muellerworld

This is in a totally different (and expensive) direction, but they look promising (Radio & iTTL):

<br /><br />

<a href='http://qtm.com/WhatsNew/?res_set=yes&res=1280&resh=1024&grad=grad&menuclrH=166&menuclrV=125'>http://qtm.com/WhatsNew/?res_set=yes&res=1280&resh=1024&grad=grad&menuclrH=166&menuclrV=125</a>

<br /><br />

Not a SB-800 solution like you asked for, but an alternative if you NEED Radio Triggers and want iTTL to work...

I have one of the Nikkor 800mm f/5.6 ED IF AIS lenses. I boought it used for Surfing photography and birds, and have found that I'm not using it very much lately (I'm thinking of selling it for much less than $4999!). It is a superb lens, but definalely a heavy thing to lug around. I use it on a heavy-duty monopod and occasionally on a set of two tripods as mentioned earlier (one for the lens, one for the camera). At sporting events or zoos (or just about anywhere), it draws considerable attention...

It is useful from time to time for moon shots, birds that spook easily, surfing, and some creative landscapes, but I always cringe when I think I might need it for something as it is VERY heavy. Even on dual tripods, I struggle to get anything useful from it at very low shutter speeds - it is VERY sensitive to any vibration.

I get far more use out of my 400/3.5 lens, and just crop in a bit.

<i>"Wasn't there a wider fisheye, like a 7mm or something that had over 180 degree

coverage on FF?" -- Michael Axel</i>

<p>

Don't forget the <a href='http://www.coastalopt.com/stan_01c.asp'>4.88mm Fisheye by

Costal Optical</a>. It will project a circular image onto your Nikon sensor.

<p>

I have also tried Bjorn's "image relay" system as mentioned earlier. Works fine, but is

cumbersome to deal with because of the additional lenses and extension tubes.

Ask them for an actual size in pixels (or inches or millimeters) and how many dpi they need

for publication. File size is meaningless if you can deliver a file that meets "real" criteria.

-Matt

I have had an ML-3 for a few years. It works great (within about 30 feet). It mounts on

the hotshoe of your camera, and the cable plugs into the 10-pin connector. The sensor

can rotate to face the direction from where you are triggering the remote. No other

clamps or connectors are needed.

I do not know if Nikon is planning any changes to the ML-3 (I got mine in a camera shop

in Kowloon on a layover in Hong Kong).

For anything more than about 20 feet, I usually use Pocket Wizards for their greater range

and non-line of sight triggering.

I have recently spent 2½ months in Cuba, Mexico, Belize and Guatemala. Many buses, dodgy hostals, rainy days, dust, etc..<p>

We took a small kit (left the D2X & F100 at home) consisting of:

<blockquote>

Nikon D70<br />

12-24 Zoom<br />

18-70 Zoom<br />

70-300 Zoom<br />

4x 1GB Compact Flash Cards<br />

Epson P-2000 Storage Device<br />

Canon S80 Point-and-shoot Camera

</blockquote>

There were times when I missed having the bigger camera and bigger glass with us, but it was a light-weight kit, packed easily, and traveled well (along with some sensor swabs and a hurricane blower, just in case).

<p>

We protected the Epson P-2000 most of all, since all of our photographs were stored on it, everything else we were cautious with, but didn't worry about it too much, since it was all insured and easily replaceable.

<p>

The fill flash on the D70 worked in most conditions, so I didn't miss an external flash much at all.

<p>

I'd get a point-and-shoot as others have suggested, and forget the F100 and prime lens.

<p>

Our goal was NOT to take lots of stuff to get published, or to build up stock. We just were casual shooters on that trip, and were happy to have the 6 and 8 MP cameras and accepted the quality they produce. There were DEFINALELY times when I wished I had better lenses, more megapixels, external flashes, but none of them warranted taking more gear. Your milage may vary.

<p>

My 2¢

<p>

Have a great trip!

If you <i>have to</i> use a flash (and the band dosen't mind), consider getting the flash off the camera (and in your outstretched hand), so you can control the direction of the flash-added light in the image.

<p>

The D70's pop-up flash can be configured to conntrol the SB-800 as a slave, adding many options for your photography.

