dave_osborne

OK thanks guys... the mists of confusion are lifting and I'm thinking I'll get by just fine with a D200 once I buy a bigger camera bag!... now to find one body only...

I can vouch for the quality of peak imaging prints but have never used the online service.

Oh that's another thing - I'm a big shallow-DoF shooter. Did anyone have a practical problem with the greater DoF you get with a D200 sensor or is it just a difference on paper that would never really bother you..?

The only Canon DSLR I've handled is a 1Ds Mk II... and it seemed very well built but a bit fiddily to use - but I'm coming from an FM3a which has 2 buttons and a couple of dials! All DSLRs are going to seem fiddily to me I suspect.

 

The D200 is definitely the path of least resistance... but since in the field I shoot mostly wide I'm wondering if I'm trying to make a square pen fit a round hole.

What the hell - I'll make a decision eventually and I'll get by fine with whatever I pick I'm sure... just the decision part that's tricky when talking 4 figure sums of money!

Thanks guys...

 

So are you talking about using my Nikon primes with a nikon-to-eos adapter?

I thought about that before right enough and it is very appealling but I wasn't sure what functionality I'd get from the nikkors on a 5d.

It's stop down metering right? How is that in practice, I've never used lenses like that..?

Do you still have spot metering?

Hi there,

 

I currently have 2x Nikon FM3a and the following manual focus nikkor lenses:

105mm 2.8 Micro

50mm 1.8

24mm 2.8

 

I need to upgrade to a digital camera and the D200 was the obvious choice (I

need at least that resolution)... or so I thought.

 

So I could use all my lenses and keep one of my FM3a's for a backup. But I would

need to buy a wide angle zoom (thinking the 12-24 Tokina for price) due to the

dastardly crop factor which I don't really want (and it screws my nice standard

52mm filter size grrrrr!).

 

Then I was looking a prices of Nikon AF lenses since I just may be tempted to

replace all my current lenses with AF versions, and I noticed Canon prime lens

prices seemed pretty cheap... and now I'm starting to have bad thoughts about a

complete switch to a FF sensor in a 5D and then I can stick with just 3 primes.

I'd be short a film backup so I guess would have to buy an old EOS film body -

pretty cheap also.

 

So I guess the question is.. am I being a complete fool for considering going to

all this trouble just to get a FF sensor?

 

How have other folk found the transition from 35mm to a crop size sensor?

 

Disclaimer: I have absolutely no alignment towards Nikon or Canon and really

don't care about all the who's better than who arguments - they're just tools to

get a job done to me. I'm just trying to make the best choice for the position

I'm in and am not trying to start any sort canon vs nikon fist fight!

 

Cheers for any help.

Dave.

www.photobox.co.uk

I often use Levels for this. CTRL-L then Options and I usually reduce the shadow and highlight clipping and then test which option gives the best result (with Snap Neutral Midtones on & off).

 

If it's just a slight warm or cool cast I often fix that using Image->Adjustments->PhotoFilter and add some opposite warming or cooling to varying densities.

 

If it's something white or neutal grey I'm trying to neutralise I use the method described by Martin Evening in his CS2 book. He plants a few sample points on the white areas and adjusts the curves for each colour channel until each sample point has R=G=B. Bit awkward but works very well.

Thanks folk - so definitely getting the impression I'd be skating on thin ice.. a post on another board seemed to confirm that.

 

It's a bummer mostly because I travel a lot for months at a time, so having to send the D200 back to base for service if it went belly up would be a major bummer. But I guess that's the way it is.

 

Cheers again.

Hi,

 

I couldn't find a clear answer to this in a search...

 

Does anyone know if I buy a D200 in the US, will the warranty be US

only or will it be honoured in Europe also?

 

Thanks in advance.

Have you got auto bracketing turned on? Just a guess...

For the record I've just found that running the scanner through a powered USB hub seems to solve this problem.

I wasn't sure about that either (whether it was optical or not) so only way I thought of to find out was to cover over my master flash with my hand and see if it still triggers the SU-4.. and it did. So it must be some sort of IR, or just magic.

Not sure for cameras either but I know an electronics retailer and his markups are small... forced that way from competition from the internet. He makes something like 90 GBP on a 1200 GBP laptop.

Just curious - which manual focus metering systems require a circular polarizer?

My understanding is the SU-4 is capable of transmitting the signal to stop as well as the signal to fire to the slave flash so both flashes could be controlled by TTL flash metering.

Either if it's manual focus. You only need to worry if you've got autofocus (in which case you would use circular).

I guess it may have been... With a PrimeFilm scanner I was trying to get to work for someone else, it refused to install until all other devices were unplugged.

Neatimage does as good a job as NoiseNinja I would say - I prefer NN because out of the box I like the results. I think Neatimage overdoes things. But I am certain you could get NeatImage to give the results you want if you were prepared to spend the adjusting the settings (which I'm not!).

In my case I think it's to do with the USB chipset of this laptop conflicting with the scanning software.

 

Different scanning software everything is fine, different PC everything is fine.

 

Annoyingly I went to check on the progress of my incident with Nikon support and found they had closed it with no explanation. They really are rubbish.

 

In your case I'd try the Vuescan free trail and see if it you get the problem then.

The text I was referring to is in the Media section under "Transmissive media". Just realised how big a page that link leads to!

OK... I take it back - turns out I was just looking at a slide with a blue cast.

Having just scanned the IT8 target again, having Media=Image seems to produce the most neutral results. With Media=SlideFilm I get the magenta cast I've been moaning about perviously.

 

And I think the whole process I've been going through to get the IT8 target to take (scanning to raw then rescanning raw from disk) only gave the results it did because I happened to have Media=Image selected when scanning the raw from the disk in the final step.

I seem to get near identical results just scanning from the transpareny with Media=Image in the first place.

 

I can't work out whether to be happy or pissed off at that.

 

You've probably seen this but Ed describes the difference between SlideFilm and Image here (scroll down a bit): http://www.hamrick.com/vuescan/html/vuesc18.htm#topic17

 

Sounds like Image doesn't attempt to match the colours to a specific film type and attempts to directly represent what is on the transparency.

 

So I guess Image is what we should be using when scanning with an IT8 generated ICC profile?

Jean-Francois - I've just had a chance to check this again. When I scan from a raw I have been doing it with Media=Image... I have just tried with Media=SlideFilm and the result is slightly warmer but I think it was more accurate. I will probably continue to do so.

 

Mendel, when I scan from disk (raw) the Mode option disappears for some reason so I can't set it to anything.

Yes! I've had the same problem on my Nikon Coolscan V ever since I got a new laptop (an Acer)... it was linked to all sorts of other problems with scans stopping halfway through etc.

Different scanner and different software (I guess) but that's exactly how my scans looked. What computer do you use?

 

Only way I've found round it while Nikon are investigating is to use Vuescan - which is not too much of a hardship really!

Some of the Hong Kong vendors on e bay have them avaiable.