georges_pelpel

<p>Know your pain and went through the same process.</p> <p>After owning all the 80-200 and 70-200 f/2.8 Nikon lenses since 1993 I switch to the lighter f/4 version about two years ago. Never regretted my choice. The lens is just fantastic and works extremely well with TCs. You will miss one stop of light and a bit of out of focus fuzziness but nothing dramatic. With a D810 you can up the ISO and be fine.</p> <p>On the wide side I agree the 14-24mm has no equivalents but the AF-S 20mm f/1.8G is excellent.</p> <p>I do not own a mid range zoom anymore, I prefer to carry my 20mm f/1.8G, 35mm f/1.8G, and 58mm f/1.4G in any combo depending of the needs. Two of these plus the 70-200 f/4 make for a nice, small and light package for travel, hiking, and all around shooting. With the D810 pixels it's easy to shoot a bit wide and crop in post processing.</p>

<p>The 300mm PF on the D750 is a sweet option if you are looking for a lightweight setup with reach. It works wonderfully well with any of the latest Nikon teleconverters allowing up to 600mm of very decent focal eight for a weight which is barely more than the 24-70/2.8 zoom.</p>

<p>I use the 300mm PF with the TC-14e (version 1) and don't have any noise issue.<br> Last time I used the combo was yesterday, even added 36mm of extension tube between the camera and the TC.</p>

<p>I wouldn't sell the zoom lenses yet either. As per a prime, it can be a good addition to your bag especially for portraits if it's a fast lens.<br> The two recommended lenses are great. The 35mm 1.8G is an excellent value, on a DX body it's a general purpose lens. The 50mm 1.4G and the cheaper but also excellent 50mm 1.8G are probably better options for portraiture allowing you a more compressed depth of field and tighter shots. In your situation I would start with the 50mm 1.8G to complement your current kit, you can find used ones in perfect conditions for less than half your $400 budget.</p>

<p>The AF-S 70-200/2.8 option is obviously excellent but you could also opt for the cheaper and lighter one, the AF-S 70-200mm f/4. It is as sharp and works very well with converters.<br> The AF-S 300mm f/4, both old and new version, will also work well for your needs. The newer version has the advantage of coming with VR and of being very light. Both work well with converters.<br> When you start with a D810 you have the possibility to 1) work with higher ISO without much image degradation (so you can loose a stop on the lens side), and 2) to crop your original images and still get extremely decent final images that can be printed at large size (so you can shoot at shorter focal lengths).<br> A zoom will obviously be more flexible. But as someone mentioned above reach is important too so a prime lens can be necessary.</p>

<p>I will suggest joining a camera club with a lot of active members organizing field trips, or joining a metope group. Some, here in the SF Bay Area, are very active.</p>

<p>I jumped from the P to the AF-S II version a couple years ago. It's a totally new world... bird photography that used to be an exercise in frustration control is now a lot of fun. :-)<br> At the time I was looking for any good deal in either the AF-I or one of the two AF-S. Almost bought the AF-I but reports of AF motor issue restrained me. First they were reports of broken motors and then those about the high difficulty to get replacements, that was two years ago so it surely didn't improve.<br> I think both AF-S models use the same AF motor but I am not sure. I was lucky to find the AF-S II version and appreciate the lighter weight. I also find that the carbon fiber hood is less prone to scratches than the metal one.<br> In any case, as Shun said, AF is a major plus.</p>

<p>I am debating sending mine as I can repeat the VR issue others have talked about. Unless I shoot in the 1/100s to 1/250s range the lens is working ok.<br> It seems Nikon is still working on the issue as I haven't not seen any 300mm PF available since I bought mine on 2/13 (eBay, B&H, Adorama, Amazon...).<br> So I suppose the service centers are waiting for some feedback from the Nikon engineers.</p>

<p>I agree with others in regards to the 70-200mm f/2.8 version. The latest one (VRII)is definitely the one to get if you go that route. It has sharper corners on FX bodies and, most of all, it is the best of the lot with teleconverters.</p>

<p>Another vote for the 70-200mm f/4. Used all the Nikons 80-200mm f/2.8 and 70-200mm f/2.8 since the early 90's. Switched to the "slower" but lighter version a year ago, I have absolutely no regret. It also works great with converters even the TC-20eIII.</p>

<p>Both the Kenko and the TC-14e would be good solution with a preference for the latest.<br> Filing the tab on the Nikon converter is super easy with a small Dremel. Just protect the lens with a piece of soft cloth to prevent metal dust to stick on it and be a potential source of scratch. The filing part will take you a couple minutes at most.</p>

<p>I cannot see the photos but you probably answered your own question.<br> At the same ISO setting underexposed areas will show more noise after exposure adjustment than if they had got enough light to start with.</p>

<p>Photoshop CS6 and Apple OS X 10.9.5 have no problem opening the D810 RAW files.<br> Make sure you Adobe ACR is properly updated. Current version is 8.7.1<br> It is very critical to have the latest ACR in regards to the D810 as previous ACR versions had issues with some of the Nikon profiles.</p>

