Matthew Brennan

My susbcription lapsed 22 days ago and my stuff is all still loaded on the site. I have to say I'm a tad surprised it has not been removed. Maybe p,net is hoping I'll renege.......?

 

After 10 happy years of paid up p.net membership I still can't get over the new website makeover and the seemingly endless litany of cock ups and techno snags - problem must be with me...........

 

If it ain't broke, don't fix it ,I'm still sticking with that sentiment and miss the former user freindly p.net site.

 

No chance of me renewing without PayPal convenience as per the past decade.

After months of waiting for the endless litany of bugs to be ironed of the new P.net site out I still can't log in without several attempts, the site still takes forever to load, switching pages still happens at a glacial pace and I'm being auto logged out if I leave for just a few minutes. I still cannot make my photo info / titles / captions / locations stick to the images when I upload them to a new galley and half the time I set up a new gallery I'm told the gallery is not registered to the logged user???

 

I can't begin to tell you how many wasted hours I've spent trying to knock together a simple gallery which used to take minutes on the old system.........

 

......and all this with p.net auto emailing me constantly telling my subscription is due soon............ after 10 years+ of subscribing and several years as non subscriber prior I'm seriously wondering if I pull the plug on p.net - it's all just too hard.....

 

Signed,

 

(still) Very Disappointed

Can anyone here at the Nikon forum explain to me in layman's terms, the reason/s :-

 

1) Why p.net has eliminated my ability to use my own images in my own hidden gallery for other online forums via the right click > image info > address > paste method? Clearly I'm somewhat I.T. deficient, however I thought the purpose of offering hidden galleries was to prevent outsiders from access images in the first place.

 

Hey - paragraph spacing is back!

As a subscriber and regular browser of p.net for the best of 10+ years I'm in shock and awe at how disfunctional the new look p.net is. How it can be launched with so many basic glitches like ridiculously slow loading speed, being logged out after a few minutes of inactivity and no paragraph breaks is beyond me. All of my previous images (hundreds) in my hidden galleries are AWOL, I can't update my profile details as nothing sticks and worst of all I cannot share my images on other online forums as I'm told p.net needs security upgrades to stop people from lifting other people's images............ which was the whole point of me placing all my online sharing images in a hidden folder....so no one had access to them other than me. This to me is completely illogical and unecessary. If p.net members don't want their images lifted by others then don't post them or at least place them in a hidden gallery - yikes! Disappoinment turned to frustration and now after days with no improvements turning to appathy. I expect I will become used to the flow of things and the operating functions of the new site but really, the old site may have been cosmetically dated but I liked it because everything worked. End of rant.

ditto

..........yet another 24 hrs and I still can't remain logged in for more than a few minutes each session, nothing sticks, no images remain assigned to the their galleries, and profile information and site preferences/settings refuse to gel once re-set........... My former hidden gallery images are still devoid of all their images and thus my posts online with those imags are now just holes in cycberspace .......

 

C'mon p.net I want this to work out but it's now days and still nothing works as it should.

Hi Glenn,

 

So there is no other way I can keep my images on p.net and access them to use them on other forums?

C,mon p.net - you can do way better.................

 

Another 24 hrs goes by and I'm still being logged off after a couple of minutes of no activity, I can't link my images to other places online as there is no right click functions and my hiddeen images are no longer accessible........

 

I'm sure hours in front of the screen and I'll get used to navigating the new site but the glitches are many and varied and not being repaired........yet..........

 

I really want to continue my nearly 10 year long subscription but I'm beginning to wonder...........

+1

Hey, I'm another who would appreciate this being sorted pronto - the main reason I pay an annual subscription to p.net was so I had an easy to use folio of hidden images to share online.

 

I'm suffering the same symptoms, the galleries which previously contained my hidden images remain under previous titles but every way I try to enter/view those galleries, no images are showing up and no amount of frigging about on my part can access any of them..............

Yep, I'm another member looking for an answer to this please.

My private view 'galleries' ie image files I used for online posting indicate that they are empty once I enter that gallery - I had over 500 images in one of them of which I refered to many repeatedly. Just uploaded a fresh pair of images to one private gallery and same deal - cannot click on the image and access the image data and the gallery indicates there are no images in that gallery..........

 

I'm also finding that I am not staying logged in for long enough - is there an adjustment I can make to stay logged on for longer or is there an auto nil activity log out activated?

 

And whilst I'm having a good sook - this new p.net takes way too long to load up - and there is nothing wrong with my internet connection........... The 'My Account' section insists that I fill in my address detail and yet it offers Australia as an option but only offers USA states as an option to fill in the data box, this is simply way too America centric and a bit of an oversight.

