kuryan_thomas

<p>One tip I've read from some nature photographers, e.g., John Shaw, is that you don't use shutter priority. Just use aperture priority, open up wide, and use continuous mode autofocus. You will always get the fastest possible shutter speed and the AF system will track whatever you want to be in focus.</p>

<p>Caveat emptor: I have only read this, never tried it.</p>

<p>I'm curious if anyone has tried using video stabilization platforms, such as Steadicam, for these applications? Coupled with VR, wouldn't it offer a pretty steady platform from which to shoot these types of very dynamic scenes?</p>

<blockquote>

<p>May be I should make a virtual copy, and export the virtual copy with all the fixing you mentioned?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That's an excellent way to do it. Edit the image to your taste, then make a virtual copy, and add any photo.net specific tweaks to the virtual copy. If they're always the same tweaks, you could create a photo.net develop preset.</p>

<p>Don't forget to create a photo.net export preset so you can apply all the export parameters at once without having to think about it. The ones Ellis lists are the ones you should include in the preset.</p>

<p>Thank you both very much.</p>

<p>On the D3 class bodies with dual CF, you have the option to overflow from card 1 to card 2, so that the total capacity is the sum of the two cards' capacities (e.g., two 8GB cards -> total capacity is 16GB).</p>

<p>My question is this: is the counter that shows number of shots remaining supposed to show the total number of shots across both cards?</p>

<p>I ask because on my D3x, if I insert two identical cards, I would expect to see twice the total number of shots, but I don't. So I insert one 8GB card, the display says 156 shots. I insert another one, and the display still says 156 where I would expect it to say 312. It makes no difference whether I select overflow mode or backup mode (again, I would expect the counter to change).</p>

<p>Thank you.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>For nikon, I believe it is a menu setting.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Unfortunately, it isn't. You have to load an image as a "White Balance Preset" and use that preset when you're setting exposure with the histogram. There are various sources for the images that you use as presets. I believe at least some of Thom Hogan's Nikon e-books come with the preset images.</p>

<p>Previously, you could load it as a white balance preset into Nikon Capture and then have Capture push it to the camera. That's what I did with my D2x.</p>

<p>As I mentioned, overall I found the technique more fussy than it was worth given the barely visible differences on the images I took.</p>

<p>Martin Evening's book, <i>Adobe Photoshop CS4 for Photographers</i>, has an accompanying DVD that shows many of the techniques discussed in his book.</p>

<p>Unfortunately I have nothing <a href="../nikon-camera-forum/00SRCN">other than this</a>, which is also a forum post - the good news is that it's a photo.net forum. See the post by Dieter Schaefer; I happen to think it's the clearest explanation.</p>

<p>I should mention that I tried UniWB with my D2x and didn't like the results. I didn't really see a huge improvement in any real world images over just using the scene-appropriate white balance. It seemed more fiddly than I was prepared for in the field.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I was never getting an "fEE" message, just "F --"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>These young cameras these days, with their language! (Sorry, couldn't resist. Carry on.)</p>

<blockquote>

<p>made from the extreme corner of the roof of an approxiamtely 10 story building</p>

</blockquote>

<p>My vertigo is kicking in just reading that! But it's a wonderful image. What was going on down where the crowd of people is?</p>

<p>Just to clarify my original question: the camera and lens are solid and secure on the panorama rig. I was not worried about stability, although I agree my question made it seem that I was. It seemed to me that the distance between the camera focal plane and the rotation point was too great, and I suspected my parallax alignment technique. Based on Ellis's response, I think I am aligning the system correctly. I suppose zoom lenses have much farther nodal points.<br>

 <br>

Thank you all for responding.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Please share with the readers what camera body you are using with this lens.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Nikon D3x.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The rotation point for the Nikon 24-70 on the D3 series body, at least on my set up, is in the vicinity of the gold ring on the lens.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Thank you, Ellis, that's what I see too. The system is in no way unbalanced and is quite secure, but I thought that was pretty far forward. I don't know why, but I thought the nodal point would be closer to the camera body.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I am breaking a vow I made to my wife to make this post</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Do tell. What was the vow?</p>

<p>Anyone else here tried using the Nikkor 24-70 f/2.8 G for panos? I'm finding that the nodal point of this lens is far forward - so far forward that I can barely get the system parallax-corrected using the 192mm long MPR-192 nodal slider from RRS. The camera is way back on the slider, cantilevered off the ballhead.</p>

<p>If you've tried panos with this lens, do you see the same result or am I doing something wrong?</p>

<p>Thank you.</p>

<p>I'd like to experiment with digital panoramas or stitching. I have all the gear necessary (nodal sliders, Gitzo leveling head, etc.). I've tried a few panoramas but ended up with more questions than answers.</p>

