b._p.

April 9, 2010

Matt, just try the difference to change from normal to Liveview with both camera's: with the D300 you have to push down a button, while you change the bigger dial around it, same if you want to change to remote or self-timer.

With the D90 you simply press the Liveview button. Also, the D90 has the info button to go through a lot of things to change real quick. True: the D300 has more dedicated buttons, but if that really simplifies things is up to the user.

But which buttons do you think are lacking on the D90 but are on the D300?

April 8, 2010

I never had the D300s, but I did have 2 x D90 and before 2 x D300. At first I was very happy with the D300, but after I switched, I understand the D300 has a lot of "overkill" that sometimes even got in my way with taking pictures. I know change settings in the D90 3 x faster than with the D300, simply because there where to many options and buttons.

The superior focus system of the D300 never really helped me; I shot some sports and never had a problem with the D90.

Although the D300 has the option of 14 bit, I could never see the difference and according to DXOmark, the sensor of the D90 is even more sensitive! I may be going out on a limb here, but I shot a lot of photo's here in the hard light of Portugal and I really believe I got much better sunsets with the D90.

Everything is relative as usual. But I just can't justify the higher price of the D300(s) for what it offers more.

Just my 2 cents.

PS: I read somewhere about a pro wedding photographer who only uses 2 D90's....

April 8, 2010

First thing that comes to my mind, is, why you use 2500 ISO when you're using a flash?

I had some strange things happen with my D90, like one day the 2 format buttons didn't work at all. I had to turns the camera off and on again, until it finally worked again.

Another thing was, that I got an "F" when I wanted to shoot. This time I wiggled the lens a little and then it worked again normally. Sometimes the metering is completely off for no real reason. Again: I turn the camera off and with a little luck, it works again.

In short: electronics don't always do what they're supposed to do...

But again: why 2500 ISO?

April 2, 2010

I had the same dilemma and went for the D90.

Here they sum it up pretty good:

<a href="http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Nikon_D5000/verdict.shtml">http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Nikon_D5000/verdict.shtml</a>

But they forgot to mention the master flash function that that D5000 also lacks.

Much smaller OVF and screen. For me it was a no-brainer.

April 2, 2010

Like Robert said. I use CW most in the hard light of Portugal. Matrix almost never gets it right and blows out more then it should. Only good for inside or cloudy days.

I never use compensation, but I compensate by aiming at various parts of the photo, like the sky, and then go lower and lock. Check with histogram and highlights to make the final composition.

March 26, 2010

Easy and cheap:

<a href="http://atlantic-diesel.com/">http://atlantic-diesel.com/</a>

March 26, 2010

Or here:

http://atlantic-diesel.com/

March 11, 2010

Wanted to edit the other post, but they wont allow it. After a few minutes? I do pay for this subscription!

Here are a few photos from the link:

March 11, 2010

Oops, deleted the photos without thinking.

Here's an update with newer photos. Some shot with the flash firing twice in one shot!

<a href="http://atlantic-diesel.com/HS/">High Speed</a>

March 10, 2010

Thanks all for you positive and inspiring words.

In theory I know how to do all of this stuff, but I don't have the budget and I have no studio to make everything perfect. However I will try to get the most of it.

FYI: except for number 1, the balloons were all filled with smoke and some water drops on the outside, to get a more visual effect. I did find that less smoke is more appealing, like in photos 3 and 4 (with milk).

Next is to try with 2 microphones: one close and one a little bit further away. I should get two different captures in one picture.

March 9, 2010

Just started with high speed photography. Next things on my list are: stopping a bullet, shotgun freez darts and more dangerous and stupid things I can think of ;-)

Here are some starters:

So what do you think?

March 1, 2010

I would still ask Nikon. You never know. I would complain about the fact you trust Nikon to have excellent quality and this is just.... unbelievable! I don't know if you "have a way with words", but you'll be surprised how much I get done from Nikon.

Just make them go on the defense; better then playing the victim. After all, it seems it's a factory fault and there is no time limitation to that in my book. How many cars get called back to the garage after years because they discovered defects?

I have the same lens and I love it. Much better than the 18-105 VR. This lens is amazing sharp, specially for a "kitlens".

