steve_king5

<p>Matt -- when I'm closer to the date, I'll pull down a copy of 'Control Pro', and play with it. Even if I don't end up using it, might be way cool to play with! Will this only work with cameras with Live View? If I picked up a D200 or D100, would this software work? I guess I can look myself -- just being lazy.</p>

<p>Robbie -- yes, this would be for USPSA/IDPA shooting. I also share you concern about leaving my expensive camera downrange, but I'd tuck it low and to the side so it would pretty much have to be an AD (and DQ!) if someone shot it. Nonetheless, the concern is valid.</p>

<p>I don't have to get shots from this perspective, but they're a nice change. I experimented a few weeks ago, at a very small local shoot, with some more conventional shots, like this:<br>

http://stkpix.5nxs.com</p>

<p>Stupidly, I just sold my 70-300mm VR, but I do have a knock-about 55-200mm vr which should be fine for outdoors/day.</p>

<p>Hi Matt -- interesting!</p>

<p>Heh -- I like the thought of using terminal services (RDP) or something to extend the range...But that's probably way overkill.</p>

<p>In fact, it occurs to me that the power is going to be an issue. Some areas have AC; some don't. This leaves me reliant on my laptop batteries, which is going to be a problem. Camera Control Pro? I wonder (hope) that came in the software bundle with purchase of the d90, but I'm betting it didn't.</p>

 

<p>I'm active in various shooting sports, and have been asked to take some pictures at a large pratical shooting match in the near future.</p>

<p>I would like to have a camera downrange of the competitors, but facing back towards the shooter. Naturally this would need to be remotely controlled. :) My question is, what's the best way to handle this? I have the little MU-something $19.00 remote control for my D90, but it's finicky and I'm thinking it would be great if I could tether the camera somehow to a laptop 10m away, or so, and able to see the finder in the laptop screen....</p>

<p>I don't care about storing the jpg I'm capturing on the laptop, and I'm planning on locking down exposure and focus, so that won't need to be adjusted remotely -- I'd just like to get some sense of what's in the finder before firing the shutter. What sort of solutions are out there? I don't mind picking up or borrowing a 2nd body, either -- like an older D100 or something.<br>

Thx!</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>After doing a tremendous amount of research on this site and others I've decided to switch my 35mm to the new Zeiss Ikon camera and Zeiss lenses.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That interests me as well, because - to the original poster's point - I don't see a whole lot of sense moving to another larger and heavier SLR body just to use 35mm film.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>AF-S locks focus; I think what you want is AF-C.</p>

<p>Do a search a week or two back on auto-focus and the D300, and in the thread is an article on how to use the AF ON button. On the D90, you can set things up to do the same thing, by assigning the function of the AF/AE-Lock button.</p>

<p>It could not be easier -- static subject? Put the focus point on the subject, and tap the button once. Recompose if desired. Moving subject? Put the focus point on the subject, and keep the AF-On button held down while you're shooting. I've not found a more effective way to use AF and the D90.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Thx all -- I actually went with Matt's suggestion, and I should have a package arriving from Adorama soon. I've been certainly doing MY part to stimulate the global economy lately....<sigh></p>

<p>I was pretty much set on the 055CX3 regardless, simply because I did rather like the old 3021 I had. For the head, I'm happy enough at present to only spend $100 on the 488RC2. I'm going to be dealing with some possible saltwater exposure, and I'd feel a LOT better about accidentally dunking this head than a $400 Arca. I figure too, if I upgrade, I can always swap out this head, and use it on a monopod, or something....</p>

<p>Ken Rockwell's site has some basic but decent instruction on this camera, with a couple true gems hidden in his user guide. It's either free or $5, depending on your conscience. </p>

<p>The key for me has been setting up My Menu in an efficient way. In fact, I wish the UI were completely modular, and users could add/remove only those items they want PERIOD, then upload to the firmware.</p>

<p>It drives me crazy to no end having 'features' that I'll never use clutter things: in-camera editing, or slide-shows with music, or....</p>

<p>All that said, the best tip I've found is here on the forum in a thread about D300 autofocus. You can decouple AF from the shutter release by assigning it to the AE/AF-L button, turning that button into "AF-ON". I'm still getting used to it, and unfortuantely my thumb falls naturally on the Live View button, but it's getting better.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>+1 (to Ramon's suggestion of a D40 and 18-55 kit zoom)</p>

