mike_halliwell

<p>The 'continued' smear may or may not be due to impure solution. If you put a tiny drop straight from the little bottle onto a clean microscope slide and let it evaporate, does it leave a tide-line? If not, it's getting the gunk from the pad material or the sensor itself.</p> <p>I cleaned a friends D3 sensor and it took the whole pack of 5...mind you it was pretty grim to start with.</p> <p>I've still got a bottle of that amazing paint-on Opticlean liquid. It's fidlier to do a FX sensor because there's not much room down in the shutter box, but DX is a breeze. Paint on the entire sensor surface....wait 5 mins and then peel it off. It takes all the gunk with it. ....and I mean all. I usually managed to lift a corner with the tip of a soft plastic cocktail stick.</p> <p>It was designed for astronomical CCDs with a bit more free access than camera bodies, but works well enough.</p> <p>I think the company either went bust or stopped making it, because I haven't seen it for sale for a number of years.</p>

<p>Despite Bob being as efficient as always (I got the Nikon post) ...I'd personally go for the D5300.</p> <p>I had a D5100 and got kinda annoyed with its poor LV focusing in dim light....then I got a d5300 at a un-gettable price, and it's dark AF is so much better. Pixel power alone is huge, but if the chips are down, and flash is forbidden, high ISO does work...sure it's not pretty but you get the pic.</p>

<blockquote> <p>The lack of weather sealing is a deal breaker.<br> </p> </blockquote> <p>Tell you what, just give me your D800 'cos that isn't weather sealed either. <br> <br> See that aperture-tab follower slot? Does that look weather sealed to you? Ha Ha! Forget it...!</p>

<p>EDIT. Just in case of any misunderstanding, it's metric graph-paper marked in millimeters...:-)</p>

<p>Because of the interesting optical properties going on with macro shooting, it's a lot more common to move the camera back and for rather than actually rotate the lens barrel for critical focus once the ball-park range has been reached. It's easier to actually see the focus pop in and out.</p> <p>Luckily the subjects you've mentioned so far don't move which gives you the luxury of a good solid support to use such things as a focusing rail, it is your best friend...:-)</p> <p>WRT focal length for going beyond 1:1, the easiest (and cheapest) is extension tubes on a shortish macro. Tubes come in groups of 3 totalling 68mm, so added to the 60mm macro get you better than 2:1.</p> <p> </p><div></div>

<p>If, as Shun suggests, the D800/E is up for renewal imminently, unless you need one <strong><em>NOW</em></strong>, it's not the time to buy a D800. Period.</p> <p>The current D800 is undeniably a great camera and the newer one won't lessen that, just the price to pay!</p>

<p>What lens is it, on what body, and do you have a filter on the front?</p> <p>I think it's a reflection in/on the filter personally, it's not in line with the sensor matrix, so don't think it's electronic as such.</p>

<p>Well, both DxO (6MP for the Nikon, 8MP for the Sigma) and Lenstip have it numerically better...agreed not by that much.</p> <p>But that extra stop can be used for softer backgrounds or better ISO or a faster Shutter, etc..</p> <p>To get a lens fixed for the price of a more modern lens, that with a clever & cheap gizmo, can be corrected for such behaviour as the OPs lens is suffering from, and no Nikon lens/body can do, is a no brainer for me.</p> <p>You've only got to look at any AF Fine tune thread (of zoom lenses) to see the number of comments thus...</p> <p> "You can have one end good, the other end good or a good midpoint and hope for the best"</p> <p>Is that showing the best use of modern technology? I don't think so...nor do Sigma!</p>

<blockquote> <p>Most likely, major camera companies, including Nikon, will have a series of new products to announce in July, August, and early September.</p> </blockquote> <p>No kidding...:-)<br> </p> <blockquote> <p>There is a chance that the D800/D800E as well as the D7100 will be updated to newer versions </p> </blockquote> <p>Is that a prediction or a rumour?</p>

<p>I've gradually come to the conclusion my 16-85mm isn't as good as it might be. I pixel peep and it's not nice. Don't remember bashing it. Rather than spend money fixing something as tricky as differential front/back focusing, I'd replace it...</p> <p>..with a new C Sigma 17-70mm OS. Sharper all around, especially the edges. I'd loose a bit of wide and tele, but gain a stop. And it's very sharp wide open. </p> <p>It's also going for about 1.5x the price of that projected fix price...or on par for 2nd hand:-)</p>

<p>pic</p><div></div>

<p>Duplicate</p> <p> </p>

<p>I'd not noticed the D3S has been <em>ARCHIVED?</em><br> <em><br /></em>I guess you mean 4 on attached pic??</p> <p>The Right Arrow translates as.<em>. The Focus Point is Between and Subject.</em><br> <em> </em><br> I guess this is that setting that won't release the shutter unless focus is confirmed....Focus Priority, but taking it to the extreme!!<br> <em> </em><br> <em> </em></p>

<blockquote> <p>as the point of focus changes as the lens is zoomed out. From being too far in front at wide angle to a little behind at the telephoto end</p> </blockquote> <p>Are we talking AF front focusing at the wide end and AF back focusing at the long end? Err, is there a Goldilocks Point? Will it AF accurately anywhere?</p> <p>I imagine it <em>doesn't</em> do this on AF LV?</p>