 

Personally I prefered the old site, nothing was broken with it for the 10+ years I subscribed to it - i found it quite logical and 2nd nature to flow through the menus, this new set up is too scatterlogical to my way of thinking. Maybe if I sit in front of this for hours I might find everything I used to browse on p.net but I say if it anint broke - don't fix it.

 

....and......... why do my paragraph breaks disappear when I post? C'mon p.net you can do (and did) much better than this.

<p>I echo the above mentioned positive sentiments for the 70-200/4. If you don't require a larger aperture ,the VR on this lens is truly excellent and portability is as good as it gets. I hand hold this lens 100% of it useage and have an excellent rate of 'keepers' I don't consider myself to have very good hand held technique at short tele lengths but the 70-200/4 works well for me never the less.</p>

<p>I made several circa 90 - 120 minute exposures on my D700 with an extra battery via the the vertical battery grip. This never effected the sensor - maybe I got lucky but I never had an issue with an uber long exposure so long as I had enough battery power for the shutter to remain up and for the noise reduction afterward.</p>

<p>As an Australian who pays attention to these things; given that it's Christmas retail frenzy time I'd disregard a store discount right now as a sign of anything other than regular discounting cycle ie. stock has been on inventory for XX months and thus a push is required.</p>

<p>Sure, if Nikon's announcement history is to be heeded the D750 and D810 are coming up at some stage soon for replacement, however I would not necessarlily interpret a discount right now as a sign of a replacement model coming in the next couple of months. </p>

<p>However, if you need a body and the current D750 fits the bill then take the discount even if we are paying with Antipodean Pesos.</p>

<p>Please keep it mounted, keep shooting and update us as you use it.<br>

I'm very keen to hear about it as I'm currently wedded to my 14-24 with the full blown Lee SW150 filter kit but after a recent 5 day interstate trip I can see I'm still carrying plenty of weight in the form of glass.<br>

I'm particularly interested in how well the filter system works as I can well do without A/F at 14mm-18mm which is where I use the 14-24 mostly.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I thought VR isn't exactly the strength on the 300mm/f4 PF AF-S VR lens, at least not around 1/100 sec or so.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I have tested my copy (of the 300/4 E) right down to 1/25th sec - the VR performs for me better than the 70-200mm/2.8 VRI ever did and it's also better by a considerable margin than my micro 105mm VR at uber slow shutter speeds. By 'better' I mean significantly more keepers but of course shooting totally different subject matter.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I hope Nikon have something more exciting in the pipeline.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Like an update for the 24-120/4 with VR akin to the 300/4 E please Nikon..... please..... ;-)</p>

<p>A Nikkor AF-D 50mm f/1.4 is something I do actually have hiding in the bottom of my lens bag........ It's indeed tiny and lightweight but I do have a subjective issue with that hexagonal bokeh it produces.......</p>

<p>Might be time to trial it as a standard zoom substitute on a couple of photo day trips away from home to see if I can live with 50mm and zoom in and out with my feet. I'd be squeezing it in between a 14-24mm f/2.8 (non negotiable lens- it alawys comes with me) and the 70-200mm f/4. </p>

<p>I have checked several recent batches of images where I have used the 24-70mm and 35mm to 50mm is where I use it most.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I have been on a lens weight reduction crusade in recent months and with a 7 week overseas road trip coming up next May I'm thinking about just how heavy and bulky my 24-70mm f/2.8 lens is for a travel lens. I have no beef with the lens as a short trip and and around home lens however, I now have experienced the advantages of Nikon's f/4 zoom lens range like the 70-200/4 which provides plenty adequate IQ, superior VR and is so compact and light compared to the f/2.8 version I used to carry.</p>

<p>The 24-120mm f/4 VR model is several years old and the 24-85mm variable f/3.5-4.5 lens is also a few years old now. I have tried both and can live with the optics but the VR on both of these lenses is not up to the same standard as the current VR on the likes of the 70-200/4 and the 300/4 E.</p>

<p>My style is to carry a trio of zooms for travel and only a small tripod and ball head for occasional ND and grad exposures. I know p.net deals only in absolutes, not rumours, but is a new f/4 VR standard zoom likely to surface from Nikon in the next 7 months?</p>

<p>Excellent.</p>

<p>I envy you!</p>

<p>Ok, assuming you are at B<strong><em>r</em></strong>ookings down on the Californian border and you are heading roughly south eastward to be in Vegas in a week's time.......... I see you have a couple of options.</p>

<p>1) You have Lassen National Park in central NoCal which is the best kept secret in California - simply stunning scenery, great access (road is still open according to the internet as I type) and not as madly popular as Yosemite etc so not so crowded. Then take California State Highways 89 and 385 down the Eastern Sierra Nevadas to see Lake Tahoe and Mono Lake - again stunning scenery all the way from Tahoe - stay down at Bishop and go see the Bristlecone Pines then down to Mojave via Red Rock Canyon and onto the State Highway 58 and then the Interstate 15 that will take you through to Vegas.</p>

