ron_hiner2

<p>Thanks William... I don't expect the two colorimeters to produce identical results... but the difference is quite startling... and I don't know which one is right. </p>

<p>I have two monitors on my Mac Pro. One is a Wacom Cintiq 21ux, and the other is a Eizo Cg241W. I'm pretty sure the Eizo is correctly calibrated, but I can't seem to get the Cintiq calibrated. <br>

If I use my Eye-One match colorimeter, the Cintiq is warmer in tone, and not quite as bright as the Eizo. This Photo.net page should be bright white... its a dull, slightly ivory color on my cintiq. <br>

If I use my ColorMunki, on the Cintiq, then the result is not only very dull and lacking in contrast, but is decidedly cooler - with a definite blue cast.<br>

I would think that both colorimeters would product near identical results. With each colorimeter, I use the 'easy' method -- i've really achieved better results with the advanced, so I don't bother. <br>

I would also think that the Eizo will pretty much always look better than the Cintiq, and for that matter, any other monitor out there. (It should, it was really expensive.) I trust it, and while I don't print much, I always use that monitor for final adjustment.<br>

I have not recently calibrated the Eizo -- until I get a result I'm happy with on the Cintiq, I don't want to <br>

Can anyone shed some light on my problem? I want to be able to trust my color calibrations... and I'm not able to. <br>

Thanks! <br>

Ron <br>

</p>

<p>it's a very thin and flat cable that connects the electrical connectors on the lens mount to the internal circuitry of the lens. <br>

It's just long enough to allow you to rote the mount 90 degrees in one direction only. </p>

<p>I've heard its about $125 for this service, but it's as easy do-it-yourself mod. Just undo the 4 screws on the mount and carefully rotate in in the direction that the ribbon cable allows. </p>

<p>I mix SB900s and Elinchrome all the time. Works perfectly. The only time it doesn't work is if you try to use CLS . Nikon fires pre-flashes to read the scene, which will trigger other lights before the shutter opens. Shoot in manual mode and you'll be fine. </p>

<p>Wouter -- you don't need an Apple computer. The dealer mentioned in the original post was just plain wrong about that.. and about everything else.<br>

Ron </p>

<p>Steve - if you like the Photomechanic/NX2 workflow, which I love because it doesn't tie me to a proprietary database, then you might want to look into Capture One. It appears to be a solid product. I've downloaded the 30 day trial, but have not played with it enough to know if will work for me. I do wish NIK would make plug-ins for it. <br>

The biggest hurdle I have with Capture One is the price tag. At $399 USD, I'm concerned that it will never reach enough unit sales to firmly establish itself as a contender in this space. Having said that, I think it's shortsighted to reject this product based on price alone. If one were to do the math, it would probably come out to a dollar per hour of usage per year. Seems like a small price to pay for a major productivity boost.</p>

<p>NX2 was released in June of 2008. That's three and a half years ago. (That's an eternity in software years.)<br>

They have put out minor bug fix patches, new camera support, and, if I recall correctly, they put out a minor update 4 months after snow leopard came out to address some minor compatibility issues. They've done the same to address Windows compatibility issues. But they have never announced software product plans in the years that I've been following - including any making any directional statements regarding the Capture line.<br>

But Nik Software (partially owned by Nikon) has taken the best parts of NX2 and made them available as lightroom/aperture/photoshop plug ins (Viveza and CFEX). Nik follows the normal routine software update cycles of new releases roughly every 12-24 months on every product except NX2. <br>

Meanwhile, Nikon's software competitors (Lightroom, Aperture, Photoshop, Capture One, etc) are marching down the path of progress much more quickly with regular and significant updates. So even if NX3 were released today, the competition is just moving faster with better and better products.<br>

On top of that, Nikon's big plants in Japan and Thailand are heavily damaged. No, this shouldn't impact software (Nik is in San Diego), but it will keep Nikon's management focussed in rebuilding its manufacturing capability.<br>

I, like many others, wish for NX3, but sadly, the writing is on the wall here. Plain for everyone to see. <br>

Keep in mind that NX2 incorporates the code of the original Capture - so that your old images edited with that old software will still open in NX2. That old code is mired in ancient software technology, and my assumption is that they don't want to invest in rewriting that. <br>

