Jump to content

dan_brown4

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    4,461

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 Content Type 

Everything posted by dan_brown4

  1. dan_brown4
    <p>Sigma continues to raise the performance bar, and competition like that is good for consumers.</p> <p>Did I really just type that? Sigma, who'd of ever thought ...</p>
  2. dan_brown4
    <p>You done good and got done right by Nikon. Thanks for reporting back.</p> <p>Enjoy...</p>
  3. dan_brown4
    <p>I greatly prefer compact lenses, and this is why a keep a range of 1990's era AF-D primes and zooms.</p>
  4. dan_brown4
    <p>They would be very good video lenses on a DSLR.</p>
  5. dan_brown4
    <p>Stating the obvious, mirrorless uses the sensor for exposure and autofocus, two important functions where reflex cameras have a clear advantage. Particularly autofocus. I'm not aware of any mirrorless camera that doesn't suffer in the autofocus department.</p>
  6. dan_brown4
    <p>I have no particular interest in an F-mont mirrorless. Before that would be enticing, Nikon would need to develop a line of compact F-mount lenses.</p>
  7. dan_brown4
    <p>A few years ago I got a $450 quote from APS in Morton Grove, IL, to replace the AFS motor in a 17-35/f2.8AF-S Nikkor. The $600 number mentioned above would be a reasonably good price for your 500mm, IMHO.</p> <p>As others have said, I would drive the lens over to Melville. But, I would also give APS a call (847-966-4091) just to compare prices.</p> <p>Good luck.</p> <p>- Dan</p>
  8. dan_brown4
    <p>Surely they are all very fine. By this point in camera technology history, it's expected that Zeiss would incorporate autofocus.</p>
  9. dan_brown4
    <p>The slide film's dynamic range is irrelevant with respect to copying the slide. Just like Ansel Adam's zone system film and paper analysis, the exposed and developed slide's contrast range is from the clarity of the film base (brightest) to the most blocked-up emulsion (darkest). This issue is about the light source used on the copy stand.</p>
  10. dan_brown4
    <p>Try softening your light source. I have done this with the D800, the ES-1, 60 Micro, Provia slides, using an AlienBee B400 320WS studio flash (at about 1/4 power) into a small double diffusion softbox, and the result were satisfactory.</p>
  11. dan_brown4
    <p>Pull out shirt tail, spit on lens, rub with shirt tail.</p> <p>j/k</p> <p>;-)</p>
  12. dan_brown4
    <p>If it's a US serial number, yes, Nikon USA will warrant it. Competitive Camera in Dallas separates kits, mostly because people want the new camera and don't need the kit lens. I have bought these lenses before.</p>
  13. dan_brown4
    <p>Not sure what you mean? My first Nikon was an S with a 50/1.4. I only used 35mm film cassettes in it for a couple decades. Worked fine.</p>
  14. dan_brown4
    <p>I like the 50mm/f1.8D-AF Nikkor on my Df. Super compact. No filter, no hood, sharp images. <br /> After that, I like the 28-70mm/f3.5-4.5D-AF Nikkor and the 80-200mm/f4.5-5.6D-AF Nikkor zoom combination. Versatile kit, super compact.</p> <p>And, let's not forget the compact SB-400 speed light.</p>
  15. dan_brown4
    <p>Look for an MF-29 data back. Probably not expensive.</p>
  16. dan_brown4
    <p>Nikon storage temperature specification says don't exceed 50 degrees C (122 degrees F).</p>
  17. dan_brown4
    <p>To Galen, the equipment meant very little.<br> To Thom, the equipment means everything.</p>
  18. dan_brown4
    <p>View NX-i (version 1.0.0., 64-bit for OS-X) leaves the EXIF in the file even if you select the option to remove it.</p>
  19. dan_brown4
    <p>Thank you for the input, I did find the Export function in View.</p> <p>Bad news, it does not work, EXIF data remains even after it is stripped off file.</p> <p>Oh Nikon ...</p>
  20. dan_brown4
    <p>How do you strip the EXIF off a file when you convert it to JPG? There used to be a "safe for web" option, IIRC, but I can't seem to find it in the NX-D version.</p> <p>Thanks for your comments.</p> <p>- Dan</p>
  21. dan_brown4
    <p>I have owned and shot the 80-200/4.5-5.6D-AF (plastic-fantastic) Nikkor for 20 years. In fact, I have two of them now. It is a very good lens, and given its compact size and light weight, and LOW COST, it's a lens every Nikon shooter have on hand. In side-by-side tests with the 200/4 AiS and 70-200/4VR Nikkor, the 80-200 is never shamed, and at f8-11, it very much holds its own.</p> <p>My 2¢</p>
  22. dan_brown4
    <p>I upgraded my D700 to a D800 before I got the Df. But, I did do a side-by-side manual focus test between the D800 and Df. Based on detailed review of 1:1 crops from both, I could not pick a winner.</p>
  23. dan_brown4
    <p>EM and FG are the little/light guys.</p>
  24. dan_brown4
    <p>When in doubt, shoot sunny-16 and dial in your developer. Then, figure in the meter factor.</p>
  25. dan_brown4
    <p>Side line sports really requires something longer than 200mm. The value choice would be the Nikkor 70-300/4.5-5.6G-VR. Stepping up would be the Nikkor 80-400/4.5.5.6G-VR. Also, don't rule out a prime 300mm. The 300/4.0AF-S can be had a good prices now that the 300/4.0E-PF is out.</p>
×
×
  • Create New...