Jump to content

jeremy_wakefield

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    294

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by jeremy_wakefield

    Using D800 with Live View in Studio

    in Nikon

    Posted

    <p>I'm not sure I follow this. Rodeo Joe has shown that the sensor lights up (a bit anyway) during focussing and so surely for purely focus issues the LV in manual mode is adequate; or is it not?</p>

    <p>I'm really wondering if the LV function is adquate in the studio in manual mode for focussing. I realise the image will not look right due to the absence of sufficient ambient for the exposure set in manual mode but if you can let the camera focus then that would solve the problem surely?</p>

    <p>William</p>

    <p>William</p>

    Using D800 with Live View in Studio

    in Nikon

    Posted

    <p>Presumably this means that it is perfectly possible to use LV to focus in a studio setting with low ambient light with the camera on manual exposure? I'm wondering if LV would be a realistic alternative to the AF points in the studio. I would fancy this due to the ability to place focus exactly where you want it in the scene and I know the Nikon Tech Guide says it is preferable to the AF points.</p>

    <p>Is it within the scope of a firmware update to change the way LV works? I'm guessing yes but wasn't sure.</p>

    <p>William</p>

    Using D800 with Live View in Studio

    in Nikon

    Posted

    <p>Hi</p>

    <p>I believe in the studio and in manual exposure mode, the D800 in Live view will not show an image due to low ambient light and the fact that the camera is likely to be set at something like 125th @ f8 or f11.<br>

    Is there a way round this problem?<br>

    I understand though, that the image gets boosted to become visible when you hold the focus button to use LV to focus. Can anyone say if it does or doesn't? </p>

    <p>Thanks</p>

    <p>William</p>

    Comparing images from different cameras

    in The Digital Darkroom: Process, Technique & Printing

    Posted

    <p>Well I downloaded samples of the D800 and D700 images from Dpreview and printed sections of each at 10 x 8m on my R2880 set at max resolution. I used both resolution of 240ppi for a pair of prints and then let LR use the image native resolution for another pair.<br>

    The sections came from prints sized at 28" x 18" approx.<br>

    There was a difference but it was hardly night and day. I'm guessing for prints of this size taken in normal shooting conditions ( at wedding for example without a tripod ) you'd be peeping pretty hard to notice it if you could tell at all.</p>

    <p>William</p>

    Comparing images from different cameras

    in The Digital Darkroom: Process, Technique & Printing

    Posted

    <p>Hi Joe,<br>

    As I said I didn't interpolate them at all so they were at the resolution they came out the camera with and which obviously changed in resizing. The reason I didn't upscale the D700 image was so that I could get a reasonable comparison. And you are right it was 20 x 16 inches - I didn't think 20 x 16 pixels would have given me a very great sample ;-)<br>

    The imaging resource website simply shows crops at different percentage sizes eg 100% etc which will obviously be different size but surely these will only show per pixel sharpness? If that's the case it isn't really what I want. What I really wanted to know was what the difference between a 20 x 16 print from each camera would look like.<br>

    I will take your advice and compare two print sections printed on my Epson R2880 which should be adequate. The lenses used in the test were pro spec ones which will also do the trick. I suppose you've answered my question already by implying that at the 20x16" size there won't be much difference which is what I suspected.<br>

    Apart from increased DR it would seem there isn't a huge amount of gain with the D800 over the D700 for prints of this size.<br>

    So thanks for your help which is appreciated.</p>

    <p>William</p>

    Comparing images from different cameras

    in The Digital Darkroom: Process, Technique & Printing

    Posted

    <p>Thanks but I'm still not sure what to do. I understand the thing you mention, Stephen and have done them no problem. I also know the D800 images are bigger at any given % view. However, if i resize them to say 20 x 16 and then view the at "print size" and I haven't applied any interpolation, there isn't an awfully noticeable diiference.</p>

    <p>What am I missing?</p>

    <p>William</p>

    Comparing images from different cameras

    in The Digital Darkroom: Process, Technique & Printing

    Posted

    <p>I must be missing something. Can someone please explain how `i should make a valid comparison of two images from diiferent cameras in either photoshop or lightroom?</p>

    <p>I compared some images from D700s and D800s and couldn't tell much difference. I guess my monitor or some other part of my preparation is reducing these to a low common denominator. I'm just not sure how best to judge the quality difference. </p>

    <p>It isn't my camera technique because I downloaded these from a test site!<br>

    This is probably a stupid question but I'd be most grateful for guidance</p>

    <p>Thanks</p>

    <p>William</p>

    Thom Hogan Declares D800 "Not Recommended"

    in Nikon

    Posted

    <p>You use live view to get the best possible image given any shortcomings of your lens etc. This should be accurate and the standard to which you can reasonably compare your "viewfinder" AF test results. In other words the Live View image isn't the test, it simply becomes your reference point against which you actually test the AF points</p>