<p>

Consider using different gels on the flash (if it works for the style of photography you do), and rear curtain shots...

On their website, there are many different points of contact, depending on what your query is:

<br />

<blockquote>

<a href='http://www.nikon.co.jp/main/eng/contacts/index.htm'>http://www.nikon.co.jp/main/eng/contacts/index.htm</a>

<br />

<a href='http://www.nikon.co.jp/main/eng/support/inquiry/index.htm'>http://www.nikon.co.jp/main/eng/support/inquiry/index.htm</a>

</blockquote>

A 4.88mm f/4 or f/2.8 DX circular fisheye that is razor sharp.

<p>

The 4.88mm focal length is what is required to get a full-circle 180-degree on the APS

sensor.

<p>

My trusty old 8mm f/2.8 AIS lens is great, but not a full circle on the APS sensor (at least

not without a complex set of extension tubes and a image transport system), but it is not

sharp enough under scrutiny on a D2X.

<p>

Costal Optical makes one, but they are known to be soft (and expensive).

<p>

There are many scientific, environmental and entertainment uses for such a lens, but

probablly not enough to justify mass-production. :(

You didn't say if you were on Windows, Linux or a Mac.

If it is a Mac, just string a Firewire between the two computers and reboot the laptop holding down the "T" key and the laptop will boot as a disk instead of a laptop, and you can just copy the images to your desktop.

If you only took a few Gig worth of photos, you could shuttle them back to your desktop computer using Compact Flash Cards and a card reader (this is the slow and labor-intensive option, but it works).

Alternatively, you could also get Wireless Cards in both computers and have them networked together and be anywhere in the house...

Greg,

<p>

I think you are right about the 3-tier display system. However, the small and medium-sized images do not need to be 300dpi. They will look the same on people's screens at 72dpi, and you should be able to get your file size down below 100kb (and images will load much faster). The "printable" version, of course, should be 300dpi (or whatever you want to provide). That being said, 125kb is perfectly OK.

<p>

Another thing to consider is naming convention. Some people put different-sized images in different subdirectories, some people add a "_t" to the end of their filename (or something to indicate "thumbnail"). Again, I followed Philip's & Kodak's advice and used a size indicator between the filename and the extension. His naming system is outlined in his old book:

<p>

<blockquote>

<a href='http://philip.greenspun.com/panda/images'>http://philip.greenspun.com/panda/images</a>

</blockquote>

<p>

I mainly use the "1", "3", and "5" sizes, so my three files (thumbnail, medium & printable) would all be in the same directory:

<p>

<blockquote>

example-1.1.jpg (the thumbnail)<br />

example-1.3.jpg (the medium-sized one)<br />

example-1.5.jpg (the "printable, large one)<br />

</blockquote>

<p>

It is always VERY clear what images and sizes I have. Your milage may vary.

<p>

I think you are in the right range with 700x500. Initially I followed <a href='http://philip.greenspun.com/'>Philip Greenspun's</a> advice and used the Kodak PCD default sizes of 768x512 for my medium sized images, and 192x128 for my thumbnails. I have recently moved to 670x450, because veritcal images usually caused people to have to scroll down a bit in their browsers to see the whole image (depending, of course, on their screen resolution).

<p>

Everyone will have a personal preference about a website forcing a new window upon them. I hate them, some people don't mind. <b>Most</b> browsers have a right-click option to "Open in a New Window", so, I like it when websites don't force this to happen.

<p>

I also do what Justin (great site, BTW) does, and upload "printable" higher-resolution images upon sale, usually within a few hours or overnight. Since you are providing printable images from your site, this hassle won't effect you, but you will need to budget for more hard disk usage for your site.

<p>

Good luck,

<p>

Matt

Manually, you can open your RAW image in the Adobe Camera RAW Dialog box, then choose

the eye-dropper and click on the 20% gray square (third from the bottom right). This

neutralizes the image (setting color temp and tint). Then, take a look at the RGB values that

are given when the eye-dropper is over the same gray square. Adjust the Exposure until the

values are 123-123-123. You can use whatever RGB values you want, as long as the chart

looks good to you, but 123-123-123 is "neutral". Note that this is a color-correction based

on "numbers" only. I use it as a starting point for my images, and only start to adjust curves,

saturation, etc once I have neturalized the images. Good luck.