<p>or</p>

<p>2) You follow State Highways 101 and 1 all the way down the NoCal coast and see the magnificent redwood forests. Just over the border Crescent City is a good base to see Jeddadiah Smith, Ladybird Johnson and Prarie Creek Redwoods. Further south there are other great statnds of Redwoods at the Avenue of Giants, Humboldt Redwoods, Grizzly Creek and Cheatham Redwoods. The coastline between the Oregon border and San Francisco is also divine like southern Oregon. Head down to Point Reyes Coastal National Park before heading inland to catch the Insterstate 5 and all the way down to State Highway 58 to catch the Interstate 15 to Vegas.</p>

<p>If you want some cool places to visit in the Mojave desert before you cross the Nevada border then sing out...........</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I'd keep the TC 14E III and instead of a DX body, save up for the AF-S VR 300mm f/4 E PF prime lens.</p>

<p>Yes, it most definately expensive, however it truly is compact ( shorter in physical length than your 70-200/4) and is lighter weight at only 864 grams with caps and hood which is fly weight for a telephoto prime lens.</p>

<p>I use the 300/4 E on the D810 and have found it quite a revelation in that it is so compact and light, it autofocuses very well and has the best VR by a long way - even better than the 70-200/4 which I also use.</p>

<p>I see no need for a tripod collar with the 300/4 E as the compact lightweight nature of it demands hand held use, however, as an aside - the good news is that if you do want one, it's the same RT-1 collar that fits both 300/4 E and your 70-200/4</p>

<p>I have the TC 14 E II and it works acceptably well on the 300/4 E, possibly the newer TC 14 E III will be marginally better - you really want to use TC's on prime lenses. The 300/4 E + TC 14 E II makes a nifty 500mm f/5.6 set up and again is so portable.</p>

<p>The 300/4 E will be the 2nd lens I pick in my bag to take with me to the USA/Canada next year for a 6 week long road trip and I always carry it in my camera pack everywhere at home/work/ photo excursions etc as it is truly so light and compact and produces excellent hand held birding shots.</p>

<p>Tristan,</p>

<p>I'm sorry to hear that your equipment was stolen, an experience I never wish to have. Thank you for explaining where you are at. Ok, I understand what you mean by 'boring'.</p>

<p>I have used the 17-35mm on my D810 and found it produced equally as sharp images to the 14-24mm (which I now use) in side by side tests in the shared 17-24mm focal length range. At 17mm the 17-35mm produces more distortion than my 14-24mm does at 17mm which is hardly surprising, however, I never found the wide end of the 17-35mm a weak point of the lens. If anything the 17-35mm was slower to focus than the 14-24mm is and it also lacks a little contrast or pure clrity over the 14-24mm but this may be <br /> In my experience, the 17-35mm is better suited to very close focus subject matter like fungi on a forest floor or wildflowers in a meadow - that sort of thing - with the 17-35mm the background is rendered more pleasingly than the 14-24mm which, in my subjective opinion, produces some surprisingly ugly bokeh when focusing on very close subjects ie close or on the min. focus distance.</p>

<p>That said the 14-24mm has 14mm which on FX is truly vastly wide and really puts a smile on my face every time I use it. The wide end of the 14-24mm has distortion but mostly correctable in processing and a small price to pay for mind boggling wide angle. It's a challenge to use the 14-24mm a lot as framing up ultra wide exposures in the 14mm to 18mm range, I find is often a genuine compositional challenge about what to leave out more than what to put into the frame. The 14-24mm lens is def. a more 'exciting' lens than the 17-35mm, for many photographers is less practical being uber heavy, uber expensive and uber bulky and not being filter ready / compatible without the use of a third party custom filter set up like the ridiculously expensive Lee SW150 system.......... didn't stop me though, the 14-24mm is a gorgeous piece of glass to work with.</p>

<p>My hand held shooting technique is not first class, perhaps not even second class........... and I find the D810 requires me to concentrate and be more methodical about hand held shooting than any other FX or DX body I've used before the D810. I have recently discovered some faith in VR lenses, in particular the VR systems on the 70-200mm f/4, the 105mm f/2.8 micro Nikkor and the 300mm f/4 E PF prime really work a treat for me on the D810.</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>While I've always found my 17-55 to be a fantastic focal range, I have to admit that I often found it a bit boring</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Perhaps you are contradicting yourself here - 'fantastic' and 'boring' just don't equate to my way of thinking.</p>

<p>What is your current DX set up lacking - where is it limiting your photographic experience? The D810 may not nec. be the answer.</p>

<p> </p>