michael_tam1
-
Posts
46 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by michael_tam1
-
-
<p>This article described the details on the AF system of D700. Since both D300 and D700 belongs to the second generation Nikon bodies, many of the features should applied:<br>
This thread described focus tracking on bicycle race photography by a professional which may be relevant to your activities:<br>
<a href="../nikon-camera-forum/00W09R">http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00W09R</a><br>
Hope it may be helpful.</p>
-
<p>This is an example of a photographer who uses the 70-200 f2.8 + 2x convertor in a forested environment. Please see this link to see the quality of the images:<br>
<a href="http://www.amoghavarsha.com/">http://www.amoghavarsha.com/</a><br>
Hope this may be helpful.</p>
-
<p>I have many years used the Manfrotto system with 3 different size tripods for different purpose. For hiking, I recently upgraded the Manfrotto ballhead with the brand SIRUI due to its Arca compatible design, excellent quality and price. After several field trips with it, I am more than happy with the result. Please see:<br /><a href="http://www.downtowncamera.com/index.php?option=com_virtuemart&page=shop.browse&category_id=462&Itemid=2">http://www.downtowncamera.com/index.php?option=com_virtuemart&page=shop.browse&category_id=462&Itemid=2</a></p>
-
<p>I do not shoot sports but read an article detailing the D700 AF system. The D300 and D300S apparently have a similar AF module, so it should apply. Please read:<br>
Also this thread about photographing bicycle race by a professional photographer may be useful:<br>
<a href="../nikon-camera-forum/00W09R">http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00W09R</a><br>
Hope it is helpful.</p>
-
<p>It was nearly four decades ago when I started with a Minolta SRT101, but did not start learning more about photography till acquiring a Nikon system in the early nineties. Apart from reading informative book, such as John Shaw's "Close Up in Nature" and taking several photography courses, I found the greatest progress made was through joining a local Photography Club. One can learn so much from listening in seminars, talking to people with keen interests and submitting entries to competitions. <br>
As with macro photography, I learned my skill from Flower Photography at the local conservatory. Good pictures come from practice, self-critic and more practice. It takes meticulous planning to make a good photograph. Although you may be more interested in insects, a static subject such as a flower or plant would reduce variables that are not within your control. Learn about control of background, depth-of-field, correct tonal exposure, tripod and focus techniques, etc will propel you far from your starting point. Stay with the excellent equipment you possessed while concentrate to learn in the making of a better photograph each time by not simply taking pictures.</p>
-
<p>The problem is an issue of Dynamic Range limitation of a digital sensor. As mentioned above from experienced photographers, it is corrected through either by ND filter system during shooting or by HDR in post-processing. The following are excellent articles explaining the various subject matters:<br>
On Digital Zone system based on the greatest landscape photographer, Ansel Adams' work:<br>
On ND filter system by Darwin Wiggett, a well-known Rockies landscape photographer:<br>
Hope it will be helpful to solve your metering problem.</p>
-
<p>I have no experience with the Bigma, but owned the Sigma 400 5.6 APO with its matching 1.4x convertor. With the D90, I found the result of straight 400 mm stopped down to f8 or even f11 was comparable to my 70-300 at 300 wide open. The IQ with the convertor was simply unacceptable. <br>
Please see two links below on the Sigma 150-500 lens:<br>
Hope it may be helpful for your decision.</p>
<p> </p>
-
<p>I love this lens on my D90. It produced far superior image than my Sigma 400 APO 5.6 in terms of contrast and sharpness, not to mention AFS and VR features. However, not being a shopper over the net in US, the Canadian list price with the exchange rate may be even cheaper than B&H without considering other issues:<br>
-
<p>My travel kit is Tokina 12-24, Nikon 24-85, Nikon 70-300 VR & 50 1.8 on a Manfrotto tripod & monopod, dependent on the hike. On a backpack, it is functional enough for long tour which includes food and water. This gives me FX equivalent of 18 - 450 mm coverage, hopefully for any eventuality.</p>
-
<p>I am truly indebted to the advise and encouragement on how I should move forward. The consensus is that in the digitial world, there is the camera but also the post-processing aspect to make a good picture. <br>
I have asked my old Camera Club friends to give me some hands-on lessons to launch me to the "behind the camera scene"! Over the weekend, I took some test shots at home with RAW and RAW+Jpeg, then processed them on Nikon ViewNX and Picasa with different outcome. A hands-on lesson will clarify my confusion at this point as well as finalized my plan on the new desk-top and software to move forward. </p>
-
<p>I appreciate very much for the advise up to now. It seems the notion that Full Frame instead of Crop Frame will produce a closer image to film medium is not a route to pursue, but instead post-processing. As with posting sample of photos, there is some difficulty with model permission to post it on the web.<br>
From several of the advise posted, it seems that shooting RAW through post-processing may be the route to improve the final product. In other words, with my elementary knowledge in digital photography by shooting Jpeg only, the in-camera result will never be comparable to what I saw with Kodachrome 64 (warmer) or Fuji negatives (more vibrant). The major difference I noticed are: 1. the tonal difference. This includes the skin tone as well as the whole scene with inaccuracy and less saturation; 2. the resolution of the hair and eye. The sharpness or high resolution on the computer monitor did not come out through the 4x6 prints compared to film medium and 3. an overall impression of duller or lack of richness in the image compared to slide and negative. What I hope is digital images that resembles that of wedding pbotographers or magazines (well, it could be a while from now!).<br>
I need to update my desktop before purchasing a photo software, most suggesting Lightroom or Aperture over Element. The software I am working with are Nikon Transfer, Nikon ViewNX and Picasa 3. I understood Nikon Capture is one the best RAW convertor. Yes, I need to learn to shoot in RAW + Jpeg combination :)<br>
For now, is there any camera parameters adjustment or shooting technique that I should do to improve my result a baby step further?</p>
-
I am very new to digital photography despite many years with the film medium. My question is not about which
medium is superior, but rather how to produce a comparable result between the two medium.
