richardsnow

August 15, 2017

At one point, I shot with both a D300 and D700. They're still great cameras, but are definitely getting long in the tooth.

When I upgraded cameras I had a similar choice to make, but the DX choices at the time were not nearly as compelling as a D500.

If you're anything like me I think you can answer the question yourself with one simple question - the same question I asked myself when I upgraded:

When you go out to shoot, which do you reach for most often, your D300 and D700?

May 10, 2012

Charles -

Having lived in and worked in the Mount Washington Valley for over 15 years, and only recently moving away due to work, I must both correct you and say shame on you for spouting nonsense.

During peak foliage, the routes I mentioned are no more crowded than your beloved Connecticut River Valley. The only exception being the initial 3 miles in the center of North Conway if you go on Columbus Day Weekend.

Now - If you were to have made this trip 10 years ago, I might be obliged to agree with you, but since the North-South Road went in, traffic has been much less of an issue - and most locals find themselves in Fryeburg, ME during Columbus Day Week due to the Fryeburg Fair - which is an area to avoid unless you really want to go to the Fair.

RS

May 9, 2012

I can't send this via private message for some reason - so I'll post it here - maybe others will use this information.

Photographic Locations in the White Mountains of NH:

<ul>

<li>Diana’s Baths Waterfalls – West Side Road, North Conway – 6/10 mile walk from the parking lot to the falls</li>

<li>Echo Lake State Park and Cathedral Ledge – West Side Road, North Conway</li>

<li>Saco River Covered Bridge – East Side Road, ½ mile North of Rte. 16 at Conway Village (Crosses Saco River)</li>

<li>Swift River Covered Bridge – Off West Side Rd, ½ mile North of Rte. 16 at Conway Village (Crosses Swift River before entering the Saco River)</li>

<li>Albany Swift River Bridge – Dugway Road, Albany, NH</li>

<li>Bartlett Saco River Bridge – Rte. 302 in Bartlett, NH – “The Covered Bridge Gift Shoppe”</li>

<li>Kissing Bridge – Intersection of Routes 16 and 16A, Jackson, NH</li>

<li>Whittier River Covered Bridge – Ossipee Village, west of Rte. 16 heading towards Conway</li>

<li>Conway Scenic Railroad – 38 Norcross Cir, North Conway, NH</li>

<li>Saco Lake and the Crawford Notch House, Crawford Notch, NH</li>

<li>Mount Washington Cog Railway – Base Road, six miles off route 302, Bretton Woods, NH</li>

<li>Mount Washington Hotel and Resort, Bretton Woods, NH</li>

<li>Franconia Notch, NH</li>

<li>Kancamagus Highway, NH</li>

<li>Mount Washington Auto Road, Rte. 16, Pinkham Notch, NH</li>

<li>Glen Ellis Falls, Glen, NH</li>

</ul>

Places to stay in North Conway:

<ul>

<li>North Conway Grand Hotel</li>

<li>The Red Jacket</li>

<li>Holiday Inn Express</li>

<li>The Green Granite Inn</li>

</ul>

Places to eat:

<ul>

<li>China Chef Restaurant (Chinese) Route 16, North Conway</li>

<li>Vito Marcllo’s Italian Bistro, 45 Seavey St, North Conway *****</li>

<li>Delaney’s Hole In The Wall (Pub Fare) Route 16, North Conway</li>

<li>Moat Mountain Smoke House and Brewery, Route 16, North Conway *****</li>

<li>Merlino’s Steak House</li>

<li>Shannon Door Pub, Corner of Routes 16 and 16A, Jackson, NH</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

For a few photography day trips here's a good way to put your locations into google maps:

Trip 1 - 3.5 Hours driving time - Plan a whole day!:

<ol>

<li>Where you are staying if in North Conway, otherwise use The North Conway Grand as reference</li>

<li>Swift River Bridge, Conway, NH (You will travel over the Saco River Bridge to get to the Swift River Bridge)</li>

<li>Echo Lake Road, Conway, NH</li>

<li>Bartlett, New Hampshire (Echo Lake-Cathedral Ledge State Park)</li>

<li>Diana's Bath, Carroll, NH</li>

<li>404 Route 302, Glen, NH (Bartlett Covered Bridge)</li>

<li>Saco Lake, Carroll, NH (This will take you through Crawford Notch. The Crawford Notch House is just up the road from Saco Lake)</li>

<li>Mount Washington Hotel, Mount Washington Hotel Road, Bretton Woods, NH</li>

<li>Franconia Notch State Park, Franconia, NH</li>

<li>Covered Bridge Campground, Albany, NH</li>

<li>Your Starting Location</li>

</ol>

Trip 2 - 2 Hours Driving - Plan a Half Day - Fewer Locations - more fall foliage

<ol>

<li>Where you are staying if in North Conway, otherwise use The North Conway Grand as reference</li>

