stephen_doldric

<p>Coming from NX2 and a completely different workflow it took me a while to adjust to LR. The first time I downloaded the trial, I gave up after a few days and went back to my old way. But the reality is a LOT of photographers use it and they use it for a good reason. So I bought a copy of it and decided to power through it. There is a learning curve, but once you get through it, there is a substantial payoff. For event type shoots, I do all my work in Lightroom. For portraits that need heavy editing, I start in lightroom, get my exposure, white balance, etc, then edit in Photoshop (via lighroom), then back to Lightroom for final output and cropping, etc.</p>

<p>I highly suggest switching to RAW (if you are not already) when you start using Lightroom as RAW has a lot of benefits such as white balance and more leeway in exposure and many more.</p>

 

<p>I love the idea of charging $25 a set and then mailing them anyway. The people that pay $25 will offset the rest of the mailing costs..... However.. good luck finding these people after 30 years. Its rare that most people stay in the same house, parents are still with us, etc. Its going to be a huge effort and probably not very fruitful. Plus its a lot of labor on your part without any real compensation.</p>

<p>So... Given that you want to get rid of them, but are hesitant, maybe its not quite time. Consider moving them to lower quality storage. Someplace you don't have to pay to store them. Like you basement on a high up shelf or somewhere out of the way to you. They will either take care of themselves over time or you will feel better about it.</p>

<p>You have real history as well. Too bad you can't find a place to donate them too, like a local historical society or library that would assume rights to them and archive them for you. In 100 years they will be worth a lot more to future generations.</p>

 

<p>Quality of the image, no. Its digital, so the question is do you have your images or are they lost.</p>

<p>Write speed yes. I use Lexar and Sandisk and the Sandisk cards write faster. At least in my experience with two similarly priced cards (sandisk extreme III vs Lexar Pro).</p>

<p>These are the only two brands I use and only from a reputable retailer (In the US -- B&H or Adorma). The counterfeit problem is really bad, so use extreme caution on ebay or elsewhere.</p>

 

<p>I'm with Glen on this one. If I were trying to decide between two lenses I would test them the way I was planning on using them. For Glen personally, whats the point of testing them without filters, unless he plans on shooting without filters? I do agree that the filters make the test less useful due to potential filter issues, but its good to share results like this.</p>

<p>Its also especially nice that he plans on testing them without filters, which will round out the test and give us more data. Of course this is a sample of "one" lens each, so the results could entirely be skewed by the copy of the lens that he has.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Thanks Richard!</p>

<p>No apologies necessary. I did however notice one other odd thing, that in P and Full Auto the pop up gets treated differently along with aperture. Look at the ISO and aperture on these two with the exact same everything except rotating from P to A.</p>

<p>P (w/ popup flash) = 1/60 f8 ISO 6400 w/ pop up flash<br>

Auto (w/ popup flash) = 1/60 f4.5 ISO 1600<br>

P (no flash) = 1/30th f4.5 ISO 6400</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Richard, thats an excellent article. I knew I wasn't going crazy, but I also see it was the same way on my D7000.</p>

<p>As a follow up I did get Lightroom 4.4 and 5 to read the Nikon Transfer files. I uninstalled Nikon Transfer (the standalone product), installed Nikon View NX2, which also comes with Nikon Transfer2. Then simply launch Nikon Transfer2 directly:</p>

<p>"C:\Program Files (x86)\Nikon\ViewNX 2\ViewNX 2\Nikon Transfer 2\NktTransfer2.exe"</p>

<p>All is working again like I'm used to. I know there are other ways to do this, but I generally don't swap cards in and out, and I like my files to get renamed on import.</p>

<p>Thanks everyone for the feedback and discussion. Lens testing is next...</p>

 

<p>I'm mainly comparing it to my D700, but thats because that is my personal gold standard. I did get rid of an existing D7000 though, mostly because the AF didn't work well for me personally. I figured the stuff I mention above is stuff that I didn't see before I bought the D7100 and it might help someone else in the future.</p>

<p>I did seriously consider another used D700, because I love the one that I already have. But DX has some advantages such as reach, quiet shutter and in this case higher resolution. So the D7100 seemed a good fit for me.</p>

<p>The remainder of any photography problems I might have are with the photographer and not the equipment. :-) Arguably, thats been the issue all along.</p>

