franklin_t

<p>Hi Edward,<br>

Both versions (slim and regular (non-slim)) are 77mm actually.<br>

Regular:<br>

http://www.adorama.com/BW77CPLKM.html<br>

Slim:<br>

http://www.adorama.com/BW77CPLKS.html<br>

and I'm just wondering whether the regular would cause vignetting at 17mm focal length.<br>

Thanks!</p>

<p>Hello photographers,<br>

I'm thinking of getting the Nikkor 17-55mm 2.8 lens, and would also like a B+W Kaesemann circular polariser for it. What I am wondering about is: is it necessary to get the slim Kaesemann, or would the regular one do?<br>

If I understand correctly, the slim version prevents vignetting on wide angle lenses; but I'm still wondering whether vignetting will occur at 17mm, if I use the regular version.<br>

For any given lens, what is the absolute minimum focal length at which the regular Kaesemann won't produce some vignetting?<br>

Thanks!</p>

<p>Hi guys,<br>

Thanks for the response. Wow...everyone seems to be a big-time expert here....your skills put mine to shame =).<br>

Rob Bernhard is right....those shadows aren't lens flares....those are water spots on the window actually. The rain had just stopped at that moment.....<br>

The shot was taken handheld.....I don't remember what focal length it was, but it was close to 18mm, so I didn't think using a tripod was necessary......well, at least less necessary than if I were using 55mm, for example.<br>

I'm at work now, but later I'll try to post some more photos, so may be I can learn more about the sins I committed :)</p>

<p>Hi guys,<br /> Thanks for the insights...!!<br /> Hmmm I didn't realise that since the girl and the dog are in a studio, it's easier to create more proper lighting, because then the photographer can use softboxes and all the nice studio goodies....<br /> But what about when the photos are outdoor, when it's not practical to carry studio equipments? Probably the photographer only has some speedlights at best....<br /> For instance, these amazing outdoor photos are very smooth, crisp, clean looking as well:<br /> http://www.flickr.com/photos/smithography/sets/72157605486940282/<br /> http://www.flickr.com/photos/danielcheong/sets/72157603917219822/<br /> http://www.flickr.com/photos/burnblue/sets/1588427/</p>

<p>As for myself...I use a D40, 18-55mm, jpeg, and sometimes ambient light, with occassional SB-800. Below are some photos that I took, which are not as crisp or smooth looking as the examples above:<br /> <img src="http://www.webjunction.info/DSC_0313.jpg" alt="" /> <br /> <img src="http://www.webjunction.info/DSC_0047.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>No matter how hard I try, the photos straight from my camera can never be smooth and clean like this:<br>

http://www.pbase.com/dlgphoto/image/109721171<br>

(notice how clean the girl's face and the dog's fur are.)<br>

So I suspect I must do a post-processing......with Photoshop may be. Anyone can share some practical tips?<br>

Thanks!</p>

<p>Thanks Kent. So, sharp lenses (i.e: sharper than 18-55) that would meet my budget are probably only the 50mm, 35mm, and 16-85 then?<br>

By the way, where did you get the D300 for $1040 anyway?<br>

<br /> Yes, the SB-900 is indeed overpriced and I don't think I would get it either. But if I get the SB-600, won't I be limited since it can't be triggered remotely?<br /> (As for taxes, yes that's what I meant....we pay high amount here, which goes to the so called "free" health care, which isn't really free...hehehe. On behalf of Canada, I apologise that you were told to wait 6 to 9 hours though! That is ridiculous! It's not usually that long though. What city were you in?!)</p>

<p>Rick,<br>

Actually I pay a lot more in taxes; and that's because I'm in Canada, where the tax brackets are higher than those in the US (I assume you're American?) But hey, I can't complain....we do get free health care here afterall! =) And I wouldn't fly under the radar....I'm honest!<br>

My income comes mainly from affiliate marketing....I create content-rich sites and promote other people's products and get commissioned....that's it! It's not part time though....far from it....sometimes I work up to 14 to 18 hours a day! But having no boss means I can do anything I want and vacation anytime I want...that's the beauty =).<br>

Lol @ the cellphone....hehe....there's a reason why I don't have one, and it's because I'm kind of paranoid, because I heard the wave that it generates can cause brain cancer..... =P</p>

