stefan_g

On the default chrome browser on an Android device, pages from this site never seem to finish loading, I assume this is due to ad reloading. The constant jumping to the top and back severely impacts reading and even more posting.

Here is a jpg obtained with a screw-drive lens + teleconverter from this year's air show:

No cropping or sharpening, just a bit of exposure adjustment.

I think you are using the wrong AF settings on your D600. If people are moving just a bit, AF-S (the setting, not the lens type) is not going to cut it. On my D750, switching to AF-C, and to 3D area mode made a huge difference compared to single point AF-S, which I was used to from my D70. I don't think the screwdriver lens is really the limitation. I have had good results at the Chicago air show with my 80-200/2.8 AF-D, with the blue devils (or is it angels?) zooming by so close a single plane would fill the whole image. Before investing in a new body just for the autofocus - the D600 IQ should be as good as the D750, so there's no reason to upgrade for that - I'd practice with different AF mode and area settings on the D600. If the lighting is very bad, then yes, you could gain from a D750. But as stated in an earlier reply, you are not that low in EV, so the D600 AF should work ok with your 35-70/2.8 AF-D lens.

Thanks for all the replies! For some reason the new photo.net unsubscribed me from thread updates, so I am manually updating my watched thread list now.

 

Follow-up question #1: Does anybody have any idea what fraction of people are doing their own lens overhauls, and how many of them are happy with the results? I have successfully taken apart and chipped (as in, 'added a lens CPU chip', not 'chipped the glass'...) some of my AI and AIS lenses, but got stuck on disassembling the 20-35/2.8 mentioned above.

 

Follow-up question#2: I've read that some older lenses malfunction on the D750 specifically; reasons given seemed to oscillate between 'firmware mismatch - lens firmware update fixes it', 'too much current draw - lens DC/DC converter replacement fixes it', and 'just too bad'. Could this be the case here, or does it apply to AF-S and later lenses only?

I thought about the same question for about three years (see https://www.photo.net/discuss/threads/d7000-does-it-still-make-sense-to-buy-one-now.487919/), until I could afford a refurbished D750. Here is a table comparing Nikon low light performance; all data are from DXO, and are scaled to the same resolution (8MP) for all cameras. You see that for low light you are better off (by one full stop) with an old full frame 35mm camera than with a new 24mm APS-C DX. Maybe a refurbished or used D600 or D610 is in your range.

Ignore the prices in the table; they are from 2013.

I'd be interested to learn what people here are generally paying for lens CLA and repairs.

<Br>

 

I recently dropped off my 20-35/2.8 at APS in Morton Grove, IL, because the AF/manual switch was not

working consistently anymore. A day later APS gave me a quote for $435, for replacing the main circuit

board (the technician whom I talked with when dropping off and picking up said it tested bad),

replacing/repairing the AF switch, and overall cleaning, greasing of the helicoid and adjusting to Nikon

specs. They did not break out parts in the quote, and explained that parts for this lens are no longer

available, but that they still have some in stock.<br>

I do not doubt that their work is worth the money, but since for my strictly hobby purposes the price was a

bit steep I picked up the lens without repair (and got the AF switch working again in the meantime

myself).

<Br>

 

For just CLA they mentioned the following rates:<br>

20-35/2.8 : about $245<br>

80-200/2.8 push-pull : about $235<br>

85/1.4 AIS : about $150<br>

 

 

I expected (or maybe just hoped) these prices to be a bit lower. What are people here paying at other

places, for similar lenses? Are the CLA rates for AFS lenses even higher?

If your daughter-in-law can live without AF, the Micro-Nikkor 105mm F/4

might be a nice lens, with a really good working distance. It goes to 1:2

scale without an extension ring. I assume it won't meter on a D3000 series

camera, but neither moss nor lichen will run away very far while you are

determining the best exposure by peeking at the histogram.

I liked it on my D70, and on the D750 I even get metering.

To be a bit more quantitative about the low light performance, here is a table (which I made and posted already a while ago) comparing the DXO low light ISO ('sport') ratings of different Nikon cameras: <p>

<img src="https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-Qo4q9PWElI4/VOjTIGchdPI/AAAAAAAApFw/5PrYTBEJh-s/s400/Screenshot_2015-02-21-12-44-51%257E2.jpg" /><p>

The fourth column shows the relative sensitivity in stops.

