john_n._wall

Remember, as you consider MF bodies, that in the opinion of many people the F4 is the best MF camera Nikon ever made. And with the MB 20 battery pack it is lighter than the F3 with a motor drive. Spot meter, TTL, and AF if you ever need it . . .

Well, if Franz has jumped off the Nikon ship, he hasn't updated his website -- http://www.lanting.com/home.html -- which still shows Nikon as his camera supplier.

Some images here:

 

http://jancotanis.xs4all.nl/blog/archives/00000039.html

The TC-16A is a first-class TC and very useful once you understand its potential and limitations. It was made to allow limited AF with MF lenses, but works fine with AF lenses -- just makes them work like MF lenses (ie, no focusing power is supplied to the lens on the front end of the TC with this item). It will allow you to AF from close focus to infinity with wide-angle MF lenses. It will not AF from close-focus to infinity with tele lenses, and its AF ability decreases as the lens focal length gets longer. What you do with tele lenses and this TC is either (1) to treat the lens as an MF lens and focus manually, OR (2) to prefocus the lens in the range of a sharp focus and then touch the shutter button which powers the TC to achieve sharp focus. The quality of the images produced by this TC and Nikkor lenses is just fine. It is well worth trying out.

 

As to lens choices with the F4. I have two F4 bodies and try to use the fastest glass I can -- the body AFs better with fast glass than slow because the AF sensor works better the more light it has to work with. I use some primes -- 24, 50, 85, 180 -- which work very well, plus some of the f/2.8 zooms, which also work very well. I'm sure the F4 also works well with variable aperture zooms, but not as quickly and acccurately as it does with primes and fast zooms.

 

I am told that the F4 will work fine with AF-S lenses -- an example of Nikon's forward as well as backward compatibility -- but I can't afford 'em right now so I can't speak from personal experience. As a new F4 owner, you might want to check out the F4 FAQ at http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/users/j/jnwall/html/f4faq.htm maintained by yours truly. It needs work right now but there is interesting stuff on it.

 

Enjoy your F4!

Amanda, thanks. The book I mentioned is published by the NC Department of Transportation and can be downloaded as a PDF file at

 

http://www.doh.dot.state.nc.us/operations/dp_chief_eng/roadside/scenic/

 

You might also want to look at

 

http://areas.wildernet.com/pages/area.cfm?areaID=NCSB9&CU_ID=1

 

And this title might be helpful:

 

Touring the Western North Carolina Backroads (Touring the Backroads Series) by Carolyn Sakowski

 

Enjoy!

I also live in NC and would like to recommend three resources to help you plan. One is Kevin Adams' book on(not sure of the exact title but the following is close enough) the Waterfalls of NC, how to find and photograph them. Kevin is a first class shooter and his book is very helpful for the sightseer and the photographer. Others are a book by James Hinkle, Parkway Byways: 5000 miles of scenic drives. It incluldes Virginia and NC and is very helpful. The third is a book put out by NC's own Division of Travel and Tourism on NC Scenic Byways. Check out the NC Travel and Tourism site on the WWW; this book should be listed there. NC has designated a number of roads as Scenic Byways and this book tells you how to find them and what to look for.

 

To return to the original question, you will have no problem with your tripod in NC.

I just returned from 6 months in the British Isles, with side trips to Venice, Florence, Montpellier, Oslo, and Barcelona. The important thing to say is that most European cities feel, and are, far safer than American cities, even when one has to acknowledge that bad things can happen anywhere. One should take precautions, of course, but mostly the streets seem lively and safe, with men and women out at all hours everywhere we went.

 

But one should be prudent and careful when one is a long way from home. I carried a body and three lenses most everywhere. Put the body and one lens around my neck and the other two lenses (plus film, etc) in a small pack around my waist. Wore a hip-length jacket all the time, which covered straps and allowed me to put my wallet in the inside pocket of the jacket where it was buttoned in. Figured the more layers I put between me and any would-be thief was a good thing. With one exception, I had no problems at all. Yes, the Gypsies were out; they were all over southern Europe, usually operating alone, begging for money. We had been warned to watch out for them so developed a habit of just saying "no" to all appeals. When more than one showed up we got EXTRA cautious and headed for the exit. Otherwise, we were fine, indeed more than fine.

 

The one exception -- in Oslo, where there were no Gypsies, I forgot to put my wallet in my jacket pocket one day. As I was getting on a bus and dealing with the fare, I felt something and reached quickly back to feel my wallet halfway out of my hip pocket. Fortunately for me, I caught it in time -- the guy trying to get it stepped off the bus and ran away.

