brooks_lester

September 20, 2009

OK, I forgot how to post images... let me try this:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3412/3552462058_77cc02a801_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3423/3389559141_10123a6d2e_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3376/3429459456_bc2af29755_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3621/3464670986_2e2544e12e_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3505/3463825053_0cac6087e0_b.jpg

September 20, 2009

105DC. It's rendition goes beyond the technical to a flattering rendering of human and other living subjects. It has very fast focussing for a screw driven lens. It displays focussing issues on some FX Nikon cameras such as the D700, but AF Fine Tune usually clears up the problem. In this forum there's a very long post concerning this subject. It's my favorite lens and my first choice for people. Nikon's DC lenses are produce the prettiest portraits of any Nikon glass - this is their sole purpose.

September 20, 2009

I'd reduce your NR setting somewhat to get rid of that plastic-y look.

I shoot my D700's pop-up flash with ISO at 1600 and 3200 on many occasions - it's not counterintuitive at all - it allows much more of the ambient light to appear in the image, which lessens the obviousness of the flash. If you combine this technique with gelling (color correcting) your flash to match the dominant ambient source, you'll get subtle but effective fill flash instead of snap shot-looking bright faces and dark backgrounds. In fact, the high ISO ability of modern DSLR's makes this technique easy and even current APS-C sensor cameras can pull this trick off at ISO 800-1600.

September 20, 2009

Noise is directly related to your ISO value. Check ISO at the beginning of the shooting session to make sure it's set where you want it. I try to always check white balance setting and ISO when I turn the camera on. I've screwed this up enough times to have learned some hard lessons. After a while it should become second nature.

August 31, 2009

For the type of photography you talking about doing, the best and most suitable rig would be a full-frame Nikon (D700, D3, D3X) or equivalent Canon DSLR with a least f/2.8 constant or faster aperture lenses. The cropped frame (DX-labelled) Nikon's like yours, and other manufacturers' APS-C format cameras, simply don't have large enough pixels on their sensors to be sensitive in very low light levels such as available light concert shooting and behind the scenes coverage.

Yes, you can shoot with a DX (APS-C) format camera as long as stage lighting is directly illuminating your subjects, but you are not going to have enough light to stop motion in unlit areas off to the side and backstage. The full-frame DSLR's, and especially the Nikon D700 and D3, can produce images with very low noise up to ISO 6400, and are exceptional at ISO 1600-3200. They are really the best tools for the job, in this scenario.

If you can't upgrade to a full-frame camera you should at least buy fast aperture lenses such as the DX Nikon 35mm f/1.8 AF-S , 50mm f/1.4 AF-S, Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8 AF-S, and perhaps something longer as well, or similar third party lenses, and work within the limitations of your camera's sensor. You'll need auto focus lenses with built-in focus motors in order to have auto focus ability with your D60

August 31, 2009

Interesting; I find that when using fill flash with both Auto WB and Sunlight WB subjects tend to look a little cool in warmer sunlit conditions. Using Flash WB setting while shooting with flash in such conditions will at least deliver flesh tones that don't look too cool while ambient values go warm. I prefer this to cool-looking flesh tones with fairly accurate backgrounds that Auto and Sunlight WB seem to produce. I shoot RAW so I'm more concerned about matching flash color temperature for subject to ambient values for backlight and background illumination. I can then move WB values in whatever direction seems appropriate to get a warmer or cooler overall value.

You may simply desire a cooler WB value for you images.

August 19, 2009

The 85mm f/1.4 AF-D is a general purpose short telephoto lens. As such, it has more contrast than the DC lenses. Much of the appeal of the 85mm f/1.4 AF-D's fast aperture and creamy bokeh is due to the ability to shoot at a slight telephoto length and create large amounts of background defocussing and shallow depth of field. While this is a desirable effect it isn't specific to portraiture - it can be used in other styles of photography.

The DC lenses' Defocus Control is really more of a value-added feature; the DC lenses are extremely sharp and produce beautiful bokeh that is at least as pretty as that of the 85mm f/1.4 AF-D - all of this without DC being active. The DC lenses' real advantage is in their glass formulation, which emphasizes skin tones and hair. The overall effect of the DC lenses is to create a "painter-ly" image with medium contrast - they are purpose-built portrait lenses designed to flatter human subjects. They can also create very shallow depth of field and combine it with longer focal lengths than the 85mm f/1.4 AF-D.

July 28, 2009

SU-800 transmits infrared signals to CLS-capable flashes like the SU-600, SU-800, and SU-900. The SU flashes emit preflashess to communicate. They do not transmit infrared; they only receive it.

July 24, 2009

The 105DC is considered as one the very best high quality bokeh-producing 35mm lenses ever made, perhaps on another level than the Sigma 30 HSM. It's also sharper than the Sigma 30 and has the unique-to-Nikon DC lenses Defocus Control feature. The 135DC is similarly performing.

July 23, 2009

HDTV's can't display the full resolution of DSLR images: at 1920x1080 pixels their resolution isn't high enough to come close to say, a D700's 4256 x 2832 pixels or the D40's 3008 x 2000. Sure, the HDMI display option is nice for the large size of the image but the screen resolution is going to make the DSLR images look blurrier than the actually are.

July 6, 2009

24mm f/2.8AF - beautiful for landscapes and compact, minimalist approach choice; add an 85mm f/1.8 or 1.4 for occasional portraits or a 105 Micro for closeups

24-85AF-S - goes to 24mm albeit with some distortion, nice at 35-85mm, sharp, nice bokeh, ultra-compact, very fast focussing

28-105 - sharp and no distortion, nice range except doesn't go to 24mm, screw drive motor (not as fast focussing as 24-85AF-S.

Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 very nice lightweight lens, sharp and fast with f/2.8 constant aperture, good range, compact, beautiful bokeh, adequate focus speed (screw motor version) suffers from Tamron yellow cast which doesn't bother some people

July 2, 2009

Who says the Tamron 17-50 front focusses on Nikons? I had two copies and neither one front focussed on my old D50. An isolated issue, perhaps, or limited to Canon bodies.

July 2, 2009

Is the 105 f/2.8 a macro lens?

July 1, 2009

Wow, beautiful work in your portfolio. I'd get the D700 now and start shooting. If, later on, you decide you want a D3X or the rumor-D700X with the 24MP chip, sell the D700 to subsidize the next purchase. By that time you'll have made many great images with it. Then, again, I don't know that you really need 24MP for your work.

BTW, the FX sensor will react better to the dynamic lighting in your set-ups than DX, not to mention give you more control over depth of field.

July 1, 2009

Kennedy Lake in the middle of the island (road from Nanaimo to Tofino goes through here) is a spectacular area, both lake coast line and surrounding mountains and valleys. On our return trip from Tofino we saw a black bear mom and cubs on the side of the road, in plain view, munching on blackberries, by the lake.

July 1, 2009

Do you have a 24mm f/2.8 or equivalent? The 20mm is a nice lens, but the perspective is somewhat extreme. 24mm is the classic 35mm format landscape focal length. You can put people in the frame (not extreme corners, though) and they won't look too distorted. Yes, the 20mm might be better in very tight spaces, but for sweeping panoramas it will render background elements further away than the 24mm would.

July 1, 2009

Parks mentioned are good ideas, and of course, shooting in the first two and last two hours of the day for best light. You could also go down to Ocean Drive, ("OD") and get images of the attendant wriggling mass of humanity cruising around on the sidewalk and in souped-up import cars with coffee-can sized exhausts. It's quite a spectacle and commentary on our society.

July 1, 2009

Are you shooting in available light? I'd try to find a way to afford the D700. Significantly better low light performance than the DX sensor bodies. Only about $500USD more than a D300. Much better control of depth of field as well.

July 1, 2009

Is what you're missing with the wide lens the shallow depth of field of the 105mm f/2.5AIS? You're just not going to get the subject isolation and sense of depth from an wide angle lens that you get with a telephoto. This is the nature of optics in these focal lengths.

June 30, 2009

I'll shake things up a bit and suggest the D700 full frame camera. If you're buying to take pictures of your family, and you'll be shooting inside, the D700 high ISO performance is a huge benefit over any of the DX Nikon camera bodies. It's worth the investment over the long term. I also feel that D700 color values are more accurate. I went D50, D300, and D700 and have shot plenty of film over the years. The D300 rendered greens too intensely for my taste and for people photography the DX format limits shallow depth of field. The difference between the D300 and D700 is what, about $500? Spread it out over 5 years, not too much more for the much greater performance and pictures of a lifetime. I do no shoot professionally but feel that spending a significant amount to be your family's archivist is well worth it when you and your family look back on those pictures 10, 20, 30, or more years down the road. I have the D700, 24-70AF-S, 50mm f/1.8, LensBaby 2.0, 105DC, and 180 IF ED. Still have a few more lenses to purchase but I have a good start and nice images of my 2.5 year old shot in available light.

June 30, 2009

I'll shake things up a bit and suggest the D700 full frame camera. If you're buying to take pictures of your family, and you'll be shooting inside, the D700 high ISO performance is a huge benefit over any of the DX Nikon camera bodies. It's worth the investment over the long term. I also feel that D700 color values are more accurate. I went D50, D300, and D700 and have shot plenty of film over the years. The D300 rendered greens too intensely for my taste and for people photography the DX format limits shallow depth of field. The difference between the D300 and D700 is what, about $500? Spread it out over 5 years, not too much more for the much greater performance and pictures of a lifetime. I do no shoot professionally but feel that spending a significant amount to be your family's archivist is well worth it when you and your family look back on those pictures 10, 20, 30, or more years down the road. I have the D700, 24-70AF-S, 50mm f/1.8, LensBaby 2.0, 105DC, and 180 IF ED. Still have a few more lenses to purchase but I have a good start and nice images of my 2.5 year old shot in available light.

June 21, 2009

I too have no problems holding this lens steady at lower speeds than 1/200. I shoot at 1/60-100 constantly with this lens. I think it handles very well and is a pleasure to shoot with. It's significantly shorter and lighter than the 70-200VR, for example.

June 15, 2009

Either way, I wouldn't let the difference determine your decision to buy the D700. It's a great camera with the same sensor as the D3. The viewfinder (90%) and lack of standard portrait grip are the only significant differences between the two cameras. You can factor for the 90% viewfinder when framing (or use Live View to see 100%) and buy the portrait grip as an addition for the D700. The option to not mount the portrait grip gives you a much smaller, less conspicuous camera when coupled with a prime.

June 15, 2009

It's my understanding that the focus issue is with 105DC's on D700's.

Do some searches about focus issues w/ 105DC's on D700's. This combo tends to front-focus. I don't know if the 135DC does the same thing, but 105DC users experiencing the issue find that one of two adjustments work well:

setting AF Fine Tune to +10 to +20 (back focus)

turning the DC ring just slightly towards the F 2.8 value. (not a full click, about 1/3 to 1/2 of the turn from DC Neutral to DC F 2.8.

I have the 105DC and love it on my D700. I do have to set AF Fine Tune to +20 back focus, though.

June 15, 2009

You obviously don't realize this, but your post makes you appear to have some resentment towards Spanish speaking folks who live in the U.S. Why not just post that you wished Nikon had provided a built-in bounce card, and leave it at that?

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Events

Downloads

Gallery

Store

Posts posted by brooks_lester