March 1, 2010

After a DIY disaster (spending $35.- and 8 hours of blood, sweat and tears), I found a simpler solution to make a sound trigger for a flash. The article seems rather old because they talk about film.

<a href="http://people.rit.edu/andpph/text-cheap-sync.html">http://people.rit.edu/andpph/text-cheap-sync.html</a>

I have a few questions:

<ol>

<li>They write to use a 400 volt BRY 55 400, which is a SCR (Silicon Controlled Rectifier, no idea what it means, but I can solder it together). For a SB600 would that be correct or too much or little?</li>

<li>What kind of store would sell those? I live in Portugal where electronic parts are more rare than gold.</li>

<li>Instead of an old tape recorder, I'm guessing I can use my PC or notebook for this? I think it's easier to control both the mic and the out port, but maybe I'm wrong?</li>

</ol>

I'm still trying to find a PC sync hotshoe with a cable, but no such luck. Probably have to import it from Holland or something.

Thanks!

February 18, 2010

Thanks Lex. I see what you mean by the reflections.

No, I didn't do any real comparison, because I had only one lens at a time. But I did shoot a lot with both the 16-85 VR and the 18-105 VR and both gave me much too bright photos in matrix. So I switched to CW and then it would be fine.

I hardly gave it another thought until I got that 18-55 II non VR and all of a sudden I could use matrix and it metered correctly. Later I got the 18-135 and the same thing: I now hardly ever use anything else then matrix. With one old 70-210 the same thing.

Trust me: I'm not imagining things: I started photography over 30 years ago. This is the first time I see a very, very big difference in just changing lenses.

With the VR lenses, even if it was a gray cloudy day, the camera would over expose and basically wash out the whole picture. The problem was, that it wasn't consistent; sometimes yes, sometimes no. It was just all over the place. Aiming around what I wanted to frame, the meter would rapidly change: as if it was in spot metering instead of matrix.

But I'll go to my local store here and see if they'll borrow me a VR lens, so I can try to show what I mean. It just doesn't seem right to me: could be I have a "funny" monday morning camera, so I'm eager to find the problem, so we can find a solution.

February 17, 2010

Will,

It seems I can tell 2 things from your pictures:

1. Matrix shoots lighter than CW.

2. VR under exposes by about 25%

Hm, maybe we found a little "secret". By under exposing with VR, you get more room to shoot, but it shouldn't affect the exposure.

Do you have a normal, non VR lens as well? To compare that to the VR with OFF and the compare matrix and CW against each other with both lenses.

That was my point to be able to see if the VR lens has an impact, because I think they do. In your pictures it certainly looks like that!

February 15, 2010

If you look on internet and even here, a lot of people (including me) complain about the matrix metering being too bright and blowing out skies.

I had the same problem with 2 different D90 bodies (new) and with the 16-85 VR and the 18-105 VR lens.

I even took it to the Nikon service center, thinking it must be the camera, but the said it was OK. A while ago I bought two lenses: a 18-55 3.5-5.6 II lens and a 18-135mm.

Now the strange part: with neither I have a single problem with matrix metering! I'm starting to think, the D90 only has problems with a VR lens.

Since I don't have a VR lens anymore, could some of you guys who DO have both, try to test this and see what happens?

I know it doesn't make sense, but reality seldom does ;-)

If I can find one to borrow, I'll do the same and post results here.

Thanks for reading.

February 15, 2010

Without a doubt, like Bjorn already remarked, has the colorspace changed. Accidently or not. Electronics are not 100% reliable, as it also reads in the manual.

I'm running Windows 7 for quite a while (started with beta) and I have a Nvidia Geforce 8400 GS card. Windows installed without pain, but I didn't see any Nvidia controls, so I downloaded the newest W7 driver package. After installing that, the power keeps going in sleep mode; i.e.: the monitor switches off every 20 minutes. I turn the power setting to "never" and sure enough, a little later it 's back. Got so tired of it, I discarded the "original" driver and re installed the old that came with W7. Go figure....

As far as a archive system: I think I have a reasonable way for this. I download the photos with a cardreader with Nikon TRansfer . I have that set always to make a new folder named after the shooting date. Th files are renamed also after the shooting date + _001 etc.

So whenever I have a JPG and wish to find the original to try some filters or else, I find the NEF in no time at all. Hope this is usefull to some.

