CvhKaar

<p>MM If the Samyang does not give you what you expect from it, and a Nikon 14-24mm is to expensive, then maybe Sigma 12-24mm DG HSM Type II could fill the bill ?</p> <p>You could just try one on your camera at a store maybe... ?</p>

<p>When it is between the 105mm macro and the Fish Eye only ( that is what the OP is asking about) then i would say go for the 105 macro.</p> <p>Just try : walk around for a day with a fish eye on your camera, and then do the same with a 105mm macro ( or 60mm as some suggest) on a wedding, and then afterwards compare the number of usefull shots you end up with...</p> <p>Fish eye's can be very usefull in certain situations, but not in a crowded / busy environment , when you are doing a series where it is about two ppl and there families mainly , whereas the versatile 105mm allows you to pick exactly the subject you are working for, be it portraits, ring shots, somteimes wedding cake's or glasses of champange. few of these subjects are doable with a fish eye without having a separate space which you can set up exactly the way you want it. ( no feet hands or whatever of other ppl in the frame..)<br> If you still need "wide" shots you can do a lot with "stitching" i guess...</p> <p>Do not get me wrong : I love wide and very wide including Fish Eye, but not for weddings mostly...</p>

<p>Not sure if that XQD standard will survive very long, i guess 'cause as it stands now<br> - XQD cards will probably remain very expensive,<br> - Only two brands available her Lexar and Sony, and they are not available in the electronics stores in general, just in some specialized Photo shops and over the internet at some sites....<br> But i may be wrong here, you never can tell but it feels a bit as a product like the laser disk which was a good product / technique but it did not take of for exactly the same reasons..</p>

<p>Today Nikon publishes new versions of View NX2 and the Picture control Utility</p> <p>Here is the link for European users for View NX2 version 2.10.3 :<br> <br /> <a href="https://nikoneurope-nl.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/63505">https://nikoneurope-nl.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/63505</a></p> <p>And here is the link for European users for Picture Control Utility ver. 2.02 :<br> <br /> <a href="https://nikoneurope-nl.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/63457">https://nikoneurope-nl.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/63457</a></p> <p> </p>

<p>Just concerning the Serial number question : Nikon uses the first <strong>2 </strong>digits two tell for which maket a camera was produced.<br> To cut short ( so i do not need to explain it myself... bit lazy... :-) ) looked up an explanation for you :<br> <a href="http://www.dslrbodies.com/cameras/camera-articles/nikon-camera-serial-numbers.html">http://www.dslrbodies.com/cameras/camera-articles/nikon-camera-serial-numbers.html</a> </p>

<blockquote> <p>To be fair, <em>every</em> lens needs software to improve the image taken in some difficult situations</p> </blockquote> <p>Andrew, i fully agree with this statement, but the thing that holds me back a bit hereis that for this particular lens ( for the time being) this improvement depends on one single piece of software, and this particular piece of software for me is <em>not</em> the best rated package i could think of...</p>

<p>mm If you like a zoom , do not need a fast lens, you could also get just a little bit more "adventurous" and opt for something like a Sigma AF APO 150-500mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM<b> ....</b></p>

<blockquote> <p>I will have to pay 8.25% retail sales tax</p> </blockquote> <p>MM that's not bad at all, here there is a 21 % tax on most stuff....</p> <blockquote> <p>This lens certainly should be attractive for someone who does not own a 70-200mm or a 300mm.</p> </blockquote> <p> I agree with this, but it looks like this will end up in a choice between a Zoom ( 70-300mm) , this lens and a 300mm F/2.8 or a used prime of sorts, so for a lot of ppl it will be the only choice if they want a 300mm prime, wether the fresnel efect shows in ( low light) shots or not ..</p>

<blockquote> <p>I suspect the algorithm for fixing the colored flare is something that is specific to the lens</p> </blockquote> <p>MM For some reason the words "Fixing" and in Nikons own text "Minimizing this effect"do not realy feel right to me ( mininmizing is not Fixing i think). <br> Shame, I would have liked an "affordable" 300mm lens WITH VR , but for now i think this is not for me then, but i'll sit and wait for othr reviews, maybe all turns out to be OK...</p>

