stephen_lilley

<p>I have been using my Nikon 500mm F4 VR lens with a Nikon 1.4TC for a couple of years now, shooting mainly birds and am more than happy with the results. I had never seriously considered using a 2X teleconverter , as everything I had read led me to believe that I would lose autofocus on my D300, and the loss of IQ would be unacceptable to me. I now use a D800 and understand that this camera will autofocus at F8, I am therefore reconsidering my position. Sometimes a modest loss of IQ is acceptable, especially if the target is an unusual bird. I have not seen any articles reviewing my new combination and using the 2TC111. I did read though, an article by Brad Hill, a Nikon user who said bluntly that the 2TC111 was ,( in my words), rubbish with the 500mm F4 lens, although I see from his site he doesn't use a 500mm lens. Anybody out there used this combo? Your comments would be most welcome.<br>

Stephen</p>

<p>Not sure if this is the right forum, but here goes. Received my D800 yesterday, Wow! Took some early morning shots today and downloaded my Raw files via Nikon Transfer ver 2.1. When I went to edit in Nikon NX2 ver 2.3.1 I found that "camera settings " was not available in the develop section of the drop down menu. Everything from and including " quickfix is available. I was using my D300 until Friday no problem with that and the software. Any Ideas ? </p>

<p> Thanks Stephen</p>

 

<p>I would welcome feedback from any one <em><strong>who has use</strong></em>d the latest version of the 2x TC. I am aware of the loss of 2 stops of light and loss of autofocus on my D300/ 500mm EF VR setup. I am more concerned with trade off of image quality. I shoot mainly small birds, getting close is all, but there are sometimes when you cannot get those extra few feet , which would make all the difference. Normally I use a 1.4TC, I have considered the 1.7TC What do you guys think? Stephen</p>

<p>I am new to flash photography. I shoot wildlife, often from a small hide, mainly birds. I decided to explore the possibilities of flash (SB900) as light here in the UK is often poor. My camera is the Nikon D300, along with the Nikon 500mm VR11. My question is can flash compensation be adjusted from camera ,as opposed to using the flash unit. The reason I ask is that when in my hide the SB900 is positioned well forward of the camera out of site and out of reach from my position in the hide. Hoping you can help Regards Stephen</p>

<p>PS Any recommendations to links on wildlife/flash photography would be appreciated.</p>

<p>Very definately sharp wide open , early days but not as sharp with 1.4TC,Using a D300 body</p>

<p>I have recently sold my soul to aquire this lens.I thought long and hard and read , I think every question on the forum relating to this focal length. I shoot birds, mainly small birds, in English conditions, (often poor light), I traded in my 500mm P lens and took the bull by the horns. I can say , without reservation, IMO this lens does everything it says on"the label" I do not know where the doubts regarding VR "normal /tripod mode originate, This lens is all I could have hoped for ,and more. VR WORKS . Regards Stephen</p>

<p>I have been shooting birds for three or 4 years , the last couple with a Nikon 500mm P lens, which I rate highly. I do not have a problem with my inability to get flight shots with this lens , nor with the fact that my % of good shots is low, I set my standards fairly high. I have noticed recently as my field technique gets better and I am able to get nearer to my subject, that my % of keepers dramatically falls away, I am still within the minimum focus distance of the lens, so I assume my problem is to do with the decreasing depth of field as I get nearer to my subject. Focusing on subjects , say 30 to 50 feet away is no problem.<br>

My question is would I see a dramatic improvement in results with a 500mm AFS. I am heading for retirement my eyes will no doubt deteriorate in the future. I could just about finance the lens, would it be a worthwhile investment. So often it is said that photographer makes the image not the equipment, would that hold in this case. Your comments and experiences would be appreciated.</p>