 

My advice -- no need to be fearful, just prudent, vigilant, and careful. Keep up with your stuff and enjoy the wonders of the country. You will have a great time and get great shots.

 

In fact, since you are going with a tour group you may find that the biggest challenge you face is their getting in your way. Consider getting up early and wandering the streets of the city for a couple of hours or so before breakfast -- the light is great and the streets are filled with signs of the city coming to life. I did this in Venice during the run-up to Carnivale and found a dozen Venetians in full and elaborate costumes wandering the streets around San Marco looking for the opportunity to pose for photographers looking for great shots. There were a bunch of shooters there, too. A great time!

The Canon is a nice body. You can take great shots with it. These decisions are personal and often involve ergonomic factors. The key is to try both bodies and decide which you want to shoot with. Buy the body you will want to have in your hands. Having owned a Canon once upon a time (an A2e), I can say I wanted to use it less and less because of how it felt in my hands and how it responded to me. For instance, if you wear glasses, you will probably enjoy using the Nikon more because Nikon provides more eye relief than Canon. I got tired of trying to see through a Canon viewfinder and found Nikon viewfinders a joy to look through.

I've traveled a good bit this year and to keep things light I carried prime lenses. Most of the shots I've taken have been with a 24 f/2.8 and an 85 f/1.8. I also carried a 180 f/2.8 in my bag but it takes fast film and good light to hand hold. I also have a 50 f/1.8 but haven't used it all that much. With the 24 and the 85, and 400 ASA B&W film, I can almost shoot in the dark. I also have good mobility and flexibility with Provia 100, which is my choice for color. With variable aperture zooms, you need to shoot fast film, which pretty much limits you to print film. Fixed aperture zooms are great but HEAVY. Consider primes.

F4, ditto. The F4 is the best MF camera Nikon ever made, and you have AF when and if you want it. And the AF is not nearly as bad as the AF speed freaks want you to believe. I use the F4 in the basic configuration -- with the MB-20 battery pack, not the F4S configuration with the MB-22 pack -- and it is not really any heavier than the F3 with a motor drive, and its more compact, too.

I've been doing a good bit of traveling lately and have carried prime lenses to travel light. The rule of thumb about travel photography is that any one lens you carry is either too wide or too long for what you want to shoot at the moment. So I've carried a 24, a 50 (1.8), and an 85. The whole kit is not much heavier than one f/2.8 zoom and with fast film I can just about shoot in the dark with any lens. This set-up has really worked well for me. Most of the shots I've taken have been with the 24 and the 85 (see rule of thumb above), but the 50 is great when I want more in the image than the 85 will give me but not as much as the 24.

The 180 f/2.8 is a wonderful lens, one of the all-time great Nikkors for general shooting. I have used the Nikkor 180 mm AF lens with the Canon 500D close-up diopter (with a 72>77 adapter ring) as part of a light-weight kit while traveling and had very good results. Haven't compared them directly to slides taken with my 200 mm Nikkor macro, but preliminary results look quite positive. The major drawback is the lack of a tripod mount on the 180. I use an L-bracket on the body to facilitate switching from horizontal to vertical format. Works OK, not as neatly as the 200 mm macro but fine when traveling.

Two lenses -- the 24 mm f/2.8 and the 85 mm /1.8. If you have an extra $75, get the 50 mm f/1.8. and if you can fit in a third lens, the 180 mm f/2.8. I personally don't think the additional speed you get with the slightly faster Nikkor primes justifies the cost. With these lenses and Ilford 3200, you can just about shoot handheld in the dark.

F4 without a doubt. The spot meter is too good to give up. I agree that one should use the F4 battery pack, not the F4s pack, for macro.

TCs are aonther area in which Nikon lags behind, depending on old technology to see them through. Many of us use the Kenko PRO TCs, with exceptional results. Make sure you get the PRO models, in both 1.4 and 2.0 configurations. There is a link to a thorough review of these TCs on the Nikon Links website. You will like these -- AF and full metering as well as exceptional images.

Don't know about the Sigma, but the Kenko and Tamron PRO TCs are the same thing with different labels. Kenko makes these, and they work GREAT with the 80-200. See the extensive review at

 

http://www.nikonlinks.com/lenstest.html

 

I have the Kenko units (1.4 AND 2.0) and I have tried them with the 80-200 and my results duplicate the reviewer's. Kenko seems to specialize in making affordable quality aftermarket gear for Nikon.