<blockquote> <p>so I don't see how using a zoom could help answer this question</p> </blockquote> <p>The OP is into street photography, not that a lens barrel marking for 28mm might actually be 29.1mm at 2m and, shock horror, 26.4mm at infinity. Simply 28mm or 35mm? It's not copystand framing of perfect rectangles, it's the street they're shooting..:-)</p> <p>The markings on primes are not exactly guaranteed either!</p>

<blockquote> <p> "trap is in bad shape"</p> </blockquote> <p><strong>S</strong>trap maybe? Perhaps it's an old one put on in the shop.... DEMO kinda implies ex-shop/dealer.</p> <p>It's not a wonderful price, good but not a 'gift'.</p>

<p>The more (or less!!) helpful answer is borrow a 24-70mm zoom and have an actual look.</p> <p>35mm (on FX) will let you get personal from just that bit further away.</p> <p>I'd go get a Sigma 35mm 1.4 A and be done with asking....:-)</p>

<p>I think we might need to know whether you're DX or FX? </p> <p>The FOV difference is HUGE at the 'wide end' of things.</p>

<p>Nice Ant!</p> <p>What aperture and working distance is that Albin? The EXIF's all gone....not that aperture would show!</p> <p>OK, so what you're saying is that after aiming, and then shutting down the aperture, the VF goes black, and you think you're still pointing at the ant and nothing has moved <strong>at-all</strong> whilst only supported by your hands? ..........or is this the good one from 150 trials? Not that that's wrong, it's a <em><strong>major</strong></em> advantage of digital over film...:-)</p> <p>The link Sem listed admits 1 in 50 success. Quite a few of them are stacked as-well. Oddly some of those amazing pics show EXIF as being an 86mm lens? Weird or what?</p> <p>To quote myself... </p> <blockquote> <p>I'm not saying it can't be done<br> </p> </blockquote> <p>...but it's certainly not the easiest, most practical way to get to x4 ...and going back the OP's question (!), go get a Canon.</p>

<p>The Sigma USB Dock method of talking to and calibrating the lens's 'chip' seems to work well enough, but Nikon and Canon haven't followed on....yet.</p> <p>I guess all Nikon and Canon 'old' lenses would all need re-chipping, where-as Sigma makes new, innovative lenses for all sorts of lens mounts and incorporated the things from the get-go.</p>

<blockquote> <p>It remains a mystery to me why the fine tuning needs any user interaction</p> </blockquote> <p>Indeed! Seems odd that none of the DSLR makers, but especially Nikon or Canon, have gone into the AF self-calibrate route. It would seem simple enough to implement and be a good selling point.</p>

<p>I guess, take 5 frames in AF with zoomed-in LV, camera on tripod, contrasty target, self timer, mirror up, shutter delay etc... blah, blah</p> <p>Repeat with conventional AF...</p> <p>If the former 'set' are better than the later, send it back.....if you can't tell ANY difference, then the AF is performing to the MAX ability of the lens.</p> <p>As you can imagine, IF you could go to +25, it might be even better..:-)</p>

<p>Seriously, is <em>ANYONE</em> actually using reversed lenses, with or without bellows, hand-held, in the field with moving critters at greater than 2 to 1?</p> <p>Compose and focus at eg f2.8, shift aperture ring round with the other hand to f22/32 and take the shot, without you, or the bug, moving more than 0.5mm? Yeah, right. </p> <p>Sure, fixed on a sturdy tripod with a focusing rail and a dozy, cold bug on a windless day OK, but all by hand......unrealistic. The VF is black for a start!</p> <p>Has anyone actually looked through a macro lens focused at 1:1 set @ f32 and tried the DoF Preview button outside in normal daylight? Now whilst pressing the button in, move the camera towards or away from said crawling bug, see anything helpful? Are you still in focus? Who knows?</p> <p>....and you've only had to push a little button, not reach around the front of the lens and move a ring to an unknown place.</p> <p>Unless you happen to have a LOT of ambient light, like a mobile 500w spot, you're doomed.</p> <p>I'm not saying it can't be done, if you take 100 frames the odds are that a few will be good, but that isn't good technique, that's chimps typing Shakespeare.</p>

<p>How about the Dof @ f8 @ 4:1? Screens are flat but Eye-Balls are just that...spheres!</p> <p>High-mag macro focussing is always tricky....but doable....but focussing stopped down, even if you have the light, is impossible at the apertures needed to get anything like a decent DoF. That's why auto apertures were invented! Studio-based on copystands, fine.... hand-held in the field, not so much.</p> <p>What I'm not sure is possible is to hand-hold this set-up when you have to focus wide-open, then use your hand to find and then turn the A ring to the right place whilst Mr. Bug counts his many legs and moves off...or you move a fraction of an inch. It's the Aperture ring that would do me in!</p> <p>Is the focal length (for calculating DoF) of the lens when reversed on bellows, still the same? </p>

<p>RJ, what's the working distance on the screen grab? </p>