vineet.rajasekhar

<p>A lot of people talk about how DSLRs depreciate, and how any DSLR purchase is ultimately a waste of money. I moved up straight from a digital compact to a D700 after months of soul searching and saving money. Its a brilliant camera! I take photos that I love, and its always there, doing just what I want, never in my way. </p>

<p>So here's my question. How does anything that comes after, take that away from me? How does the next new camera make my camera worth less to me? I'm going to shoot with my D700 until it stops. And given how rugged and solid it is, I'm thinking that'll be many many years. </p>

<p>All the best. </p>

<p>V</p>

<p>Its well worth revisiting this forum on (my) Thursday morning.. <a href="/photodb/user?user_id=299288">Barry Fisher</a> - Far and away the best shot of the day - I love the mood, and the light, and the movement, it comes together to make a brilliant shot! </p>

<p>Some really fantastic stuff from everyone this week - this is a great thread!</p>

<p>Cheers!</p>

<p>Hi everyone! </p>

<p>Some great stuff here this week - most notably: <a href="/photodb/user?user_id=2344388">Matt Laur</a>, <a href="/photodb/user?user_id=786707">Tiffany Brook</a>, <a href="/photodb/user?user_id=3854064">Bogdan Nicolescu</a>, <a href="/photodb/user?user_id=1472982">James Kazan</a>, <a href="/photodb/user?user_id=5576216">Jana Hughes</a>, <a href="/photodb/user?user_id=5735871">Enrique Rabelo</a>, <a href="/photodb/user?user_id=3944538">Jeff Lipsman</a> - thanks for some awesome photos!</p>

<p>My contribution this week is from an excursion out to Blackhead Point - south of Dunedin, New Zealand. This is my first experiment with Panoramas - quite pleased with how it turned out - but its a lot harder than I thought. Cheers!</p>

<p> </p><div></div>

<p>Hi Donald, </p>

<p>First off, I never turn my camera off when changing lenses (I shoot landscapes, so I generally know what lens I want to use, and don't change very often). I shoot a Nikon D700, and I've never had problems with it. </p>

<p>Second, I used to go out and shoot a lot, any time of the day, any subject, and used to be very dejected about the quality I got. I then found that my images get substantially better when I pick a subject, or an area, and haunt it, regularly. I went out to the same spot several days in a row, at different times of day (and night), shot from a whole bunch of angles, in different light and different weather, and about 1500 shots later, had about 5 shots of the subject that I was really really pleased with. </p>

<p>I dunno if this is the same experience that other photogs have had - personally, apart from looking at (a lot of) images from other photographers, and getting (a lot of) inspiration from them, I don't try to copy the practices of other photographers - I find I learn faster when I just try and fail a coupla hundred times. </p>

<p>But I definitely think picking a subject and photographing it exhaustively might be a good way to get shots to be really proud of. </p>

<p>All the best, </p>

<p>V</p>

<p>Hi!</p>

<p>Woke up at 5.30 on Sunday, went an hour north to photograph the sunrise at Moeraki. Totally worth the bleary eyes!</p>

<p>Appreciate your comments!</p><div></div>

<p>Hi everyone!</p>

<p>Wow, some really great stuff here! The following really stood out for me:</p>

<p>Matthew Brennan, Greg Jones, Thomas Gerstendoerfer, Anish Mankuthel, and Apurva Madia - awesome photos folks!</p>

<p>My contribution this week is from a drive to the airport last weekend. </p><div></div>

<p>So many awesome shots this week! My contribution this week is from a really really windy and dramatically cloudy day in Otago last weekend.. These are fence posts, or maybe they're just bits of wood standing at the edge of a farm... I loved the light and the clouds behind them. </p>

<p>Nikon D700 with Nikkor 180/2.8, handheld. Otago, New Zealand. </p><div></div>

<p>Hi everyone!</p>

<p>Some fantastic shots this week!</p>

<p>My contribution is from a trip with my lovely girlfriend Jo to Nicols Creek, north of Dunedin, NZ. </p>

<p>Thanks!</p><div></div>

<p>Dave,</p>

<p>Does the D3s really have better image quality than the D700? I was under the impression that it has the same sensor as the D700, but processes the data in-camera differently?</p>

<p>Am I right?</p>

<p>Cheers, <br>

Vineet</p>

<p>Hi Rene, </p>

<p>I'm an amateur, and have been shooting the D700 for about 4 months now. I'm just here to say - don't worry about the memory card door, I've never ever had a problem with it. I don't even notice it. </p>

<p>The 95% viewfinder is a very small negative - but I've learned to live with it. </p>

<p>I've never used the other cameras, but I can say without reservations - the D700 is a phenomenal camera. </p>

<p>All the best, </p>

<p>Vineet</p>

<p>Hello!</p>

<p>My offering this week was taken from the surf, in wet shoes, at St. Clair, in Dunedin, New Zealand. </p><div></div>

