pontus_wallst_n

Yes it definitely seems that one of the best affordable wildlife lenses currently available is the nikon 200-500 mm. I had planned to sell my canon 5d mk3 at some point soon anyway, so i am almost tempted if available here to buy a nikon 200-500 and then try and sell my 5d a bit earlier than planned to cover the cost. As Cheung said, i also agree that it would be frustrating to spend alot of money and time on a wildlife trip aimed mainly at seeing specific birds without being able to properly immortalise them, even though seeing them is a hige excitement in itself of course..... I have been able to get good pictures in the past in africa though with my current setup when i did not yet have the d810, with patience and as always some luck and whaiting..... But i did feel many times the short reach of the 200 mm even with a tc.... I just read a swedish review of the 200-500 as well which was a great insight! Pontus

Yes i did look into renting prices, i dont know how they compare to usa prices, but just to give you an idea of swiss averege rental prices, itvseems renting lenses is more expensive than renting dslr bodies. A D810 here costs around 110 $ a day to rent, while a nikon 500 or 400 mm fixed focal length costs around $ 200 a day. A 200-400 mm will cost you $ 160 a day. I looked into the 200-500 mm nikon lens, cheaper than i thought, as here a new one costs around $ 1300 or 1350, but currently they are not available to rent and if you order one, you have to whait at least 6 weeks if not more to get it. There is also the af issue with tc s that has been raised hete and there on the internet. Of course heavier than the recent nikon 300 mm f4, and only a 5.6... It does however seem to have good reviews and has a longer reach than the 300 mm fixed lens of course. With the 200-500, i would probably not need to carry in adittion the heavy 70-200 as well.,, Pontus

Yes i did look into renting prices, i dont know how they compare to usa prices, but just to give you an idea of swiss averege rental prices, itvseems renting lenses is more expensive than renting dslr bodies. A D810 here costs around 110 $ a day to rent, while a nikon 500 or 400 mm fixed focal length costs around $ 200 a day. A 200-400 mm will cost you $ 160 a day. I looked into the 200-500 mm nikon lens, cheaper than i thought, as here a new one costs around $ 1300 or 1350, but currently they are not available to rent and if you order one, you have to whait at least 6 weeks if not more to get it. There is also the af issue with tc s that has been raised hete and there on the internet. Of course heavier than the recent nikon 300 mm f4, and only a 5.6... It does however seem to have good reviews and has a longer reach than the 300 mm fixed lens of course. With the 200-500, i would probably not need to carry in adittion the heavy 70-200 as well.,, Pontus

Yes i have considered renting, and being in Switzerland where everything is expensive, renting a lens for 2 weeks would almost come to the same price as buying a new one! I enquired about renting a canon c 100 for about 10 days for another shoot in january, the price was the same as buying a brand new c 100 body.... I will check out the link thanks Pontus

Yes i used to have a sigma 50-500 mm f 5.6, and later a 80-400 nikon, but i sold them eventually, as they were not very sharp, especially at the long end and unfortunately a bit dissapointing... Although i did get a few good shots. Unfortunately right now i cannot afford any of the very expensive fixed 500, 400 or 600 mm lenses... They are also generally very heavy, so not the best if you are climbing up and down mountains and wading through muddy swamps.... But they are ideal for hide work of course... Pontus

<p>Hello Everyone,<br> in about 2 weeks I will be going to Tanzania to do some film and photography work for an NGO. I will have 4 days off work, so I will be doing a birding + wildlife trip. In preparing the trip, I had a few questions, :<br> With bird photography, the dilemma is always getting more reach, especially when photographing birds of prey or slightly shy birds.. but it seems to always be a compromise, between lens affordability, wheight and quality.<br> I currently havethe following for wildlife photography : Nikon 70-200 mm f 2.8 vr2 + TC 1.7 E2. I use these both with my Nikon D90 and Nikon D810. I have been considering the new Nikkor 300mm f 4 PF ED VR, leightwheight and has had excellent reviews for sharpness, colour, combination with TC's..etc, but sadly at the moment I can not afford a new lens, at least not before this trip.<br> I also have a 3x Teleplus Kenko extender, which I rarely use as it is not that great<br> So I was wondering what was the best setup to get sharpest best quality images with what I already have?<br> I usually enlarge the best images to 30x40 prints, usually not more.<br> of course, the D810 has a great cropping factor.<br> sometimes though with the TC you loose some light, sharpness and AF speed..<br> I have read that using a TC in FX mode almost gives the same result as not using a TC and being in DX crop mode on the D810.....<br> any advice would be most welcome!</p> <p>Pontus</p>

