User_4754088

<p>Henry, I've been a loyal customer of B&H for over twenty years and will continue doing business with you. But one of the two D7100's I had issues with was from B&H. I returned it because of focus issues. The other one was borrowed from a friend and I am not sure where he purchased it. I have not tried another D7100. Maybe to Jeff that is statistically irrelevant. But to me it says, "Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me."</p>

<p>My reason for asking is a concern about quality control. I've used two D7100's made in Thailand and both had issues, right from the factory. Having worked with many brands of cameras since the 1970's, my experiences point to certain things. One is that cameras made in Germany and Japan have proven to be more reliable and better assembled than cameras made in China and Thailand. This is just from my personal experience using probably close to 100 different cameras over the last forty years. As I use my cameras for work, and clients aren't terribly understanding when you tell them you couldn't come back with the images because the camera failed, quality control is of great importance to me.</p> <p>Best,<br> -Tim</p>

<p>Shun, what other Nikon DSLR's are made in Thailand? Or maybe more importantly, what Nikon DSLR's are still made in Japan?</p> <p>Best,<br> -Tim</p>

<p>If Nikon could make the Df the size of the F3HP, and leave off the LCD and all the buttons and dials, and just give it two controls, Shutter Speed and ISO, with a built in Matrix light meter, make it shoot NEF and make it compatible with all Nikkor F glass, I'd buy one in a heartbeat.</p> <p>I love the concept of the Leica M60, not real crazy about their execution and price though.</p> <p>Best,<br> -Tim</p>

<p>Friday Night Lights:</p> <p><img src="http://www.timcarrollphotography.com/Forums/JoshWalker1.jpg" alt="" /></p> <p>Nikon D4 w/300mm</p>

<p>Soggy Sophomores on Friday Night</p> <p><img src="http://www.timcarrollphotography.com/Forums/Soggy.jpg" alt="" width="800" height="600" /></p> <p>Nikon D700 w/80-200</p>

<p>Let's keep in mind that it's not just how fast or slow a lens is. Each lens has a signature, a particular way that <strong><em>lens design</em></strong> renders light passing through it. The way the 85 f1.2 L renders light is unique and can be something you love or hate, or are indifferent to. For me, I love the way that lens renders, particularly with film, and particularly with old Kodak EPP and AgfaPan 100. Unfortunately neither of those films are made anymore (at least not in their original formula), so I don't use my 85 as much, but even with Tri-X she still renders uniquely, compared to my Nikon 85 f1.4 and other 1.2 lenses I've used.</p> <p>Best,<br> -Tim</p>

<p><strong>The Deep.</strong></p> <p><img src="http://www.timcarrollphotography.com/Forums/TC003.jpg" alt="" /></p> <p>Well, not <em>too</em> deep. Nikon 1, J1 in WP-N1 housing.</p>

<p>Hi Gabriel,</p> <p>I gotta say, the 85mm f1.2 L is just a special lens. It's been my favorite FD system lens for well over twenty years. Back in the early 1990's when I was doing fashion work in New York, and money was tight, I tried to get by with the 100mm f2.0 (also a really good lens), but it just couldn't compare to the 85.</p> <p>Maybe it's romance, I'm not sure, I just know the 85 is one of the real gems of the FD line. If you have a chance to own one, I'd jump at it.</p> <p>Now my experience with the lens is strictly with film, and I'm not sure how it works with digital, but the creamy film bokeh, the shallow DOF, it just works magically with that lens.</p> <p>Best,<br> -Tim</p>

<p>For me the TC-14E II works very well with the 300/4 AF-S, even wide open. Not sure what a TC-14 III could offer that would make it worth the upgrade.</p>

<p>That's an interesting thread Shun, thanks for the link.</p> <p>I am currently using the AF-S 300 f4 with the TC-14E-II, which gives me f5.6, but unfortunately it is just too dark for the high school stadiums we shoot at when night falls.</p> <p>Interesting note, I've read a number of places that the combination I am using gets significantly better when stopped down one stop to f8. On my example of the lens and TC, that's really not so much the case. If I shoot five shots at f5.6 of objects 10 meters, 20 meters, 45 meters, 75 meters and over 100 meters, and the same five shots at f8, it's pretty much a wash. At some distances the f8 shot is a bit sharper (and I mean a pixel peeping bit) and at some distances the f5.6 shot is sharper, again by a bit. So I just shoot the thing wide open.</p> <p>Just need more light.</p> <p>Best,<br> -Tim</p>

<p>Hi Eric, Thanks for your observations. I looked at the 80-400, but the f5.6 at 400mm is a killer. This is for nighttime sports, and f4 is even pushing it. My ideal would be the 400/2.8, but the bank account says "No".</p> <p>Best,<br> -Tim</p>