 

<p>I received my D7100 last night. Yippi for me. I traded in a D90 and D7000 and I'm very happy. No buyers remorse. Here is what I've found so far.</p>

<p>1. The flash formula has changed. Too early to tell if its a good thing or a bad thing. On my D700 if I pop up my internal flash and manually set my camera to 1/60th f4 and letting the ISO float (shooting something close so I'm not trying to light the world), the D700 uses ISO 200 (lowest iso it can). On the D7100 same settings, it floats up quite high. Sometimes as high at ISO 6400 with flash, but normally about 1/2 of ambient ISO. Meaning if an ambient shot needs ISO4000, using flash it shoots at ISO2000. Using an SB600 and this is not nearly so pronounced, but still not at the lowest ISO. So I'm thinking its some sort thing they are doing to reduce the flash output. I even called Nikon support about it and they had no idea. It could also just produce better overall results. Time will tell, but not a deal breaker, but surprising to have an ISO 6400 shot when using a flash.</p>

<p>2. The AF System lacks one setting the my D700 has. In AF-C, you can set it to release, release + focus, or focus. I normally set AF-C to release + focus. On the D7100 you do not have the middle option. Just release or focus. I won't know for a little while if that makes a difference, but will put it through its paces on a 5k road race soon.</p>

<p>3. My D700 still kicks butt. Generally comparing photos of people coming out of my D700 are just better. Better overall exposure balance, better ISO and better overall for my type of shooting. I do think full frame makes a difference and on the D700 the mix of everything is just right. However, the D7100 is no slouch. The 24mp is really nice, noticeably nice and makes me no longer afraid of the D800 at 36mp. Even at ISO 6400 there is plenty of pixels to make a nice looking photo when downsampled, but really ISO 1600 is about as high as you generally want to take it. The AF system appears to be as good at my D700.</p>

<p>4. Using Nikon Transfer (end of life, no longer supported), I can't open the images with Lightroom 4.4. Directly transferring them from the camera and they open without issue. So I have no idea what Nikon Transfer is changing, but its time to move on from Nikon Transfer.<br>

<br /> 5. The standard mini USB port is now some sort of super micro USB port, so you have to use the cable supplied in the box unless you already have one laying around.</p>

<p>I do feel like I finally have a suitable backup to my D700 that I can use for other things as well, though not a complete replacement pretty darn close and DX has the zoom benefits, so they compliment each other fairly nicely.</p>

<p>I would prefer to just own my own copy of it, but if PS is really $9.99/month. Over three years thats $360 and I would normally end up upgrading in about 3 years anyway. So the pricing is on closer to reality. $20/month (Current pricing model for PS only) is too much.</p>

<p>Still. I'm happy and excited to upgrade to LR5 and own it. Sticking with CS5 until I have some compelling reason to get in the middle of the Adobe nonsense and start yet another monthly payment. I'll use CS5 for as long as I can.</p>

 

<p>I own a D700 and D7000 as a backup body. I shoot sports, stage, general events and studio. The D700 is my goto camera without fail. Why? Great AF and High ISO. I shot a charity golf event yesterday w/ a 70-200 on my D700 and I had 3 of 200 frames out of focus (about 2%). Obviously not all we're keepers for a multitude of other reasons, but the AF is so much better than the D7000. I select my focus point, so the AF problem is not just about number of points. When I shoot with my D7000, my percentages of out of focus shots are closer to 15% overall.</p>

<p>Since the D700's shutter is loud, two weeks ago I had to shoot a section of a live orchestra performance. I took out my D7000 w/ my 70-200 and put it on quiet mode. ISO was an issue, but so was AF (a very challenging shoot for any camera), but life is sometimes a compromise and thats what I had to work with. I got what I needed out of it and don't get me wrong, the D7000 is a good camera, but when given a choice I will still swap lenses onto my D700.</p>

<p>Since my D7000 is depreciating in the bag, I'm swapping my D7000 out for a D7100. I agree the D700 is getting long in the tooth otherwise I would get another D700 as a backup. I want a backup that I'll also want to use. DX with a little extra reach might also be handy. I'm not sure about 24mp, but I'm very excited about having a backup that has great auto focus. I thought about the D600, but the the autofocus scares me and I'm not going to fork over for a D800 right now. Hope my story helps.</p>