<p>Regards Stephen</p>

<p>Hi , I know related questions to this have been asked before, please bear with me. I recently upgraded to a D300 from a D200 and am having problems with inaccurate colour /hue renditions. I shoot mainly birds, often not in ideal light. I shoot in raw, not usually higher than 800 iso. I have used Auto WB as well as dialling in values. I have tried all the" picture control" settings, all produce similar effects, though some are obviously more saturated than others. With my D200 the images colour wise were nearly always on the button, out of the camera. I have alternated between srgb/argb with little effect. I have alternated between Adobe PS elements and NX2 for editing with little effect. I can arrive at a satisfactory image with editing, usually it involves changing the white balance and/or the Hue slider, the only problem with this is that I have to know/remember the colour of my subject. What is puzzling is that images in the camera LCD and images in the browser pre editing look totally different(with regard to colour) and much more accurate, but as soon as I open them in edit the issue becomes apparent. I have noted that reds are particularly affected.Has anybody had similar issues? <br>

Regards Stephen</p>

<p> Hi, I recently upgraded to a D300 from a D200, I always shoot raw. I am finding that my raw conversion in both photoshop elements and NX2 is unatural, ie not the colours I remember at the time I took the shot.Usually I can achieve a satisfactory result by adjusting the "tint" slider in the raw conversion for elements, but should I have to do this everytime.. I have reset my D300 to factory settings , no improvement. I did not have this issue with my D200, the sensor seems so different on the D300.By the way the colours on my D300 LCD look spot on, the colours in the NX2 browser look okay also. I have checked white balance, saturation etc but have not come up with an answer. Somewhat confused Stephen</p>

<p>I am a keen amateur bird photographer, shooting with a  Nikon D300 and 500mm P lens. Until recently I have  used photoshop elements  6 for all my editing and browsing needs. I have also used "imagenomic " as a plugin to photoshop. I have to say that I have found the noiseware removal tool to be excellent. I have had a copy of NX2 for six months  but have  not managed  to  come to terms with it, always  choosing the easier option  of "Elements" a programme  I am familiar with. I have now determined to  get up to speed with NX2, (with the help of James Odells guide") My question is, where  in my workflow  should I use "imagenomic"?  bearing in mind the platform it uses. Should I simply use  the noiseware tool in NX2 instead, or  should I invest in another editing / browsing programme  eg "lightroom "which I believe supports "imagenomic" to deal with noise before  I import into Nx2. <br>

Slightly confused<br>

  Stephen</p>

<p>I recently upgraded to a D300 from a D200 and thought it would be good time to review my technique. I shoot mainly birds so rarely do I alter my camera settings other than to obtain the correct exposure, ( or when I am tracking BIF). I shoot in manual mode, usually wide open as I am nearly always struggling for enough light here in the UK, ( I have good Nikon glass).To obtain the correct exposure my method has been to set my shutter speed to expose correctly, say the nearby grass illuminated under diffused sunlight, when I then focus on a subject I quickly check the camera meter reading in the camera viewfinder and then turn the rear camera dial to increase or decrease the shutter speed as needed. If my shutter speeds drop too low I increase ISO.<br>

My question , is this the best method to use?<br>

A further question if I may? which of the three factors influencing exposure ( ie. Shutter speed., aperture and ISO ) does the exposure compensation function in Nikon DSLR's affect.</p>

<p>Regards Stephen</p>

<p>I have recently aquired a Micro Nikkor 105m D lens. to use with my PN 11 extension . I find that I cannot mount the combo on my Manfrotto(Bogen) ballhead as there is not enough clearance between the release leaver on the ballhead and my Nikon D200. Previously I have used the PN 11 with my Nikon 300mm F4 AFS mounting the combo via the lens bracket. Any suggestions please.<br>

Stephen</p>

<p>I am consideing the purchase of a used 105mm D Nikkor for use in the main for close up photography. At the moment I use a Nikon 300mm AFS with a PN11, (bought for birds in flight) and occasionally a 1.4 TC, which is great for butterflies, but I would like to get smaller detail on insects and flowers. What would be the maximum magnification ratio and minimum working if I used the Pn11 with the 105mm lens. I am aware that the lens will go to 1:1 all by itself. I do not have anything in this focal range and thought the 105 might double as a short/medium telephoto. Thoughts and recommendations would be greatly appreciated. Regards Stephen</p>

