sebastianmoran

<p>I had good experiences buying refurb Nikon gear. But, note the comments above. Look for a viable return policy.</p> <p>My most recent find: LensRentals tests all their lenses before sending them out. They don't want you to have a lemon. So, rent the lens. If you like it, call them and ask about buying. Usually, they will sell it to you at a good price. You get one you know is not a lemon.</p>

<p>Another one from my recent trip to Africa. D7200 with the Nikkor 300mm f/4 PF.</p> <p><img src="http://2under.net/images/161029-Impala-Male-D727202.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>Skip -- I'm using the 200-500 with a D7200, about the same rig you are using.</p> <p>I use a gimbal head on a tripod. Frankly, I have trouble imagining using this long a lens on a ball head, but have seen others do it. Gimbal works great for me.</p> <p>The VR on this lens (and on the 300 f/4 PF) is great. Makes it practical to hand-hold as far as shutter speed is concerned, and I've got some good bird shots this way. More often, the tripod and gimbal. Here's a sample hand-held bird shot.</p> <p><img src="http://2under.net/images/160728-Nickerson-HeadOnAttack-D722287.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>I am using a MacBook Pro of three years ago. It has plenty of pep for running Lightroom and Photoshop on today's 24MPx images and 4K video.</p> <p>But, my favorite environment for photography is the 5K iMac.</p>

<p>My granddaughter shows up for Thanksgiving with her kid magazine, and announces, "Let's build a pin-hole camera, like this!"</p> <p>So, we start making pinholes, using aluminum from soda cans. First one was 1/2 mm, way too big. Second try is much smaller and looks better. Kid magazine project involved two 35mm cassettes to move film through a juice box. I said, "Let's put it on a body cap and use a real camera with film transport." Nikon body cap, an old body, and Tri-X. Everyone is thrilled. But, it'll be a while before the B&W film gets developed, so we shoot a few with the pin-hole on a Sony body with a Nikon adapter. This gives approx 45mm focal length.<br> Here's a sample. 15 seconds at ISO 1600. My light meter app tells me the pin-hole is f/128. One bit of advice: blow out all the dust and junk carefully after you drill the lens cap.</p> <p><img src="http://2under.net/images/161124-StillLive-PinHole-Sony-DSC2427.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>@Bill Nelson, great shot of the two sandhill cranes in synchronized formation.</p>

<p>More shooting from recent Africa trip. This is a weaver, interesting bird, nesting in the grass at water's edge. At St Lucia, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. D7200 with Nikkor 300 f/4 PF. Regards to all!<br> <br> <img src="http://2under.net/images/161031-Weaver-D727807.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>FWIW, I'm very happy with the 15" Mac Book Pro mid 2015 model. Should be available at discount since there are newer models.</p> <p>Even better, if you're wiling to have a desktop, is the 5K iMac. Best display of high res photos and 4K video I've ever seen.</p>

<p>Lion in the bush. </p> <p>From our recent trip to Africa. Spent a week with the big animals. <br> Some high points:<br />- This lion, about 15 feet away, had just devoured a kill and didn't eat us. At this close distance, he did rise, turn to us, threaten with a growl and make a move in our direction. <br />- We didn't run over the cheetah<br />- The elephant didn't succeed in breaking through the electric fence<br />- And the rhino rammed the other vehicle, not ours.</p> <p><a href="https://www.facebook.com/hashtag/southafrica?source=feed_text&story_id=10211522640321158" data-ft="{"tn":"*N","type":104}">#SouthAfrica</a> <a href="https://www.facebook.com/hashtag/safari?source=feed_text&story_id=10211522640321158" data-ft="{"tn":"*N","type":104}">#Safari</a> <a href="https://www.facebook.com/Nikon-940738779295836/" data-hovercard="/ajax/hovercard/page.php?id=940738779295836">Nikon</a> 300 f/4 PF<br /><a href="https://www.facebook.com/zulunyalagroup/" data-hovercard="/ajax/hovercard/page.php?id=723991374302171">Zulu Nyala</a><br> <img src="http://2under.net/images/161030-Lion-in-Bush-D727420-EditScr.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>On a safari trip in South Africa. This cheetah obliged by moving around, most of the time they are just sprawled out. Nikon D7200 and the 300 f/4 PF. </p> <p><img src="http://2under.net/images/161030-Cheetah-Prowl-D727661-Scr.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>p.s. All the heads I mentioned have Arca-Swiss quick releases. </p>

