steve_phillips3

<p>A visit to Portland, Maine with my new D7200. This is the fence next to the Portland Lobster Company.</p><div></div>

<p>Trying out a new D7200 on the spiraea bushes along my front walk.</p><div></div>

<p>Actually, the cost savings by going with the D7100 is even better now as the D7100 with 18-140 lens kit is now listed at $1199.95 - that's a pretty sweet deal. Body only is 899.95. These are current list prices direct from Nikon.</p>

<p>I went through the exact same process over the last few months, also upgrading from a D80. While I love the idea of full-frame camera for various reasons, I also shoot lots of kids, and realized that the D7100 would give me better autofocus and shot-to-shot performance than a D610, and without needing new lenses (I have 4 lenses and all but one are DX lenses). I would never have been able to sell the home budget committee on a D750, even if I just got a used 50mm lens or something with it to hold me over for a while. While I was deciding, the D7200 came out and that's what I ended up with. At the time it was only $200 more, though even that was a big decision. I think the D7100 would have been great too and especially at the lower price. The AF system on the D7200 is simply, stunningly awesome compared to the D80. The photos also look great up through ISO 6400, at least compared to the D80 at ISO 1600. What more does the average amateur need?<br>

My dream is actually to someday own a Nikon Df (or something similar in terms of appearance and controls), though even if I was able to any time soon, I would probably still use the D7200 a lot.</p>

<p>My daughter and her cousins cool off in the spray of Grandma's garden hose.</p><div></div>

<p>Modern, proprietary rechargeable batteries are sometimes chipped and communicate with the device they power. In some cases, the device (camera in this case) does keep a record and could also keep a record of having been powered by an "unidentified" battery. If it is an expensive camera, without having certain knowledge as to the specific battery/camera combination or manufacturer's position on an after-market battery, I personally would avoid it until the camera is out of warranty.</p>

<p>Does the D70s use the internal battery like my D80? If so, it may be dead by now and need to go back to Nikon if it is to keep time on its internal clock. That will add to the cost.</p>

<p>John, I like your performance shots as well.</p>

<p>Lex, thank you and I am humbled as a rank amateur to be considered "qualified" along with the likes of Michael, KJ, and especially Martynas - all clearly outstanding photographers. Rick also - if that's a shot that ended up on the cutting room floor I would enjoy seeing the "good" ones. We have probably gone a bit over the top with details in our advice to Kelli, a parent accustomed to shooting on "Auto" taking pictures of her daughter at a kids' dance recital with existing equipment. Hopefully she can post some pics so we can see the fruits of our discussion.</p>

<p>It occurs to me all us "experienced" photographers may be over-thinking this a bit. In addition to shutter priority, try the "Sports" scene mode for some shots. This should force both the shutter speed and ISO as high as they can go given the light and available aperture at the focal length you are using, without having to put any thought into it. I have a friend who shoots, dare I say, a Canon Digital Rebel with a consumer zoom lens and gets pretty nice basketball pictures this way.</p>

<p>I can't add to much except to agree with Michael that the D80 is perfectly capable of producing acceptable results at ISO 1600. We have gotten so used to the latest gear that we forget that ISO 1600 film was very grainy but we were all delighted with the shots we could get with it given the shooting conditions. I shoot lots of dance in theaters with a D80 at ISO 1600. Typically at f2.8 and shutter speeds between 1/125th and 1/250th of a second. You can probably use the current lens if you live with some underexposure and/or post process, or with careful timing and slightly slower shutter speeds.</p><div></div>

<p>Brian,<br>

Your option 2 with the 16-85 and the 35mm f1.8 is what I mostly use on a D80. I agree with all the comments on the excellent 16-85. It's important to keep in mind that when you look at f2.8 wide-angle primes, you are only talking 1 stop or so difference between those and the short end of the 16-85, which the image stabilization will more than make up for if you are doing architecture, darkened landscapes, etc. I don't use the 35mm f1.8 as much as I thought I would, though to get close low-light people shots, it is pretty nice since you need some higher shutter speeds to freeze motion. I also use it occasionally when I want to travel light, although it is just a bit longer than I would ideally like for walk-around use. If you eventually need a longer low-light people lens, you can get a used f2.8 zoom of some sort. I got a Tokina ATX-Pro 50-135 f2.8.</p>