    <p>William</p>

    Thom Hogan Declares D800 "Not Recommended"

    in Nikon

    Posted

    <p>I don't know how typical my experience is. It is possible I had two cameras from a "bad" batch. I received mine on a Friday and tested it over the weekend. When it was found to be faulty I phoned the retailer who put one aside for me that day so both of these came from the same shipment to the dealer.<br>

    I know of other cases in the UK of cameras returned to Nikon for repair with mixed results. Some seem to get the issue fixed quickly and without any problem whereas others get the run around. I know this is anecdotal but my own experience led me to wait for a while.<br>

    The other worry was the on the second body the centre point AF was pretty erratic and failed to focus correctly - and I mean it was a long, long way out - on several shots. I'd estimate 15% of the time. This was on my 50mm f1.4 lens wide open. The same lens has worked without problem with my D700 and D300 cameras for a while before but I suppose it might be possible it has developed a fault and that this second issue was lens related. (I will keep an eye on it for a while)<br>

    <br />All I know for sure is that both bodies I was sent had the AF problem.<br>

    I will certainly be looking for a D800 once Nikon sort it out though. If I stuck to the centre to right points or Live View focus, it was absolutely amazing. I was really gutted at having to send them back.<br>

    William</p>

    Thom Hogan Declares D800 "Not Recommended"

    in Nikon

    Posted

    <p>Sorry I forgot to add in response to your comments, Ariel, than I <strong>did</strong> speak to NPS and far from confirming they had a fix, they denied the problem existed. Doesn't square with your view I'm afraid.<br>

    In summary, the reason people are annoyed ( and the reason Thom withdrew his recommendation ) is that far from your comments being accurate, the opposite of all of them is true.</p>

    <p>William</p>

    Thom Hogan Declares D800 "Not Recommended"

    in Nikon

    Posted

    <p>Ariel. The only link of yours I can see is to the Mansurovs article. This isn't a Nikon response. Ming Thein's experience is one customer talking to one Nikon service department and not a Nikon response. If you know of any response from Nikon and you have posted it I have missed it and I apologise. Would you mind posting it again please?<br>

    <br />Also I wasn't saying the internet is all accurate. The point I made is that Nikon used the "internet tattle" argument to mask a known fact identified by many of their customers. <br>

    As far as the bad US batch theory goes, not true I'm afraid. I know of several people here in the UK who have had this issue. I myself had it in two bodies as I pointed out in my response above.<br>

    Some of the above posts remind me of what happens when you criticise Apple on certain forums</p>

    <p>William</p>

    Thom Hogan Declares D800 "Not Recommended"

    in Nikon

    Posted

    <p>While I personally congratulate Thom on his stance and believe it is probably quite a powerful step in concentrating Nikon to give a bit of clarity to the situation, I am really saddened by the whole situation. When I used the centre AF point, those to the right of it, or Live View to focus the D800 it was absolutely superb.<br>

    While I was extremely tempted to ignore the issue and hope Nikon would sort it if I sent it back. I wasn't really made to feel confident when I spoke to them though. They just said they'd never heard of this issue and when I pointed out it was splattered all over the internet their reply was that they didn't read reports online. This seemed to confirm a number of reports that Nikon weren't really throwing their full weight behind sorting this out for customers.<br>

    TBH if they'd said " Sorry you've had this problem. A small number of units are affected but we understand the cause and are able to fix it" I'd have happily sent it in. But they didn't and the number of people saying their fixes weren't fixes at all is disappointing. So I played safe and sent it back. £2,600 is a lot of cash to take a punt with!<br>

    In the end I've decided to hold fire until there seems to be a solution. There is not the slightest doubt in my mind that once Nikon sort it ( as I'm sure they will ) I will bite their hand off for this camera.</p>

    <p>William</p>

    Thom Hogan Declares D800 "Not Recommended"

    in Nikon

    Posted

    <p>Well I ordered the D800 about 3 weeks ago. It had the AF issue. I sent it back for a replacement and the second body had it too. In addition the second body had another AF issue which was worse. I don't know if my experience is common or not but this is the first camera I've had problems of this nature with.<br>

    A number of highly respected people have noted the same issue so I know mine wasn't an isolated case. Nikon are claiming no knowledge and, as Thom rightly says, will pay the price.<br>

    I'm waiting until Nikon sort it out before ordering again and I applaud Thom Hogan for his stance.<br>

    William</p>

     

    Epson R2880 roller question

    in The Digital Darkroom: Process, Technique & Printing

    Posted

    <p>Hi all,</p>

    <p>I have used my Epson R2880 for a while now and have been running Permajet Fibre Base Gloss 295gsm through the normal feeder for some of that time. Now I have been told by Epson that putting a paper over 255gsm in this way will, over time, cause damage to my printer. I am not sure if I have caused any damage but it seems to print perfectly well.</p>

