brians.

<p>WedNEsDAy again! Nice start-off shot Jose.</p>

<p>This week I took a drive up the coast near San Simeon, CA and found a beach full of Elephant Seals. It's a well known place but a first for me. These two giants were batteling it out for the alpha spot. Their huge gutteral roar carried far up the beach.</p>

<p>D50, Sigma 150-500mm @500mm, 1/1250, F/8.0, ISO 200, hand-held.</p><div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<p>Joseph Braun, are you saying you can calibrate the exposure sensors without sending the camera to Nikon? If so, how?</p>

<div></div>

<p>Lots of great shots again this week -- nice work everyone!</p>

<p>Took a trip to Mono Lake, California, this week. There are viewing areas where you can stand right next to these tufa towers. The towers were exposed after sugnificant amounts of water were diverted to Los Angeles in the '40's <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mono_lake">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mono_lake</a> The water level is slowly being restored today. The lake is also a significant breading and migratory area for many kinds of birds.</p>

<p>D90, 16-85mm @16mm, 1/1250, f/6.3, ISO 320</p><div></div>

<p>I found the D90 (similar sensor to D300) noise levels were not better than the D50 at ISO 200 in JPEG, and only slightly better at ISO 400. However, at ISO 800 and higher the difference was obvious. I'm surprised you would find the cameras even close at ISO 1600 -- I think something needs to be reexamined there. Still, I'm glad you posted your observation because many people can't believe that the D50 is that good a camera, but it really is.</p>

<p>Happy WedNEsDay all. I didn't get out to get any new shots, so I'm posting a shot of an illconceived project for my van which is occupying most of my time. It's a couch... don't ask. I hope it will be done soon.</p>

<p>D90, 16-85mm @16mm, 1/200, f/8 (should have been f/5.6), ISO 320, internal flash</p><div></div>

<p>I always use Manual mode (well usually). Once you check a few basics it's pretty easy.</p>

<p > </p>

<ol>

<li>

<p >Determine your<strong> ISO</strong>: do you need clarity or speed; is the light bright or dim?</p>

</li>

<li>

<p >Change <strong>WB</strong> from auto if needed: is it a cloudy day or a special situation?</p>

</li>

<li>

<p >Set the <strong>aperture</strong>: use the optimal size for your lenses clarity unless you have a special situation.</p>

</li>

</ol>

<p > </p>

<p >Then just press the shutter release half way and adjust your <strong>shutter speed</strong> until your exposure level is 0. Viola, you're ready to click.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Of course there are many other settings to consider but these basics have made working in Manual mode fun and easy for me. Most situations are fairly constant so once I've got the first 3 settings, a tweak of the shutter speed when the light changes is all I usually need (but then I don't take many pictures while dangling off the side of a cliff, egad! :) ).</p>

 

<p>I've had the same experience with the D50. Its buffer just isn't that large, and processing isn't fast enough to clear it quickly. You can usually get off 3 to 5 shots off quickly, depending on your settings, and then it becomes a hit-or-miss affair (sometimes I get 7 or 8 shots). Shooting in JPEG speeds things up but that compromise is up to you. However even my D90 will slow down after 15 (or so) shots in JPEG-RAW.</p>

<p>Richard, thanks. I don't think I should get into the Sigma 150-500 OS here but you can see some things I posted in another thread: <a href="http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00SXC2">http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00SXC2</a> (scroll down a bit. Thanks for your interest. Great tulip!</p>

<p>Jose, great bug! I think the shadow on the ground makes the photo.<br>

Martin, nice austire beach house.<br>

Sanford, this was my favorite this week. The tree seems to be setting the bird free.<br>

Ken, World Trade Center? Nice shot.<br>

Paul B, Interesting, with the face in the old building (I hope the place didn't fall down around her)<br>

Another great week everyone!</p>

<p>A view of the California coast from Fort Funston, looking south toward Pacifica (near San Francisco). Many homes in this area have met their demise by falling off the erroding cliffs.</p><div></div>

<p>I agree with what everyone is saying but there is a couple of things you might check: What level of Active D-lighting are you using? If you're using Auto then you're stuck with what the camera gives you. However, be careful with High setting since it can produce unwanted noise and poor WB sometimes. Also, Matrix metering usually works best with Active D-lighting, Center or Spot metering can throw things off in my experience.</p>

