rconey

I think what matters is that YOU feel it is art. Maybe you won't be recognized until you are dead, or maybe never but YOU have to feel that you captured what you SEE. Who do you take pictures for? For whom do you spend the time developing the raw images? Why do you bother? I think all of us do it for ourselves, and then our egos like stroking when we are appreciated. The effort is for yourself.

To amplify Rodeo Joe and others: If I have a static object I (try to) use a tripod. I then run a series of shots, aperture priority, from lowest f stop to f8 or 11. If the lighting is constant, and the wind not too hard I then have a choice as to which depth of field I like best. Oh, in this case I have auto iso turned off to use base iso since noise is lowest, and on a tripod a long exposure is ok (wind not a factor).

Its a double, hinged mat (cut front and backing mat), and looks nice.

I buy picture frames with front glass (18x24 for the mat size I use) and use the images as wall art. I can replace the mats/new pictures, thus not having to buy new frames to hang new images.

I thought about cutting my own mats, but …...

Don't know if they have what you want, but I buy pre-cut mats for 13x19 from Archival Methods, a .com company easily found on line. They might have what you need.

Pre-cut mats for 13x19 prints. It hasn't arrived yet, but in the next day or two. Still on the Canon i9900 printer.

Should I print even larger...……?

The 16-35 f4 has a 77mm filter size. I used to use graduated neutral density filters for sunrise-sunset on Velvia. It had what, 5 stops of light to work with?

However, with digital, you can shoot multiple shots, bracketing exposure and merge to a high dynamic range (HDR) image in software. Alternatively you can take two images at different exposures and blend a properly exposed sky into the lighter foreground image. I haven't used grad filters in many years, although I still have them.

Still need a polarizer since that can't be done in software. Other filters can be mimicked in software. I don't do much of that but its there.

On the other other hand. don't overthink it. If you like taking photos, especially if you use a tripod, a D750 or D810 or whatever used with "Live View" lets you focus to taste. Live View reads right off the sensor so lets you see the exposure, depth of field, etc.

I have not had a big problem focusing manual lenses on the Dxxx cameras. I am more landscape so f5.6-8 mostly with wider depth of field. I actually find the little green focus light in the optical viewfinder to be useful at these apertures.

A major plus of digital is that extra shots don't cost you anything. Take lots. Vary the focus point, and f stop. To paraphrase Galen Rowell, throw most of your images away. They aren't that good.

I have found that when looking critically, the corners on many of the old, good manual lenses aren't up to snuff. Really annoying given how heavy the newer lenses are.

Its all fun. Look up KEH camera and start buying used lenses and selling them back, just to play with them. Accumulate the ones you like. Keeps us off the streets (unless you like street photography).

Grab shot. My favorite.

A "found" shot.

I used velvia for years, until about, what, 2003 when Cibachrome printing went away. Digital since, up to a D850 now. It is much better, although learning photoshop, lightroom, or whatever post processing software takes a little work. It is fun. I print up to 13x19 desktop that is better than Cibachrome from the day. Could print larger with a bigger printer

The D750 will put you basically back to your film experience in that 24 mp is the same to a bit better than full frame film. Budget does matter. If you want better resolution a used D800, D810, or D850 pushes you in to film medium format territory. But then you will find the old 20 mm lens lacking. A new 20 f1.8 autofocus is not that expensive and will be much better.

Come on in, the water's fine!

Always carry my DSLR with a 35 mm lens. My biggest regret is driving home from work, stopped at a stoplight and to my left I saw a large dog in a car, sitting in the owners lap with head out the drivers window. Missed the shot! Have to be ready!

I remember how pleasantly surprised I was when I first got this lens around 2012, with my D800. Haven't used it lately-should pull it out. The loose zoom lens never bothered me unless I was shooting at a steep angle.

As above.

I have the zeiss 35 f2 zf.2 version which is chipped. I set the aperture on a command dial, not with the aperture ring. On my D850, if I unlock the aperture ring and turn it, I get an error message(EE) from the camera, so can't even try to manually set the aperture.

Not focus to infinity? I had a Nikon 35 f1.4 once that that was the case, but my zeiss 35 f2 has no such problem.

