tombest

<p>@ Chris Speaker... #2 is a very nice capture. Love the framing and how serene that shot is. Nicely done.</p> <p>Tom</p>

<p>Al, I was an every other update PSE user up through version 9. It was powerful enough (I thought) but in one of the latter versions they removed Camera RAW from it. I shoot RAW so the omission of that meant upgrading wasn't an option for me. And even though I was concerned about being married to Adobe through their subscription service to CC/Lightroom, I pulled the trigger on that. And I have to say, I like CC better... now that I am familiar with it. Even though I considered myself fairly accomplished with PSE9, CC was a whole 'nother ball game. I have an older Dell computer with an early generation quad-core processor (before the i-series) running at 2.4gh with 8gb of RAM. Gotta say, things process more quickly (seat-of-the-pants observation) on CC than they did with PSE. So I guess I'm a convert. Lightroom is just a bonus. <br> Tom</p>

<p>Thanks for the clarification, Matthew.</p>

<p>Brendan, you have a lot of irons in the fire here. A couple of clarifications are in order. First off, your D3100 does not have a focus motor in the camera body itself. In order for your camera to autofocus with any lens, the lens will have to have its own focus motor. A 'D' series lens does not have a focus motor in it and will only autofocus with a camera that can drive the focus mechanism within the lens. The 'G' series of lenses with a SWM (silent wave motor) listed as AF-S, <em>will </em>autofocus with your camera. <em>Either</em> type lens will meter with your camera but the older 'D' series lenses have a manually adjustable f-stop adjustment ring on them if. Typically, you lock a 'D' series lens on its minimum aperture and set the f-stop from the menu when in Manual mode. You can still control a 'G' series lens aperture with a D3100 but can <em>only</em> do so from the camera's menu and not the lens itself. Hang in there... it gets easier as you go along. <br> Hope that helps</p>

<p>Well, I was all set to include a flower shot taken with my new camera but the topic sort of started... well south. So, in keeping with the fungus theme, I drug out an old shot taken in South Carolina on a hiking path leading to a waterfall. The 'shrooms were abundant and very picturesque. These were taken with sunlight reflected upwards from a small reflector as well as diffused flash. The lighting is a little unusual coming from the bottom but I found it more interesting than direct flash. A little 'shroom city on a hill.</p> <p>Tom</p><div></div>

<p>We are all assuming that you have an adequate computer with substantial memory to support your new habit? 24mp files are no joke and memory fills up fast. This wasn't an issue before with film but your computer will be an extension of your photography process now.</p> <p>Tom</p>

<p>FYI, B&H still has the D610 at it's discount price but are including the Nikon MB-D14 battery grip at that price. If the idea of a grip added to your camera appeals to you, it's a swinging deal right now. I just bought a D7200 and it is an amazing camera but if I had your selection of lenses and wasn't interested in sports or wildlife photography, I'd jump on the D610. The D750 has better features, especially the auto focus module, but you may not necessarily need the differences it offers. That's for you to decide. But you have a nice selection of FX lenses and I would buy a camera that takes full advantage of them... based on your indicated photography interests.<br> Tom</p>

<p>Purple flower theme this week? I watched a good number of these hornets hover around the Plumbago plant in the front of the house. They would enter the flower, stay for a bit and then fly off. So, I grabbed my D7200 and tripod and thought, 'this will be easy to get a shot of one of them coming and going.' Wrong. Sat there for a half an hour before one chose the flower I was focused on and then the whole event lasted a second or two. Man, they were quick! Anyway, I did get one shot off that was reasonably sharp and in focus, but even at 1/1000th of a second, the wings are a blur. This was the first coupling of my D7200 and my 60mm f2.8D Nikkor. So far so good.</p> <p>Tom</p><div></div>

<p>If you're into value and are interested in a battery grip, B&H still has the D610 bundled with the MB-D14 grip and some other goodies for the '<em>still</em>' sale price that's been around since the beginning of the new year. It does sound like FX will suit you well for what you shoot and this camera is a steal right now with all it comes with. It would give you the spare money to buy lenses. Just a thought.</p> <p>Tom</p>

<p>Thanks David. I had (still have) a D7000. While it has served me well, this D7200 is a serious upgrade for me. The autofocus is <em>way</em> snappier and the resolution is astounding.</p>

<p>I love all the beauty seen here in the Monday nature forum. Today, no morning light. It was more mid-afternoon light. But I was testing my new D7200 and grabbed this red-bellied woodpecker with its tongue deep in a branch.<br> Tom</p><div></div>

<p>I was at Shark Valley a couple of weeks ago in the Everglades National Park, west of Miami. Ran across this baby enjoying the freedom a watchful mother provided. She was well behaved until a group of kids and cell phones decided to get closer for a better shot. First her whole body came up to the surface, then her mouth came open, then a little wider... and then the hissing started. I grabbed my camera and tripod and got out of there. She never charged but it was tense for a bit. Kids...</p><div></div>

<p>Thanks everyone. A buddy of mine offered to rent a lens for the two of us to use on a weekend outing. Lens choice was up to me. He initially offered the 300 f4.0 AF-S or an 80-400. After talking, we decided against either and went for a Sigma 150-600 Sport. As this past weekend approached, I decided to add the 300 f4.0 to the mix so we would each have something to shoot with that neither of us owns. We each have the 70-200 VR1 with a TC14E - he with a D7100 and I with a D7000. It was to be a great weekend of lens swapping and comparing with 5 venues in mind. The rest is history and I've learned a bit in the process and maybe have avoided spending money on something with limited application for me. Had the 300 f4.0 performed well, it still would have been limiting since it is fixed at 300 or 420 with the 1.4 TC attached. The Sigma zoom was certainly more versatile and in this application, outperformed the Nikon handily. At this point, I'm soured on the 300 f4.0 lens since modification would be mandatory to make it useful... either with a home remedy or purchased. (The inhaler is a bit of an ingenious solution though.) In the future I may rent the 80-400 to see how it holds up. There's no free lunch here. I understand the tradeoffs with price/weight/cost/AF speed, etc. I <em>did</em> learn that the D7000 is still a capable camera and that my 70-200 + TC14e can produce sharp images (something I've posted about before) and that good glass and technique trumps camera model.<br> Tom</p>

<p>Shun, You have detail in your picture that I was not able to attain. When I look at Maria's hat, there are stitching lines in the underside of the bill that are clearly clean.<br> So, I just took the lens outside and handheld a few shots and am able to be at peace with this whole thing. I was able to get some handheld shots that had detail and were properly focused. Wow. The foot <em>IS</em> that bad. I guess there are dynamics at work that even shutter speeds and a sturdy tripod can't rectify. I would have never guessed. Nikon really missed the mark on this one. And if the lens really is a high ISO - high shutter speed, handheld only lens, I wish I had known before spending the money to try one out. It was on my short list of lenses to buy but with its current cost plus a foot, I would have to think about the PF version. <br> I was really spoiled using the Sigma, though. It's sharp and the zoom range for wildlife is perfect, especially here in S Florida where we can get pretty close to the birds. It's a chunk to carry around with 8+ pounds of tripod attached to it but the images were worth it.<br> Thanks for all the responses and the encouragement to take it off the tripod. You guys are good.</p> <p>Tom</p>

<p>crop</p><div></div>