peter_howard2

<p>Wouter and Ellis, Thanks for your input. Wouter, the issue I have is really trying to only take one lens. Whilst the 28-300 maybe heavier as an item, it would prove lighter than the two other lenses put together. Ellis, thank you for your fantastic photos. It has reassured me that super results are achievable with this combination. The issue I now need resolve is how much I would miss the 18-27mm range if I go for this new option. Decisions, decisions! My grateful thanks to you all. Kind regards, Peter.</p>

<p>Thank you very much Guys for your very helpful information and comments. The reason I am considering this option is due to me going to Australia later this year and I have a serious luggage weight problem and hence trying to restrict the equipment I am taking. All your details are valid and will give me greater insight into my ultimate decision. Many thanks once again.</p>

<p>Hey Guys, I happened to be passing when this gem caught my eye. I really do not mean this to sound patronizing or "Holier Than Thou", but how many who are so concerned about this "radiation" scare, still smoke, are obese through eating fast foods, drink to excess or do little exercise? The old adage about removing the plank from our own eyes before trying to take the sliver out from our neighbour's seems to ring a very pertinent bell! (Incidently I include myself amongst them!) We have all got to go sometime. Would it not be more beneficial to try and control those things within our own remit and worry less about those things outside our control? Only a thought! - now where did I put my camera?</p>

<p>Hi, At present I have a D300s with a 18-200mm VR and 70-300 VR lens. I am thinking about exchanging them for the new 28-300 VR lens. I understand the FX lens would not function fully due to the crop factor on my DX camera, but could anyone tell me whether they have actually tried this combination and if so what the results were. Many thanks, Peter</p>

<p>Michael, Sorry for taking so long to acknowledge your reply, I've had problems this end. Thank you for your comments I shall study the map now and see what can be fitted in to our schedule. Regards, Pete.</p>

<p>Thanks for the reply, Yes, It is a stong possibility. It all depends upon time available.</p>

<p>I'm visiting the beautiful state of Montana early in September (DV) could anyone help me with some tips and also any specific locations where good scenic vantage points may be found. I'm flying in to Bozeman and heading up the Southern part of the Rockies. Any tips would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Pete</p>

<p>Yes, I really think Nikon are out of touch here. Thanks for your input guys.<br>

Pete</p>

<p>Hi Alan,<br>

Thanks for your response but I'm afraid I can't agree with you on this point. To address your last point first. I am not wanting this manual to help me decide whether to purchase this camera - that decision has already been taken. As far as the copyright issues are concerned: as a general principal I accept the reasoning, but sadly I feel society as a whole and large companies especially, have lost sight of common sense and "the objective" allowing themselves to be carried away on this modern wave of beareucratic rightiousness. WHAT IS THE MANUAL FOR? Surely it is to give users help and guidance in using the item. I do not wish to utilize this for any other purpose other than what it was conceived and produced for - to learn about the camera. If I were wanting it for some other alterior unauthordox / immoral purpose, then yes I would have an issue with concience, but Nikon spend millions on advertising and promoting their products trying to get people to buy their products. To penalise a genuine customer by charging for an user aid - that I do feel is immoral, especially with the high price charged in the first instance.<br>

To keep this in context: If Nikon feel so threatened by copyright issues, why produce one at all? Common sense dictates that anyone wanting to use this for any reason other than it's intended purpose will get hold of one regardless of protocol. As one of the previous contributors to this thread commented "the only affect it has is to annoy genuine enquirers". COME ON NIKON - THINK THIS THROUGH AND JOIN THE REAL WORLD. I hope I haven't caused offence Alan - None intended.<br>

Pete.</p>

<p>Thanks for your comments guys. It's amazing how there is always some very "restricted thinking" even in the best organisations, but thanks to your initiative I have now downloaded a free PDF file unlocker and hey what do know . . . . . Martha thanks for your input, but the link you mention only allows either: printable via serial number entry, or the non-printable version, but thanks anyway.</p>

<p>I'm hoping that Santa will bring me a D300S (Yes, I'll even believe in Santa if it means I get this camera!!!) and would like to be able to print off a copy of it's manual prior to getting it. For some reason Nikon block off the option to print this which restricts the oportunity I have to study it. Two points: Firstly, why do they do this ? ? ? I would have thought this is one of the best selling articles for any camera, so the more people can read it the better! Secondly, does anyone know where I can download a copy - or am I now being very naughty???? Well if you don't ask . . . . . Thanks in anticipation ! ! Pete.</p>

<p>Thank you Kris for such a prompt answer - and solving my problem. I am very much obliged to you.<br>

Peter.</p>

<p>I have the opportunity of buying a MC 30 Remote Cable at a very reasonable price. It will not fit my current camera (D60) but I am hoping to upgrade to a D300 (not D300S) in the near future and wondered whether this cable will work with the D300. Can anyone advise please?</p>

<p>Thanks for your comments guys. Very valid point about the situation changing in two years Bengt, Nikon will have probably replaced the D300 by then, which means the D300 should come down in price - and that would suit me just fine!!! Thanks to you all. Pete.</p>