<p>I don't know if I'd say "flood", more like a trickle. I have been looking for a good one that maybe was used for "birding" a few times and now the wealthy retired owner wants to upgrade and let his old version go for cheap. I keep dreaming. :-)</p> <p>Best,<br> -Tim</p>

<p>Hi John,</p> <p>Can you email or PM me the name of the "site that must go with no name" as I have no idea which site you are talking about, and I would dearly love to read that review.</p> <p>Thanks,<br> -Tim</p>

<p>Hi folks, thanks for the responses.</p> <p>Shun, the teleconverter I'm using is the TC-14E-II, not the III. I believe you are correct in asserting the III doesn't work with non-G lenses.</p> <p>I'm old school, and have always stayed away from teleconverters, but the cost of the 400mm is putting it out of my reach. Brad does review the 200 w/TC-20E and says it gives good results, if you shoot at f5.6. Which is a bit too dark for my needs. I've read numerous articles about the 200-400 having issues with distances over 50 meters (which is a big part of my shooting). So I haven't found a good solution yet.</p> <p>It's interesting, I have found little to nothing about the 300mm f2.8 coupled with the TC-14E. Makes me wonder if there's some tragic flaw with that combo and that's why no one is shooting with it.</p> <p>If anyone has used the 300 w/TC-14E combo, I'd love to hear what you thought.</p> <p>Best,<br> -Tim</p>

<p>Hi all, was wondering if anyone here has experience using either a Nikon TC-14E-II with a Nikon 300mm f2.8 AFS lens, or using a Nikon TC-20E-III with a Nikon 200mm f2.0 G AFS lens.</p> <p>Trying to find out how the results compare. Trying to reach 400mm and can't afford the Nikon 400mm f2.8, which is now clocking in at $11,500 (since the old 400mm f2.8 has now been discontinued).</p> <p>Anyone have experience with either of these combinations, or know of a different combination (to reach 400mm) that they've had good luck with shooting night time sports?</p> <p>Thanks.</p> <p>Best,<br> -Tim</p>

<p>I had that Nikkor 17-55 f2.8G lens and it was tack sharp when used with my D4 on DX crop mode, but was soft with my D7100. Never could get good results out of that combination.</p>

<p><strong>Friday Night Lights:</strong></p> <p><img src="http://www.timcarrollphotography.com/Forums/FNLites2.jpg" alt="" /><br> D700 w/80-200 f2.8</p> <p><strong>Soggy Sophomores:</strong></p> <p><img src="http://www.timcarrollphotography.com/Forums/Soggy.jpg" alt="" /><br> D4 w/300 f4</p> <p>Best,<br> -Tim</p>

<p>Night Lights . . .</p> <p><img src="http://www.timcarrollphotography.com/Forums/NiteLites.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>Or the D4.</p>

<p>I like screw on lens hoods for my prime lenses, so I have the metal lens hood for my 28mm f2.8 and for my 85mm f1.4D, but the rubber lens hood for my 50mm f1.2. Never owned the metal 50mm hood, but it looks like a clip on one, and I like the security of the screw on models better.</p> <p>As far as metal vs plastic, don't really care one way or the other if the hood stays put, blocks flare, and gives some protection to the front of the lens.</p> <p>Best,<br> -Tim</p>

<p>If you need the high ISO, the D4s is the way to go. If not, you can save some cash by going with the D810.</p> <p>Was in a similar situation a couple years ago, deciding between the D4 and the D800. For my work, the high ISO is most important, so I had to go the extra cash and buy the D4. A decision I do not regret.</p> <p>Best,<br> -Tim</p>

<p>I'd send it in to Nikon service. I have the same set up as you (D4 w/D700 back up). My D700 is five years old. Noticed it wasn't hitting focus as well as my D4 and a few other little things. Just had Nikon service it and it's like a whole new camera. Now it can run with the D4 in most regards (save high ISO).<br> <br />I don't think there is any way, unless you're a camera technician with access to the Nikon computer they use to set up the cameras, that you can fix something like a muddy lake submersion by yourself.</p> <p>Good luck with getting it back up and running.</p> <p>Best,<br> -Tim</p>

<p>Unlike Peter, I love the Nikon 1 system; but you need to use it completely understanding it's limitations.</p> <p>I think the AW1 with the 11-27.5mm would be a great camera for kayaking. They aren't really scuba diver cameras like the old Nikonos were, but they should be fine down to about forty feet.</p> <p>Best,<br> -Tim</p>

<p>I used to feel the same way about screw on diopters, I loved the in-camera adjustment. But a couple years ago I had to get a diopter for my FM2N, and although I initially didn't like it, I got used to it quickly. Now I have them on my F3HP, Canon NEW F-1, and Canon A-1 (which actually does stick out pretty far and get knocked out of place from time to time), and I don't even notice them (except on the A-1). But I love how clear the focus screens are on each camera now.</p> <p>Best,<br> -Tim</p>