<p>I'm quite happy with my 85mm F/1.4 D, because<br> - i like the way it renders skin,<br> - i am used to using it<br> - it's got a nice smooth Bokeh ( i do not say that other lenses do not hae that nice Bokeh, 'cause i did not try them for that),<br> - not for the AF (it is not the best) ,<br> - not for the corner to corner sharpness (it's is not there) ,</p> <p>So for me it is a good lens which does what i want it to do...</p>

<blockquote> <p>Kent, according to the Nikon website (with regard to ring-shaped colored flare), <em>"This phenomenon can be minimized with "PF Flare Control" included in Capture NX-D."</em></p> </blockquote> <p><br /> <em>Would that mean that other raw developing software ( Lightroom , Capture NX2 etc.) will not be able to "Minimize " this effect because the "PF Flare Control" is not included ? E.G. you would become dependend on Capture NX-D for this ? <br /></em></p> <blockquote> <p><em>BTW, the new 300mm/f4 AF-S VR is an E lens, so only the higher-end bodies from the D3 on can control its aperture without the mechanical coupling</em></p> </blockquote> <p><br /> <em>Does this say you need a D3 or better to be able to use this lens at all , because other Nikon DSLR's depend on the mechanical aperture coupling ? Then what camera's would, and woulfd not be able to control the aperture for this lens ? <br /></em><br /> <br /> <em>Seemingly the previous F-S 300mm F4 is or will be discontinued, so for a lot of ppl a 300mm Nikkor primary lens will be out of reach unless they buy the newer Nikon DSLR models , looks like then..<br /></em></p>

<p>Some Zoom lenses indeed prove to be air- and Sust pumps, but mostly so for ppl who tend to zomm from one extreme to the othe extreme of the available range.a lot. Ppl who zom in and out over shorter stretches of the available range and ppl who utilize the zoom more cautiously also seem to have less problems with sucking in dust then ppl who operate the zoom function more vigorously too..</p>

<p>I think he is refering to getting physically close, so like with a normal ( 50mm) or wider ( 35mm 24 mm ) prime lens.</p>

<p>Challenge when "filming" often is that you are pointing your camera not at 1 spot to AF on, but you are often moving your camera around. <br> In doing so your camera will often have nothing to properly focus on, since it needs something with some contrast in it ( so not the sky, and not smooth surfaces) if it wants to focus. Therfore auto focu often will not give you satisfactory focus in those situations, especially when using just a center focus point.</p> <p>In adition to that , if there is not enough light ( efected by an aperture smaller than around F/8.0 or an ND filter, when pointing the camera at shadows, will also give the AF system a very hard time.</p> <p>For this , manual focussing when "filming" will in most situations be more effective. To ennable you to do so, the "Follow Focus systems on rigs were designed, allowing you to manually focus much smoother..</p>

<p>Question : are you sure to have an "Oil Problem"like some D600's showed, or can it be "Just Dust"which is a normal thing in DSLR's because of the regular lens changes ?</p> <p>It would be really an expensive and time consuming operation to exchancge the shutter mechanism ( if possible at all..), so it would be hard to gain any profit from that action i think.<br> But if you have a problem with your camera, it would be best to connect with Nikon for a repair quote i guess..</p>

<blockquote> <p>I noticed I tend to use the 50 more since the 85 sometimes takes a little while to focus</p> </blockquote> <p>Maybe the newer (and much cheaper) Nikkor AF-S 85mm <strong>f/1.8G </strong>could solve this challenge for you ? it is a very good lens also, and since it is an AF-S lens it focusses much quicker than the F/1.4D ...</p> <p> Other challenges concerning focal length of your lenses could also be solved by adding a DX (APS-C) body to your "tools" , a D7100, or D7200... :-) ) could make a valueable addition i think ... (and costs less than a 70-200 VR II) ..</p>