<p>Hi Guys, Many thanks for your replies - albeit some are a bit over my head. That being said the consensus of your opinions have answered what I really wanted to know - I am a pure novice using a D60 and as a beginner finding this little camera fantastic. I am still learning but at the same time I am beginning to aquire lenses. Namely Nikon 18-200 Vr, Nikon 50mm 1.4G, Sigma 10-20mm Hsm and a Sigma 150-500mm. Now, whilst I have every thing I need at present, looking to the future, when I retire in a couple of years time, I shall have (hopefully) gained more experience and having more time??? shall probably upgrade the camera body at that point. The reason for asking therefore was whether I would really benefit from a FF camera as opposed to say the D300. From what I understand I would never really use a FF to it's optimum use and most of the lenses would not really be matched to a FF. I think the D300 would more than satisfy my needs and save me having to re-invest in different lenses. My thanks once again I appreciate your time and trouble. Pete.</p>

<p>Would someone please explain what the main benefits of a full frame camera (e.g. D3) are over a DX (e.g. D300). Obviously there are many other benefits with the more expensive camera but specifically - apart from being able to print larger photographs - what is gained from the full frame senser. Thanks</p>

<p>Nathan & Darrel, Have just checked back on the thread and found your comments. Thanks - I have noted others say that the 85mm is better for head / shoulder work. I now think that as you state Darrel, an evaluation of my work together with "patience" , i,e wait until I can try the 50mm 1.4G then see whether the extra 85mm would be of significant benefit to justify the extra expense. Thanks guys. Peter</p>

<p>Mike: I have on occasions switched off the auto-focus on the lenses I have and used the manual option. I imagine the 85mm in question would be similar to use as doing this.<br>

Bruce & Tommy: You really confirm what I have "picked up" from reading various articles on this forum and the net generally, but felt some expert advice specifically relating to these lenses would clarify the situ.<br>

Alan: once again you have come up trumps for me. thanks so much for the in-depth evaluation. Being a "newbie" (and an old one at that!) it will take a lot of reading it over and over again for me to fully comprehend the complexities - and yes it sure is complex, but thank you for your time and willingness to share your knowledge.<br>

I shall continue to monitor this thread for any other input, but am fairly convinced that if the piggy bank will allow, I'll go for broke and get both. The span of possibilities with both is too irresistable to miss.<br>

Thanks once again everyone, I really appreciate your help. Pete</p>

<p>Hi Guys, Thanks for your replies. Sorry I did not give full info. The lens in question is a Nikon 85mm AI-s F/2 version. approximately 20 years old - as far as I can establish. I accept that this will have restricted functionality i.e no auto focus, but for portraiture work I can't see that being a problem. Your other comments are appreciated.</p>

<p>I am a senior just getting into a lifelong intention / ambition of photography as a hobby. I have ordered and am awaiting delivery of the Nikon 50mm AF-S 1.4G lens (for use on D60) but now have an offer of an old (but in superb condition) 85mm F.2 lens. I am now wondering whether to spend out more and get both or whether the 50mm will cover (+ or -) the same area or work. I want to spend time in portraiture - most of which will be inside and probably head/shoulders. Would there be any benefit i.e. more flexibility, better quality from the 85mm lens. Any advice / help would be greatly appreciated. Pete.</p>

<p>Joseph: Thank you - my "studio" is my converted bedroom-cum-study and I imagine most of my portraiture work will be on a very informal basis with family and friends, so your comment on headshots versus bodyshots is valid and food for thought.<br>

Michael: Thanks for clarifying my unspoken query re: is the 85mm f1/4 worth considering as well. I guess I'll not go there . . . . but I've not heard anything about 60mm G - presumably this would have full functional use with the D60. Thanks for mentioning it, I'll go and look further - having said that, I've only just scraped together enough for the 50mm 1.4G and am awaiting it's arrival here in England (at a place where the price is right!) Perhaps I need keep enquiring and saving! My thanks to you both. Pete.</p>

<p>It occurs to me that as a newbie part of the art of photography is having the ability to "bring out" the natural beauty of any given person / subject. Part of what fascinates me about photography is how some of you talented people seem to have an inate ability to extract the essence of beauty from within the subject. Wow! that sounds rather deep (especially for me!) but I guess what I am saying is that everything / body has beauty - it's knowing what and how to emphasize and what to leave out or hide that makes the difference. Thats where the photography talent bit comes in. Me . . . I struggle, but am inspired by all the fantastic examples you guys post. Many thanks for that. Pete.</p>

<p>I am a newbie so please be gentle with me folks - you know not too techie! I have a D60 and want to do indoor portraits. I have been saving (now just have enough) for the new 1.4g but have been reading varying reports on what is best for indoor portraits with digital cameras. Any useful opinions on which would be best for my needs? Incidently I also have 18-200 VR, 70-300mm VR and 10-20mm lens but want a prime with good bokeh and quality detail for this area of photography. My thanks in anticipation. Pete</p>

<p>William, Thank you for the clarification re "math" & "maths" - yep it's just like I thought, the old "you say tomaaaatoe" we say "tomarrrrto" sydrome - whatever. . . as long as we are all talking about the same fruit . . .<br>

Simon, I'm with you here, not because I'm necessarily a "rebel", but simply because I ain't clever enough to understand all that "math"!!!! So I'll just meander about in ignorant bliss punching in the numbers and being amazed at the results.<br>

Alan, I'm in total awe ! ! ! you certainly know the "biz".</p>

<p>Thanks for your reply Gary, it occurs to me there may also be a difference depending on which side of the "pond" you are situated in. Me . . . I'm a good ol' Essex boy in U.K. Thanks for your input, appreciate your time. Pete</p>