dwight200

<p>VR samples the image at around 1 KHz, so compensation is in the 1/500 second range. If you use shutter speeds faster than that, the VR is ineffective, and may introduce some image blur.</p>

<p>Sorry I didn't explain it well. What I meant is that the flash starts the discharge, then cuts it off when it has produced enough energy for the shot, as directed by the camera. When ISO is high, it needs less energy, so after the shot there's lots of energy left stored in the flash and the next shot can be taken without waiting for recharge.</p>

<p>I show some test examples at comparing the SB800 and the Di866. I used TTL for both flashes. I would guess that for some reason the Nissin doesn't leave as much charge in the flash after cutting off the discharge.</p>

<p>I've used my D200 (10 MPx) to reproduce slides. I can get as much resolution from the 10 MPx image as I can get out of the slide. I would not see any advantage to using a D800 to copy my slides.</p>

<p>I have the Nissin Di866 (first version) and an SB800. I have used them together. I did find that using the Di866 as a master and the SB800 as slave is more reliable than the other way around. However, using both as slave (with an onboard pop-up flash as commander) works fine for me. Since I only have one Nissin flash and one Nikon flash, I haven't tried using one as a master and one of the same brand as a slave.</p>

<p>The Di866 does not have the charge cut-off capacity of the Nikon flash. I frequently use multiple shots at high frame rate. Setting the ISO high allows me to do that and not dump all the charge in one shot. In a medium sized room, ISO 1600, bounced off the ceiling, I was able to get 10 shots from the SB800 before the power fell off. I could only get 3-4 with the Di866.</p>

<p>If I'm going to buy another flash, it will probably be a Nikon, although the Nissin works for me.</p>

<p>I'd guess it's a wasp. In the spring they go looking for suitable places to build nests. They crawl into small openings exploring, and in the process they sometimes get into buildings. </p>

<p>I don't have a SB900 or 910, but I have a SB800 and a Di866. I find the Di866 almost compatible with Nikon CLS.</p>

<p>It all depends on whether or not you use the fancy features or push the flash. If all you're doing is using the Di866 on the hot shoe as the only flash, it works just fine as far as I've tried it out. If you're using it on the hot shoe as a commander for a Nikon flash it works just fine as a basic commander.</p>

<p>It has a few limitations compared to my SB800. When I use the Di866 as a commander and SB800 as a slave, no problem. Using the SB800 as a commander and Di866 as a slave results in occasional misfires. Using my old D200 and the SB800 and Di866 both as slaves I've had no problem (but I don't do that too frequently).</p>

<p>On my D200, the SB800 works as a slave when you activate the modeling flash. The Di866 doesn't (i.e. it doesn't put out light when I press the button). I don't use this feature so it doesn't bother me. I just tried it to see if it worked.</p>

<p>I find it useful occasionally to run the camera on high speed release (Ch) with flash. Running the ISO up allows you to take quick bursts of shots. Since the ISO is high, the flash doesn't dump too much of the charge for each shot, so you can get several shots. On a test setup I got 10 shots with the SB800 before the flash energy dropped off. With the Di866 I got about 3 shots.</p>

<p>Just so you don't think that's a specialized use of the flash that you'll never need, let me describe why I use it. When I have a group of people indoors so I need flash, I use the flash on the hot shoe. (I generally try to bounce it, but can't always do that). In some groups, there will be at least one person who will blink when the pre-flash goes off, so when the actual shot is taken, that person has their eyes closed firmly. If I take one shot, their eyes are closed. If I take a second shot the same thing happens. However, if I take a burst of 3-4 shots, the blinker generally recovers by the third shot so I get a shot with everyone's eyes open.</p>

<p>Occasionally you'll get a late blinker, whose eyes are closed on the third or fourth shot. When that happens, you have a set of several shots, in the first couple there will be one set of people with their eyes open and in the last few shots you will have another set of people with their eyes open. Since you took the shots in a quick burst, the background won't change much between shots and swapping heads with photoshop is easy.</p>