I love that NX2 actually edits my NEF files. AFIK, no other product will do that. They will edit my NEF files, but store the result to a new file. I love that I don't have to use import my images into a proprietary catalog before I can work on them (as does Ligtroom and Aperture). I love the integration with Photomechanic. And I love control points and the CFEX plug ins. But I hate that NX2 is embarrassingly slow with D3x files. So, everyday, I think that I should be using something else going forward, but I keep using NX2. <br>

Ron </p>

<p> </p>

<p>Kevin... the buffer point would be interesting, but I only shoot in raw. I can't think of a reason to shoot JPGS. I've heard your argument before that raw files take longer, but with photomechanic, raw files run at the same speed as jpegs. </p>

<p>Kevin... I just shot a game tonight, and during halftime I did a quick test. I pointed the camera (D3s) at the clock (digital, precision to seconds) and let the frames rip for 3 seconds. I did it twice... once with D-lighting set to NL, and once to off. In both cases, I got 8 consecutive frames of the clock showing the same exact time before the clock advanced to the next second -- which means 8 frames per second. I know there are a lot of factors that do impact the max frame rate, but I proved to my own satisfaction that d-lighting is not one of them. </p>

<p>Kevin... try Photomechanic. It was meant for this. You can shoot raw, with no time penalty. I do it all the time. </p>

<p>Kevin - how about if you post a sample or two that shows the problem you are talking about. </p>

 

<p>Kevin... I shoot a lot of field sports, and in bright sunlight, I almost always expose 1/3 (sometimes 2/3) under. I look for the blinking highlights on the uniforms, and dial down until I don't get the blinkies. Shadows get deeper this way, but I'm ok with that. The action is not in shadow. Having said that, in football, players faces are pretty much always in shadow due to the helmet. <br>

I don't use active D lighting... if I need to bring out shadow details, I want to control it myself, rather than have it automated incamera. <br>

Ron</p>

<p>Nikon doesn't pay me to advertise, so I won't use their walking billboard straps. I've used Op-tech, black rapid, upstrap, and I like them, then I found Domke - which is thin, but it has silicon rubber beads down one side that works really well at keep the strap on my shoulder, assuming the rubber beads are down, not up. Thinktank improve the almost unimprovable by putting the silicon on both sides. This is my setup now. I have them on 3 D series bodies, and two big lenses. </p>

 

<p>It's very easy to rotate the Nikon mount to suit your preference. But it involves 4 small screws and a delicate ribbon wire. It's something you do on kitchen counter, not something you do in the field. </p>

 

 

 

 

<p>you guys all are awesome! Thanks! Every single post here is insightful. Thank you all. <br>

Its interesting that no one has jumped on the FX vs DX debate here... I think that's a good thing.. it means that it's not really an issue. I used to have a D2x and I still love the pics from that -- DX sized images in the same body (essentially) as the D3 bodies. </p>

 

<p>I went to Switzerland last summer with the d3x and 3 2.8 zooms from 14mm to 200mm, plus 24mm pc, 85mm 1.4, a couple other small primes, a light tripod, and a macbook pro all in my back pack. I got some great shots... but not enough to justify the burden of my bag. Hence, the desire to go light.</p>

 

 

<p>There is a subjective factor at work in my thinking... the D3 is pretty much at home in my hands. I know what it does and what buttons to press. The D7000 doesn't have many clicks on it.. And I've not really invested in its learning curve. Just yesterday I took it to NYC and I was trying to figure out how to bracket. It seems incapable of bracketing in conjunction with the 10 seconds of my attention span I was willing to spend to look for it. Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't.. but I didn't find a bracket button to press.<br>

So, I'm heavily leaning toward the body I know and love -- attached to a all-in-one lens that I might like.</p>

<p>As a lurker, I hate these questions... but I guess it's my turn. I'll try to fill in the usual blanks.<br>

I have a D3s and a D3x for my pro work... love them both. <br>

I recently bought a D7000 so I could start learning about dslr video. (So far, all I've learned is that I hate shooting dslr video.)<br>

But... I've got a couple family vacation trips planned. Instead of carrying a 25 pound bag with tons of glass, I thought I'd try one of these do-it-all lenses.<br>

The thing about vacations is that you want to travel light, but it's on vacations when killer landscape shots present themselves - and for that, I want to maximize image quality.<br>

So, my question is this... <br>

Should I buy the 24-300 fx lens, and take that along with my D3s, on my trips? <br>