The apparently,shortly to be announced, D3x has 24.5 mp sensor. This fact got me thinking about seemingly

accepted logic that shooting with telephoto lenses, 400mm and above is better with cameras where a digital crop

factor comes into play ie.narrower field of view, greater magnification etc. It seems to me that with a larger sensor ,

more cropping can be had, compared to a smaller sensor, for a given level of image "quality" and at some point

shooting with a larger sensor and cropping will have the advantage over DX format. Is this the case? If so what size

sensor would we be talking about. I shoot birds mainly with a Nikon 500mm P lens, 1.4 TC and a D200(10mp) and

crop practically every image. Is the successor, to the D300(12.5mp) likely to have a sensor, that is significantly

larger than 12.5mp.

Regards Stephen

Hi , I posted a question earlier in the week about my problems with a dead battery (EN-EL3e) for my Nikon D200.

After taking a previously, perfectly healthy battery out of my charger it was dead, not even " the number of shots

left" was illuminated. Nothing wrong with the camera as a second battery worked fine. I ordered a replacement

battery, on recieving it, placed it in the charger to top up and would you believe the same thing happend again. I dare

not put my third (original spare ) in the charger for obvious reasons. Anybody any idea what is going on. Could a

faulty charger drain the battery so low that "NOTHING" is illuminated on my D200. Is there any way that the charger

as terminated my batteries. The charger has worked fine for 18 months.

 

Regards Stephen

Hi, can anybody comment on the following.

Recently one of my two EN-EL3E batteries gave up the ghost without any warning. I had taken it off the charger and

put it into my D200 and noticed that when the camera was switched on the top LCD screen was totally blank, there

wasn't even the"images left to shoot" number visible. Thinking that the battery had somehow become completly

discharged I put it back on the charger for a couple of hours , but nothing changed. I notice when I put the battery in

the charger, the charge indicator light flashes just once and remains un-illuminated. My second battery charges

without any problems in the same charger.The batteries are of a similar age, 18months old , both are regular Nikon

products. I would estmate that each battery has had approximately 60 charge cycles.

Is this the "normal" way that this type of battery expires and is 60 charge cycles a typical life span.

 

Ps I usually rotate my batteries and do not often allow them to become completly drained.

 

 

Regards

Stephen

Thanks Frank for your comments. Could I just add that I take the ultimate of care with my gear, carrying my 500mm lens on my tripod and Gimbal head with the Gimbal adjusted so as the lens cannot rotate or pivot whilst walking. I did try to download the missing images , but they were indeed missing. Regards Stephen

Apologies if this question is in the wrong category.

Whilst photographing birds in my local district, early this morning I encountered a problem I have not come across

before. I was shooting with my Nikon D200/ Nikon 500mm P lens,+1.4 TC. Plenty of juice in the battery and plenty of

card space. I had shot bout 200 images and was walking to a different location with camera on tripod over shoulder,

when a bird appeared and perched quite close to me . I hurriedly set up my gear, quickly focused and banged off a

dozen shots or more. Shortly after, I checked the results in the LCD screen only to find none of the dozen or so

images were recorded. My first thought was that the card was empty, I tried a couple of test shots , which were then

okay. All previous and subsequent shots were okay. I can say definately that the shutter fired for all

those "missing" images.What had I done in my hurry to set up my gear?

 

Regards Stephen.

I'm still waiting for the delivery of my Nikon 500mm F4 P lens so have to content myself for the moment with

planning how I am going to use it and asking questions on the forum , which seems to ease my frustration, so

thankyou for bearing with me. My question tonight is , as the closest focus distance of this lens is about 6metres, I

may have to use an extension tube in certain situations. I often see the Nikon PK series of tubes recommended for

this type of use, I have a PN11 which I use for close up work, would this be of use to me with my 500mm lens. to

reduce CFD.

