ben_johnson10

<p>I found an interesting website where they have created a poll for users with D600 issues: http://www.listentothewindmedia.com/nikon-d600-oil-and-dust-sensor-poll/<br>

The poll states it is unscientific, so take it for what it is worth.</p>

<p>Well, after reading many of the D600 dust/oil-on-sensor posts on this forum, and others around the internet, and reading how many D600 buyers are unhappy with this persistent issue, it seems that many have returned their cameras for refunds.<br>

Perhaps the total percentage of cameras returned is small, but one has to wonder, <strong>what happens to all those returned D600 cameras?</strong><br>

I for one do not think that Nikon is requesting the dealers send those returned cameras back to them, so they can study the problem, and come up with a solution (they probably already knew there was a problem before they shipped the first camera).<br>

With the number of returned cameras on their hands, too many to accept as a loss, Nikon or the dealers are probably "recycling" those returned cameras, as "new" cameras. If one buyer is picky enough to return a camera after the sensor is dirty after 200 actuations, they are betting that the next customer will be absolutely tickled pink to clean it lovingly every 100 actuations and consider it an honor to do so.<br>

Personally I would be wary of buying a D600 right now, if one wanted to get a "pristine" brand new camera, as there are probably enough returned D600s that one would have a good chance of buying someone else's reject.</p>

 

<p>I was recently contacted by a group that wanted to use some of my Flickr-posted images in a documentary video. I already have an idea on license fees from another website forum (basically responses from pro photographer Seth Resnick)<br>

I'm planning to cobble up a licensing contract from googling examples on the web (I guess I'm getting ahead of myself here...I should come up with contract lingo if and when they agree to compensate for use of the images)!<br>

Anyway as an absolute neophyte in this area, some questions came to mind while mulling over this whole licensing process:<br>

1) If an agreement is reached and they want to use my images, how are the images submitted to the customer? Are they submitted by email, or are the sent on a disc, or what?<br>

2) Are the full-sized image files sent, or are the image files resized in Photoshop, and resolution adjusted? Or, does this depend on the needs of the customer, and they will specify what they need?<br>

3) For the image files sent to the customer, do I need to put a copyright watermark along the edge of the image using Photoshop, then the image flattened? Or, is this not necessary?<br>

The above questions were some of the many floating about in my mind right now...there are probably more important questions I should be asking!<br>

Any advice on the above questions would be appreciated!</p>

<p>I would buy a 70-210 or 80-200 f/4 Nikon lens, if Nikon ever made one again (and not in the G-series, either). I could get a f/2.8 version, but I am not interested in lugging around this heavier, bulkier, version (of course we know how well the f/2.8 performs, but I still do not want to carry it). A f/4 aperture would fit perfectly in my lens bag. <br /> This is the part of being a Nikon-user to accept not getting what one needs, for years, and years. Sometimes I joke to myself that being a Nikon user means "Nikon = Disappointment."</p>

<p>I wanted to get folks' opinion on the best way to store lenses to prevent fungal growth. </p>

<p>This comes about because over the past few years I've been buying more used lenses from KEH.com. When I receive the used lenses I thoroughly check the lenses under a very strong light, and use a magnifier to inspect for any signs of fungal growth, and to date I have found none.</p>

<p>However after a few years, those previously fungal-free lenses, show signs of the beginnings of fungal growth!</p>

<p>In general I store my lenses either in my photo backpack with silica gel, or in Lowepro padded lens cases with silica gel. For lenses that I have purchased new, I have never had fungal growth (I live on the west coast, so we rarely have long spells of humid days), but only with used lenses I'm having this problem.</p>

<p>Usually cleaning lenses of fungus by a professional technician, is expensive proposition (is it about $200 - $300?, so that is usually out of the question. I've read on the forums that fungus likes the dark and the damp, so some folks suggested to store them so they are exposed to light. To me this sounds like a risky proposition to store expensive, delicate glass, with the lens caps off so that the lens glass is always bathed in some intensity of light.</p>

<p>What is the best way to store these used lenses (knowing that there is always chance a previous owner lived in a humid climate)?</p>

Thanks, but I did run across that dpreview.com article before. Unfortunately, it is not a hands-on-test, but just an announcement.

 

I'd like to see an actual hands-on-test, so we can see just how well it performs. Unfortunately, as of this date the only

reviews of this camera are the snippets of comments posted at Flickr.

I was searching the internet for any reviews of the P6000, but I haven't found any reviews from the major camera reviewing websites (too

early)?

 

However I found some info on the internet where folks have posted their photos from the P6000 (already on sale outside the US)?

 

http://www.flickr.com/photos/streetfusion/2871968906/

 

 

 

 

If you click on the photos there are comments from the photographers and one can at least get some rough idea of how this P&S will

perform.

To all that responded to my concerns, thanks!