<p>Hello Everyone,</p> <p>I have been shooting some test footage recently with my Nikon D810, but i seem to have a problem.</p> <p>When playing back footage on the camera everything is fine, however, when I view it on my computer, and also import it for editing in première pro v 5.5, the footage is jagged and does not play correctly, there are jumps in the footage every second or so.... these jumps are also in the sound.</p> <p>I have shot at 25p, 24p, and also 60p to see if this had any effect but the consequences are the same.</p> <p>I have an important shoot in a weeks time and am trying to resolve this problem ideally beforehand, so any help or insight would be greatly appreciated thanks :)<br /> this problem has not occurred with my canon 5D Mk3, that i also use for filming, at 25p and 24p....</p> <p>Pontus</p>

<p>Hello everyone,<br /> After doing quite a bit of research into getting a new "Video SLR", I have more or less decided to sell my Canon 5D MK3 and get a panasonic Lumix GH4. There are so many different lens options with this camera that it is easy to get a bit lost...<br /> I do mostly documentary work, especially for an NGO in Tanzania, which involves quite alot of observational work, such as in the film "the importance of music at shiri" and classes at shiri": (<a href="http://www.youtube.com/user/watutanzania">http://www.youtube.com/user/watutanzania</a>)<br> <br /> 5 years ago, I used to use a Canon XL2 quite alot, but it was very heavy and bulky, especially when travelling in Africa...This was why I upgraded to the Canon 5D, to get a less bulky camera with good image quality at a reasonable price compared to most other professional camcorders available at the time. I also liked the fact that with DSLR's, you can get away a bit from the typical "video image" that some camcorders produce, which I have never been a big fan of..<br /> But shooting with DSLR's does have its drawbacks : only 29 mins of continous recording, ocasional overheating of the camera, lack of autofocus tracking when filming mooving subjects, reduced "zoom capabilities"....etc. <br /> I therefore come to my 2nd question :<br> <br /> I do miss sometimes the advantages of camcorders, and their ergonomics... But could not find one which I liked without having to spend over $ 10 000...which was a bit over my budget. <br /> as I have a total budget of around $3000, the Panasonic Lumix GH4 with some good lenses seems a good option for now. I have heard alot of great reviews about it, ,and seen it used alot in documentary filmmaking. I also like its image quality and the fact that it is slighly smaller even than the 5D.. The only concern I have is that it seems that the AF tracking when filming mooving subjects is not good. I also dont know if it would be compatible with my radio mic XLR adapter (a BeackTek DXA-5DA)..<br /> Any help or thoughts would be greatly appreciated, Thanks :)<br /> Pontus Wallstén</p>

<p>here is some more info from Richard regarding black and white cameras, and also colour cameras that where used in the first colour TV broadcast in 1958 with president Eisenhower, :<br> ( <a href=" )</p> <p>"The most likely cameras to have been used in that early color broadcast would be RCA TK-31 portable image orthicon cameras and the color cameras are most likely RCA TK-40s. The TK-40s used three 3 inch image orthicon tubes in the classic RGB arrangement using dichroic mirrors to split the light into red, green and blue. In the early part of the program, you can clearly see the nonliearity of the horizontal scan coils. That means that an object will be a slightly different width if it is right or left of center. You can see the image compressing on the left side of the image. The home TVs of the time were no better and no one really noticed or cared. It was amazing that the things worked at all! <br /><br /> Here is a TK-11/31. It was "31" when used in the field and was an "11" when used in a studio. The two cameras had different support equipment. <http://www.big13.net/Facilities/TK%2011%20and%20Lynn%20Stuart%20Horner.jpg> <br /><br /> Here is the color camera or one very much like it. These were the size of a coffin and that was their nick name. "The Coffin", because the earliest models were painted black. <br /><http://www.pharis-video.com/rca-tk~1.jpg><br /><br /> You might find a complete camera chain somewhere. but, be prepared to spend around ten thousand for a complete BW camera. The color cameras are impossible to acquire. The owners will never sell them. Because a "camera chain" consisted of the camera head, a huge fat cable, a separate power supply, separate sync generator, a separate monitor/operator console and more, these are extremely hard to set up and use. Plus, if you found the complete system, it will absolutely need to be rebuilt from top to bottom. Not easy as the parts are getting very hard to find. Complete camera chains are very rare. Most collectors took only the camera head and ignored the rest of the system. "<br />Rich <br /><br /></p>