The DXO ISO ratings are rescaled to 8 MPixel, and are for 'decent' color depth and noise, so depending on your demands your actual usable maximum ISO might be a bit higher.

Nikon has a concise summary of this feature for the D810 (at http://nps.nikonimaging.com/technical_solutions/d810_tips/highlight/), which clarifies that the camera finds the highlights (so this mode is NOT like spot metering where you have to pick the spot), and that a single bright spot (like a stage light) in the frame can throw the algorithm off:

<p><em>"Bright light in frame: <p>

 

The camera may treat the light as a highlight, leaving the main subject underexposed. Compose the shot with the light out of frame or use matrix metering."</em>

A while ago I made a table comparing the DXO low light ISO ('sport') ratings

of different Nikon cameras. At most you are going to gain half a stop over a

D700/D3: <br>

<IMG src="https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-

Qo4q9PWElI4/VOjTIGchdPI/AAAAAAAApFw/5PrYTBEJh-

s/s400/Screenshot_2015-02-21-12-44-51%257E2.jpg">

 

The DXO ISO rating is for 'decent' color depth and noise, so depending on your demands your actual usable maximum ISO might be a bit higher.

There is clearly vertical shake, just look at the doubled upper edge of the

lips. That needs to be fixed before you can deal with any focus issues.

Just a reminder that any of the old f/2.8 Nikon zooms is in that $400 price

range (used of course). An 80-200/2.8 could be an interesting addition,

complementing the kit zoom lens nicely. If you have the space (e.g.

outdoors) it's also not so bad for portraits. The D7000 has the motor for the

old screw drive AF lenses, doesn't it?

Not to beat a dead horse, but it sounds like there were really only a few DX-

only screw drive lenses. I wasn't even aware they existed, since Nikon

omitted the screw drive for most of their DX cameras, so these must have

been early niche products. I know it doesn't help, but it seems kind of

unlucky if you ended up with a bunch of them.

<p>

To come to the main point though,

for me and I assume many others the attractive feature of Nikon (as

compared to, say, Canon, where I was coming from originally) is the

system aspect, i.e. being able to use any old lens (within reason, unless you

don't mind some machining) on a modern body. DX-only lenses and non-

screw drive bodies violated that principle, so they really never fit into the

system.

<p>

Buying more DX only lenses seems to me like making the same mistake twice. The mount diameter and register distance are the same for DX and FX, so there's no reason to assume there won't be a similarly compact FX sensor Nikon some time in the future.

A Nexus 10 (2nd version coming soon, I think) offers good screen size, has

really nice resolution, and works well with an OTG USB adapter and the free

dslrdashboard app. Even for older Nikon cameras.

Before resorting to using a file, I'd look for screws attaching the ring that

that 'shelf' is part of.

Not trying to hijack your thread, but how would an 80-200/2.8 AF with a x2

teleconverter compare to the 300/4 with x1.4, on the D600? Would it be a

lot inferior, optically?

 

And regarding the original question, I think the answer is yes.

Two comments: <br>

Isn't it a good thing for the rest of us, if people who can afford it support

Nikon by going out and just buying the Df, without too much research into

the fake 'buttons vs menus' issue?<br>

And b): You can still buy those pre-AI Nikkors, for example on eBay. Often

they are quite affordable. Personally, I like the idea of a camera that can

use (and meter) with them without having to get the file (and super glue, for

the chip) out.

Since it hasn't been pointed out yet: your camera can also operate the old

screw-drive f/2.8 Nikkor zooms, like the 80-200/2.8. Those gather just as

much light and are considerably cheaper used than a new 70-200/2.8.

Having lived through the 90s myself, I can totally understand your loyalty to

the D70, and resistance to using your D600. (In fact, if you wanted to get rid

of the 600, I might be talked into taking it off your hands, just to spare you

from dealing with that horrible temptation all the time.)<br>

But, seriously now:<br>

D70? Vs. D600? In low light? Is that really a question?

John, thanks for the hint, but there's some

weird business going on with your link. There's

some ad server interjecting itself. The adorama link

should be

<a href="http://www.adorama.com/INKD600R.html">http://www.adorama.com/INKD600R.html</a>; but now the same is happening to my link. Sorry, not your fault, must be photo.net (or my tablet got hacked).