I tested a CR2 file from a Canon 1Ds Mark II (I'm assuming this will be similar to a Canon

20D) and found that the EXIF data contains:

<p>

<ul>

<li>Make (Canon)

<li>Model (Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II)

<li>Exposure Time (1/160 sec)

<li>F-Stop (f/18)

<li>Exposure Program (Manual)

<li>ISO Speed Ratings (100)

<li>Date Time Original (2005:03:31 10:14:24)

<li>Shutter Speed (1/160 sec)

<li>Aperture Value (f/18)

<li>Exposure Bias Value (0.00)

<li>Metering Mode (Pattern)

<li>Flash (18)

<li>Focal Length (50.0 mm)

</ul>

<p>

Hope that helps.

All mechanical things vary from sample to sample. Some live WAY past their design life,

some don't.

<p>

My personal experience is:

<p>

<ul>

<li>D100: 25,000 shots in 18 months

<li>D100: 70,000 shots in 2 years

<li>D100: 50,000 shots in a year

<li>D70; 40,000 shots in 6 months

<li>D2H: 28,000 shots in 1 year

</ul>

<p>

Daily shots range from 50 to 2,500 (long days, continuous shooting).

<p>

After 30,000 cycles I extected the D70 & D100s to die at any time, but they keep on

working (I sold one of the D100s).

<p>

So far, I am <b>very</b> impressed with how long the shutters (and everything else)

have held up on the cameras I use on a daily basis.

<p>

Your milage may vary.

<a href='http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2.html'>Bjørn Rørslett</a> provides <a

href='http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_CPUconversion.html'>a list

of which Nikon (Nikkor) lenses can be chipped</a>, along with his opinion of the

difficulty to

chip each lens. He has updated many of his own lenses.

<p>

You can read about <a href='http://www.naturfotograf.com/

CPU_extension.html'>his experience with chipping an M extension ring</a>

and a

<a href='http://www.naturfotograf.com/ultra_micro55.html'>Ultra Micro Nikkor</a> for

use with today's modern Nikon bodies.

> <i>The average gray card (and the ExpoDisc, for that matter) aren't the best color balancing tools. They're built for accrate exposure, so they reflect very close to 18%. But they're typically not color neutral (my Kodak gray card is visibly green). The gray patches on the MacBeth are much more neutral.</i>

<p>

Great point! I have noticed that as well. I forgot about it because I've been using the MacBeth Chart for so long...

<p>

> <i>Matt - if you're going to go to the trouble of automating PhotoShop and the MacBeth, why not try the script I pointed out. Find the four corners of the MacBeth, and it uses all 24 squares. Have you ever gotten the grays right, but noticed that the reds and blues were still weird? The 24 shot method will fix a lot of that...</i>

<p>

I'll give it a try and see how it works into my pipeline. I *do* occasionally have the problem you are talking about...

<p>

Thanks.

> <i>Matt Thanks for your input and advice Can you do this with just a</i>

<br />

> <i>18% Gray card and not bother with the expense of a macbeth chart?</i>

<p>

Sure, that'll work just fine.

<p>

I like the MacBeth Chart (~$60 USD) because I can tweak other parameters (Saturation,

Shadows, etc) and see how they apply to those "baseline" colors, then use those changes

in an Action to modify all images in the same manner.

<p>

That being said, an 18% gray card will work just fine with RBG Values of 117-117-117 (be

<i>sure</i> to play with these a bit to suit your own tastes, but I have found this is the

best neutral gray for me).

My daily method for this is as follows:

<p>

<ol>

<li>Photograph a MacBeth Color Checker under the same lighting conditions as all of

your other images.

<li>Open the image of the MacBeth Chart using the Photoshop RAW Plug-in and use the

eye dropper to select the medium

gray square that is third from the bottom right (magenta box on attached image). This

will

neturalize

your image and

set the "color temperature" and "tint" values (the top two sliders in the RAW plug-in, cyan

box on the attached image).

