cherubinphotography

<p>I finally had the opportunity to charge the battery that was in the grip and then put it in the camera body. It is showing a life of 2 out of 4, and this is a new Nikon battery! So, now I don't know if the issue was with the Nikon battery or the Flashpoint grip but the battery is definitely no good. Both are being shipped back today.</p>

<p>I'm using the "Flashpoint" grip which has got to be a private label of the Nikon grip. They are far too alike.<br>

I think I may have read somewhere else about this or a similar problem a while ago. I like using the grip and extra battery so I'll likely just manually switch when getting close.</p>

<p>PS - I just added the grip a week ago...</p>

<p>I think you guys may be on to something. I think it may be related to battery power and I am using a grip. The grip battery had been close to 0% and the body battery close to 100%. I never saw such an error with either of my D300 bodies so I never gave it any thought. After the "incident" I noticed the grip battery reached zero and I was now running on the battery in the body.</p>

<p>I have been shooting with a Nikon D800 and a new 24-70 f2.8 for about a month with no problems. Even had a full portrait session yesterday that went flawlessly. Then today I took out the combination to shoot my son's baseball game and the first shot sounded like the mirror stayed up and the camera showed err on the top lcd. I checked all of my settings and was shooting in aperture priority at iso100 in bright sunlight. The image displayed said it exposed at 1/320 at f5.6 but was very overexposed. I cycled power, removed the battery, and reseated the lens and still had the "err" on the lcd. Finally, I switched to manual and was able to clear the code. Then went back and continued to shoot in aperture priority with no further problems.<br>

Any thoughts as to the cause?</p>

<p>My only preference is to produce the best image quality I can (without going broke). Only I can decide if the cost is worth it but I may be willing to invest more if the difference would blow me away. I believe you have enlightened me, Nadine, in that I do <strong>want </strong>to go full frame. Maybe I should have attacked this from more a technical perspective.... ie. What technical advantages will full frame give me when shooting weddings and, am I a fool for not going that route?<br>

I have been considering "upgrading" to full frame and was at an event this passed weekend where a fellow photographer said she could never shoot weddings with cropped sensor cameras... I suppose I am wondering how many others would agree with her statement.<br>

No matter. I appreciate the input from everyone. Thank you all.</p>

<p>And thankyou Nadine! I enjoy and respect your input in this forum. Unless someone has a "you're crazy for not using FX" statement then I will save my pennies and stick with DX.</p>

<p>I appreciate that Nadine but my original questions were based on a need to replace the bodies. If I am going through the effort of updating then should I just take the opportunity to go to FX? I was asking if, as a wedding photographer, I would be better served using FX over DX....Assuming that I want to pay for the difference that is... :)</p>

<p>Vail, you are correct. I have considered the lens updates as well. I currently carry a Nikon 35 1.8, a Nikon 50 1.8, a Nikon 17-55 2.8, and a Sigma 50-150 2.8. I will need to replace glass too.</p>

<p>Thank you John. You confirmed my thoughts and that my choice may come down to what I am willing to afford.</p>

<p>Thank you for the responses. I was leaning towards changing out both bodies but Alex reminded me of the longer reach advantage of the DX. From an image quality standpoint, is the FX that much of an advantage?</p>

<p>I currently shoot weddings with two Nikon D300 bodies and will soon need to replace/upgrade the bodies. My dilemma is that if I stay with the crop sensor I would rather not put the money into the D300S given that this model is near the end of its cycle. So, do I wait for the D400 (or whatever it will be called), or change over to a full-frame model now? Am I wasting my time to even consider sticking with a crop body? And, if I do go full-frame, what model would you recommend?</p>

<p>Okay, I'll toss in my two cents as well.... I owned the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 and replaced it with the Nikon 17-55 f2.8. The image quality on the Tamron was excellent but it would sometimes miss focus. The Nikon is also faster focusing.</p>

<p>I just bought a 23" Viewsonic model VP2365WB with an IPS panel. Great monitor for the price!</p>

<p>And, I forgot to mention that the Nikon 17-55 is a heavy lens...</p>

 

<p>I would not buy the Nikon 17-55 for just one wedding....That lens is quite an investment for a once and done. I have used it on other projects but it is best suited for wedding work.</p>

<p>I shoot about 20 weddings per year and I have used both the Tamron 17-50 and the Sigma 50-150. The Tamron was capable of some sharp images but I sold it because it often hunted for focus in low light. (I also had to send it back to Tamron for repair only after 3 weeks due to poor communication with my D300). I now use the Nikon 17-55 and still use the Sigma 50-150. The Sigma is light and quick to focus. I may still sell it though just to get some additional focal length....</p>

<p>I believe the D40X has a setting for AF on the closest subject. That may be what has happened here.</p>

<p>I just purchased a D300 body from an online source to use as a backup. It has two scratches on the bottom from tripod use, and did not have a strap or lcd cover. It only had 2746 actuations and I paid $1000. Then went to KEH and picked up a lcd cover and strap for $13.</p>

<p>RAW always.</p>

<p>Come on Mark T....I never said I include advanced retouch work. : ) However, thanks to Lightroom2, I can pop through 1000 images in just two to three hours, make any necessary "tweaks", select those to be presented, and move on.<br>

I am not stating that all $500 CL photographers are equal to full-time pro wedding artists. I am only saying that there is a market for $500 weddings, and there are qualified artists willing to do the work. Besides, it takes a lot of skill to be good at this business but it also takes a lot of repetition and practice. I'm glad to have had the opportunity to work my way up from the bottom.</p>

<p>I often advertise on Craigslist as a supplemental. I'd rather book a $500-$1000 event than sit on my hands if I have an open afternoon. Maybe I am wrong but who cares??? If a B&G can only afford $500 then that is their business. The reality is that there is a lot of competition at that price point and the best photographer usually wins. If a wedding photographer is too good to be so cheap then it is likely below them to even look at CL. So why do it???<br>

I have had clients approach me looking for just a dvd of images from their two hour event. If I were in their shoes I would not want to pay over $1K just for that. I may be guilty of being too cheap at times, but I provide quality service, my clients are happy, and I'll gladly take the business if someone else won't do it.</p>

<p>I used to have the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 and it is an exceptional value for the money. Mine had very good image quality and was only sold because the Nikon 17-55 is faster focusing and sharper.</p>

<p>Hi Christina. I just recently sold a Tamron 17-50 2.8 for the very reasons you have addressed. The image quality was often outstanding, and the price was a big factor in my decision to buy it in the first place. I used the Tamron heavily for one wedding season and found that the focus inconsistencies were just too much to take a chance on anymore. The noise was not much of an issue but it would hunt quite a bit in low light and, even when it locked on, the focus was sometimes missed.<br>

For these reasons, I have decided to bite the bullet and invest in the Nikon 17-55. I purchased through a well known online retailer and used a familiar "no interest for 6 months" promo. I would suggest you take a solid look at the Nikon.</p>

 

<p>Dan Brown - I know some of the original Rockwell guys. Were you a member of the club?</p>