<li>Conway Scenic Railroad, Norcross Circle, North Conway, NH</li>

<li>3641 Route 302, Intervale, NH (Intervale Scenic Outlook and Visitors Center)</li>

<li>Route 16 and 16A, Jackson, NH (Kissing Bridge)</li>

<li>Mount Washington Auto Road, Jackson, NH</li>

<li>Route 2 and Route 113, Gilead, ME (Route 113 will take you through Evans Notch)</li>

<li>Route 113 and East Conway Rd, Conway, NH</li>

<li>Your Starting Location</li>

</ol>

Hope all of this helps - I don't know Vermont at all, but there's plenty to photograph if you take I-93 into New Hampshire, get off on Exit 40 (IIRC) and take Route 302 into North Conway - This will take you by the Mount Washington Hotel and through part of Trip 1 backwards.

~Richard Snow

May 9, 2012

Without hiking there are many choices in the White Mountains of NH:

North Conway, Jackson, Glen, and the surrounding areas have many covered bridges (6 within an hour or so of each other) and scenic overlooks. There's a large loop that takes you by the base of Mt Washington and through 7 notches, (a notch is a mountain pass in New England if you've never heard the term), you can drive that takes a few days depending on how often you want to stop and what you want to do while you're in the area. I suppose you could do it in one day - but you'd spend an awful lot of time in the car and not much time taking pictures.

I can send you a map with areas of interest and places to stay if you'd like - just email me using the link on my member page - and let me know how many days you'd like to spend in the Mt Washington Valley.

The day-long routes I go on every year take you by 5 of the 6 covered bridges I mentioned above, the Mount Washington Hotel, several "scenic overlooks" that you don't need to hike to, and through a whole lot of scenic country that's worth photographing. You'll also drive through Crawford, Evans, Pinkham, and Franconia notches (where the Old Man of the Mountain used to be) - which are all in the White Mountain National Forest.

There's also two trains worth photographing (and taking if you have the time) - The North Conway Scenic Railroad and the Mt Washington COG Railroad (which actually takes you to the top of Mt Washington).

Just look up all of these locations and you'll see there's a whole lot to photograph in the area. Look me up if you decide to make a few days of it - I usually take some time off in the fall to take photos and always make my way to the White Mountains.

You say you don't hike, but can you walk a mile or so on a well maintained trail? If so, I can point you to many other locations that are walkable in the White Mountains.

Hope this helps and hopefully you'll make it to my neck of the woods this fall.

RS

April 10, 2012

The Pixel density of the V1 is about double the pixel density of the D800 - so your V1 should produce a better image than a D800 cropped to CX dimensions.

RS

March 14, 2012

Did a shoot for a friend - wanted some photos of his car - this was my favorite<div>

00a8jF-450181584.jpg.c567b74c52df4e38023e699690c12c04.jpg

</div>

February 11, 2012

One extra thing to consider - you want to try to shoot at 1/1000 sec or faster. Forget VR at these shutter speeds except maybe for composition (it does help a bit). Really, all f the other advise is good and I don't have anything else to add. Shooting from a helicopter is tricky and you may find some tricks that work better for you than for others.

RS

February 11, 2012

I'm not a professional photojournalist who has to catch a news-worthy moment so I don't need the fast frames per second of the D4)

</blockquote>

I think you answered your own question

Here's my thoughts:

- What are you not getting out of your current body/lens setup that makes you want to upgrade?

- If you're used to using primes, do you use them at wide apertures or stopped down? If you like wide aperture lenses, get a wide aperture zoom, don't get a variable wide aperture super-zoom, which is a common mistake when making the transition to zoom lenses

- I've not seen much on video and zoom lenses, but I think that if you can zoom smoothly, you'll be happy - if you jerk around the zoom ring and go from wide to tele quickly you may not be impressed - but you may. You never know...don't let someone else's opinion sway you until you've tried it.

Good Luck with your decision.

RS

February 8, 2012

Please explain how your D7000 "blows away" the D300 IQ wise... I'm not sure what you're looking for, but except for high ISO performance, (which is better than the D300 by about 1 1/3 stop if I recall correctly), and the higher megapixels, I'm not sure one is really better than the other.

1. Wait until the D700 drops in price. There are sure to be many people clamoring for the D800 and dumping their D700s to fund the upgrade. I will not be one of the people dumping my D700 as I will be keeping mine as a second body when I get my D4.