Or, should I do the DX route and travel really light with the 18-200 lens? <br>

What would I sacrifice by going DX? <br>

Thanks! </p>

 

<p>I just installed Snow Leopard on my mac, and updated a bunch of software, then recalibrated. <br /> In firefox, my own images look fine, but in Chrome, they look terrible. <br /> I'm assuming the test image here is of a fairskinned blond -- on my copy of Google Chrome, the images look like she fell asleep on the beach without sunscreen. She looks great in both Firefox and Safari.<br /> My thinking is that my copy of Chrome has lost its ability to do color management.<br>

Update five minutes later: I simply restarted Google Chrome, and your friend is beautiful once again. <br>

There is probably a lesson here... restart apps after profiling. Maybe even reboot. </p>

<p>Tom hit the nail on head... The lights change color during the course of the AC cycle. And expo disc won't do you any good.<br /> Check these out... the white balance of the light changes during the course of the exposure.<br /> http://galleries.ronhiner.com/temp/d1scusssion_whitebalance/index.html<br /> Try Jim's suggestion.... shoot at multiples of 1/60 of a second, you should get the full range. (1/60, 1/30, 1/15, etc.) Not going to do you much good shooting sports. I'm not sure 1/120 will do it -- you will only get half the cycle.<br /> Not a lot you can do... if the publication you are shooting for allows photoshopping, you can fix it, or -- what happened to other shots from this series, they were published in black and white.</p>

<p>I have about 50 rechargables bought in varous batches over time. <br>

A month or so ago I realied that some of them seem to be discharging more rapildly than they should. I then charged all of them, waited 2 days and tested them all. 16 were clearly at lower charge than all the others.<br>

What did they all have in common? I had written "2/09" on each of them with a sharpie. I called thomas distriuting, and they replaced all 16 because they were within the one-year warrantee. (I had a reciept for purchase of 16 bateries from Feb 09.) <br>

Keep track of your batches... it matters for warrantee. But I don't pay any attention to batches when I use them.<br>

ron</p>

<p>there are a couple benefits to NPS membership...<br /> - if you shoot really big sports events, like the olympics, super bowl, kentucky derby, etc... I'm told that Nikon puts an on-site repair center there for NPS members. I don't shoot those events, so I don't know for sure.<br>

I just found this... unpacking the NPS service center in Vancouver<br>

http://www.scottdiussa.com/Scott_Diussa/Vancouver_2010/Entries/2010/2/7_Depot_Setup_-_Time_Lapse.html</p>

<p>- if Nikon has a product that is new and/or in tight supply, you can order the item from your local dealer, then tell NPS about your order. NPS will ship the item to your dealer with your name on it, and your dealer then may have the item for you before the unwashed masses. I've done that a couple times with big ticket items (north of $5000), and I'm not entirely sure that I get my gear any sooner than anyone else. For something like a 200mm F2 lens, the distribution channels run out of them completely from time to time -- place your order when there are none to be found, and you will get it at the same time that everyone has them in stock again, or maybe a day or two sooner.<br /> - I once needed a fast loaner, due to a failed critical piece of gear (a pro camera body) NPS promised to cover for this sort of situation, but that one time, I realized that really need to maintain my own backup copies of critical pieces of gear. So it was faster (and more painful) to just order another camera body from B&H. <br /> - I have sent repairs in with NPS priority. I don't know if my repairs came back faster than they would have normally.<br /> - there are no discounts, advance 'beta' loaners, free swag, not even cool nikon pro logo wear.<br /> So, I've been a member for three years or so, but haven't really had any benefit from it.<br /> No, I can't sponsor anyone I don't personally know.. but if you include a letter with your application that describes the type of pro work you do, and that you don't know any other NPS members, I'd be willing to bet that they will accept your membership.<br /> Ron</p>

<p>samples... from my shoot this weekend --<br>

sorry... I tried to upload images, but got server errors from photo.net. You'll just have to take my word for it!</p>

<p>#3 is understated... Nik Software's CFEX plug in for Nx2 rocks!<br /> However... NX2 is not all good... there is something terrible about the internal architeche that keeps it from using more than a single processor core on a Mac. Therefore, it's a bit slow on D3 files. It is nearly unusable on D3x files.</p>

<p>Matt -- isn't a longer lens better for DOF? DOF is always my achilles heel when shooting macro shots. </p>