<p>But I digress. The Di866 is just fine as a general purpose flash (PS: I have the first version, and I understand there's a newer version out which I haven't tried). Most of the time it's CLS compatible and you can use it as your only flash. But there may be times when you wish you had a Nikon flash. It all depends on how you use your flash. If I were doing one-of-a-kind shots (like weddings) I would go for the Nikon flash. If I were only taking pictures of my cat and family get-togethers (more like what I actually do), the Di866 would suit me just fine.</p>

<p>User settings are typically stored in flash memory, which doesn't require power to maintain. The clock has a separate battery, which will last for several months. When the main battery is inserted in the camera it charges the clock battery.</p>

<p>If you're planning to store your camera for a year or more, you will likely have to reset the clock, but not the user settings.</p>

<p>First, I must admit that I'm comparing my Di866 to an SB800, not an SB700 since I don't have a 700.</p>

<p>I'm not saying that the Nissin isn't reliable or doesn't do burst shots. I'm saying that I find my Nikon more reliable than the Nissin. That is based on using one for a commander and the other for a slave. With the Nikon as the commander and Nissin as slave, I miss a remote firing occasionally (I haven't done this for a while, but I think it was on the order of 10%). With the Nissin as a commander and Nikon as slave, I did not notice any misses, so the missed shots would be less than about 2%.</p>

<p>For burst shots, both flashes do them. But when I tried a test setup, I got 3-4 shots with the Nissin and 10 with the Nikon. Identical setup. I suspect that the Nikon is better at saving unused charge when it turns off the flash. BTW, I frequently use ISO up to 1600 or more in burst shots. That keeps the charge usage to a minimum and helps to get more shots in the burst.</p>

<p>I have no complaints about the Nissin power except for the secondary flash. I find it brighter than I expect, and it creates shadows like a direct flash, even when I have it set to low power. This is based on a couple of shots. I haven't done a lot of testing on it. I don't generally use it that much. When I need fill I raise the white card on either of the flashes when doing bounce. It could very well be that on those shots the ceiling was too high and the CLS told the flash to tone down the main flash to get the exposure right since there was so much contribution from the secondary flash. OTOH, the Nikon doesn't have the secondary flash, so it is a plus for the Nissin.</p>

<p>As far as CLS is concerned, it has some limitations. When trying to use a commander and two off-camera flashes I find that changing the power in one flash does radical things to the overall lighting. The camera still tries to get the exposure right by adjusting the power output from both and when you change one down, the other goes up. When using dual off-camera flashes I generally go to manual. In that mode I have no complaints about the Nissin. Particularly since I only have two flashes and my Nissin makes it possible to use two off-camera flashes (on my D200 -- my D3 is limited since one of the flashes needs to be on the camera, but then the D200 does just fine for my "studio" work).</p>

<p>Example of burst test:

<p>What I want:</p>

<p>Reliable operation<br>

Operation in burst shots<br>

Operation as either commander or slave for off-camera use<br>

Enough power to do bounce shots</p>

<p>The Nikon wins the first 3 and the Nissin wins the last one.</p>

<p>By the way, the reason I like to do burst shots with flash is that when I need flash to take a picture of a group (or sometimes just a portrait), I frequently encounter someone who blinks in response to the preflash, so that the photo has their eyes closed. When I use a rapid burst of shots the blinker usually recovers by the third shot, so their eyes are open for that shot.<br>

In the event there's a late blinker in the group, the rapid burst is still useful since their eyes are open for the early shots. Since the background won't change much during a quick burst, you can swap heads in Photoshop to get everyone with their eyes open.</p>

<p>I have a Di866 (not mark II) and it works pretty well. It's not completely compatible with the Nikon CLS but it's pretty close. I have an SB800 also and find that the off-camera flash works more reliably with the SB800 as a commander and Di866 as a slave than the other way around. The Di866 doesn't do the modeling flash off camera like the SB800 does. Other than that it works pretty well as a single on-camera flash.</p>

<p>The range of motion of the flash head is better than the SB800, which doesn't rotate the way I want it to when I go to portrait orientation and bounce (I have to rotate it 270 degrees the wrong way).</p>