<p>Hi, <br>

Your D3000 has a crop sensor (such that lenses mounted on your D3000 give you an effective focal length that's 1.5 times the "true" focal length of the lens). <br>

This makes getting really wide angles of view with your crop frame SLR more difficult. On the other hand, longer lenses become even longer on your D3000 as compared to full-frame, or film cameras. <br>

Nikon (and Sigma, Tamron, et al) have made some really good DX (crop frame) ultrawide zooms - e.g. the Nikkor 10-24. The 10-24 for instance gives you an effective focal length range of 15-36. I don't believe these are fisheye though. Nikon might have made some DX fisheyes - sorry, I'm not sure!<br>

I'm a novice Digital photographer myself, so I've only just done all this research. I'm sorry if I just dumped a whole lot of stuff here that you already know! :) Good luck with everything. </p>

<p>Cheers, <br>

Vineet</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Hey Rocky - I've only just started photography. You've had a lot of expert criticism here, and I couldn't add much, but can I just say - good on you for putting yourself out there and inviting critique like this? You seem to have a really great attitude to asking for, and taking on board criticism, which, honestly, I wish I had. <br>

I'm sure you have great things ahead - well done, and keep doing what you're doing. </p>

<p>Good luck!!<br>

Vineet</p>

<p>Hi everyone!</p>

<p>Matt - nice!<br>

Jeff Lipsman - great shot of the Mission, I'm just itching to do a B/W conversion on it.. <br>

Thomas Gerstendoerfer - Nice capture!<br>

Tiffany Brook - Little Red Riding Hood never looked better!<br>

My contribution this week is from a sunny afternoon at the beach. This seagull was a real poser!</p><div></div>

<p>Hi - yep, the 50/1.8 is definitely a softie at 1.8. But stopped down a little, even just to f/2 - f/2.8, it sharpens up nicely - and past that point the quality of your light, composition, colours, etc. begin to outweigh lens sharpness as determinants of image quality.. And stopped down to f/8 it can be a tack sharp lens, so for the price you pay, the 50/1.8 is really good...</p>

<p>Happy Wednesday everyone! Its good to be back!</p>

<p>Eric James - great shot, great story!<br>

Tiffany Brook - lovely lighting and mood!<br>

Neven Jurkovic - awesome timing, that shadow is brilliant!<br>

Sanford Gerald - outstanding colour and composition!</p>

<p>My offering this week is another shot from my Wednesday photoshoot at the St Clair groynes last week. </p>

<p>Cheers from NZ!</p>

<p>Vineet</p><div></div>

<p>I've definitely experienced variable WB from the D700 with the same light source, from shot to shot. Actually, you get some really cool results by shooting a Fluorescent tube-light at continuous-high for a couple of seconds.. you get 10 shots, each with a vividly different colour cast - lots of fun!</p>

<p>Hi, <br>

Did you use a polarising filter?<br>

Without a look at the image its hard to say, but the first thing that comes to mind is a polarising filter - shooting a blue sky with a full frame camera, at 18mm and a polarising filter would definitely cause some dark/light blue banding across the sky. <br>

Vineet</p>

<p>Hmm. That didn't work at all. Here's another attempt with a lower res version. Sorry for the mucking about... this is my first time!<br>

Shot with Nikon D700, and Nikkor 28/2.8, wide open to get the vignetting. Shot in RAW+JPEG(Fine), Raw processed using Adobe Camera RAW, and saturation and exposure adjusted very slightly using PSE8, </p>

<div></div>

<p><img src="../photo/10581831" alt="" />I've been following this forum for months, but this is my first post, with my brand new D700!<br /> Really awesome shots this week - my favourite has to be Andrew Fedon's picture of the Aegean Airlines Airbus... great light, and an interesting point of view - well done!<br /> My contribution this week is of groynes at St. Clair Beach, Dunedin, New Zealand, shot handheld, Nikon D700 and Nikkor 28/2.8.</p>

<p>Hi, <br>

This is probably a silly suggestion - but is it possible he took the two photographs in different seasons of the year, and so there actually are leaves on the tree in one of the shots, and there actually aren't leaves on the tree in the other?<br>

I've seen the pictures you're talking about, and to be honest, yes the film result looks better, but I don't think its because of resolution so much as because of the richness of colour and tonal range. I shoot film and digital, and I love my film shots. But being relatively inexperienced, I find that the number of good shots I get is higher from digital because I get a chance to adjust and re-shoot: an expensive proposition in Film. I'm sure that as I get more experienced, the quality of shots I get from film and digital will begin to equal out. <br>

By "quality" and "good shots" I mean my impression of the whole image - not what I might see from gazing at a pixel-to-pixel crop of a corner of the image. <br>

:) <br>

Vineet</p>