 

Given the fact that Nikon's TCs for lenses other than "S" lenses represent 30-year-old technology (or more), and that they've never actually made TCs for AF bodies and lenses, I think the word is Kenko.

 

One sleeper in this mix is the Nikkor TC16A, which was made to provide some AF capability for MF lenses in the early days of AF. It is sharp, works with most Nikon AF bodies, and does give limited AF. It will AF from close focus to infinity with wide-angle lenses, but its AF range shortens the longer the lens you use. With Tele lenses, you manually focus to approximate sharp focus, then let the TC 16A sharpen things up. Its AF ability is engaged when you press the shutter button as you would if you had an AF lens on the body.

Fuji Neopan 400 and 1600.

I don't really care all that much, but had a spare 5 minutes with

the new Pop Photo. They have the results of their "9th Annual

International Picture Contest."

 

Of 54 winning images in all categories, thirty-one were made with

Nikon gear. Twelve were made with Canon gear. Eleven images were

made with other 35 mm gear, medium format gear, etc.

 

So Nikon DOES make the best pictures -- at least in this sample.

 

Best to all,

 

NikonJohn

Get the Tamron 90mm f/2.8 AF lens and forget about other options, unless you have the cash for the Nikkor 105 or 200 mm. You will not be sorry.

To get a tripod mount on this lens, you need one of the later models -- same great glass, but easier to handle.

 

For this lens, when it was being made, several aftermarket suppliers made brackets for it that included a tripod mount, including Kirk Photo and some others. There was much internet discussion of these, pros and cons, and you might find traces of some of that if you search archives. None of them are being produced any more, but they show up on eBay or other place from time to time.

 

You might check with KEH or B&H used equipment to see if they have one. The only problem is that I don't think any of them worked all that well and they added weight to an already hefty lens.

 

Others on Photo.net will remember specific examples of these brackets and might have more encouraging comments to make about the various designs.

This is a great lens, regarded at the time as on a par with the 80-200 f/2.8 in their common range -- and only one stop slower. The variable aperture 70-210 that followed it was more compact but not as good optically. I had one of these, finally selling it to get the 80-200 f2.8. Took GREAT images with it. I recommend it. AF is a bit slower, but the optical quality is definitely there. This lens is one of the "secret" Nikkors -- great optically, but not recognized for its quality until after it had been replaced.

Suggest you look into a mint copy of the 20-35 f/2.8 AF zoom. In its heyday, it was as highly regarded as the 17-35 is today and it should be cheaper now that the action has moved to "S" lenses. The highest possible AF speed is not a major concern with wide angle lenses. Also, lots of people like the 24-50 Nikkor, if you want to to move gradually toward wide angle. The prime lens fans will tell you that what you really need is a another prime or two in the 20/24/28/35 range.

I've been asked to make a color photo of a family against the

background of a lighted monument at night. I want to use ambient light

to shoot the monument but flash to shoot the family.

 

I'm shooting a Nikon F4 and I figure I put the camera in manual and

spot metering and meter the monument for a proper exposure. Then I put

the camera on a tripod, put the flash in TTL and in slow sync/rear

curtain flash.

 

Then I probably set the film speed to compensate for flesh tones,

perhaps one stop slower than the rated film speed to get a stop more

light, and make sure that the spot meter circle is on a face when the

flash goes off.

 

What have I forgotten, or misunderstood? What other settings might I

use? Or can I trust matrix metering and auto fill flash in this

situation?

Now here's a radical thought -- what if Nikon "G" lenses and Canon's

cheaper lenses were made by the same manufacturer?

 

I was in my local dealer's shop the other day and looked at oen of the

new Nikon "G" lenses. Then I looked at a comparable Canon lens and

noticed that the shape of the lens barrel, the typeface of the

markings, and the overall set of design elements -- color, texture,

materials -- were the same.

 

Has anyone else noticed this?

Suggest you at least try your F4 with the MB-20 battery pack. This makes an F4 look like and weigh about as much as an F100. The only thing you lose, really, is the big grip. The motor drive works slightly slower but the difference isn't noticeable unless you shoot a lot in bursts. There is a substantial weight difference between the F4 with the MB-20 and with the MB 22 or MB 23.

 

The major problem with using an F3 if you are used to the F4 is the flash problem. The F3 has its own eccentric flash system. And, the F3 with a motor drive is a hefty beast in its own right.

 

A really nice combination is the F4 with the MB-20 and a prime lens. Using this combo is a revelation!