<p>The second flash is a nice touch but I find it's always too bright. I can set it to 1/128 and it's still too bright to fill when I'm using bounce. Maybe I'm pushing the bounce too much but it leaves shadows that seem pretty strong to me.</p>

<p>The recycle time is a bit longer than the Nikon and when I'm using multiple shots at high frame rate the Nikon gives me more flashes than the Di866 for the same conditions.</p>

<p>I'm happy with my Di866 as a second flash, but I'd go with the Nikon when I'm using only one flash.</p>

<p>I don't believe there will be any difference between a zoom lens and a prime lens unless you always leave the prime lens at the same focal length for the entire experiment.</p>

<p>Both zooming and focusing involve motion of lens components. When the volume within the camera/lens system changes, air has to move in or out to make up the difference. Your camera/lens system is not air tight. It might be water resistant, but even that is not the same as waterproof. And the viscosity of air is much smaller than that of water so It can enter through smaller apertures.</p>

<p>Dust happens. It may be left in the mirror box and loosened as the mirror slaps up and down. It may be parts wearing (although I would hope they don't wear that fast). It may have been in the lens when you put it on. It may get in through the F mount, even with weather sealing.</p>

<p>When I got a D200 I got an 18-200 as the kit lens. I figured I'd never have to take it off, and I didn't for about a year. Eventually it got lots of dust so I learned how to clean it. It's not hard.</p>

<p>Bulb is definitely not a good idea for sensor cleaning. In addition to the fact that power is applied to the sensor, giving you static problems while cleaning, it all depends on you keeping your finger on the button while using your other hand to clean the sensor. If something shifts and your finger loses its grip on the button and the shutter closes while you're in there, it could mean a shutter replacement. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. It's not just the mirror that's locked up. It's the shutter.</p>

<p>Take the time to charge the battery. It's worth it.</p>

<p>I got a Nissin Di866 a while back. It's advertised as being CLS compatible and when I got it, it was around half the price of the SB900.</p>

<p>Having used it a bit, I find it's pretty close to being compatible with CLS. The missing chunks of performance are not something everyone will use, but it's probably not something a pro would invest in.</p>

<p>Used as a straight flash with CLS, it performs just fine for me. It's some of the fancy stuff that doesn't quite work. e.g. when using two flashes, one on the shoe and one off camera as a slave, I find the Nissin a bit unreliable as a slave, but as a commander (SB800 as a slave) it does just fine. Also, trying the modeling flash off-camera doesn't work, but it does work with my SB800.</p>

<p>I sometimes use the flash in bursts of shots. I set my camera to high ISO so the flash doesn't dump a large part of its charge with a shot. I can then take a burst of 3-5 shots, all with flash. I tried this on my camera in a small room, bouncing the flash off a 7 ft high ceiling, ISO at 1600. With my SB800 I could get 9 fairly consistent shots at 5 frames/second. The 10th shot showed distinct falloff of the flash power. Trying the same thing with the Di866, I got about 3 shots and the 4th was dark. Still, I was able to use the Nissin flash for short bursts.</p>

<p>I use this technique when shooting groups, and find it useful. When you shoot a group with a flash, many times someone will blink. If you shoot the group in a burst of 3-5 shots, the one who blinks at the first shot will probably have recovered by the last shot. Occasionally you get a late blinker. If that happens you could have someone with their eyes closed in every picture, but if you take the burst as fast as the camera will handle bursts, the background won't change significantly so you can swap heads from one shot to another in photoshop.</p>

<p>I would recommend the Nissin Di866 if you are going to use it for standard flash shots, without a lot of off-camera stuff. It can be used that way but you have to understand the limitations there.</p>

<p>IMHO, if the D800/D4/whatever were announced tomorrow it would still take up to 6 months before you could get your hands on it. In the meantime you're without a camera.</p>

<p>If you make money off your camera, or even if there are people who depend on your photography (without payment), then you need something NOW. Get the D700.</p>

<p>If you don't make money off your camera, you could buy a stopgap body and wait for "the one" to be available. This course of action runs the risk of having the new body not be just what you need (e.g. it puts a large emphasis on video and the still camera is just a D700 with tweaks). It could also be significantly more expensive than the D700.</p>

