john_n._wall

Moose sez there's a new Nikkor 200 mm lens and 1.7x TC -- is this

news, or did I miss the announcement while I was away? Moose

sez:<br><br>

 

"Well... the hot news today is that Nikon has announced the <a

href="http://www.nikonusa.com/template.php?

cat=1&grp=5&productNr=AFSVR200#"> 200mm f/2G IF-ED AF-S VR

Nikkor.</a> Most photographers probably don't remember the old

200f2 which was a killer lens. I can hardly wait to get my hand on

this and play!<br> <br>

 

Nikon also the <a href="http://www.nikonusa.com/template.php?

cat=1&grp=5&productNr=TC17EII">TC-17E II AF-S AF-I Teleconverter</a>

which is a 1.7x teleconverter. I've not seen this lens yet either,

but look forward to it!" <br><br>

 

Thanks, Moose!

Scotland -- the Isle of Skye is an absolute must -- would suggest the West and Highlands up at least as far north as Ullapool. Take the road to Applecross and drive carefully. Beautiful country to explore by car -- vast and open -- I will echo good words about Glen Coe. Glasgow is splendid.

 

Ireland -- go to Galway and head west to the coast and then head northwest to Cliffden and the Connemara National Park -- explore that area -- the drive round to Leenaun is a splendid drive as is the drive across to Maam Cross through the Maumturk Mountains. Ah, so many possible images, so little time!

I traveled through Italy and France for a month last year basically with one body and two lenses -- a 24 mm and an 85 mm -- and there were VERY few shots I wanted that I could not take with that gear. I carried the camera on a strap with the wide-angle and had the 85 plus film in a small padded waist pack. I also carried a table-top tripod -- mine was not a Leica but I think Leica makes a really good one.

 

I used 400 speed B&W and Provia F 100 which easily pushes to 200 when you need the speed, or Sensia 100 when I could not find Provia in the shops. My general working pattern was to go to a place, size up the area, shoot with one lens for a while, then switch to the other and shoot with it -- used the wideangle for interiors and street scenes and switched to the tele for portraits. I also had with me a 50 mm 1.8, which was handy in some situations, and a 180 f/2.8 which I did not use all that much.

 

I would not hesitate to use that setup again -- light, easy to handle, fast, flexible. If you are going to shoot the best film you will need fast lenses and the drawback with zooms is that fast zooms are big, bulky, VERY HEAVY. Suddenly you need bigger camera bags, sturdier tripods, flash units, and flash cables -- maybe even flash brackets -- and lugging all that gear would wear me out way too fast on a special trip when every second counts.

 

Also, remember to get up for the sweet light of morning and stay late for the golden light of afternoon.

There are so many splendid places to shoot in Tuscany that one can hardly go wrong. I agree with all the suggestions made here. My only caution is that it sounds like you are planning to carry along a good bit of gear and I would caution you about overloading yourself. There is much to see and you will want to travel light so you can move around without getting worn out physically and more important mentally. There are always many things to shoot and many compositions and for every one you lose because you don't have a particular lens there are a thousand others you can get with the lenses you have.

 

The old idea about travel photography requiring a wide angle and a short tele is good advice. I shot all over Tuscany last spring with a 24 mm and an 85 mm on my Nikon body and rarely missed a shot I wanted because of the lens. Not bad to have a 180-200 mm lens in the bag as well, but its not essential -- just look for other shots.

 

Flash is good to have as well because it will expand your shooting time under the Tuscan sun. You can use it to open up shadows during midday and to extend your shooting into twilight.

 

Bob Krist has a video about travel photography for Nikon that happens to be set in Tuscany and seeing it might be a good preparation for your travels. He of course shoots with Nikon gear but he gives you loads of advice about photography applicable to any kind of gear.

I agree that Nikon is very short-sighted to avoid upgrading its TCs, so I concur with the recommendation to go Kenko. Based on my own experience and on all the evidence from people who have tested the Kenko PRO TCs with care and good technique, I have to conclude that they are superb. The 1.4x involves practically no loss of quality at all and the 2x produces a slight softening of image quality and a bit of flattening in contrast but the result is still excellent images.

Lots of folks claim the F4 is the best manual focus camera Nikon has ever made. And the AF isn't all that bad if you want it. And the F4 can use AF-S lenses (but not VR lenses and not G lenses with full functionality). Check it out. With the MB-20 battery pack its only a little heavier than your N90s.

Then there's

 

David Ruether's and Grover Larkin's very independent lens test site at

<BR><BR>

<a href="http://www.verwoerd.info/nikon/">http://www.verwoerd.info/nikon/</a>

The F4 has the greatest forward and backwards compatibility with Nikkor MF and AF lenses. You can use AF-S (but not VR) lenses, plus almost all Nikkor F-mount MF lenses with the F4. The F-mount on the F4 has a fold-back coupling pin that allows use of pre-1977 non-AI lenses with the F4.