<p>Thanks Gary. I'd seen black backgrounds used with similar looking animal shots and had always meant to ask... I assume they were doing something different however. Still, it's a good technique for making the subject stand out. thanks</p>

<p>Wow Jeff, great long exposure!</p>

<p>Oops, WedNEsDAy already! It almost passed me by. Great shots everyone. Some of my favorites are: Gary's bud (how do you get that black background?), Per-Christian's Gull, Hector's parade, Wayne's gift shop, Adey's BBQ (yum!), Michael's chicks, C. Bay's apartments, Mikkihail's colorful canal, Richard's Beacon Hill, and Chris's buttery dark fountain. Nice everyone!</p>

<p>I headed for the hills Monday, drove over Ebbetts Pass into Hope Valley and back through Kit Carson Pass. This is South of Lake Tahoe in the California Sierra Nevada Mountains. There was still snow in them thar hills but the temperature was into the 80s and beautifully clear.</p>

<p>For some reason my D90 gave me fits with wiley exposure levels and poor white balance (in Manual mode). I tried three different lenses and all had troubles. Everything worked fine when I got home, go figure??? Since I mostly shoot JPEG there wasn't much wiggle room for adjustments.</p>

<p>This shot could be saved with a lot of post processing. D90, 16-85mm @16mm, 1/400, f/11, ISO 320.</p><div></div>

<p>Wow, this weeks collection is truely exceptional. I know everyone says that every week but this week just blows me away! I was going to pick out a few of my favorites since I appreciated being mentioned last week but there are just too many great shots -- everyone should take a bow.</p>

<p>Well, here's mine: This is a Muscovy Duck. There is a small group of them living around a pond in a local park. Most people find them quite ugly but I've grown to like them. They seem more intellegent, more expressive, than the Mallards and other ducks in the area. </p>

<p>D90, Nikkor 70-300mm VR @ 300mm, 1/100, f/8.0, ISO 320</p><div></div>

<p>and thanks Jose... I really must pay better attention, guess I'm the mediocre type.</p>

<p>This is a great thread, and I agree that its non-critical nature is one of the best parts. However, I also agree with Bernard, that having someone mention your name is a nice perk -- thanks Georg -- as long as we stay positive. But I'll go with what ever is best for the thread.</p>

<p>Busy week, so I had to pull one out of last weeks park visit. Bottoms up!</p>

<p>D90, Nikon 70-300 VR @ 300mm, 1/160, /f/11, ISO 320.</p>

<div></div>

<p>I went down to the local park today... lots of turtles taking sun.</p><div></div>

<p>Well, I just reread the CameraLabs review and it's not that bad a review. So what can I say... those are my opinions. Thanks for posting the tread Glenn.</p>

<p>Glenn, The Photozone review you refered to was the most favorable review I found: <a href="http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/377-nikkor_1685_3556vr">http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/377-nikkor_1685_3556vr</a></p>

<p>but the CameraLabs review, which I like because they are usually more critical, was more in line with my experience. <a href="http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/377-nikkor_1685_3556vr">http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/377-nikkor_1685_3556vr</a></p>

<p>However, this is a go-to lense for me... I use it all the time because of it's focal range and great VRII.</p>

<p>I have owned the 16-85mm since November and find it's focal range and VRII to be indispensably for what I do (hand-held enthusiast). That said, with my version, shooting at f/5.6 primarily:</p>

<p > </p>

<p >At 16mm, I find the sharpness to be barely adequate, with high loss in dynamic range (requiring dynamic D-lighting most of the time).</p>

<p > </p>

<p >At 50mm, much better, but my 50mm f/1.8 is sharper.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >At 85mm, very nice sharpness, very usable lens, but not as sharp as my 70-300mm VR @ 70mm.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >I have read reports that show the 16-85 to be nearly as sharp as the 17-55, and other reports that show it's barely better than the 18-105 kit lens. I sent mine to Nikon for a check-out and it was within specs. Since some people find the 16-85 to be a very sharp lens I can only conclude that there is a wide variation in versions of the lens. </p>

 

<p>I've started a van conversion project that is pushing the limits of my work space. This was meant mostly for documentation but since it's the only thing I've shot this week... The piece on the table is foam ceiling tile being covered in fabric and batting.</p>

<p>D90, 16-85mm @16mm, internal flash 1/2, 1/200, f/8, ISO 320</p><div></div>