<p>I think the bigger problem is going to be lighting, however. An off-camera flash with a little peanut slave that can be tripped by the pop-up flash will do wonders, IMO.</p>

 

<p>I'm been actively shooting again, after not having been very interested in photography for a period of six or seven years....Natually I sold much of my stuff, including my tripods.</p>

<p>I'd had a Bogen 3021 with 3030 3-way, and had also bought an early Gitzo carbon fiber (don't recall the model) and one of the first Acratech Ultimate ballhead -- all long-since gone.</p>

<p>Starting fresh, at least I have some idea what I want but model numbers have changed, and technology has gotten better? I'm also torn between getting one good outfit, and abusing it, or a cheap outfit, or....</p>

<p>Budget: about $500 for now....<br>

Camera: D90, 17-55, 70-300, the odd short tele prime. Nothing for wildlife/birds.<br>

Use: outdoor/travel. Especially in coastal area -- beaches, marshes, etc. I won't be backpacking, but the ability to stick the tripod in my suitcase is a plus.<br>

I have to be able to stand and use it comfortably. I'm about 6'1".<br>

Must have nice QR system. I don't mind that on the Bogen, but the Acratech's was nicer.<br>

Must be a ballhead, and it would be nice if I could apply enough tension (forget what this feature is called) so I could shift the camera easily w/out it moving before locking down. And I would like to be able to take the occasional panorama (horizontal).<br>

I don't see buying another Acratech -- nice and light, but it was funky in it's motion and couldn't be damped (do the thing above).<br>

I prefered the Bogen clamps to the turn-locks of the Gitzo. Clamps seemed MUCH faster, though they'd sometimes snap the hell out of your fingertips. Either isn't a deal-breaker.<br>

3 piece design seems a lot simpler.</p>

<p>Thx! Cheerfully welcome any recommendations. The Manfrotto carbon fiber version of the 3021 looks attractive...</p>

<p>I spent exactly one week with a used 24-85mm f2.8-4 on my D90 before selling it, and buying a 17-55. While it took my two attempts, I can assure you that used, clean examples of this lens abound for $800-900.</p>

<p>But it's your vision. Personally, I'd be furious with myself, if I spent $1700 and had to put up with the weight, and the size, and *still* have to change to another lens, or sacrifice the shot. <shrug></p>

<p>Why not give her enough money for the D90, but then turn around and OFFER your D200 at an attractive price?</p>

<blockquote>

<p>If none of the above are available, that does not necessarily mean that the lens is an unofficial / grey market import. It could be 'grey', but it could also be 'USA'. Honest people do lose paperwork and receipts. FWIW, any remaining warranty is not transferable anyway, and there are well known and well respected repair shops in the USA that will service a Nikon lens regardless of import origin.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That is the salient point, IMO. And, of course that the seller has a good reputation, and ideally will accept returns....</p>

<p>If the piece of gear is new, with warranty, the issue of 'USA vs. Gray Market' makes sense -- otherwise, what does it matter, unless you simply won't be comfortable paying (and waiting...) for any other repair shop but NikonUSA to do any potential repair work?</p>

<p>Of course, as another poster sagely observed: by the time you resolve this with the eBay seller, mostly likely the lens will be sold. :)</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Excellent points! Thx :)</p>

<blockquote>

<p>With some exceptions, pretty much each Nikon product is manufactured exclusively at one location. E.g. all D200 bodies and all D300 bodies are manufactured in Thailand. The 18-200mm AF-S VR is made in Thailand but some early samples, especially demo units, were made in Japan.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Hmm...But where are the D3, D2X's, and high-end optics made? If I'm guessing right, Japan? If that's the case, there must be *some* reason the most expensive items are still made in Japan, while the next tier is made in Thailand, and finally we have China....</p>

<p>If the reason isn't entirely capricious, then why (and I'm not saying you are) scoff at a new Nikon owner's concerns over where his gear was made? Or provide a blanket assurance that Nikon == Nikon Japan, no matter where it was assembled.</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>Matt wrote:<br>

They do use assembly facilities throughout Asia, but there is absolutely no meaningful (or even measurable) difference between a Nikon body assembled in Thailand or one assembled in Japan.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Out of curiosity, what determine why a lens such as my 17-55mm f2.8 is made in Japan, while a 70-300VR lens is made in Thailand and the 50mm AF-D 1.8 is made in China?</p>

