blumesan

<blockquote> <p>I started in the days of manual everything cameras and my habit is to see a subject ( I do street photography) place the central focusing area on that subject, press the release 1/2 way to freeze the focus and exposure for that subject, re-compose and then hit the shutter release.</p> </blockquote> <p>Bennett, what you are describing is not a "manual everything" camera if you can focus by a 1/2 press of the shutter release. Nevertheless, if you maintain the half-press of the shutter it will freeze focus while you re-compose, but only if you have your D810 in AF-S mode. In AF-C mode the camera will attempt to re-focus on the subject under the selected focus point(s) as soon as you press the shutter release. To prevent this you must decouple the shutter release from autofocus:</p> <p>To incorporate the AF-ON button into that workflow:</p> <p>Set the camera to AF-C mode.<br /> In the Custom Settings menu set AF Activation to AF-ON ONLY. (This will prevent any press or half-press of the shutter release from initiation autofocus)</p> <p>To focus on a subject and then recompose without allowing the camera to refocus: Place focus point over subject then press AF-ON button and hold only until focus is achieved. Then release button, recompose, and press shutter release when ready.</p> <p>To focus on a subject and maintain focus on that subject while it moves: Place focus point over subject and press AF-ON button and maintain the button depressed while following subject, until you press the shutter release.</p> <blockquote> <p>I seem to be hearing that a camera as sophisticated as the D810 can allow you to set focus on a subject, recompose and then follow that subject if it happens to move.... WOW. How would one set that up with the D810?</p> </blockquote> <p>You would follow the last procedure described above. But you cannot just arbitrarily recompose, hoping the camera will remember the subject on which you initiated focus. You must keep the focus point(s) over the subject (and keep the AF-ON button depressed).</p> <p> </p>

<p>Les,<br> Thanks for the reference to Gordon Wickstrom. I have just ordered two of his books from Amazon.</p> <p>Coincidentally, Norman Maclean was my English professor in college. I remember him (he gave me an "A"), but it was several years later that I became aware of his published works and his interest in fly-fishing. </p>

<p>Indeed, fishing is the answer:</p> <blockquote> <p>One great thing about fly-fishing is that after a while nothing exists of the world but thoughts about fly-fishing.</p> <p>All there is to thinking is seeing something noticeable, which makes you see something you weren't noticing, which makes you see something that isn't even visible.</p> <p>Norman Maclean<br> A River Runs Through It.</p> </blockquote>

<p>Such wonderful and insightful references, and in a photography site no less. Shows that Pnet is head and shoulders above all the rest.</p> <p>And Les, everyone's past contains a host of "might-have-beens" just as everyone's future contains an abundance of "can-be's". Chin up; this too shall pass. (From the perspective of one who has seen 82 summers pass.)</p>

<blockquote> <p>By releasing the AF-ON button does it put the camera in AF-S or does it stay on AF-C? I've been practicing with my D300s.</p> </blockquote> <p>When you release the AF-ON button focus becomes locked on the subject under the focus point and autofocus is suspended until you again press the AF-ON button. So essentially it is in neither AF-S nor AF-C. </p> <p>If you subsequently recompose, then behavior will depend on whether you have selected "focus priority" or "release priority" for the autofocus mode set on the camera. If you have set the camera to AF-C, the default is "release priority". Thus, after reframing, if the subject under the focus point is out of focus the shutter will still release. If you change the priority to "focus" then, in this case, the shutter may fail to fire (behavior may differ depending on camera model and firmware version).</p>

<p>Frode,</p> <p>A splendid demonstration. Totally convincing and something from which many can learn. Thank you!</p>

<p>For my landscape shots I do not require extreme low light capability, very wide dynamic range, nor ability to significantly crop. The D700 has enough pixels to make some pretty big prints. So I will have to differ from Andrews remark. And I'll bet he has taken his share of landscapes with the D700 before he acquired his D800.</p>

<p>Ford, If one returns to ACR, presumably to make additional edits, under what circumstances would one not wish those edits to be saved? After one has returned to ACR the only options to go back to PS are "cancel" and "save'. Save ought to mean save.</p>