Dieter, the idea would be to get all the oil flung off whatever is doing the

flinging, and then do one cleaning only after those 5000 shots. That would

be for a used camera with few shots. <br>

Ideally though there would already be more than a few thousand actuations

on the camera, and the 5,000 would be a test, under the assumption that if

the oil/grease problem doesn't show up (again) during that test, it won't in

the future.<br>

But, as Panayotis point's out, that's still a gamble. And I do not like to

gamble, at least not when money is involved...<br>

So, look for a well used D700? Keep waiting? I just took my D70 out to the

lakefront in the mini snow storm we are having here in Chicago, with the

85/1.4 AIS. So it's not like I'm without camera.

I have neither a D800 nor LR 5, but about half of my USB cables (with micro

or mini USB at one end) have a defect or intermittent malfunction for some

combination of widgets. Before all else I'd try a few different cables.

Dieter, do you think there would be a danger of something overheating

when running a few series of 1000 shots in a row? I read one post where

somebody used the interval timer to run several rows of 999 shots (and

probably had to recharge the battery in between).<p>

Regarding the speed of progress, 'only three stops', and why I haven't

upgraded the body (but instead bought faster lenses, and chipped some of them for exposure metering and trap focusing with the D70): I'm fine with

focusing and recomposing. So more (cross-type) AF sensors would be

nice, but not a necessity. A Nikon that could focus anywhere in the image,

and would know where I want it to focus (eye tracking?) would be nice, but

from what I have read that doesn't exist yet. I do agree that an extra cross-

type AF sensor in the upper third for portraits would be very nice.<br>

Ditto for resolution. I rarely crop and/or enlarge so much that I run into the

D70's pixels. The few times I have, a 24 MP DX camera would have bought

me a linear factor two, which of course is not nothing, but would not really

have improved the situation (tiny plane or bird in big empty frame)

significantly. <br>

Ditto for sensitivity and noise. I was very excited initially when the D200

and the D300 became more affordable, but the problem I have regularly run

into is dimly lit scenes at about LV (EV at ISO 100) 2 or thereabouts, i.e. I'm

at f/1.4, 1/30s, and ISO 1600 (and sometimes still underexposed). I'd want

to be at f/2.8 (so I can use a zoom), 1/100s or faster, with ok noise. That's

more than one stop. In the earlier thread Wouter pointed out that maybe

this simply is not a good situation for taking pictures.<br>

Maybe I should rent a D7000 and see what it looks like in that situation.

Again, thanks for all the replies! In particular for the used buying experiences. So maybe a reasonably safe strategy

would be to try to find a used D600 from a reseller that allows returns, with

a good number of actuations already done (10,000 or so), and run a few

1000 additional actuations quickly. Except they might not let you return it

after that. Mhmmm. Have to ponder that.

<p>

Shun, good point about the biased sample when buying used. Also about

the not-so-demanding OP ;-) I prefer to see myself more in the 'very

demanding, but too frugal to spend' category...

<p>

Jim, my understanding is that those differences (between D600 and D610,

or even D7000 and D7100) are just random. That's why I added the color

coding. I assume anything in one of those three groups uses the same

sensor and amplifier/digitizer technology (not necessarily the same chip, and certainly not the same sensor patterning).

Happy New Year!<br>

 

I was thinking of buying a new D7000 (and got lots of good advice in <a

href="http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00cGkP"> this thread </a>)

since they are available for $700 currently. But after looking at the

DXOmark low-light ISO scores, that would only get me a bit more than 1

stop improvement over my D70. <br>

To really get significantly better low light performance it seems full frame

35mm is my only option (see table):<p>

<IMG SRC="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-

hpzILvnm9VQ/UsHapGuFlRI/AAAAAAAAZDU/8nhs6ZqnOj0/s640/Nikons.j

pg"><p>

And the only remotely affordable camera in the upper tier (2.5 stops

improvement over a D70) is the D600, which seems to come with some risk

of excessive dust and oil/grease sensor contamination.<p>

 

So, my questions:<br>

What are the odds of getting a problematic used D600? 1%? 5%? 50%? <br>

Has anybody here bought one from KEH, and what was the experience and

outcome? <br>

And, can one just run 5000 shutter actuations (apparently the D600 has an

interval timer), clean the sensor once, and be done with the problem?