<p>Pure coincidence, if skills and expertise are identical?</p>

<p>Heck, I'll scan 35mm film again.</p>

<p>I mean you'll have to pay me, but I will! :)</p>

<p>It's like someone insisting on bringing his turntable and collection of remastered vinyl to a party, and boring everyone to tears with long discussions of the superiority of this media over CD-ROM's, and MP3's, when everyone just wants to dance.</p>

<p>Can you extract more detail out of <em>certain</em> 35mm film types with <em>painstaking technique</em> and very <em>expensive</em> film scanners, than you could obtain with modern dSLR's? Probably. I'm sure a very few people can. But why? For all that pain, why not medium format, where the quantifiable difference is much more apparent and useful? And s anyone going to notice? Probably not. It's a different question, but go back to those crops of the map of the East coast of Africa -- show those two images to 10 people off the street, with no comments, and 9 out of 10 will like the D2X shot better, and the 10th person is just lying 'cause he's contentious pr*ck.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Last Saturday I went to CC, for another reason, actually. Giant store closing signs everywhere. Huge crowd overwhelming the cashier....</p>

<p>Before turning around and walking out, I looked at the camera gear. What remained -- the usual kit zooms, and stuff, was still about 10-20% higher than Adorama/B&H.</p>

<p>I can't believe your CC actually carried 2.8 zooms! Nice.</p>

<p>I might as well use this opportunity to shill a lens I'll probably put on eBay. It's a 35mm Nikkor-O model f2 that John White did the conversion on a few weeks ago. Lens is in terrific condition, with a tiny amount of dust and a speck smaller than a grain of salt floating around inside.</p>

<p>$60 U.S. plus actual shipping? Might as well put a dent in the cost of the new AF-S 35mm DX! :)</p>

<p> </p><div></div>

<p>I guess (and I'm truly not trying to be contentious) if the 50mm lens is sharp at 2.8, assuming it was autofocused, and lens "X" looks like it was smeared with vaseline....Why dig into the mystery further? Return it, get it fixed, or sell it on eBay 'glass is perfect', as ones ethics dictate.</p>

<p>If the autofocus isn't accurate...what does it matter how sharp it is if you hyperfocus manually? :)</p>

<p>Looks incredibly soft at f2.8 in my opinion. <shrug> Can you return it w/out hassle?</p>

 

<p>A bit extreme, no?</p>

<p>Since there's not any significant savings buying a "kit" at the reputable online dealers (Adorama/B&H), why not buy the lens(es) used, OR the plain 18-55mm kit zoom, until you know what you want?</p>

<p> </p>

<p>If you're going to buy the D300 refurb from Adorama you might want to act <strong>quickly</strong> . This thread intrigured me enough to call them up and ask about exchanging my D90 -> D300, and was told there were only 2 units left (Sun. PM). <shrug></p>

<p>I passed -- their price was fair, but ultimately I couldn't justify the extra four or five hundred. Look at it from the opposite angle. Suppose you were told you could get *same* image quality as a top of the line Nikon DSLR, in a smaller, lighter body, brand-new with full factory warranty for $850? I wonder what refurbished D90's would go for, when they trickle out?</p>

<p>I am very susceptible to 'upgrade fever', and have looked at that $1199 refurb deal, myself, having recently bought a D90 in mid December.</p>

<p>There are some things I would like on the D300 - mostly a more professional 'layout', build, and faster AF. I suppose working with manual focus lenses is easier on the D300 (I'm finding focusing is damn near impossible with MF lenses on a D90), but I'm more and more convinced shooting old MF lenses on modern DX bodies is a fools game, period.</p>

<p>At about $400 to upgrade, this path doesn't seem unreasonable. BUT, I'd be giving up size and weight, which -- when it matters -- really matters, so I'm on the fence. The D90 with the 50mm AF1.8D is awful light, as it is with the kit zoom....That's a pretty attractive travel outfit, and you give up image quality to no other DX SLR, in any meaningful way.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I had a number of beautiful circa 1970 non-AI lenses -- some of which were converted. I've sold most, recently, though I kept a couple....I'm not sure why. Probably because they're worth so little. <em>And there's a reason for that.</em></p>

<p>I find them hard to focus on the D90 -- this bothers me far, far more than the lack of metering. The focus confirmation light can get very squirrely.</p>

<p>I don't know about the "G", or "VR" but for sure I like "AF" and especially "AF-S", and the "ED" seems really, really nice, too.</p>

<p> </p>