I purchased a digital body, Nikon D90, the first time last fall. While very satisfied with the result in landscape and
nature photography, I was not able to produce a comparable image to negatives or slides medium, with
identical technique and equipment in the same location. I am humbly assuming that I have the basic understanding in the aspects of lighting, perspective control, etc. through various photo competitions in the past. I have experiemented by using Picture Control on SD, Vivid
and Portrait mode, sharpness at 5, default saturation, use of incident meter or even preset WB on grey card. When
compared with all my previous natural light portraiture, I could not reproduce a
similar sharpness/contrast/tonality as a in-camera result.
My question is what I should be trying next before learning all the RAW and post-processing skills. I was told
by the camera store that perhaps a Full Frame sensor with less pixel density than a Crop sensor will produce in a
closer image result to the film medium. Please advise what should be my next step in improving my digitial
portrait photography.
-
<p>I am a birder (birdwatcher) but not a bird photographer. My interest is in other areas of photography. However, I came across a website by a photographer from India that uses D80 with 70-200 VR I and tc 2x. He shoots frequently in dense forest environment. Please see his photos to assess whether it satisfies your need: <a href="http://www.amoghavarsha.com/">http://www.amoghavarsha.com/</a>. Hope it is helpful.<br>
-
<p>I have recently performed a series of test shots through wide open aperture to F8 on 50 1.8, 85 1.8, 105 2.8 and 80-200 2.8. What I found with my lens samples was that at wide open aperture, the 85 and 105 produced excellent sharpness, the 50 was a little softer while my 80-200 was soft at both 80 and 200. The zoom is now at Nikon for an examination even it has always produced excellent sharp prints on film body. Please see the MTF chart on the 50 1.8 lens review:<br>
-
<p>For Bird photography, it used to be Gitzo with Arca Swiss ballhead. Now I saw a birder with Sigma 500 with D300 on this Induro tripod and ballhead system costing much less. It looks like the old Arca Swiss design but at fraction of the cost that you might wish to research further:<br>
Good birding and photographing.</p>
-
<p>Speaking from the perspective of a birder (bird-watcher) for many years, wildlife photography will require a dedicated lens. The change from 70-300 to 70-200 with 2x teleconvertor will be a compromised improvement at great cost. The ideal set up for a safaris shoot will be 300 2.8 VR with convertors on monopod due to the restricted tour envioronment but will triple the cost of your 70-200. The cheaper alternative amongst bird photographers is the Sigma 50-500 or the newer 150-500 with IS HSM. <br>
Please see: <a href="http://www.birdingworld.co.uk/Sigma%20Photos.htm">http://www.birdingworld.co.uk/Sigma%20Photos.htm</a><br>
Other threads of related topics: <br>
-
<p>There are many good advise from the various experienced photographers responded. Follow the old axiom by investing more in the optics while less in the body, in particular to the modern days digital body that become obsolete quickly. I have a D90 and hope to add D700 in the future when I have enough digital experience to utilize it.<br>
With regards to optics, one cannot function with the single DX zoom in wedding photography. Without resorting to the pro zooms, the most cost effective means is to acquire several prime lens. If you are ever to consider FX in the future, only invest in FX format lens. Please see the thread that was posted before regarding the benefits of prime lens vs. zoom lens below:<br>
<a href="../nikon-camera-forum/00VJ8f">http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00VJ8f</a></p>
<p> </p>
-
<p>I speak from the experince of flower photography that has a similar requirement to your mushroom photography. My comment is limited to technique, not software, since digital is new to me as well. I also use D90, but the optics requirement for mushroom is macro. Assuming the kit lens is 18-55, which gives a 83 on DX, it may not be enough. If it is your passion, invest in a macro lens. Nikon has 60, 105 or 180 while third party brands may be good also.<br>
For details into tecnhique, one good reference that I read was John Shaw's "Close Up in Nature" which should be readily available. Once learned the principles of macro photography, it is a matter of practice to improve the result. Post-processing will correct minor flaws, but one needs to prepare as if shooting with slide or film, do it right from the outset. </p>
-