<p>Aside from a new lens one of the most useful accessories that many photographers tend to forget is a good flash unit. The D5300 comes with a built-in flash but it has limited use compared to an actual flash unit. A detachable unit also has the advantage to work with the built-in one as a remote unit for more creative effects.</p>

<p>NikonRum... just published some D7200 rumored specs. Take it with a grain of salt but it seems the D7200 may be arriving this coming February.</p>

<p>I second Owen, I love my 28mm f/1.8G so much so I just bought the new 20mm f/1.8G.</p>

<p>Can be used to enhance landscape shots with yourself in the picture.<br> I used the Camcorder for the following image. The camera was on a tripod along the lake shore. I prefocused to where I was planning to ride the canoe. Unfortunately it was my first time using the Camcorder and only knew to shoot one image at a time so I had to stop paddling in order to press the shutter button on the iPad. Next time I will set it to automatically take a shot every 5 seconds after pressing the button.<br> I think these remote units offer many possibilities. I am planning to get their remote controlled head to shoot small birds. Should be fun.</p> <p><img src="http://www.logisoftinc.com/photos/2014/_GP10591.jpg" alt="" width="1000" height="452" /></p>

<p>Shun is probably right. I would add that large capacity high speed CFs tend to be cheaper than their SD equivalents. They are also faster. But all these tend to be irrelevant nowadays.<br> I like having both formats using the CF card for saving my RAW images and the SD card for saving a fine JPEG copy. The idea is that I can upload the JPEGs into an iPad when the computer is not around.</p>

<p>Anyway you cut it you want the fastest cards possible in your D810. For most shooting situation regular cards are fine but if you regularly shoot burst of images (sports, wildlife,...) the card speed is critical if you want to keep shooting without filling the buffer in mid sequence.</p> <p>A couple years ago most test sites demonstrated that CF cards were faster and recommended for stills while SDXC were better for movies. Not sure if that was true or not but Rob Galbraith site lists CF at the top of the speed game.<br> Note sure if this is still relevant but here is the link: http://www.robgalbraith.com/camera_wb_multi_page9ec1.html?cid=6007-12451</p> <p>It also seems that Lexar has the fastest CF cards while Sandisk has the fastest SDXC cards. I have been happy with both using Sandisk Extreme Pro 32GB and 64GB in both formats as well as Lexar 1000x and 1066x 64GB CFs. There are now much faster cards in both formats but you will pay a fortune for them.</p> <p>One caution... Be very vigilant when buying online, there are a lot of copycat cards around, especially SDs.</p>

<p>Used to stick to B+W, Nikon, or Heliopan until I read the following link. Now I only have Nikon and high-end Hoya filters. All new filters are Hoyas, they are as good as the german filters and cost less (IMHO).<br> http://www.lenstip.com/113.1-article-UV_filters_test.html</p>

<p>I have own all iterations of the Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8 and Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 since the early 90s. Bought my first one with a N90 body and upgraded as new ones came on the market.<br> Last year I decided to lighten up the weight and size of my kit after and left the 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII home for a trip to Europe, I opted for the 180mm f/2.8 at the time. I missed the zoom flexibility but not the weight.<br> A few months ago I made the decision to sell the f/2.8 and bought the lighter f/4 zoom. I am very pleased I did. Half the weight, smaller, and half the cost but still super sharp. The cherry on the cake is that the little zoom works fantastic with the TC-20eIII converter.<br> I may have missed the bigger version if I was shooting a lot of indoor sports but for what I mainly shoot, landscape and travel, the lighter version is absolutely fabulous.</p>

<p>The Brikk version is worst than bad taste. Just plain horrible...<br> The Nikon version reminds me of the Lotus F1 race cars from the 70s and 80s. Plain black with gold lettering and accents. I find it stylish.</p>

<p>Another example with the Nikon TC-20eIII.<br> Shot this afternoon in Alsace, France.<br> D810 + Nikon AF-S 70-200 f/4 VR + Nikon TC-20eIII, AF on light Gitzo series 1 tripod (from my travel kit).<br> No sharpening.</p> <p>Original image:<br> <img src="http://logisoftinc.com/photos/2014/_GP12001.jpg" alt="" /></p> <p>Crop:<br> <img src="http://logisoftinc.com/photos/2014/_GP12001-1.jpg" alt="" /> </p>

<p>Problem is to get the lens.<br> It was available for a short period but it's been weeks that anybody can get one.</p>

<p>When people rave about lenses it usually mean the lenses offer a good balance between sharpness and price. What we are talking here is available light for the camera AF system to work with.<br> I would really recommend the Nikon 35mm f/1.8 and 28mm f/1.8. For their price they are terrific. The new Nikon 20mm f/1.8 is getting for great feedback too but that might be too wide for your needs. And of course if your budget allows you have the f/1.4 series (35mm and 24mm).<br> Over brands may also have offerings in this range but I am not familiar with them.<br> Keep in mind that a f/1.8 lens gathers 2.5 times more light than a f/2.8 zoom, and a f/1.4 four times as much.</p>