<p>Ford-<br /> Yes, I now understand.<br /> I find it very curious that, when one REopens a smart object in ACR and makes supplemental edits, these edits are not automatically added (exported) to the .xmp. Only the edits made during the first trip thru ACR are retained. The need to specifically request that the subsequent changes be incorporated into (exported to) the .xmp appears like a minor bug to me.</p> <p>My first thought was that one should, when returning to PS6, choose "open as smart object" again. But this option is not available; only choice is "open", and this results in the problem you have described.</p>

<p>Ford,<br> In your workflow, step 4, when you return (to PS6), you are not returning to a "modified PSD" until you save your edited image to this format. When you do so, the resulting file should reflect all your edits done in both ACR and PS6, including any round trip to ACR via the smart object.</p> <p>As Andrew has explained, none of these edits are written to the raw file (unless a .dng). The are written to a sidecar file (.xmp) and that file will incorporate all the edits you have made to the raw file in ACR (initially, or on a return via smart object). Edits which you subsequently make in PS6 are not saved anywhere until you save out of PS6 to whatever format you desire.</p>

<blockquote> <p>A postcard of a wide-angle shot both looks distorted and fails to give you the sweeping field of view that was the reason for taking it. However, print (or view on screen, or project) big and you can get the original impression back - the trick is to match the field of view from a sensible viewing distance.</p> </blockquote> <p>I agree. But the human binocular field of vision (horizontal) is, conservatively estimated, 90 degrees. At a sensible viewing distance of only 16" the print would have to be 32" wide. From 3 feet you need a print 6 feet wide. Maybe back to film transparencies and a slide projector is a solution. :)</p>

<p>I could never understand the widespread preference for wide angle lenses for landscapes. Sure, when you stand on some mountain top and have a wonderful view of some magnificent panorama, you really want to capture all of it, and reach for the widest angle lens you have. But when you get home and print the image you end up with a sort of picture postcard that is a condensed version of what you saw, but lacks most of the details that impressed your eyes when viewing it in person. Just my personal opinion. YMMV.</p> <p>My favorite lens for landscapes is the 180mm/2.8. If I need a panorama I can always stitch.</p>

<p>Here's the lens correction panel in PSCS5</p> <div></div>

<p>Here's the lens correction panel in PSCS5</p>

<p>Brooks,<br /> I am fairly sure that will not change any of the options available in the lens correction panel.</p> <p>George,<br> After a second look I note your screen grab of the lens correction panel is vastly different than the current one. Among other things it is missing three "sub-tabs" at the top, for profile, color, and manual. </p>

<p>Rick,<br /> I think that one of the more innovative features of the RTS was the use of a quartz clock timer to control the shutter speed. When used in auto (aperture priority) mode, I believe this permitted nearly step-less shutter speeds based on the metered light. I am guessing that this may be the reason for the "Real Time" designation, rather than the immediacy of the response to the shutter release (although I know some literature has preferred the later). I don't know of other cameras of the time that used this process.</p> <p>I think the positioning of the button to activate the display was dictated by the desire to have a very sensitive and short throw shutter release, thus making a half press not practical/desirable. Based on RTS-II, the bodies of these cameras are quite rugged and hefty; the electronics, unfortunately, less so. Perhaps because of the sophistication required for the quartz timing.</p>

<p>Your lens correction tab is certainly different from what I see in CS5. If you reinstalled from the original disks, have you updated the software since reinstallation? Normally just opening the program should inform you that an update is required.</p> <p>Perhaps you need to install the lens profile data. Go to Adobe site and get the "Adobe Lens Profile Downloader" Then run this application. You need to have the lens profiles on your computer in order to manually or automatically select a profile.</p>