Regards Stephen

I am eagerly awaiting the arrival of my recently purchased Nikon 500mm F4 P lens. I have up untill now been

shooting with my Nikon 300mm F4 and 1.4 Nikon TC. My question is would it be a worthwhile investment to

purchase a second TC to take advantage of the 500mm focal length, obviously the manual focus question is not an

issue. The 1.7 TC was the one I had in mind, although the TC 2.0 would be great, but from what I have read using

the TC 2.0 results in a substantial loss in image quality. I should have mentioned that I am shooting mainly birds.

Any views on this subject would be appreciated. Regards Stephen

Hi, Anybody know if there is a marked difference in qualityand performance between the Lens Pen supplied with

the Nikon logo, and those with no trade mark supplied at 20% of the Nikon price, the latter seem to invariably

come from Hong Kong. Superficially they look alike. I am wondering if they are cheap inferior copies or , a similar

quality product , but cheaper because they dont carry the Nikon logo.

Second question is how does one know when the pen needs replacing. Im assuming the pens contains some

compound that will invariably run out with usage. I was sent a Lens pen (the no logo variety) as a freeby when I

purchased a gray market lens from Hong Kong a year or so ago. I have used it and was impressed how well it

cleaned those fingerprint and smear type marks, but it seems not to be as effective know, almost as though it

has "dried up".

 

Regards Stephen

I have been using Photoshop elements for a few years now, to be honest there are a number of applications that I

still have not come to terms with, mainly layers and mask techniques. I have been considering upgrading to an older

version of Photoshop, CS2, CS, or even older, (they can be had quite cheaply on E Bay), as many plugins eg

Photokit sharpener, and some of Fred and Mirandas products will only run on the full version of PS. I would like to

ask wether doing so would be step in the right direction.

I do very little creative editing, shooting mainly birds and landscapes . I am improving my skills and knowledge all

the time and wonder wether there is a whole new ball game with full version of PS that I am missing out on. I do not

process large numbers of images at any one time, and like to spend as much time as is needed to get the best out

of my keepers. I realise there is no one answer to this type of question as views on the subject will vary between

photographers, but nevertheless your comments will be most welcome.

Regards

Stephen.

I find myself shooting mainly birds, with a Nikon 300mm F4 AFS and Nikon 1.4 TC. Like every other bird

photographer before me I realise that along with improving my field technique, to enable me get nearer to my targets,

a lens with more reach is highly desirable. My budget will not extend to one of the AFS super tele's I have therefore,

after reading many, many posts on the forum, decided that I have three options.

1 Nikon 300mm F2.8 VR /1.7TC.

2 Sigma 500mm F4.5.

3 Nikon 500mm P manual focus.

I think I will be opting for the Nikon 500 P Lens.

I would like to ask, is the viewfinder on my D200 good enough, especially when using TC's,to enable me to focus

manually? My eyesight is okay, but I,m no spring chicken. Would the use of a "Katz Eye " be advisable? and finally

is the viewfinder on the D300 much better than the D200? I do not have a problem when occasionally I manually

focus with my 300mm F4 AFS.

 

Regards Stephen

I have been using this TC with my D200/ Nikon 300mm AFS FS combo for 6 months

or so. Generally it works very well,but there has always been a bit of

rotational play between TC and camera resulting in momentary loss of autofocus

and the Fee warning appears in the camera display.When I apply a little "turn"

to the lens, functions are returned.Has anybody else experienced this problem?

Would I have a similar issue with the Nikon TC? Lastly I noted somewhere on

forum that the Nikon 1.7 TC was recommended for this setup, is this the case?

Regards Stephen

Thanks for the help. Everything working okay now. I'm assuming that the setting of aperture is now via the ring on the lens only, when using the PN11. All this will be obvious to you guys (and girls) whose experience predates AF, I'm fairly new to photography but enjoy the learning curve. Regards Stephen