<p>Hi Kent,<br>

Thanks VERY much for the detailed analysis!<br>

Well, I guess I didn't mention, that the lenses that I currently have are the 18-55mm (non VR), and the 55-200mm VR. I know that the 18-200mm certainly isn't the best when it comes to sharpness, and the reason why I said about it is just because it has such a very nice focal range, which means I wouldn't have to switch lenses too many times, which keeps my camera sensor clean. I'll definitely take the 16-85 and 70-300 into consideration, but I was wondering if you could suggest any other reasonable lens with such a broad focal length range like the 18-200?<br>

I definitely realise the importance of off-flash camera for portraits, and in fact I own an SB-800, which is quite amazing I think. One of the drawbacks of the D40 is that it can't function in the commander mode, which means that although I can trigger the SB-800 remotely, the TTL won't work, as I'm sure you know too. Now that Nikon no longer manufactures the SB-800, I guess I would have to get either the SU-800 or SB-900, or a camera that has the commander mode (and as I understand it, the D90 does, right?)<br>

Having seen many amazing pictures out there, I realised that having only 1 external flash is probably not sufficient, and I would need at least 2, in order to create reasonably stunning pictures no?<br>

If you go here:<br>

http://www.scottkelby.com/portfolio/<br>

and then click on "PEOPLE", you'll see that many of the lady photos there have very nice highlight, and I'm so eager to learn how to take pictures like that....I know Scott most likely used more than 1 off-camera flashes, and perhaps some beauty dishes and Alien Bees, and I just wonder where he positioned them =).<br>

Oops I digressed!</p>

<p>Hi guys,<br>

Thanks for your insights and positive critics! Much appreciated. Well I guess I should've added more details:<br>

* This month (May), the camera shop from which I plan to get the D300 is running a promotion for Nikon cameras and lenses, and is selling the D300 (brand new of course) for about US$ 1320, and I thought that's a pretty good deal for such an awesome camera!!<br>

* I'm interested in the D300 due to its faster focus, faster frame rate, better highlight, and more saturated colours.<br>

* My main use for the camera will mainly be for foreign travels, landscapes, and once in a while, portraits and some fast actions as well. But hey, we never know what suddenly could show up in front of us right? ;)<br>

* I just turned 17 in January, so I still live with my parents, and my "salary" (more like income) comes from the Internet, so I don't need to spend money to travel to work since I work from home, and my monthly expense is about $1000; $500 of which goes to an investment account (for my old days in the far far future, when I retire).<br>

* If I were to get the D300 + lenses, I'd pay the full amount, by cash, since I don't like having debts.<br>

* I don't have a car, and, believe it or not, no cellphone either.<br>

Hmm, that's about it for now....<br>

Thanks once again!</p>

<p>If you don't mind saying, what's your income?<br>

I've had my D40 for about 1.5 year now, and I am really, really, really, strongly considering to upgrade to the D300 (plus get the 18-200mm, 50mm 1.8, and 35mm 1.8).<br>

My salary is only about $50K/year, and I'm trying to justify the purchase. For the past 2 months, I've been saying to myself "to get or not to get the D300, to get or not to get the D300, to get or not to get the D300" =P.<br>

Thanks for reading! =)</p>

<p>Thanks Chris....<br>

Another (silly) newbie question: when manually controlling the exposure, is it really just a matter of trial and errors, or is there a more intelligent way to do that?! =)</p>

<p>Thanks a lot for the responses guys...I'm a more enlightened person now... =)<br>

Chris, you mentioned that the D40 does have the ability to wirelessly trigger the SB-800, although in such case we'll lose the iTTL functionality. So what does the iTTL do actually? I guess it allows the speedlight to automatically "communicate" with the camera to determine the correct exposure...? Am I right? In this case, will I be able to at least manually control the exposure?</p>

<p>Hi guys.... <br /> <br /> Some beginner questions here..... <br /> <br /> 1. Can the SB-800 speedlight work with the D40 SLR?</p>

<p >2. Can the on-camera flash of the D40 wirelessly trigger the SB-800? If not, what do I do if I want to use the SB-800 off camera?</p>

<p >3. How do I create professional-quality images with the SB-800 on the camera? Do I just bounce it off the ceiling and use the diffuser? Any other tips?<br>

Thanks!</p>