"So what did we learn today?"

 

It's complicated. Probably makes sense to get a lens with a reasonable reputation and use it a lot to get used to its quirks.

Although it's fun to get different lenses and try them out......

Ah,...grasshopper. The camera that can take the better picture is the one that the photographer can control better.

I won't testify under oath about any of this but......

At base iso (iso 64) the D850 is incredibly noise free. Bring up the exposure 2-3 stops and frequently still no need for noise reduction for the shadows. As the iso goes up, noise appears and needs noise reduction. Fortunately, with downsampling for printing the noise is less of an issue.

We have all learned that viewing these high resolution images at 100% is fraught with disappointment, noise included. I remember when I first looked at D800 images in 2012 at 100%- the horror!

As an aside, looking back at old images, I have been impressed at how noise free the D700 pictures were at 100%.

Astrophotography- never been there.

I got this lens when I moved from a D300 to a D700 years back. For backpacking I have tried to find a lighter weight replacement but really haven't. The corners are very good, but not as good as primes or as the sigma 24-35 f2 Art lens (which weighs as much as the 24-70 with shorter range but prime quality). A 24-35-50-85 prime combo will weigh more.

Last year I thought my copy had been damaged, but found that photoshop/ACR really mucked up the corners if allowed to "auto correct" the lens aberrations. Images look just fine without "auto-correction" in ACR. I haven't felt the need to move to the newer, VR edition that is bigger and heavier. I haven't tried any of the non-nikkor competitors so can't comment. For two pounds of carry, it is a very solid, useful lens in a zoom range that I use quite a lot.

I often wander around my neighborhood with a single lens (walking the dog). Different focal lengths absolutely change what and how you shoot. I am usually a landscape guy, so 24-45 is my most used range when actively shooting. My 24-70 f 2.8 zoom saves lens changes here.

I have grown fond of the 100 mm focal length, and to my surprise, lately 35 mm is growing on me.

Many times I am shooting just to see how the lens behaves, like into specular highlights. I know they are throwaway pictures, but it is "good to know" what to expect.

Wide- Up close subject with lots of distance. tele- subject isolation with backdrop blur.

All good fun. Probably just OCD rearing its head.

The 24 f1.8G is a nice lens. The corner sharpness is good. I once had the 24 2.8D but got rid of it-don't remember why.

The Sigma 24-35 f2 is a great lens, but a brick. I keep trying to remind myself it weighs no more than a 24, 28, and 35mm prime and is as good. Still a brick.

The Nikon 24-70 f2.8 AFS has it flaws but is a very good lens. I was reminded on a recent rainy trip that not having to change lenses can be a blessing.

I'm trying to be a prime boy, but zooms have a place...….

haven't used my 9000 scanner in some years but the occasional Newton's Rings issue was annoying. Especially when I did not notice it until late in post. i cut out spacers to whatever (medium format) film size i needed and that helped a lot, even with the anti-NR glass holder.

I was just in Scotland, where much of the time there was heavy mist or outright rain. It reminded me there are times when a 24-70 zoom wins hands down. In Edinburgh, a 35mm prime worked-I could easily hold it under my raincoat.

The D850 is an awfully nice camera. No hurry for a newer one.

The 100 mm at f4, close focus.

I have found a few ways over the years to retain images on cards after download. Let see, Adobe asks if I want to erase images from card after download- can forget to check that option. It leaves everything intact. Ummm, my Nikon lets you lock images on the card, and the button to do so is in the left column of buttons so can be hit accidently. That leaves single images on the card until you unlock them, or maybe format the card. My personal favorite was when I forgot I had the dual cards set to "Main" and "Backup". I would take out the main card, download, erase images, put it back in. Then when I pressed Image Review, all the images were still there. It hurt my head for a few rounds until I realized the images were on the second card.

I like autofocus, but sometimes doing without it is fun-for static objects. My cat is more difficult with this lens. Trying to sleep here, iso 1280 f2.8 hand held

1.5 sec, f11, iso 64 near close focus. Of course, reducing a 27 inch wide, 300 dpi image to 5 inch at 96dpi loses something.....