    <p>Anyway, I have started to feed the paper through the manual rear feeder slot and it seems to be fine. However, I did wonder if the printer used the same rollers for both methods of feeding paper. In other words, if any damage has been caused by my use of the "standard" feed tray whether simply changing to the rear feed slot would mean i could by-pass the damaged rollers or not.</p>

    <p>TBH I'm not sure what to make of this roller thing. The guy in Epson seemed more interested in selling me an R3000, telling me about the more economical inkset etc. I wasn't too impressed with his tech knowledge because when I checked Epsons prices for cartridge ink, the R3000 set worked out more expensive than the R2880! Also he kept trying to tell me I had to stick the paper in the rear slot directly and said the plastic tray ( supplied for the rear manual feed slot ) was for rolls of paper. No matter how often I told him this was incorrect he was adamant! Ah well!</p>

    <p>Anyway all advice would be gratefully received. Thanks in advance</p>

    <p>William</p>

    Pink skin tone problem R2880 and LR4

    in The Digital Darkroom: Process, Technique & Printing

    Posted

    <p>Hi folks. Sorry not to have responded sooner but I've been pretty busy trying to get things organised for the Easter break. Thanks for the replies which I appreciate.<br>

    I seem to have solved the issue. I forgot that I'd calibrated my monitor with basICColor software and this was the first time I've tried printing since I've used it. Epson suggested making some changes which I did. First I had my monitor gamma set to the basICColor "L" setting. I changed this to 2.2. I also changed the white point to D65 instead of D50. <br>

    Now I wouldn't have thought that would make too much difference but to my surprise, when I did this and re-calibrated I could see the skin tones were too red fairly easily on my monitor. I have been able to get satisfactory results from my printer now.<br>

    I suppose it wasn't a really huge cast but it was certainly noticeable, but even so I'm surprised these changes seem to have had such an impact.<br>

    Well thanks again and sorry to have wasted peoples' time when the fix turned out to be pretty simple</p>

    <p>William</p>

    Pink skin tone problem R2880 and LR4

    in The Digital Darkroom: Process, Technique & Printing

    Posted

    <p>Hi<br /><br />I have been getting a pinkish ( magenta I suppose ) cast on skin tones when I try to print from Lightroom 4 to my Epson R2880 printer. I know this issue can be caused by double profiling but I've checked several times and am pretty sure this is not the case.<br /><br />I don't recall it ever being a problem in the past when I've printed portraits at home though, I haven't printed at home for a while having used a professional printer mostly or else my dye-sub for most of my printing requirements. I've really only printed the odd landscape so maybe this issue hasn't been noticeable. <br /><br />Anyway, I'm using Mac OSX 10.7.3, I have used both the iMac monitor and an external NEC mulitysyc to try and resolve this issue. Both have been profiled using eye one 2 colorimeter and Basicolor software. I'm using Epson Profiles and paper but the problem is also there when I use Permaject paper with the correct Permajet profile.<br /><br />I'm stuck now. As I say I haven't done this for ages but never had this issue before. The only change is that the Mac is new since I last printed but external print companies have done work for me with no problem. The only other change is that I've upgraded LR4 but I doubt that would cause the issue.<br /><br />I have run nozzle tests and all are firing properly. Just to be sure I did two head cleans but this hasn't helped. <br /><br />The problem is only seen in skin tones.<br /><br />Any suggestions would be much appreciated. :confused::confused:<br /><br />William</p>

    AF accuracy

    in Canon EOS Mount

    Posted

    <p>Interesting post, Eric. Thanks.<br>

    I notice a few people don't seem to rate the AF system on the 5D2 all that highly. Maybe I'm just going to have to accept it isn't quite as nippy as Nikon's offering.<br>

    The other thing I've noticed is that many people recommend manual focussing as a way out of the problem. Now I've used manual focus SLRs a lot and loved using them. I had the split screen focus aid surrounded by the little shimmering collar thing ( can't remember what it was called ) though, and the rest of the screen was nice and gritty to help. None of these are in my DSLR viewfinder though and I really can't see how manual focus can really be useful, particularly in dim light trying to get someone's eye spot on! Am i missing something?<br>

    Anyway, I will just need to take a few shots as insurance when using AF and probably stick with the centre point only ( though close up I'm sure focussing and re-composing will throw the point of focus out again!)</p>

    <p>William</p>

    AF accuracy

    in Canon EOS Mount

    Posted

    <p>Thanks Scott. I know what you mean about AF. As with so many things we take for granted these days, it is absolutely amazing when you stop to consider what it does.<br>

    Just comparing the difference in quoted accuracy for lenses of f2.8 and below and those of smaller apertures is quite revealing too. <br>

    I am most grateful for your help</p>

    <p>William</p>

     

×
×
  • Create New...