 

<p>Great as always!</p>

<p>Get the 70-200 VR. The 80-200, VR1 or VR2 all all fantastic lenses, but each one makes improvements on the other. This is also the kind of lens purchase where you won't go wrong. You buy this lens for many many years and its in most professional toolkits if they can afford it (excluding you prime shooters and you know who you are). I'm guessing the person selling the VR1 is buying a VR2 otherwise I would see no reason to ever sell a lens like this. But still a tough choice when looking at a 5 year warranty.<br>

In terms of needing VR. It depends on what you are shooting. I find I use VR way less then I thought on my 70-200. Sports and action, I always turn VR off especially when I'm above 1/500th. And in the studio with flash, its a mixed bag. So really natural light or low light is where VR gets used.</p>

 

<p>Godspeed Nadine. May you have a safe journey to the other side. We will all miss you.</p>

<p>Nope. Not even remotely worth it trying to use it again. Set it aside in case you find you have the same issue with a new card. If you do, you'll know to start looking at your D3 or how you go about downloading/managing your cards.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I have a D7000 and a D700. I find the AF module on the D700 (which I think the D300s shares) to be way way better than the D7000. If you shoot basketball, the D7000 will just seem substandard and you'll get less keepers. Its a nice camera, but the AF is my main issue with it. I find this when shooting models in the studio and when shooting running road races. If you have a D700 and a D300s I would just keep those two cameras until an obvious replacement for either the D700 or D300s comes along. Till then save your $$$ unless you have a compelling reason to upgrade.</p>

<p>Agreed with Leslie. Hands down lighting and people technique. You really can't go wrong with Nikon or Canon. I ended up with Nikon because that was my first camera, now I'm entrenched. But really I could just as easily have be entrenched with Canon. Choose the camera that feels right to you, then concentrate on what matters. Lighting and your subjects.</p>

<p>+1 Hoya HMC. I use those on my glass, but I don't use a lens cap ever. I couldn't find one if i needed too. In difficult lighting I'll remove the filter, but generally I prefer the ability to replace the filter if it gets messed up.</p>

 

<p>+1 for Steve, I appreciate your sharing. Please keep posting.</p>

<p>+1 for VueScan. The Minolta software is slower, especially in batch mode and not nearly as good.</p>

 

<p>I have a D7000 and bought a D700 to get to Full Frame. I couldn't be happier. Loved the D7000, but for portraits, etc. the D700 is so much better. I can only imaging the D600 would also be fantastic. I can't speak for the AF on the D600 and bunched up sensors, but the AF on the D700 was an improvement over the D7000 as it uses a different AF module, which you won't get with the D600 upgrade.</p>

<p>With Full Frame I'm getting better low light, which the D600 should give and I think might be even better than the D700. I'm also able to get much better Depth of Field (or lack of it), since I need to get closer at a given focal length to fill the frame. I'm sold on Full Frame especially for indoors where you might not have the space. 35mm DX vs 50mm FX for a portrait are not the same even if they are equivalent.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Late to the party, but I love love love my Black Rapid. Classic RS4. Mounts in the tripod hole, but makes walk around and events so much easier. Orig strap stays in the box.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>For portraits I found "Professional Portrait Retouching Techniques for Photographers using Photoshop - Scott Kelby very helpful. What I really liked about it is that it left out a lot of theory and just went into how to actually do things. Its the first book that really helped me. I totally agree with Emil. Photoshop is an evolution of skills over time.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>If you can afford the 70-200 its a fantastic lens. I think thats the right direction, lens first, worry about the Body later. You will have this lens for many years and in my case I bet its going to outlive a few different bodies. If your body is doing what it needs to now, upgrade your body later. It is very large and heavy, so be warned, not a good walk around lens.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I'll have to go to the local improvement center and see what they have for options. Floor covering and painting it might work depending on the backing. I def don't need 14ft wide, but I use white a lot so I figured if I had an entire wall thats there all the time, it would in turn save me a bunch of time and I would never need to worry about an edge to the left or right. It would be the default. I could then use a different colored seamless when required vertically. Of course I could just lay out a white seamless and leave it there full time down to the floor, but not on the floor. I wasn't too worried about the seam as long as its tight to the floor. I've used white 4x8 sheets before on the floor and just cleaned the seam up in PS.</p>