<li>Check the RGB values of the gray square by holding the eye dropper over the gray

square (magenta box in attached image). Vary the "exposure" slider (the third one down,

yellow box in attached image) and keep checking the RGB values (red box in attached

image)

until the RGB Values

are 123-123-123 (this is for 20% gray

since the MacBeth chart is a bit different than the Kodak Card,

use 117-117-117 if you want 18% gray).

</ol>

<p>

I do this as part of an action, then I run the action on all the images that were taken under

the same lighting conditions.

The D100 is well-suited for <i>some</i> "professional" uses, and many not be for many other "professional" uses. You;ll have to decide if you need something that is more rugged than the D100, or something with a larger RAW buffer, or something with other features/options.

<p>

My main "professional" camera is a D2H (I used to own a D100 & Fuji S2 Pro), but I have been taking LOTS of studio portraits recently with a D100.

<p>

When I've been shooting auto racing or birds or other sports, the D100 did not have the frames-per-second that I get out of the D2H, but the images are still very useable and saleable.

<p>

When matched with an SB-800 flash, the D100 is pretty good, but with the SB-80DX, it was pretty terrible. Your milage may vary, but *my* SB-80DX paired with just about any camera I tried it with (D100, D70, D2H, F100, S2 Pro) was unpredictable at best. If you are considering a SB-80DX flash, get a SB-800 (or SB-600) instead.

<p>

I feel that the D100 is flimsy compaired to the D2H, but I took mine all over Eastern China, South America, New Zealand and to the Antarcitc Peninsula, and it held up VERY well under some abusive conditions. It certainally is not as "bomb-proof" as an F5, but it targets a different market with different features & requirements.

<p>

In a slow-paced studio, the D100 is a great camera when the pace is reasonable. If the pace speeds up, the D100 is great or a few shots, but, again, the buffer dosen't clear as fast as *I* want it to.

<p>

For "professional" macro work, or landscapes, the D100 is great (some will argue that you'll need MLU, but that is another entire discussion).

<p>

I have sold far more images from my D100 than from my D2H, but I like the D2H much better for its fast(er) frame rate, better egronomics (for me) and more sturdy build.

<p>

ANY camera can be used "professionally". By today's standards, the D1 & D1H produce a tiny images (in megapixels), but they are still wonderful cameras that have helped many "professional" photographers make a living for several years. Cameras are only tools, the "professional" quality mostly comes from the eye looking through them.

<p>

I am unsure about the rating for shutter cycles, sorry. (I got through about 20,000 on mine before I sold it working like it was new...)

<p>

I think the D100 can be an excellent semi-pro or pro camera, but not for all situations...

<i>Modification may be possible, but restrictions to the use of the lens could apply in some cases</i>

<p>

<a href='http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_CPUconversion.html'>http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_CPUconversion.html</a>

This isn't <i>my</i> first-hand experience, but here are some tests done by a person over on <a href='http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/board/7'>Fred Miranda's</a> Discussion Boards:

<p>

<a href='http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic2/124294/0#1001398'>http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic2/124294/0#1001398</a>

<p>

I hope that helps out a bit...

Thanks for that image, David, it printed out just fine...

<p>

Brian, I am not entirely sure what you mean by <i>entrance pupil</i> on a fisheye lens. As I said in my original post, I experimented with two sticks to determine a point of rotation where I see no paralax shift. It corresponds pretty closely with the F' point on David's <a href='http://www.photo.net/bboard/big-image?bboard_upload_id=19253284'>image</a>.

<p>

Could you describe what you mean a little bit further for me?

<p>

Thank you

Does anyone know where the front nodal point is for the Nikkor 8mm

f/2.8 AIS circular fisheye lens?

I have e-mailed Nikon USA & Nikon UK and not recieved any response,

I've searched around some on the internet and I've e-mailed a few

people that work with optics and fisheyes... All have come up empty

on the location of the front nodal point.

I am asking so that I can shoot some nodal panoramic images (I have

found the nodal point experimentally with some sticks, but I want to

check my empirical measurement with what it is supposed to be to see

if I am close).

Thank you.<div></div>