<p>I looked back in my archives, and found this e mail from Richard Diehl in the USA, which i had alot of correspondance with regarding tube cameras. I found this e mail very informative :</p> <p>"There are several types of tube cameras. The purple streaking on scene highlights is <br /> indicative of plumbicon 3 tube <br /> cameras. If the beam current is not high enough, in a particular tube, the photo target <br /> can not fully recharge when it is scanned. This leads to a charged area, in the picture, that is over lit will eventually decay to zero until the offending light is removed or the beam current is raised. <br /> <br /> Other cameras that have this effect are of the 3 tube image orthicon type. However, I am unaware of a single operating color orthicon camera anywhere. <br /> <br /> The last type <br /> of camera, like the QC-54 and Betamax (Trinicon tube) cameras use variations of the <br /> vidicon. Like the newvicon and saticon. These produce hideous color artifacts. Not because of the tube itself. But, because of the <br /> horrible color striped filter system used in these. A vidicon used in BW has an image lag property. <br /> It is similar to the effect I mentioned for plumbicons. This can effect the color filtering and produce lagging green and purple trails. <br /> But, the severity depends on the camera. The effect is worst in low light. "</p> <p>we also discussed black and white tube cameras of teh 50's..i will dig around for that e mail too..</p> <p>Pontus</p>

<p>I have quite a few tube cameras in perfect working condition, they are from the 1970's mostly, so are single vidicon tube cameras, colour cameras, also some from the 1980's. as i like the artefact effects you can get with them..</p> <p>the big problem is to find a new source of power to power them up....it needs to be a 12v ac power supply of some kind....which will have enough power to power the camera and portable VCR..I did quite alot of research and tried different ways, mostly with no luck...</p> <p>but i keep trying..</p> <p>Pontus Wallstén</p>

<p>yes the small range may be a problem....<br> I currently have a 50 mm f 1.4, a nikon 70-200mm f 2.8 and a Macro 60mm f 2.8 (and the 14-24 f 2.8 mentioned earlier)<br> If I am planning to take alot of wildlife pictures, I generally bring the 70-200 (very heavy) with a 1.8 extender, and the macro. Also in the past the Tamron.<br> But that is all very heavy if I just want to "stroll around" somewhere, lets say in a city, park or historical site, In that case i would just bring a wide angle.<br> if course if this lens would stop at 16, i dont have any focal range in between that and my 50mm....which might be a bit limiting and a slight problem..<br> I did like the tamron, and the fact that it was a 2.8 lens, although ocasionally in some situations i found it not to be sharp enough, and not always great in low light situations. That is also why I was pleased when i heard that the tokina was so crisp sharp...<br> Pontus</p>

<p>ah ok, i did not know that the Tokina was available in Canon mount also...that is good to know.</p>

<p>yes i just read a review about the Tokina, and it seems excellent, nowhere can I see any negative comments about it, and it is said to be extremely sharp, in fact the sharpest wide angle there might be for Nikon (in the ultra wide angles)<br> i almost regret that I didnt know about this lens when i bought my nikon 14-24!!<br> a small adittional question : <br> a friend of mine is also looking for a new wide angle lens, but she has a canon D600. I have heard that the canon 10-22mm is good, any other recomendations would be great thanks!<br> Pontus</p>

<p>Hello everyone,<br> I am currently looking to buy a new Nikon wide angle lens for travelling purposes.<br> I already have the very good Nikon 14-24 f 2.8 that I mainly use for work, since it really is heavy and cumbersome, and bringing it on more "touristic" trips when you want to try and travel light is not great, especially as I like to carry 1 or 2 more lenses with my Nikon D90 body as well.<br> I am trying to find a lens which is not too heavy, but that would still have a good aperture, at least 3.5, to make it possible to shoot in the evening without having to use the flash too often, and one that would also give sharp images..<br> I have been recomended the following : <br> Nikon afs dx 10-24mm f3.5<br> Sigma 8-16 f 3.5<br> sigma 10-20mmm f 3.5</p> <p>I have not had a very good experience with sigma in the past...so am not too much in favour of them...I did have a Tamron 17-50 f 2.8 which was fairly good, but sadly broke after many years of usage and travels...</p> <p>Pontus</p>