<p>My personal opinion is that a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.</p>

<p>I've had pretty good results from GIMP using Colors>Auto>White Balance</p>

<p>The 17-55 f/2.8 DX lens works on FF above about 25mm. I don't think the 18-200 has a focal length above which it doesn't vignette on FF.</p>

<p>If you have the D700 and 18-200, try it out and decide for yourself. If you're planning to get a D700 I'd factor in the additional cost of a FF lens. In the long run it will be worth it.</p>

<p>The 28-300 is the FF equivalent of the 18-200 except that it's sharper on FF than the 18-200 was on DX.</p>

<p>A lot of people set their AF to work only with the AF-ON button, and not with the exposure button. There are advantages and disadvantages with that. One disadvantage is that most (if not all) digital cameras use the release button to initiate focusing, at least as the default mode. Coming from one of those cameras you expect your camera to focus when you start pressing the release button.</p>

<p>As pointed out above, by decoupling release and focusing you can prepare your shot by focusing on a spot, then release when the action gets to that spot. There is a lot of flexibility in the current cameras and you can set them up in several different ways. The downside is that you have to remember just how you have it set up and whether you have to press the AF-ON button to focus or just the release button. It takes some practice to change modes.</p>

<p>I have tried setting it to decouple focus and release, but I found it hard to remember to press AF-ON first. After 10 years of using digital cameras with release/focus coupled it's a hard habit to break.</p>

<p>But I've heard from people that use it a lot, that it's worth the effort. I suspect it comes down to response time needed to get a shot. If you have to perform two separate actions, it will slow you down and you will miss shots occasionally unless you anticipate the action correctly.</p>

<p>I've never used a variable ND filter, but since it's basically a pair of polarizers I'd be a little wary of using one for really low transmission applications. Polarizers, particularly cheap ones, are not perfectly color balanced, i.e. the degree of polarization is not constant over the whole spectrum. Consequently using a pair of them as a very dense ND filter is likely to introduce color problems. You may be able to correct for them in post, but it's additional work.</p>

<p>It's probably better to use a fixed ND filter or possibly a stack. Naturally you should be concerned with the quality of the filter and its coatings when you're stacking them.</p>

<p>ADL is designed to be used for high dynamic range situations, where the difference between highlight and shadow is greater than the dynamic range of the camera. The camera modifies the RAW image a bit to compress the dynamic range to fit the capabilities of the camera, but in the process it reduces the exposure a bit. There are limits to the ability of ADL to compress the dynamic range. It isn't magic, just signal processing. The signal has to be there to process, not zero in the shadow or saturated in the highlights.</p>

<p>There's a (long) informative thread on flickr at http://www.flickr.com/groups/nikondigital/discuss/72157623298578772 about ADL. Thom Hogan has some information about it in his ebook series for various camera bodies. In effect, he says you should only use it when you absolutely need it for dynamic range problems that can't be addressed by bracketing (e.g. dynamic scenes).</p>

<p>Keeping the light on the painting and off everything else in the room is important, particularly with paintings under glass. You want to look at a right angle to the painting to avoid perspective distortion, and that means your camera reflection will be right in the center of the photo.</p>

<p>I've had some success putting the lens through a hole in a large black posterboard. That helps to reduce the reflection.</p>

<p>If you have PhotoShop or GIMP, you can change the perspective, so you can shoot off-center and deal with the perspective in post.</p>

<p>Paintings with a lot of brush texture present special problems since there are all sorts of specular reflections from the rough surface. You may have to do a lot of experimenting in that case.</p>

<p>Irfanview does not view RAW files. Raw files contain an embedded jpg and that's what Irfanview displays. It's the same as a regular (not fine) jpg file. 8 bits. You don't get any RAW advantage if you're editing in Irfanview.</p>

<p>Skies, white paper, blank walls.....</p>

<p>People try all sorts of things to see the spots on their sensors. Whenever I want to check, my skies are full of cirrus clouds, none of my walls is blank, and my paper is all written on.</p>

