sammy_d1

<p>I have had the version I since it came out, and use it now with a D3 (FX). I liked it so well, that I bought the DX version 8-16mm to go with my DX cameras. there is NOTHING in anyone else's lineup that goes this wide. The difference between 14mm and 12mm is huge. The lens is rectilinear, and pictures from it take to sharpening very well without looking overly sharpened. Decide for yourself about each of your lenses, and don't just fall into the "Get the Nikon" mindset. I have a full stable of Nikons, and I like them very much. But, I also have some Sigmas and Tokinas that are great lenses. </p>

<p>The Samyang (in my case Rokinon) lens is very, very good. I use it on a D2x, but the viewfinder has a DK17M magnifier on it. If I don't use it for a while, I have to practice with it for a bit before I'm comfortable with it. Once I get settled with it, I can focus it wide open without using the focus dot in the viewfinder. I found that my particular lens focuses at the far side of the confirmation dot, and it works better if I start long, and focus to the short side. Using this technique, I can shoot with an acceptable number of sharp photos. I also have a Nikon 85 f1.4, and even with autofocus, it misses sometimes due to movement or sketchy AF target. All told, the Rokinon gives me a lens I can take out without having to worry about theft or abuse when I am knocking around. </p>

<p>I am a huge proponent for buying used, both for cameras and lenses. Get a low mileage D300 or 5DMkI (rather than MkII), and you will have a good deal more money for lenses. You can get either camera used for about the same price. Find what suites you, then start investing in that system. Whatever you decide to buy for a camera, you will certainly regret going with consumer lenses. </p>

<blockquote>I am quite confused by your statement that it is a 10 MP camera when shot RAW. Is this something special about the way it handles RAW files, are all RAW files higher MP</blockquote>

<p>There are many articles on the Internet concerning the unique sensor on the D1x. As was stated above, they are rectangular in shape, and processing RAW pictures interpolates in one direction. The result is not quite as good as a native 10 megapixel sensor, but much better than the nominal 5.3 megapixel JPG that comes out of the camera. When pixel peeping, you can see some loss of resolution in one axis. It has never bothered me. It gives great pictures, and I use it almost daily. </p>

<p>If you decide to give one a try, get one with the buffer upgrade. It gives you a 14 RAW and 21 JPG buffer, rather than a 6 RAWand 9 JPG. The rear screen is quite small by today's standards, but you will learn to trust the camera rather than trying to analyze every picture on the screen. A great benefit to trying one out is that you won't lose money if you don't like it. You can sell it for about what you bought it for. You may get hooked on pro bodies, and opt for a much more expensive upgrade, however. </p>

<p>The batteries are an issue. The NiMH won't hold a charge over a few weeks, and shooting in the cold kills the charge very quickly. Normally, I get ~350 shots with a battery (give or take). I use an aftermarket battery that I got for about $25. I replaced the end caps on all my aftermarket batteries with OEM caps taken from Nikon batteries. They fit better, and last longer. </p>

<p>I have responded to this kind of post a number of times, and on a number of different boards. I STILL shoot a D1x. It has a deadly fast and accurate focusing mechanism, and produces wonderful colors and skin tones. The body is easy to work with, and has a great viewfinder. There is no comparison between the handling of a professional body, and a semi-pro with an attached grip. </p>

<p>When shot RAW, it gives a 10 megapixel picture that can be printed quite large. I rarely shoot high ISO (800), but when I do, I use Neat Image, and the results are good as long as I exposed it corectly. On screen, pixel peeping, you can see some noise, but in prints it doesn't show. </p>

<p>I looked very hard at this new generation of bodies, and they really are wonderful. But for my needs, the D1x still provides me with great pictures. "On paper", it doesn't look like much of a camera, but when you actually put it to use, it shines. </p>

 

<p>Ok, so at the end of all this...? How do we determine whether or not a particular flash is safe? As I wrote earlier, I wasn't going to take the chance, not knowing the intricacies of the electronics involved. Is there a definitive test for a layman? </p>

<p>I did some test with a Fluke meter, and another much less expensive meter. The Fluke showed higher voltages, and sometimes showed a very brief spike that I cannot explain. I asked other engineers about it, and they told me that even brief spikes can cause damage over time. Maybe I had an odd flash I was testing, and maybe something is going on that I don't understand. I am not an engineer, but I was nervous enough about it that I quit using it on board. If this information is wrong, I would be quite happy to know about it. I have a number of old flashes that I would like to use. YMMV. </p>

<p>You have to be careful, even with a reading from a meter. I have found that most meters cannot measure the initial spike the flash gives, before it settles down to a stable voltage. Over time, the spike may cause a lot of problems. </p>

<p>Give a thought to the D1x. If high ISO isn't an issue, it is a great camera. I took a step "backward" with this camera about a year and a half ago, and fell in love with it. I got it for a song, and it has the buffer upgrade. I found CragsList to have much better prices for them than eBay. I get ~400 shots with a freshly charged 3rd party battery, and the results are stunning. I do mostly portraits, with an occasional wedding, and I truly love this camera. I get very tired of hearing that it is obsolete and incapable. </p>

<p>I bought 2 of the "MaximalPower" 2700mAh EN4 batteries off eBay for under $50. They work much better than the OEMs - I get regularly get ~400 shots per battery (much less if it's very cold out). If you get these, SAVE the latching units off your old batteries. They come right off with 3 screws. The 3rd party batteries do not provide the same quality latch that Nikon does. </p>

<p>I'm still shooting a D1x, and I have not found a Dxx camera that will focus as quickly or acurately. I have only played around a little with the D300 - are others of you out there finding that it will out perform the D2x (or D1x for that matter) in focus speed & accuracy? </p>