 

I guess from the many responses posted, the FM/FE is one tough series of

cameras...Nikon did a good job of engineering these cameras! A product that was done

right...one can't say that about many products these days. That is why in this era of

DSLRs, I really have a tough time giving up on my FM2n and FE2.

 

I'm hoping that when I do switch over to whatever Nikon DSLR (Nikon equivalent of the

Canon 5D?) that the design is as competent as the FM/FE/FM2/FE2 series has been

and continues to be!

I received a MD-12 motor drive recently to use with my FM2 and FE2 cameras and have a question

about proper operation. Reading through the MD-12 user manual I couldn't find any info on this:

since the MD-12 exposes the film, advances the film, then recocks the shutter so it is ready to use

for the next shot, would it be bad to shoot a frame (if, for example, it was in the single-frame mode),

turn the MD-12 off, then just store the camera (say, overnight or for a week)?

 

I would think that doing this would leave the shutter spring in tension (at least for the FM2; does the

FE2 use a spring to actuate the shutter, other than the M250 setting?) and the spring would stretch

and lose firing power.

 

If this is indeed bad for the shutter actuating spring, would the proper MD-12 shutdown procedure

be to turn the MD-12 off, then fire the shutter using the camera's shutter button?

 

Likewise whe starting up the camera again, in order not to waste a frame, use the double-exposure

lever, then turn on the MD-12, then the film doesn't advance, but the shutter is cocked for use?

 

Anyone have any thoughts on this or run across this problem before?

I have a Nikon AF 300mm f/4 ED-IF (not the AF-S version). Based on feedback I received at the forums, I

have decided to add a 1.4x teleconverter, either the Nikon TC-14B, or the Kenko 1.4x Teleplus Pro 300

DG.

 

Right now I'm shooting with either a FM2n or a FE-2, but when Nikon finally decides to come out with a

advanced amateur version of the D3, I will switch over to a FX DSLR.

 

Thinking about present manual focus use and future AF use of the teleconverters, I'm thinking to get the

Kenko 1.4X over the TC-14B.

 

Taking a guess, I'm figuring that the Kenko 1.4x will most likely be compatible with the future FX DSLR

Nikon (D400, perhaps).

 

But my question for now is does anyone know if the Kenko 1.4x is compatible with the FM2n or FE-2?

 

I checked through the forums and I couldn't find anything on this question (which surprised me, since I

figured someone must have used this configuration before).

That is interesting that Lepp used a tripod as small as Gitzo 1228 to support up to

600mm. I guess opinions are all over the place on this. I read someplace that John Shaw

considers the GT3530 the smallest tripod that should be considered.

 

It seems to me in reading various photographer's forums on the web that the general

consensus is to use the heaviest tripod that one can use which means carrying around too

much weight if you don't shoot teles exclusively.

I have a question concerning the longest telephoto lens one can use with a given tripod size.

 

It has been my understanding that one shouldn't use a focal length longer than what the tripod is rated.

For example the catalog for the Gitzo 6X carbon states that the longest lens that can used on a Series 2

tripod is 300mm (due to torsional vibration considerations). I believe this is when the camera is tripped by

a shutter release cable.

 

However, if one is for example shooting wildlife, with a telephoto on a ballhead and tripod, and tracking a

bird flying through the sky, couldn't one use a telephoto lens with a focal length LONGER than the tripod

manufacturer recommendation?

 

My thought is that the vibration induced by the photographer moving the camera body would more than

exceed the vibration if the camera were shot, hands-off, with a shutter release cable, so the size of the

tripod would not have any bearing on image sharpness (to a degree, of course).

 

I believe this would still be the case if the photographer wasn't tracking the action, and holding the

camera still in one position, as the heartbeat of the photographer, or the vibration caused by mashing the

shutter button would be much larger than any torsional vibration damping qualities of the tripod.

 

(By the way I just read George Lepp's equipment column in the latest Outdoor Photographer magazine

where he mentions on a recent safari shoot he was shooting a 500mm lens on Gitzo GT2540 tripod, so

this seems to indicate shooting longer lenses is indeed possible than what the tripod is normally rated

for.)

 

Any thoughts on this?

Thanks all for the the info. Aperture lock sounds right; I'll play around with it to see how

it works!

Last year I bought a used Nikon AF 300mm f4 ED-IF (the heavy all metal one that has a sturdy tripod

foot...not the newer AF-S version that has the reported flimsy foot).

 

I have a question about a switch on this lens whose function, I cannot figure out.

 

On the metal circular ring, just forward of the aperture adjustment ring, on the right side of the lens

there is a small circular button with a white dot on it. I believe it is supposed to be pressed and rotated

until the white dot aligns with orange marks adjacent to the button.

 

Does anyone know what this button does?

 

Thanks for any info you can provide.