<p>If you want a 70-200mm but would like to save some money for other investments, then the Sigma AF 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG APO OS HSM lens might also be a good choice i think.<br> Here is a review : http://www.photozone.de/nikon_ff/763-sigmaex7020028os</p> <p>If you do not realy need the zoom, but around 150mm prime would serve your purposes, then i would have a look at the Sigma AF 150mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro OS HSM , allowing you to go realy close to if desired..</p> <p>Here is a review : http://www.photozone.de/nikon_ff/624-sigma15028ff</p>

<p>As mentioned, the 300mm F/4.0 AF-S is a very sharp lens, also on DX.</p> <p>It has one flaw though, the tripod ring / collar which is included with the lens ( well some of them, some ppl do not seem to have an issue with this collar..). I got much improvement by subsstituting it by a Kirk version..</p> <p>So maybe your "soft Images" could be caused by some vibration issues ? </p> <p>Here is an older article about this issiue : <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/50913294">http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/50913294</a> </p>

<blockquote> <p>Any Magic Lantern firmware or similar for Nikon ?</p> </blockquote> <p>No, guess nobody boddered to disassemble the Nikon Solid ware and rebuild an updated version of it...</p>

<p>Bruce, two things...</p> <p>If you call someone ( an engineer in this case who probavly knows a lot more than you do) an SOB, then what are you calling his mother ( whom you probably do not know at all) ? <br /> Right, it is not very nice to call a woman by that name... ? ;-)</p> <p>Secondly : Having been watching this afternoon an important ( for the Netherlands) sports event live again, I've noticed, again, that most professional sports reporters at these events seem to shoot Canon, and not sony or Nikon or Fuji, for some reason. That tells me that Canon also must produce very good camera's , otherwise those guys , who are not limited by any budget for ther tools, would certainly choose different tools ( camera's and lenses) to do their jobs with...</p> <p>Don't get me wrong, i've been a Nikon fan for many years now ( over 30 years), and i still like Nikon a lot, but that does not make them the only good brand available...</p>

<blockquote> <p> I've decided that it really makes no sense to buy cameras with bullet proof construction. They'll all be obsolete long before you wear them out in most cases.</p> </blockquote> <p>That strongly depends on who the user is... <br> For a Pro reporter it is a neccesity to have a what you call "Bullet Proof "camera in many circumstances, for an amature Photographer it is mostly not...</p>

<p>Sounds dull, but did you double check wether the batteries are inserted in the right way ? ( + and - in the right direction ? )</p>

<p>Lots of usefull info here, ..<br> I did not realize that the mirrorbox would prove troublesome in vingetting, but this makes sence becausse of the registry lenght in Nikon DSLR's.<br> I need to re-think this all , and see if i can test an actus at a photostore using the setup i have in mind and check the (im) possibilities so that i can better Judge wether it is worth th investment to me..</p> <p>Ian, thx for this link , there is some usefull information on that Luminous landscape site, and i added the site to my favourites to check it out a bit more.</p> <p>I am aware of the Nikon PC-e lenses , but i was also looking for the "rise" possibilies ( indeed i'd need alarge lenses to utilize that possibillity...) </p> <p>I currently uses a PB-4 and some odd lenses for tabletop photography , but this setup is limmited to either horizontal , or vertical adjustments depending on the orientation of the combo, whereas the actus is not limited to one direction tilt/shift and allows for larger diameter lenses at the same time too..</p>

<p>If you also set the ISO dial to 400, then i guess the lightmeter is broken.. ( guess you set the aperture ring on the lens at minimum , and locked it and dailed in the aperture you want to use at the camera itself.. ) .</p>

<blockquote> <p>Does the camera talk to the lens given the fact that the AF-S lenses do not have an aperture control ring</p> </blockquote> <p>MM Chances are that it will work, since the F401(s) has a aperture control on the camera, it was one of the first nikon camera's that asked the user to put the lens at minimum aperture and lock aperture on the lens in order to allow the camera to use automatic aperture control, so it should not need an aperture ring to operate the aperture..</p> <p>Somewhere in the attic i do have an old F401(s) so i might see if i can find it and try if it still works later this week... interresting never thought of this... :-)</p>