<p>Steve</p><div></div>

<p>Lots of good comments on continuous AF, single focus point, etc. I have shot some figure skating and shoot quite a lot of dance with a D80. Based on this experience I would add a couple more comments. I agree that you need more shutter speed. 1/1000 would do it, but may actually be a bit fast as it will likely freeze nearly everything and I often like a bit of blur of the fastest moving parts of the body, like the feet, to give a sense of motion. I would suggest maybe starting with 1/500. Also, I find that I like to control depth-of-field as well, so what I do for these situations is put the camera on manual and use auto ISO. I set the shutter speed I want and set aperture to about f4 or so. This gives just enough depth-of-field to get the whole person in focus, as opposed to just a face or foot, if they are positioned so that various parts of the body are at different distances. This may be especially important if they are fairly close to you. It also gives little enough depth-of-field to make the subject pop from the background. You need enough light for this of course, so try it and see if the ISO stays below 1600. Finally, I agree with the poster who said don't worry about noise as it's easy to deal with post processing if necessary, especially if you shoot raw. Even if you don't deal with it, what looks bad on a large monitor is often not even noticeable in a 4x6 or 5x7 print. And it certainly doesn't detract as much as a blurry or out of focus subject. I have plenty of ISO1600 shots with my D80 that look great in prints, with little or no noise reduction applied, and the D90 should be even better.<br>

Steve</p>

 

<p>Thank you Kent! The daughter in the photo is the carving artist on the little jack with the hearts for the eyes and nose. Myself, my older daughter and my wife carved the others. Mine is the one on the left with the shifty eyes. Go figure!</p>

<p>My youngest daughter with our jack-o-lanterns this past Halloween weekend.</p><div></div>

<p>My youngest daughter with our jack-o-lanterns this past weekend.</p>

<p>Another thing I prefer about the 35 f1.8 DX is that it has the newer autofocus arrangement with the clutch so you can touch up the focus manually after the camera has locked focus without flipping any switches. Another vote for the DX lens if you have no plans to ever switch to a full-frame camera.</p>

<p>Steve</p>

<p>Trying out my Lensbaby. My 10-year old daughter enjoying a swim.</p><div></div>

<p>Thank you Joseph, Jeannean and Lil. Such great shots by everyone. I am loving this forum.</p>

<p>Ocracoke Island Lighthouse, Ocracoke Village, North Carolina.</p><div></div>

<p>Thank you for the comments Jeannean and Per Christian. I just discovered this forum a couple weeks ago and I love it. I am partial to kids photos since I have a couple of my own (kids that is, not just photos) although neither of the girls dancing are mine. Per Christian, Paul, Robert, Justin, Christopher, I enjoyed yours especially. Lil, I am taking my kids to the beach next week, so your shot inspired me.<br>

Tiffany, as a former electrical engineer, I believe your photo is probably a semiconductor wafer going through some part of the manufacturing process, although I am not 100 % positive.<br>

Steve</p>

 

<p>Two grade schoolers at a rehearsal for a recital at a local dance school.</p><div></div>

<p>I'll throw in my two cents. I have the battery grip. I really thought it would be cool to have the vertical shutter release like I had seen on the F5 film camera, which two friends of mine have. I don't use it nearly as much as I thought I would. I'm not sure whether senstivity is the right word, but the shutter release button has a very different feel than the one on the camera, more play and more a "plasticy" feel. Nevertheless, I haven't had any trouble getting it to fire when I want it to. I put the grip on sometimes if I expect to be shooting quite a bit vertically, and it is still nice for that despite the shutter button. The other use is for emergency power. Sometimes I put the camera away without charging any batteries and don't use it for a couple weeks, then I need to take some quick shots and the regular batteries are almost dead. I keep the AA holder with some lithium batteries on standby, and use that in such a situation if I'm not sure the regular batteries will have enough juice. I do some camping and expect to have it on a trip in September. I will not have a convenient place to charge batteries, so being able to have AA backups will be good there also. Frankly for me, the ability to use AA batteries in a pinch may be the most valuable feature.</p>

<p>OK, trying to attach the photo this time.</p><div></div>

<p>Baby bluebirds in our bluebird house, shot through cleaning door, fill flash with wireless SB-600 through entry hole.</p>