<p>Rick, truly a steal if the $80 included the lens.<br> My first Contax SLR was a 139Q, a loveable camera. It led to my lust to move up the line, as it were. I chose the RST-II because the general opinion was its electronics were improved (more reliable/durable than the RST). Hope yours (and mine) continues to function, because getting electronics repaired for any of these cameras is likely impossible. <br> Not that I would give up my Nikon D800, but photography as a pleasant pastime is so much more enjoyable with these cameras.</p> <p>On the issue of the aperture display: The 139Q uses a simple optical system illuminated by a window on the front of the prism housing. It depends on having ample ambient light. The RST-II uses an LED display which is easily visible in any light. So I guess the RST could be either, but on your photo I don't see the little window which is present on the 139Q.</p>

<p>A visit to your optometrist is the surest solution.</p> <p>Failing that, trying out reading glasses in your local drug store is a good solution, but keep this in mind: choose the glasses that allow you to read comfortably when reading printed matter held at about arms length** (actually at 1 meter), not something held at your normal reading distance (which for many is significantly less than half a meter). </p> <p>**Reason: all SLR viewfinders incorporate a negative lens to place the virtual image further from your eye than the actual distance between your eye and the viewing screen (which is only an inch or so, give or take). Nikons use a -1 diopter lens, to place the image at 1 meter which is a comfortable viewing distance for someone with normal vision.</p> <p> </p>

<p>Lots of yellow.</p><div></div>

<p>Interesting remarks here concerning a number of Nikkor AI / AI-S lenses. Generally a lot of praise for the 200/4.0. But what surprised me is no mention at all of the <strong>180/2.8 ED AI-S</strong>. I have never used the 200/4.0 but have used the 180/2.8 for several years (on D200, D700 & D800). It is a fantastic lens and suffers in no way when used on the D800. However, after 82 years of wandering around this planet, hand-held shots with this lens are out of the question. </p>

<blockquote> <p> A lot of functionality currently buried in menus could be made more readily available - to the point were a menu wouldn't be needed at all. Having to dig through the menu for the AutoISO settings is one of the main things I would like to see Nikon change.</p> </blockquote> <p>For many of their DSLRs Nikon's menu system includes 4 separate "banks" for both Custom Settings and Shooting Menu; (an arrangement that has not garnered a lot of compliments.) Unfortunately the D80 does not provide multiple menu banks, however for those whose cameras have menu banks, one can use the 4 Shooting Menu banks to store 4 different permutations to their High ISO Limit and Minimum Shutter Speed. Switching menu banks can be done quickly with a minimum of button pushing.</p>

<blockquote> <p>...but once you reach the highest selected ISO, the shutter speed starts getting slower again. I think.</p> </blockquote> <p>Once the exposure requires going beyond the max ISO and minimum SS I suspect one of them will change, but I don't know which. Fortunately it's not a problem I have needed to solve.</p>

<blockquote> <p> Also, it works great in Aperture priority (I set f/8 to have good depth of field and let the AutoISO do its work (<strong>it increases ISO until 1600 and then it starts slowing shutter down</strong>).</p> </blockquote> <p>You may want to rethink this. I believe, in aperture priority mode shutter speed is adjusted (slowed) first, and ISO is increased only after the minimum shutter speed is reached.</p> <p>I agree with those who suggest that shooting in manual mode provides the bests options to satisfy your needs. It takes some practice.</p>

<p>I am sorry if some have interpreted my remarks as 'putting down' Nikon's newest flash technology. That was not my intent. 'Luddite' should not be too literally translated. I am always eager to embrace new technology when it serves my needs. </p> <p>I was interested to read the responses pointing out the advantages of the iTTL speedlights. I do not question that such advantages exist; I simply do not need them for my work. And while I welcome all such replies, they are, in fact, not directly responsive to my initial question which was:<br> "How might the behavior of the SB26 when used with a D800 differ significantly from the performance which I have enjoyed while using this speedlight with my D700?"</p> <p>As for Autofocus, let me say (with tongue only partially in cheek) I consider it a necessary evil resulting from the apparent inability to incorporate good optical focusing aids in the viewfinders of modern digital cameras. (Again, consistent with MY needs most of my lenses are manual focus; I very seldom shoot moving subjects.) </p>