br> I suppose it's one of these? <br> </p> <blockquote> <p><strong><em>D3, D4 and Df owners need not apply</em></strong>.....<br /></p> </blockquote> <p> <br> or of course any old film camera!</p>

<p>Back in stock at WEX for £375 ($600) and Amazon UK have 8 left for £426 ($681)</p> <p>Amazon US have 1 left for $496 (£310)</p>

<p>+1 Jerry. </p> <p>I can foresee a fashion item in the offing...</p> <p>'Ah yes, one of your finest caps with the new Flash-Notch please'...!</p> <p>'Of course Sir, is Sir left or right eyed and do you require the extra Beau Geste neck-protector?</p> <p>D3, D4 and Df owners need not apply.....:-)</p>

<p>To quote from the following review...<br> http://www.lenstip.com/333.5-Lens_review-Nikon_Nikkor_AF-S_85_mm_f_1.8G__Chromatic_and_spherical_aberration.html</p> <blockquote> <p>The longitudinal chromatic aberration was more often than not a serious problem in the Nikon “primes”, presented lately. Especially the 1.4/85G model broke disreputable records – its aberration level was huge and it didn’t disappear even after stopping down by 2 EV. The Nikkor AF-S 85 mm f/1.8G is doing better in this category but it doesn’t mean the situation is good. At the maximum relative aperture the longitudinal chromatic aberration is high and it remains rather pronounced even after stopping down by 1 EV. Only when you stop down by 2 EV you see that aberration reduced to a moderate level.</p> </blockquote> <p>The Nikon 105mm 2.8 macro and the Nikon 200mm f2 have negligible measured abhoration....the Sigma 85mm 1.4 is a bit naughty wide open but improves pretty quickly on stopping down.</p> <p>I think the ED makes the difference (as it's supposed to!) ....the 85mm DX macro is ED and shows very low abhoration. The 60mm AF-S Macro has ED elements but isn't so hot and suffers from both forms....maybe the exception proves the rule?</p> <p>The real-life example shows what the reviewers have measured....but, equally i'd like to see the same shot with the 85mm or 105mm macro from the same spot. Measurements don't always tell the full story!</p>

<p>I suspect the price difference between the 1.4 and the 1.8 was/is just too big (> x3!!)...and the 1.4 was also more expensive (x2) and some say not as good as the sigma.</p> <p>So roughly £669 Sigma 1.4 v Nikon 1.8 @ £375 v Nikon 1.4 @ £1180</p> <p>The result is a sell out of the Nikon 1.8 everywhere, poor availability of the Sigma 1.4 and a surplus of Nikon 1.4's.</p>

<p>Rick, by that pixel-count logic, Nikon only make 1 pro body, the D4S....Oh, and the retro-oddity the Df.</p> <p>Forget the 600 and 800 series....too many pixels.</p>

<p>Yup, just go put a D7100 sensor in the D300s body and they'd sell loads.... Simples!</p>

<blockquote> <p>Let's see, a VR 300/4 diffractive optics, maybe fluorite, at 3500€? Not many people would be happy to see such pricing.</p> </blockquote> <p>I suspect if they made a 400mm f4 VR Fluorite for £4250, they'd not sell very many f2.8s @ £10000...but they would sell many, many more f4's! It's the old 'numbers sold v profit margin' game.</p> <p>Anyone used Canon's 400mm f4 DO? It is a bit of an oddity and seems a Darwinian dead-end??</p> <p>LATE EDIT...</p> <blockquote> <p>If I want a 400 f/4, I'm just going to stick a 2xTC on my 200 f/2 </p> </blockquote> <p>Well yes, you could. Not sure that's a common option though..:-)</p> <p>I suppose the 200mm f2 and a 400mm f4 would have the same size front elephant?</p>

<p>I'd be interested to see side by side comparisons between the 300mm VRII on a D7100 and the new 400mm 2.8 on, say a D610, both at f4 in modest light. DX always crops off those soft edges and possible vignetting of FX lenses too!</p> <p>Slight FOV difference and I know lenses of this length live for action photography in dim light and speed is of the essence... but can it really be worth the huge asking price?</p> <p>I know for the World Cup, it will be mounted on D4S's which will gain another stop or two in noise control, but that becomes over £17.000 on your tripod head as opposed to £3000 for the consumer DX 300mm route.</p> <p>Maybe with Fluorite weight saving, they'll dust off the 300mm f2 design...:-)</p>

<p>Hey, Joseph....are you celebrating the 1 year anniversary of this post?</p>

<p>I once made a melted patch on a fleece jacket with my sb-800. I'd put it face-down, whilst at 90 deg, ready-to-fire light 'on', turned my back and it fired. Sadly it was on full power manual...:-(</p> <p>Reason it went off, well Oops, I was on slave trigger feature and fired the D300's pop-up inadvertently. I heard the 'pop' behind me, spun round and when I lifted the flash there was a small puff of steam and the surface had gone a bit bobbly. You could feel the melted fibres all crispy and they'd gone a bit darker. I'd only rested it on my fleece to protect the glass front!</p> <p>I <strong><em>really</em> </strong>don't advise it, but you too can 'Feel The Force' and see the steam if you fire it in contact with your jeans leg. I suspect this would very rapidly overheat the tube, but an accidental <strong>ONCE</strong> has seemingly had no ill effect on my 800 and that was about 4 years ago.</p>

<p>I don't think I'll go bother the bank manager about this lens..Unless sample variation made this review copy a real lemon.</p> <p>http://www.lenstip.com/397.11-Lens_review-Nikon_Nikkor_AF-S_58_mm_f_1.4G_Summary.html</p> <p>I rarely let reviews put me off actually going to play with a new lens at the camera shop, but in this case I'll stay at home. Not that I can afford it anyway, but I could have dreamt. For that money, this is a nightmare.</p>