February 12, 2010

Sorry to respond so late: I completely forgot.

Yes it WAS during startup: the Colorvisionstartup program has to load the Spyder profile.

BUT! The good news is: I just found a way how to load your Spyder profile without waiting for the program (takes about 20 seconds in my PC's).

This guy explains it very well:

http://www.pusztaiphoto.com/articles/colormgmt/win7/default.aspx

Don't forget to disable the Colorvisionstartup program with msconfig.

January 29, 2010

Shawn: I had the same experience. The only thing that bites, is that the profile takes so long to load.

I thought there is another w load the profile by assigning it with color management from Windows 7, but it doesn't look the same. Anybody have ideas about this?

January 27, 2010

Paul: that's what I found too. Increases even more by turning off the cache and periodically empty the thumbnail cache.

On Windows 7 it really flies. For some reason with W7 it automatically installs the right MS C++ versions with CCP.

Tony: let us know what you think.

Walter: very funny, but I don't think you understand how NXC works and how to get the most of it. I've been using it for over 2.5 years and with Color Efex plugin, I rarely resort to PS. Only for very "artsy" photos. Nothing beats NXC together with NX View. It takes a quarter or less of the time then for PS to open it first in ACR and even then it has no clue how your camera was set, nor can you save NEF's with changes.

My "workfly" with D90: Nikon Transfer detects card and opens automatically. I have it preset to make a new folder with today's date as name. The files are named the same, but with a number behind of 3 digits (I never shoot more than 1000 a day). Then I hit download and NX View opens the new folder automatically. I can choose to fix and and make JPG's right there or I open them in NXC. There I have saved changes (presets or Adjustmnents as Nikon calls them) that I use a lot: for example

I have one called "beach". It changes Picture Control to Landscape, sharpening to 7, color noise reduction to better quality, distortion to auto and it applies a skylight filter from Color Efex.

All of that takes less than 5 seconds. Saving that file as a modified NEF takes less than a second and saving it as a JPG less than 2 seconds. In batch it goes much faster....

January 25, 2010

Arthur: sorry! Before I had Win XP and NCX2 runs under MS Framework, which is installed automatically when you install NX Capture. However, I found that if you install MS Visual C++ 2005 and 2008 (plus download updates) it really increases performance. In NXC2 you go to preferences and disable the editting cache. This speeds up and now and then you want to empty the thumbnaisl cache at the same location. Now I'm running Windows 7 and Framework is no longer needed. I only have MS Visual C++ installed and I found dit works much better and faster than Photoshop or any other raw software. Hope you understand now?

Ron: maybe this is better on a Windows machine. Specially Windows 7 is finally what Windows should have been years ago. Anyway, if you have a Mac, for you a Windows machine is peanuts, moneywise ;-)

January 25, 2010

Darn! I just became aware I had forgotten those and I was about to add them, but you beat me!

Thanks!

January 25, 2010

Many times I've seen people questioning NX Capture.

The reasons I use it over any other raw software are:

1. Ability to read camera settings

2. Ability to save NEF files with adjustments and filters (also Color Efex plug-in)

3. Speed and batch performance, which you get by turning off the editting cache and installing 2005 + 2008 of MS Visual C++

4. View of adjusted NEF's in View NX

5. Auto adjustment of lens distortion

6. Sharpest pictures and most reliable color reproduction

7. Best whitebalance options

8. Excellent healing brush. I found, when I took pictures of a car and "healed the license plate, it copied the right two numbers in that place; leaving the plate number useless, but looking like it was real. As far as I know it's not a documented feature.

9. Save settings and apply on similar pictures.

These are my personal favorites and I have PS CS4, but I hardly ever use it.

Hope this is usefull to someone.

January 25, 2010

Strange question. Why would you sell all and then start over with Canon? What do you suppose is the advantage?

I can tell you what you'd lose: better IQ, higher DR, better AF, more wide angle, cheaper and better wireless flash and cheaper lenses (at least here in EU).

So what ever motivated you to think about jumping to Canon? I'm really curious.

January 23, 2010

Thanks Stan. I'm a little dyslectic after a car accident (rear ended, whiplash) and at first I read: are worth NOTHING. LOL. Good thing I read it again...

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Events

Downloads

Gallery

Store

Posts posted by b._p.