<br><BR>

This is in addition to Nikkor AI-S, AI, and modified AI lenses, as well as all AF and AI-P Nikkors. Interestingly, the F4 is the only Nikon body other than the F3AF that can use the Nikkor AF lenses that Nikon made to use with the F3AF. These are the AF 80mm f2.8 and a AF 200mm f3.5 IF ED and the TC 16 teleconverter. Now THAT is serious backwards compatibility!<BR><BR>

 

For Leonard Foo's helpful chart of lenses compatible with the F4 body, see the Compatibility Chart on the "Photography in Malasia" website. <BR><BR>

 

See the F4 FAQ at

 

<a href="http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/users/j/jnwall/html/f4faq.htm">

http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/users/j/jnwall/html/f4faq.htm</a>

 

for more information on this subject.

Two other choices to consider for less money than the 80-200 f/2.8 (which is a wonderful lens) -- to stay with the prime line-up, take the 180 f/2.8, a wonderful lens, even better than the 80-200 f/2.8 by a little bit. You can get a Canon 500D close-up diopter for this lens and have great macro capability. Another choice is the 70-210 f/4, an older model lens available used, which is tack sharp, light, uses 62 mm filters, and only one stop slower than the 80-200.

KEH has an F3 in "excellent" condition for $379. This looks like a great deal -- KEH is very conservative in its grading of cameras and this one may look "like new" to you, based on what others have said about this grade at KEH. I agree with you tha the F3 is a first-class camera.

KEH sets the standard for many of us who wish to buy used equipment. Their prices are a bit high relative to some other sources but their grading standards are VERY conservative. If they say the gear is "Like New," it really is indistinguishable from new. Their grades "excellent+" and "excellent" are fine with me. I've bought several pieces of gear from them at that grade and have always been very pleased, NEVER disappointed. Many people say their "bargain" grade is plenty good, that the cosmetic flaws that earn this grade are usually minimal. Even at "bargain" grade there is no problem with functionality. Lenses at "bargain" grade are flawless inside.

 

They also have a good return policy in case of any problems, but I have never had to take advantage of it. On the other hand, used gear from B&H and Adorama also ought to be dependable. But I always check with KEH first for used gear.

The Sigma is well reviewed but the Tamron is one of the great Macro lenses of our time. Practical Photography did a comparative test recently and gave the Tamron 90 mm an image quality score of 94. The Sigma 105 got a 92. Nikon's 105 got a 92. The Canon 100 mm got a 95. Tamron has a 180 macro that got a score of 92; Sigma's 180 got a score of 89. i have owned the Tamron and my results support this test.

If the sample photo is an example of a past winner, then be aware going in that you have no way of predicting the outcome of this thing. That's to a degree true of any contest, but here especially the selection of this photo was not made on aesthetic grounds. The sample photo is truly an awful photo, a photo only a mother (the mother of the child) could love.

 

ALL of your photos are much better than that one, in my opinion. That said, I personally think #2 and #4 are your best shots. #2 is a lovely romantic shot, but the flowers look a little washed out, so you might try adjusting that. #4 is very nice compositionally, but it to my eye is a bit less visually compelling. Otherwise, in #3 the baby's head is too close to the flowers -- and the first one is more about the baby than the flowers.

 

Hope you give this a shot; let us know how it turns out for you.

Suggest you try the Kenko/Tamron 1.4x and 2x teleconverters -- same unit marketed by both companies although I think kenko actually makes the item. These units provide full AF and metering with the 80-200 f/2.8. <br><br>There is an excellent review of their function with your lens at

 

<a href="http://www.nikonlinks.com/lenstest.html">http://www.nikonlinks.com/lenstest.html </a> <BR><BR>

 

I believe I am correct in saying that Nikon does not make a TC that provides AF with this lens, except the no-longer-made TC-16A which is a great TC but provides useful but limited AF with this lens.

 

Certainly Nikon does not make anything as good as the Kenko/Tamron units at their price. I have the Kenko units and use them routinely with this lens and get results that duplicate the results described in the above review.

Using a 35mm lens for macro can have cool effects; see George Lepp's discussion of it in one of his BEYOND THE BASICS books. He suggests using an extension ring to get this lens to focus close. He likes to set up this rig, get into a field of flowers, and shoot them from below. His work proves the value of the practice.

 

I have heard that the 5T and 6T diopters will work fine for macro work on lenses with filter sizes larger than 62 mm. The Nikkor 80-200 zoom is supposed to make a great macro lens with these diopters. But I use a Canon 500D myself with great results. I'm a diehard Nikon user and its the only piece of Canon gear I own.