<p>I use the Nikkor 200-500 f/5.6 zoom. I like to shoot this lens on a simple monopod for birds and other moving subjects, and I suggest you try this first.. At other times, I do like a gimbal head.</p> <p><img src="http://2under.net/images/160727-Term-Chick-Nickerson-D723646.jpg" alt="" /></p> <p>I have, through random fates, a few of these heads.</p> <p>I have the Wimberly, the class act and the most expensive. The controls are exquisite in the way you can go from locked to slight movement to full movement without wobble. Without the platform tipping to one side. This is the head I used with my 200-500 on a recent trip. The tripod+head+camera+lens is pretty heavy, but otherwise I thought it was absolutely terrific. Mine was a gift (!) and replaced the Induro which I no longer use.</p> <p>I also have the Induro GHB2 gimbal head. It looks just like the Wimberly, and it is pretty damn good. Priced today at $425 at B&H. If you really push me, maybe I can tell the difference in the quality of the bearings and controls, but it's very close. I think the weight is the same. I bought this one, and used it a bit, it's excess now.</p> <p>I also just bought the Lens Master. It's a very light gimbal head, inexpensive, and pretty good. It's made of a bent bar of aluminum, not a casting like the two above. Good, but the bearings and controls are nothing like the two above. Mine is the RH-M1, has no rotating base (it's intended for a monopod), and it has the side mount for the lens. I intend to use it with free movement, not locked down except when carrying the rig over my shoulder. My take: If you are going to keep the controls loose, moving the lens to follow subjects, these will be fine. For precise positioning and re-positioning, you might want the brands with better controls.</p> <p>I've seen the gimbal heads that look like Wimberly/Induro but priced at $120 or so in the US. They look good on the web site. I have no idea whether they have the quality of bearings and controls.</p>

<p>Moved two steps beyond. But, about to attend a wedding, the only camera I could find was my D-70, just 70, not s. The old camera produced great photos.</p> <p>It was a daytime wedding outdoors, and I'm sure that helped a lot. </p>

<p>I think it's hard to tell 36MP from 24MP.</p> <p>But, I can certainly tell my current 24MP cameras from 6MP and from 12MP. </p> <p>It's great to be able to print 20x30" from 24MP and feel little or no compromise. It's like medium format in a 35mm package. Our photographic equipment today is fabulous!</p>

<p>I have the earlier 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 OSS lens. I like it better than the new one, even though it's bigger. For me, this camera was never going to be a pocketable item, so the somewhat bigger lens doesn't bother me.</p> <p>For a better, faster lens on the A6000, I opted for primes. </p>

<p>Caroline, good questions.</p> <p>I started shooting birds a few years ago. I have a couple thoughts to offer.</p> <p>My first round was a DX camera with the excellent 300mm f/4 lens on a monopod. That produced great results, but just note for birds you usually want the longest reach, so lack of zoom was no problem. Excellent result with D300 and any of the 300 f/4's.</p> <p>Upgrade for me was D7200 and the new 200-500 f/5.6. This lens is terrific. As for weight, if you want to shoot wildlife, you'll need to carry something reasonably big. I think this lens is a good compromise of utility vs. size/weight. For lighter/smaller, it would be the 300 f/4E PF. I agree with Shun, for wildlife you'll most often shoot wide open. </p> <p>Here are some options at increasing price points:<br> - D300 and 300 f/4 AF (82mm filter ring, mechanical drive for focus)<br> - upgrade to any of the newer 300 f/4's<br> - upgrade to 200-500 f/5.6<br> - upgrade the body to D7200<br> - upgrade the body to D500</p> <p>(Someone please correct me if I'm missing any compatibility points.)</p>

<p>Happy with the A6000 and the Sony/Zeiss 24mm and 55mm lenses.</p> <p>The Sony kit lens is better than I expected, but the two primes are what I use most.</p>

<p>I used to shoot the 300 f/4 on a DX body. That was great.</p> <p>The 200-500 on a DX body is ever better. That's my go-to lens now.</p>

<p>Ian Rance, your note above. That's very interesting. Is this just the D90, or do you know if this works on other Nikon bodies?</p>

<p>Spencer, can you post an example of the red artifacts?</p>

<p>Paul, you have an interesting case. Almost any newer DSLR will be a big step up. I went to D200, D300, then D7200. Each is a big improvement over the previous. Follow any of the advice above. For $300, it's probably a D300, and you can use your Nikkor lenses.</p>

<p>Evan, that image is SHARP!</p>

<blockquote> <p>I do expect to see a bunch of used FE 55mm's hitting the market soon and it may be a good time for some to snag a good deal on a clean, pre-owned lens.<br> </p> </blockquote> <p>I want to second Louis' comments about the 55 f/1.8. It's a very, very good lens. A little big for a 50, but way smaller than the giant high-end lenses we are seeing these days. <br> <br> I think this is a superb 50 in a moderate size/weight package. A real step up from the pretty good small 50's in every manufacturer's line.</p>

<p>Have you considered the Mamiya Press?<br> - 6x9 negatives are terrific; 6x7 also an option. Film flatness is a particular strength of this system.<br> - It's a rangefinder camera (a plus for some, neg for others)<br> - Relatively inexpensive<br> - Big, but so is the RB<br> - Some terrific lenses (75mm, 50mm, 100 f/2.8)<br> - Very modular. Simple mechanisms. Much less to break than with a MF SLR.</p>

<p>For a DX camera, 50mm. Any of them.</p>