2. High ISO is slightly better with the D700 in my experience - by about 2/3 stop. IQ is better than the D300/s and the D7000 IMHO. Better saturation, less noise, better color rendition, pretty much better everything. It's the benefits of an FX format sensor.

3. AF is not necessarily better or more accurate - it's the same AF as the D300, but it covers less of the frame - which can be an annoyance, but you learn to live with it. - I will say that if you are using any screw-drive AF lenses, the D700 will be much faster than the D7000 due to the motor in the D700 being bigger and more powerful. AF-S lenses should be equally fast on the D7000 and D700.

RS

February 6, 2012

+1 to the above responses regarding your aperture dial.

As for the 24-70mm f/2.8 - it is a stellar lens that I use quite a lot for everything from motorsports (RallyUSA) to portraits to event work to landscapes. The thing is - I use it on an FX camera (D700). When I had a DX sensor camera, I shot with the 17-55mm f/2.8 DX. It's a much more usable zoom range on DX and is nearly equal to the 24-70 in terms of build and image quality. It also costs about $500 less than the 24-70mm f/2.8.

The other lenses mentioned from Tamron, Sigma, and Tokina are apparently very good and much less expensive than the Nikon 17-55mm - but I can't vouch for them because I have an affinity for Nikon lenses and rarely use third party lenses on my cameras.

Do yourself a favor and try both the 24-70mm and 17-55mm lenses to make sure you are getting exactly what you want for focal length ranges. Most photographers miss the 17-24mm range more than the 55-70mm range, but YMMV.

Hope this helps

RS

February 1, 2012

The only time I used an "expodisc" was almost exactly as Nadine described with a lid to a coffee can (so it covered different size lenses up to 82mm). A Friend/camera salesperson told me to try the lid before buying an expodisc to see if it worked well on my camera. I can say that it was absolutely amazing on a D70s because the AWB wasn't exactly the best. Now - with a D700 - I see almost no difference between AWB and making a custom WB with the coffee can lid. The sole exception is for heavily amber-colored lighting (those silly colored lights people put in electric candlesticks and sometimes chandeliers) - which will fool almost any AWB.

RS

January 30, 2012

You can use *any* lens for a portrait lens. I've seen very creative shots with every focal length from 14mm - 300mm. But for a basic, use-anywhere, fast lens, that can also be used for family portraits, I'd suggest the 35mm f/1.8G DX. It's around $200-$250, so it won't break the bank.

For landscape work, I'll suggest you use your 18-55mm unless you need wider. I'd bet that, without looking at EXIF data, you couldn't tell the difference between a $1300 17-55mm f/2.8 and your 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 "kit" lens when stopped down to f/8 or f/11. I'd only go with a better lens if you've determined that you need wider than 18mm regularly.

RS

January 25, 2012

I think Matt hit everything to look for. Personally, I look for the following:

<ol>

<li>Image quality - this is different for different purposes - most of the time I am looking for a lens that produces consistent edge to edge sharpness with very little light falloff and quality color rendition.</li>

<li>Build quality - I need the lens to be able to be used daily, be weather sealed, and have a metal mount.</li>

<li>Fast maximum aperture, preferably if a zoom lens, the maximum aperture is non-variable throughout the zoom range.</li>

<li>Weight - If I'm buying a travel zoom I don't want it to be too heavy and will sacrifice some of the above. If I'm going to be working with the lens daily, weight is less of a factor.</li>

<li>Image Stabilization - Anything shorter than 70mm on FX or 55mm on DX and I don't really worry about it. For longer, heavier lenses, it's almost a requirement these days. (Although I only currently own one lens with VR)</li>

<li>Tripod mount - for longer lenses, how can I mount it to a tripod/monopod? Is it stable? Will I need to buy an aftermarket foot or collar (See Nikon 300mm f/4, which I own)</li>

<li>Price.</li>

</ol>

I think that's it - in order of what is most important to lease important for me.

RS

January 23, 2012

Does an 85mm lens have more uses than just portraits? In short - YES! - More than anyone here can post!

It's all about what you want to shoot and how you want to shoot it - On FX, I use the classic 35mm/85mm combo more than any other combination of lenses for personal and portrait work. For paid event work, I use the 24-70mm/70-200mm for flexibility.

But before you go out and buy this lens, figure out why you are buying it. What photographic need does it fill for you? Don't just buy it because it's something you think you might use - buy it because you've determined a need for it.

RS

January 21, 2012

I do not use the Gigapan, but looking on their site, it looks like you mount the device on a sturdy head (they are using a Manfrotto hydrostatic head on the site, probably the 468 with RC2 plate).

In the photo with the Nikon, it looks like a D200 or D300 and 70-200mm f/2.8. They are attaching the camera to the unit with the tripod foot, much like you would with a traditional gimbal mount.