<p>I find the easiest thing to do is to sit down at my computer and bring up a blank page on my word processor. It's white. I can just put the camera right up to the screen and click away, thereby getting a solid white uniformly lit field. (I use manual focus and put the camera right up to the screen so I don't focus on the spots on my computer monitor).</p>

<p>I can just clean the sensor right at my desk and check it.</p>

<p><strong>D4</strong>: I <em>never</em> use the camera names. DSC_4932 means absolutely nothing. What is it a photo of? Instead I change the names to something meaningful at download time. My computer never sees the camera file names. That renders D4 moot. I don't care what it's set to. (I must admit that I don't usually do large shoots -- 500 shots is high for me).</p>

<p>Voice annotation: I find it useful. AFAIK, LR does not use the voice file, you're on your own. The file should be a .WAV file on the card, so be sure you download it. It's not attached to the .NEF file, but has the same name.</p>

<p>Never having used a D90, I can't comment on the questions regarding that body.</p>

<p>You can create and specify a preset that will modify the default LR settings.</p>

<p>When I started with my first DSLR I shot jpg. After screwing up some settings and trying to recover from some white balance problems I started shooting RAW+jpg. That gave me the jpg for instant use and the RAW file for significant editing (not just cropping or brightness/contrast).</p>

<p>When I upgraded I decided to shoot RAW only.</p>

<p>(1) I save about 30% of the card space by not including the jpg, so I can get a few more pix on the card. This is of minimal importance since I rarely come close to filling a 4 Gig card.</p>

<p>(2) I have to convert the RAW to jpg in order to use it. I use Lightroom, which enables me (even encourages me) to add keywords to the photos. Since I have more then 30K pictures on my computer, having keywords enables me to find things. If you only have a few pictures that may not mean much to you. But consider looking for a picture ten years from now. Do you remember the file name? (I always rename the files to be something descriptive -- DSC_4913 means nothing, and will repeat after 10,000 more pictures). So shooting RAW forces me to use Lightroom, which encourages me to add keywords, which helps me find things later. (Note that keywording is an art that takes some practice to master).</p>

<p>(3) As mentioned before, RAW files can be edited with more range than jpgs. When I screwed up the white balance I was hard pressed to get a nice picture out of the jpg. With a RAW file you can change the white balance to whatever you want after the fact. Of course that doesn't guarantee that all your pictures will be great, but at least you will have more options when editing.</p>

<p>If you are happy with your jpgs, and never screw up your settings, by all means shoot jpg. You'll save a lot of space on your cards. But shooting RAW gives you some insurance for that once in a lifetime shot.</p>

<p>As far as the voice recorder goes, remember that the file name goes with the last picture. So since the speaker's name is generally announced at the beginning, you might have to take a nothing picture of the person walking up to the podium so you can get the name associated with a face. Or just remember the name and record it in the middle of the talk occasionally. I assume there will be a program with a schedule. Take a picture of it. That gives you a record of the sequence that carries along with all your photos (although sometimes the sequence gets broken). At least that's a good starting point. If you make sure to take a photo of everyone who speaks, the photo sequence will be a good clue if you miss a voice record.</p>

<p>You have to set up the voice recorder in the setup menu. First you have to enable it. Then you have to choose whether to allow overwriting of old voice records. Then you have to choose whether the recorder is push-on/release-off, or push-on/push-off (how the button works). You can set it to record a particular length record (5 sec, 10 sec,..., 60 sec) or just to turn off when you're done (e.g. by releasing the button).</p>

<p>To record a voice memo, you have to have the photo showing on the monitor. I'm not sure whether you can select a previous photo or whether it has to be the last one taken (I don't have my camera right here with my laptop). If you're using slot 2 overflow mode, the WAV file goes with the photo file in whichever card is currently recording. If you're using slot 2 backup mode or slot 2 for jpeg mode, the WAV file is recorded on the card in slot 1.</p>

<p>The monitor will show a small musical note image on photos with a voice record.</p>

<p>If you change the file names on download, make sure the WAV files are also changed to match the photo file. Many download programs will do this automatically, but make sure it happens and the voice record is still associated with the right photo.</p>

<p>PS: you can probably use your flash when taking photos at the free bar.</p>