Roberto, based on my personal experience with the 28-80, confirmed by a number of reputable reviewers, I stick with my original claim.

A second F4 -- the controls and performance are the same, which is important when you want to guarantee results. Keep it in MB-20 format to deal with the weight issue. Works for me.

Sometimes the ridiculous prices Nikon charges for some Nikkors forces one to do the unspeakable (to some) deed and buy a non-Nikkor lens. I cannot imagine putting the money down that Nikon wants for the 28-70 AF-S zoom -- the price is ridiculous (as far as I am concerned) unless I were a pro and could make money with this lens.

 

I own the Tokina 28-80 f/2.8 and find it splendid. It is certainly comparable to a Nikkor product in terms of robustness of build and quality of image. I would not hesitate to subject any image I made with this lens to the most rigorous critical examination, in one-to-one comparison with images made with the Nikkors. I have won prizes with images made with this lens.

 

Not clear why Tokina sells two f/2.8 zooms at this focal length. There is a rumor that the 28-70 f/2.6-2.8 is a copy of a lens design by a now-defunct company called Angeneux which was supposed to be legindary in its day -- maybe that's why Tokina keeps putting it out.

 

I also know that the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 has been very well reviewed and is certainly worth a look. If you search archives and around the WWW on review sites you will find lots of discussions of all these lenses.

 

The obvious Nikkor alternative among affordable zooms is the 35-70 f/2.8 zoom, which may or may not still be made, but clean used ones ought to be available from KEH. This lens is tack-sharp but you have to like push-pull zooms (which I don't) to enjoy using this lens. The other alternative is to remember that 28-70/80 is not all that much of a zoom range, so if you put down $85 you can get a lightning-fast tack-sharp 50 mm f/1.8 prime lens and zoom with your feet.

You might want to check out the F4 FAQ at

<br><br>

<a href="http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/users/j/jnwall/html/f4faq.htm">

http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/users/j/jnwall/html/f4faq.htm</a>

<br><br>

I have not updated this page lately but I think it still has some good information.

In close-up photography, there is precious little depth of field, regardless of the aperture. So it does not surprize me that you saw little difference in DOF between f/2.8 and f/4. Part of the challenge in macro photography is making the most of the DOF you have. That's where good technique comes in. In the specific case of the lenses you mention, you are going for minimum DOF (at your lenses' largest aperture) and therefore greatest background blur. To evaluate, look at the backgrounds to see how blurred-out they are at the different apertures.

 

The goal of course is the very blurry background with a tack sharp foreground. To get that, many macro shooters use a blurry background they prepare in advance by having a very blurry shot of background printed up and placing it behind the subject of the photo. That way, you can use smaller apertures on the lens -- to take full advantage of whatever DOF you can get -- and still get the blurry background provided by a lerger aperture and a more distant background.

You lucky guy -- Venice is a photographer's dream. Get up early and go down to Piazza San Marco. We were there in February a year ago and lots of folks in Carnivale costume were out every morning wandering around to be photographed -- and there were a bunch of shooters out with them. My guess is, they are about year-round. Venice is wonderful for photos and there are millions of them on the WWW and in guide books.

 

You want to be there for the sweet light of dawn and twilight, not the harsh light of midday -- so pray for overcast days if you are there for a limited time. Take your tripod. You will want to get the shots where the buildings can be seen but the sky is colorful with morning or evening light and the lights are glowing. Wander around -- its a really small city -- if you are familiar with the standard shots (and many of them are at the web site mentioned above, beautifully done) you will soon recognize where they were made. You will want to take your version of the great shots but also look for the not-so-familiar shots. And there is a wonderful scene around every corner and down every street. And the people are great too. Also check out boats to the islands -- very colorful buildings on the islands. You might check out stories on the Washington Post Website by Frank Van Ripper; he is a professional shooter who spends extended periods in Venice every year working on an ongoing project on Venice in the winter. He has many stories about what he has found in Venice. Oh, so much to see and so much to photograph! Take lots of images and let us know how it goes.

Consider ordering from B&H or Adorama and having the merchandise shipped to a friend in Dallas. That way, you get NYC prices, no sales tax, and your gear when you need it. They might even ship to your hotel.

Suggestions for good camera shops or sources for Provia 100F film in

Berkeley, CA? I will be visiting there soon and want to make sure I

can get the film I will need.

If anyone would like to pay me to use and tout Nikon, Fuji, Gitzo, and Epson, let me know. I'm not free but I'm reasonable.

The Geisha are a privacy seeking lot. Unlikely that you will see a real one except slipping in and out of cars or doorways, in the evening, in the appropriate section of Kyoto, and then the person you see may be an apprentice. My guess is, to meet someone who practices this profession you need carefully developed personal contacts.