<p>I am humbled and indebted to the wealth of experience shared with me on this topics. What initially brought my interest to prime lens was my lowly 50 1.8 when I used it the first time in a portrait shoot. My 80-200 was used on the film body, while the 105 on D90 was too long for me, so came the 50 with DX equiv of 75. Being a birder (or bird watcher) for over 30 yrs, I came to appreicate the best of optics from binoculars such as Leica, Swarovski and Zeiss that helped to identify a particular species of bird by resolving the intricate detail in feather pattern and accurate color redition in poor light condition. Whereas in the prime lens situation, it is the resolution in sharpness, contrast, low light ability, weight and cost effectiveness that has advantage over a pro zoom. There is no right or wrong view in this empirical question, just a lot of learning from the experience of others in order to understanding one's own needs in the creation of a good photograph.</p>
-
<p>I heard that zooms can never beat primes, perhaps other than the pro 2.8s. Having used only 105 2.8 macro in the past, while never used the 50 1.8 until the recent shoots. The sharpness and contrast surpassed all my non-pro variable 2.8-4 & fixed 4 zooms, perhaps even my 80-200 2.8 zoom. My interests are nature, portrait and travel photography, what prime lens should one have in the collection, but excluding specialized DC, tilt shift and additional macro. I have 20, 50, 105 macro, 400, while zoom covers the FX of 24-200 or DX equiv of 18-300, on D9 while hoping to introduce the D700 later. I understood the Nikon line-up of primes included 20, 24, 28, 35, 50, 85, 105, 180 and other prime teles. What should be in the wish list?</p>
-
<p>I am a birder or bird watcher but with lesser interest in pursuing Bird Photography since one cannot do both at the same time. From the latter perspective, the poor man's bird lens is this "Bigma" or Sigma 50-500. Otherwise, in Nikon, the choices will be 500 f4 VR for tripod shots or 300 2.8 (plus 2x) for handheld (tripod) shots. Please see below for further information:<br>
<a href="../nature-photography-forum/00Likk">http://www.photo.net/nature-photography-forum/00Likk</a><br>
<a href="../canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00N3j8">http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00N3j8</a></p>
<p> </p>
-
<p>Thank you for a lot of suggestions. I shoot only JPEG currently since I just started into digital with D90 and the accompanying software. They included are Nikon Transfer and ViewNX, not Nikon Capture. Perhaps I would start with the first suggestion to see if it cures the problem. What confused me was that the same file showed problem under ViewNX but not under Picasa or Window Explorer. Does it mean the ViewNX was not able to process the data but the file was not corrupted?</p>
-
<p>I have encountered a problem with Nikon ViewNX. When looking through the photos, I click "Sort by Date Shoot" to reorganize the sequence. It took a few tries to complete the process. But this time, several photos adopted others File Name. For eg., picture A has DSC name while picture B has F name. The problem is the thumbnail showing picture A but with file name of B. But when click on the picture, it showed picture B. <br>
Frustruated by the problem, I deleted the entire folder content and copy a good version from an external HDD to it. Alas, it in fact has the memory of the problem. But if the same data is viewed through Picasa, it is perfectly normal. The only way I corrected it appeared to copy the entire Folder, and not just copying the pictures over. That is, ending with a Folder within a Folder, then it is showing now the correct picture with the correct File number. Please advise what I did wrong?</p>
-
<p>I also just traded in my 24-120 D (non-VR version) for the 24-85 2.8-4 after much contemplation. My purpose is to acquire a FX format lens that can be used in both DX and FX format. My test shot also showed an exceptional sharp and contrast picture, almost rival my 80-200 2.8 D at 80 and the 50 1.8 at 50 on tripod at ISO200. These are the reviews about the 24-85 D and AFS version that I found:<br /><a href="http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/237-nikkor-af-24-85mm-f28-4-d-if-review--test-report">http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/237-nikkor-af-24-85mm-f28-4-d-if-review--test-report</a><br /><a href="http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2.html">http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2.html</a><br /><a href="http://www.bythom.com/2485lens.htm">http://www.bythom.com/2485lens.htm</a></p>
<p> </p>
D90 FILE NUMBER
in Nikon
Posted
<p>Under Custom Setting>Shooting/display>d7 should keep the file number in continuous sequence even after changing the SD card. See link from KR on D90 Plain English User Guide:<br>
<strong>d7 File number sequence</strong> <br>
This ensures your file numbers keep counting up.<br>
Nikon goofed, and left it OFF by default. Left this way, you'll start from DSC_0001 every time you reformat a card. Over time you'll have hundreds of photos on your computer all called DSC_0001. It will drive you crazy and it will be too late to do anything about it.<br>
Please reset this to ON for sanity's sake.<br>
If you ever do want to reset to DSC_0001, use the Reset option</p>
<p> </p>