bsd230
-
Posts
1,099 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by bsd230
-
-
<p>As Bernard stated, if it is not an AF-S lens it will not auto focus on the D60. It will work just fine as a manual lens.</p>
-
<p>I think the new 35mm 1.8 AF-S would be a great prime lens for a DX body. I have the 50mm 1.4 on my FX and love it, it's my favorite lens. I think the 35mm on the DX would be very similar and useful, getting too long and it can limit its uses.</p>
-
14 Bit Raw
in Nikon
<p>I agree Leigh, the D700 shoots 14 bit like it's nothing. I has been a big help going to a UDMA card to keep up with the transfer speeds of the camera. I am amazed with the grip that it can shoot 14 bit at 8 fps.</p> -
<p>I would agree with others clone out the branches like Michael's version.</p>
-
<p>I think the 50mm 1.4 is my favorite lens. I have a D700 but I loved it on my D200 too. The 85mm would be better for tight head shots, 50mm better for full length. I don't think you can go wrong with the 50mm though.</p>
-
<p>Keith that is a great example. Channel mixer in PS is the best way to create B&W photos, IMO. It's like shooting with filters to emphasize or de-emphasize different colors.</p>
-
<p>I love primes, but for me I think it would be a hassle on vacation.</p>
-
<p>I haven't used the 17-35 on my D700 but I can't imagine that I would hate it. I use a 24-60 Sigma right now and it seems to be wide enough for me at this point. If you shooting all the time at 24mm you might be better off with the 17-35. You shouldn't have any problem selling the 24-70.</p>
-
<p>I agree Kent, it is very frustrating that they don't build a comparable 17-40 f4, 24-105 f4 VR, 70-200 f4 VR. Heck I would be happy even without VR.</p>
-
<p>I will say that my choice now is different since I bought a D700. I would probably go for a<br>
Sigma 24-70 f2.8 HSM, Because I can't afford the Nikon-- Nikon would be my first choice. Maybe the 17-35mm Big lenses for a vacation but if I'm going some place like Hawaii I want quality.<br>
It would be nice if Nikon would get off their A** and build a 70-200 f4 comparible to the Canon version. Still to this day the only lens I miss from my Canon days. Sharp wide open and much lighter than the 2.8 version.</p>
-
14 Bit Raw
in Nikon
<p>Yes I usually shoot in RAW. The only time I don't is if I am just taking snap shots of family get togethers. If I am taking a portrait style picture of someone then I'll switch over to RAW. I shoot all my landscape stuff in RAW. It definitely adds to the post processing time, but you can bring so much more out of the photos it's worth it. JPEG is a compression format, so in essence your allowing the camera to deem what information is useless to reduce the file size. I do have the option of shooting in TIFF, which is considerably better than JPEG. I still haven't used it, but it could be an option for me to play around with.</p> -
<p>The 18-200 is tough to beat for a one lens vacation solution. The 16-85 would probably be a little sharper but you loose the range.</p>
-
<p>After thinking about it you are right Elliot, the shutter speed shouldn't change in manual mode.</p>
-
<p>I would either guess bracketing is on or auto ISO if it works in manual mode. Check those first.</p>
-
<p>Depending on what you shoot the 24-70 can be very useful on the DX sensor, however, I agree that the 17-55 is a better lens for the DX. 24-70 is a great lens for a FX.</p>
-
<p>Definitely the IV, it supports UDMA. That makes a huge difference. I went from a 133x to the UDMA and it writes so much faster when shooting in bursts.</p>
-
<p>VR definitely helps but I am in your camp. I can't justify paying over 2x as much to get it. The Sigma 70-200 HSM is tough to beat for $749.00</p>
-
<p>I will say that my SB-600 was great with my D200, but after I bought my 50mm 1.4 and slapped it on a D700 I haven't shot more than a couple of flash photos. About the only time I used flash was for putting things on eBay. I prefer natural light, but getting a good flash is not a bad idea especially if you shoot a lot of portraits.</p>
-
<p>It is amazing how much it looks like the MB-D10. I might have bought the Zeikos if I had not already bought the Nikon. I have no complaints though, the MB-D10 is one of the best grips I've ever owned. My only complaint would be that the button is a little sensitive. It is a huge improvement over the MB-D200 grip which I sold right after I bought it.</p>
-
<p>I would agree on the 35mm 1.8, it is a better focal length for the DX sensor IMO.</p>
-
AF and AF-S
in Nikon
<p>AF does not focus as fast as the AF-S version as well. Depending on the model of camera you have an AF may not auto focus. Like the D40/50/60/5000 do not have built in motors. I have a 50mm 1.4D which is an AF and it is a great lens. The AF-S version is about $175-200.00 more.</p> -
<p>It will come in time I'm sure. Right now the technology is still expensive. I would imagine that at some point the full size sensor will become the standard.</p>
-
<p>I would definitely check the focus point. I usually just keep mine of the center point and focus then recompose my shot. If the subject you're shooting is moving then you need to change the focus to continuous or else it will just focus at one point instead of tracking. If you have some examples that would help too.</p>
-
<p>I had the 18-200 as a kit lens when I bought my D200. I think it is a nice walk around lens or vacation lens, but I found myself not satisfied with the overall image quality. Given that you normally use a 24-70, you will definitely notice the difference.</p>
Settings for D80 to make HDR pictures
in Nikon
Posted