<p>So - I'd like to ask the forum if there are any good tutorials or articles that describe best practices for shooting panoramas using a raw workflow in Lightroom 2.3 and PS CS4.</p>

<p>Some of my questions include:</p>

<p>1. Should I raw-develop each component of the panorama in Lightroom (input sharpening, tonal curves, clarity, etc.) <i>before</i> I ship the components out to CS4 for blending? (Making sure all the components have the same develop settings, of course.) Or...what?</p>

<p>2. What happens after CS4 puts everything together? Do I just crop, or is there more I should do?</p>

<p>Anything out there that addresses these issues? I'm willing to buy a book or tutorial if that's what's needed.</p>

<p>Thank you.</p>

<p>The D70 always seemed to attract more than its fair share of dust. When I had one (2004-2006), it seemed like I was spending 60% of my time cleaning the sensor. I don't know why. My later cameras rarely need cleaning, and when they do, air blowing from the Rocket blower seems to be all that's necessary.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Can you get hyperfocal distance with a zoom lens?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Sure, but it isn't marked on the aperture scale, if that's what you mean. You can still consult a chart or a calculator once you choose a focal length.</p>

<p>What camera do you use? Live View is very useful for this, if you have it.</p>

<p>Although I have no quarrel with what anyone has posted above, I guess I would ask why you feel the need to use raw? If you and your viewers like your JPEG results and you have no compelling flaw that tells you to use raw...you see where I'm going. I myself use raw and like it, but I have specific reasons why.</p>

<p>If it's just because you want to learn a different way of doing things, I'm right there with you. I think that's a great reason.</p>

<p>Arash, are you specifically interested in the AF-S version? I've ordered the still-available-new AF-D version (built-in tripod collar) from B&H and I'm expecting it on Friday. Assuming I determine the lens is in working order, I can post center and corner JPEG crops for you early next week. Again, this won't be the AF-S version.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>so what is the reason for these huge bodies</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I'm sure there are many reasons, but one of them has to be the increasing screen sizes. The latest models have 3" screens, and no doubt there'll be pressure to increase the size, provide for "swing out" screens, and so on. All this takes space.</p>

<p>Electronics may be small, but the sensor has to be cool, so amplifiers and such can't be located close.</p>

<p>Probably others too?</p>

<p>I for one actually prefer larger bodies. They fit better into my hands.</p>

<p>If Malaysia is anything like India, you will find that buildings are heavily air conditioned. When you take your camera outside - instant fogging. In India, I even had my D70 <i>sensor</i> fog up several times. To prevent this, put the camera in a large Ziploc style bag while indoors and seal the bag. Take it outside and wait for it to warm up before you take it out of the bag.</p>

<p>This is different from the general humidity issue, for which you need desiccant as Francisco and Rob have suggested.</p>

<p>If you wear glasses, the same thing will happen to them too. Unfortunately, I don't know how to prevent that.</p>

<p>One more thing and I promise I'll shut up. To answer, or at least address, the OP's question: I agree with the many other posts that have pointed out an autoexposure system that always suppresses blown highlights won't be optimal. You have to let some highlights blow. It's a case-by-case decision.</p>

<p>Oh, and about always using ETTR? I don't. When I'm doing street shooting, I don't, because it slows me down. I just accept what the matrix meter decides. I do use ETTR when I'm shooting from a tripod and I have the time, because it improves shadow noise.</p>

<p>Another way to think of ETTR is that by increasing exposure, it's basically equivalent to decreasing ISO. That's why most ETTR practitioners only use it on the base ISO setting. It doesn't make sense to use it on a higher ISO, because you can achieve the same result by decreasing the ISO.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>How about a photo of large piece of navy blue fabric. If you "expose to the right" it's going to turn from navy blue to sky blue. Is that what you want? How about a photo of a dark-skinned lady in a long black gown against a dark background. Do you want her gown to look light gray and her skin to turn beige?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>They won't "look" anything because it's just the raw image that's exposed that way. They'll "look" like whatever you choose to make them "look" in the raw processor. Default raw processor settings may well make them "look" very light, but you adjust the controls until they "look" they way you want them to.</p>

<p>How is this any different from zone placement in chrome exposures? If you shoot chrome and decide to place the black gown in Zone V, it will look medium grey. That's your choice - who am I to say you absolutely must place it in Zone II? All that ETTR does is defer the zone placement to the processing stage rather than the exposure stage.</p>

<p>By choosing ETTR, you can decide to place the dark gown in Zone II and you will not get posterization. If you had chosen an exposure that favored a "left" histogram, placing in Zone II might cause blotchy shadows.</p>

<p>After reading about <a href="http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2008/06/but-an-internat.html">this camera</a>, my back hurts, and my D-series seem like Minox systems.</p>