<p ><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=2344388">"Matt Laur</a> <a href="../member-status-icons"><img title="Hero" src="http://static.photo.net/v3graphics/member-status-icons/hero.gif" alt="" title="Hero" /> <img title="Subscriber" src="http://static.photo.net/v3graphics/member-status-icons/sub3.gif" alt="" title="Subscriber" /> <img title="Frequent poster" src="http://static.photo.net/v3graphics/member-status-icons/3rolls.gif" alt="" title="Frequent poster" /> </a> , Dec 04, 2009; 09:15 a.m.<br>

Try Edit -> Options -> General -> Clear Cache -> CLEAR"</p>

<p>THANK YOU! I have been fighting this for a couple of weeks, including full removal and re-installs. The program was giving incorrect thumbnails, was unable to read whole folders, told me that files were unsupported. I was going nuts. </p>

<p>It now works like it should. I love the internet. </p>

 

<p>I just looked at the EXIF for your picture, and it shows that the autofocus point selected was the right one. </p>

<p>Be sure you select the autofocus point you want when shooting. There are 5 in your view finder to choose from using the rocker switch on the back of the camera.</p>

<p>You can find a great EXIF reader on the Web at http://www.photome.de/ ,<br>

or you can use Nikon's free program ViewNX to find information about your shots. I have both programs, and find each valuable.</p>

<p>It will allow you to see all of your camera settings in any picture that you take.</p>

<p>Be sure the 4 way rocker switch is unlocked. There is a switch just below the 4 way rocker that locks/unlocks the rocker switch. You also have to be sure the metering is active (by pushing the shutter release 1/2 way down) before you can switch focus points. </p>

<p>With a monopod, you do not need a super high quality ball head, since the monopod isn't all that stable to begin with. You do, however, need to have a way to adjust the camera so that you can use the monopod at an angle. I use an inexpensive lightweight eBay ball head with a quick release on mine. I wouldn't dream of using it on a tripod, as it is nowhere near rigid enough.</p>

<p>You DEFINITELY NEED to use proper technique when using a monopod. Don't have it straight up and down, as that is the least stable position for it. It will wobble in all directions. Try angling it out away from you about 30 degrees, and push into it as you shoot. You will find it much more stable.</p>

<p>I still shoot a D1x, by choice. It renders beautiful colors, and the focusing is very fast and accurate. It is a very responsive body, and as long as I shoot within its limitations (avoiding high ISO), I doubt anyone can can see the difference in prints. </p>

<p>Those who think one of the newer consumer DSLRs produce better pictures are correct in one respect: the sensor is better. Unfortunately, the camera body has to put the sensor to work, and that is where the consumer cameras fall behind. The D1x body has features I regularly need and use that are not available on the other lower end cameras, especially focusing speed and accuracy. </p>

<p>I tried using a D50 to shoot an outside graduation, and was frustrated at the lack of features. The older cameras did not stop producing great pictures just because something new came along. </p>

<p>When a newer camera comes out with higher ISO and more resolution, it does not diminish what the previous models were designed to do. When you stay within the limits of your camera (whatever you are using), the results will be as good as you are.</p>

<p>I bought a D1x a little while ago, and I haven't picked up my D200 since. The D1x produces wonderful skin tones and color saturation, and I love the way it handles. I get a kick out of the 'latest and greatest' crowd, and just shake my head when I hear them. I just tell them, "That's nice."</p>

<p>It may not have been put in with the camera's menue, but rather with the camera tethered to the computer with the control program. If that is the case, you will have to use the computer to change it. </p>

<p>The lens may or may not be front focusing. It is often difficult to get a good target for the camera to focus on, so it selects an area that you did not necessarily want. The focusing area the camera is using is larger than most people think. It is not the lens causing the problem, it is more a misunderstanding of how the focusing system works. </p>

<p>As far as lenses being soft when shot wide open, I have a owened more lenses than I can remember, and every one of them shot softer wide open than when stoppe down. </p>

<p>Monopods and tripods are two very different beasts. A good tripod will allow you to get very long shutter speeds, and very stable shots with all of your lenses. A monopod will give you a couple of f stops worth of extra exposure if used correctly. I have both, and use both.</p>

<p>You owe it to yourself to search the internet for the proper use of monopods. Most people just put the camera on top of one, and use it straight up and down. This is the most inefective method of use. It will easily tilt in 4 directions. If you put the base about 30 degrees in front of you, and push into it a bit, you will have a MUCH more stable platform. </p>

<p>I have this lens, and I find that it vignettes on a DX camera with the lens cap holder on, even without filters on it. It is built to take rear filters - something I just don't use. It is an excellent lens for doing interiors of buildings because of its minimal distortion. </p>

<p>I have both the Sigma and the Nikkor. The Sigma is sharp, focuses well, and produces very good pictures. The Nikkor is sharp, focuses more quickly, has a bit more 'pop' and has creamier bokeh than the Sigma. If I'm knocking around, I have the Sigma mounted. If it's serious work, I use the Nikkor. </p>

<p>It's possible that the BlueTac loosened up some of the lining inside the camera. It only takes a very small particle to show up when it is on the sensor. Try getting a squeeze blower and air it out as best you can.</p>

<p>I picked up an old Tamron 70-210 f2.8 AF for a bargain, and it produces very good pictures. </p>

<p>Check your EXIF info to see what focal lengths you use for your group shots. If you don't go below 28mm, then a good 28-70mm f2.8 lens is a good choice. If you can't afford a Nikkor, you can still get excellent results with a Sigma, Tokina, or Tamron. If you do need a wider field of view, then the 17-55mm is excellent. Once again, if you cannot afford the Nikkor, the Sigma and Tamron are good choices. </p>