Hmmm...I wonder about the quality of the Cokins? If their polarizer is anything like their

GNDs they would probably have a color cast to them...which is undesirable.

 

Thanks for responding, though.

Last year I purchased the Singh Ray LB Warming Polarizer to use in a P-type Cokin holder. Since then, I

have run into some situations where I would prefer not to have the warming feature that is a part of the LB

Warming Polarizer, but would just want a regular polarizer.

 

Since I enjoy the flexibility of the sprocket polarizer with the Cokin holder in that it allows me to use GNDs

when required, I was wondering if there are any manufacturers that make such a filter, just a regular

polarizer, no warming, and a sprocket type mount?

 

I checked Singh Ray, and they don't make one; are there any other good filter manufacturers out there that

make such a filter? (I haven't found any in my search.)

Thanks all for the input. Last night I mounted the FE2 atop my Gitzo, so I would have two

free hands to see what is exactly happening in MANUAL when I fiddle around with the

exposure compensation feature.

 

Sure enough if you dial in your desired exposure comp setting, you will see the meter

needle move the corresponding amount. It is then up to you to manually adjust the

camera to put the desired amount of exposure comp settings into play. Fine.

 

You know I've been shooting with a FM2 for 22 years, so all these "hi-tech" features

(exposure compensation) in this 20 year old FE2 are going to take some getting used to.

;-)

I just bought a used FE2 and while checking the functions out, a question came up. Does the exposure

compensation feature only work in the "AUTO" mode?

 

I read through the FE2 instruction manual and it does say it operates in the "AUTO" mode but it doesn't

explicitly say it DOESN'T operate in the "MANUAL" mode (but if it didn't, I could understand). I just want

to make sure everything is operating properly.

 

Thanks.

Thanks all for your responses as where to buy the camera. However, that is not really my

concern.

 

What I'm concerned about is trying to find an online guide that will show me how to check

out a used camera, so I don't get stuck with a lemon that needs repairs. Anyone know

where one is online?

After using an Nikon FM2n for many years, and all the new digital cameras coming out, I decided it was

time to upgrade to an electronic camera...to an Nikon FE2. ;-)

 

Obviously I will be buying this used, since the FE2 has been out of production for a long time, and I was

wondering if anyone knows of any good online resources/checklists, etc. on how I should inspect a

used camera to make sure there are no problems?

 

I've found procedures for checking out used lenses, but I have yet to find anything useful for checking

out used camera bodies.

 

Any info on this would be appreciated.

For the color slide shooters out there, I don't know about you, but I've been waiting patiently for the

new Velvia 50 to hit the store shelves.

 

I had begun tracking the possible arrival of Velvia 50 since the beginning of summer. We've been told

that it was supposed to hit the shelves in mid-August 2007 (last date I've heard). Everytime it seems

the expected arrival date slips.

 

Well, we're into September, and at least at B&H, it is still not in stock (Adorama is the same story). All

I've been seeing at B&H is "Availability: New - Coming Soon". That gets old quick.

 

The Fuji distributors are certainly dragging out this Velvia 50 debut until the bitter end. Will it ever

arrive? Gee, by the time it hits the shelves there will be no need for it because the folks that have been

patiently waiting for this reintroduction, will have switched over to digital out of frustration!

 

Anyone out there have any fresh rumors on Velvia 50?

Thanks for the news from B&H; gee, I wish some seller out there would have a more

definite date, though!

Thanks. Whatever you find out from B&H please post it.

 

It seems that the only place to get 35mm Velvia 50 is from Amazon: http://

www.amazon.com/FujiFilm-Color-Slide-Velvia-Exposures/dp/B00009V3C8/

ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/104-1151210-5375104?

ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1184912808&sr=8-1

 

But I wonder if those two places listed really have it in stock?

I was wondering if anyone out there had any more updates on when the new Velvia 50 will be in stock

in the USA?

 

I posted on this topic a few months back and it seemed that mid-July was the date that Velvia would be

back on the shelves. However I just checked B&H today (7/15), and they don't have any Velvia 50, and

further more it seems they are only expecting RVP 220.

 

Anyone have any recent news when 35mm Velvia 50 will be in stock?

Edward: I thought the modulus of elasticity of carbon fiber was much greater than that of

say, 6061-T6 aluminum? Isn't the stiffness of composites what is always touted by

manufacturers using them in aerospace, recreational, auto racing etc. industries?

 

I'm not sure about the cross-sectional differences in the aluminum vs. the carbon fiber

tubes, but all dimensions being equal, I would think the carbon fiber tube would be stiffer

due to its higher modulus of elasticity?

 

If the G-Lock joint design effectively makes all the leg segments behave as a single leg

segment, and the superior stiffness of the carbon fiber is utilized, I would think the old

adage of "more joints = wobbly tripod" is no longer applicable.