As for a QR, it looks like you can buy a QR plate right from Gigapan and use any arca-swiss type dovetail QR plate/L-bracket/tripod foot. If you want to use a QR for mounting the Gigapan to the tripod head, it looks like you can use any QR with a 1/4-20 thread that will mount to your tripod head.

Hope this helps...I'm doing this based on photos of the system.

RS

January 21, 2012

According the the Nikon forum and Nikon Wednesday threads, along with everyone I know that shoots Nikon, (both glass and cameras), today both are equally Nikon Photographs.

If you are shooting Nikon glass on a film camera, no matter the camera manufacturer, it's a Nikon photograph.

If you're shooting XYZ glass on a Nikon film camera, it's less a Nikon photograph - the image is made on film not made by Nikon using glass not made by Nikon. Therefore, the only thing contributing to the making of the image is the viewfinder, the metering, (if you're metering TTL), the AF, (if you're using an AF camera), and the shutter actuation.

That's my two cents.

RS

January 21, 2012

Agreed, although from sample to sample, it can be better or worse than that of the photozone.de tests.

Like I said, for 99% of my shooting the vignetting is not noticeable or is easily corrected in post.

RS

January 21, 2012

Most of my work, like Steven above, is shot with the 24-70mm/70-200mm f/2.8 combo. I don't have the latest and greatest Nikon VRII because I cannot justify the cost vs keeping my VRI version. If you can find a used VRI, it's a great lens and the cost is much better than the cost for a new VRII.

The only issue with this lens is vignetting on FX sensors, (thank you Shun for pointing this out...I never would have noticed until I experimented after reading you posts about it). Seriously, for 99% of my shooting, the vignetting is barely noticeable and easily corrected if needed. If you're birding and/or shoot a lot of bright sky, you'll notice it more than I do.

RS

January 18, 2012

If you're shooting 100% manual then that would make sense to set your cameras so they are about a stop different, but I'd be surprised if it was a full f/stop different between the two lenses.

I'm also curious how you have your lights set - are you using speedlights on the camera or are you using off camera flash and popping them remotely? By the way, what flash units are you using?

As a small side note, I'd be suspicious of someone's ISO setting being off rather than light transmission through the glass if you're a full f/stop off with the same camera, manual settings, and the only difference being the glass.

- I know it sounds like a dumb question, but you have checked ISO settings, right?

RS

January 18, 2012

I have the VRI version of the 70-200mm f/2.8 and I like it very much. I've had it for about 5 years and it has paid for itself. It's a work-horse lens and is with me on 99% of my shoots. It's not quite as sharp as the VRII and it does vignette when wide open, but since I am shooting more portraits these days, I like the vignetting...besides, in every day usage it's barely noticeable, (unless you're birding and have lots of bright sky in your images), and is easily corrected in post.

RS

January 18, 2012

If I'm working a job that I'm unsure of what I'll need I carry the following (on FX):

24-70mm f/2.8 - Body #1

70-200mm f/2.8 - Body #2

35mm f/1.4 - Swap for low light/DOF wide - usually body #2, but this can vary

85mm f/1.4 - Swap for low light/DOF short tele - usually body #1, but this can vary

I rarely shoot wider than 24mm or longer than 200mm unless it's a sporting event and I can't get sideline access.

RS

January 18, 2012

Peter -

In short - YES, the f/stop may be the same, but the t/stop may be different.

Here's a down and dirty explanation :

http://thephotoletariat.com/f-stops-vs-t-stops-explained/

RS

January 18, 2012

Martyn -

As I encourage anyone wanting to start in wedding photography, try to find a local pro willing to hire you on as an assistant or second shooter - there will likely be little to no pay, but you'll gain experience.

The pace of a wedding is very fast - and you only get one chance to get the important shots - you don't want to mess them up. It's better to have some experience before going at it solo. There are some who have, but the experience of shooting with someone that has done this before is priceless.

RS

January 17, 2012

Richard, Nikon also made the F3 (F3T) and FM2N (FM2T) in titanium.

</blockquote>

Yes, I found that when I looked further into it - like I mentioned in my original post, I was doing it from memory. (What I failed to mention is that my memory on film cameras seems to not be that good.)

Thanks!

January 16, 2012

From what I understand, the F2 was the only camera Nikon made with a titanium body structure. The F2AS has a titanium shutter, but not a titanium body structure. I don't have a copy of The Nikon Compendium handy to look at, so this is all from memory.

Are you sure it's a F2AS and not a F2 Titanium without Titan engraved into it?

RS

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Events

Downloads

Gallery

Store

Posts posted by richardsnow