alex_zepeda

Nikon D600 • Sigma 35/1.4

 

Nikon D600 • Sigma 35/1.4

 

Nikon D600 • Nikon 180/2.8 AF

This new forum software is pretty awful. Unfortunately you cannot show a URL in a hyperlink, it's insisting on pulling the title which is atrocious from an archival standpoint. Anyways, Adobe lists which versions of Lightroom/ACR support which cameras here:

 

helpx.adobe.com/camera-raw/kb/camera-raw-plug-supported-cameras.html

 

The non-gimmick-licensed version of Lightroom has been abandoned at version 6.14, but that should be enough for the D7000 and D7100. If you don't mind renting your software (we're all made of money, right?) Adobe maintains rental versions of Lightroom "Classic" and Lightroom UberGimmick. From my end, the only meaningful difference between Lightroom 4 and 6 was that 6 supported the D750 I was using for a few weeks.

 

There are plenty of free options as well. Versions of Apple's OSX released after the D7000/7100 should be able to parse NEFs just fine with the Preview app Nikon used to have free software available for download (ViewNX2?). Nikon used to have a more full featured offering which you could buy (secret file format and paid software? awesome!). Google Photos should support NEFs from your cameras.

 

There's also a variety of open source stuff that should work on Windows like GIMP (not really photo oriented, really archaic interface, but should work in a pinch), darktable (a great combination of the worst features of proprietary quality and open source support, and it's comically unstable), ufraw (both from the command line and as a GUI), RawStudio, and RawTherapee.

So, what does 100Mbps get you in real terms, both theoretically and real-world?

 

.....are they the same units as the Sandisk Extreme Pro 95 MB/s high-speed cards?

 

No. Sandisk says 1MB=1,000,000 bytes, or very roughly eight times faster than that ancient ethernet gear on the UT-1. I bet 1000BASE-T/TX use too much power for a little camera dongle so we're probably not going to see faster wired dongles from Nikon anytime soon. The built-in WiFi on the D750 is laughable at best, be careful what you wish for. While the WT-5A lists 5 GHz 802.11n support, it's not clear what speeds it will operate at. You'll have a much better time skipping that nonsense and just copying the files over to your computer with a dedicated card reader.

My two cents -- I've recently been reviewing the past decade of concert shots and for the type of concert stuff I do most of my favorite shots have come from a 35mm lens. That said, I've gotten plenty of good concert shots with my longer manual focus and AF-D lenses (58 - 105 mm). The sorts of venues I frequent won't necessarily have the room to use such long lenses. If you're not sure what focal length you want I would start by doing two things: 1.) reviewing your photos and see where you set your zoom lens at and 2.) renting a few candidates and see what suits you.

 

As Shun pointed out, getting good glass for the D750 is a really good idea (otherwise why buy such an expensive camera). I skimmed the responses but didn't see focus speed mentioned. Nikon's ƒ/1.4 primes simply do not focus quickly. Even though the extra light capturing capability is a win, the lower cost ƒ/1.8 primes may be a much better proposition here simply because you'll be more likely to nail the focus.

 

I cheaped out and went with the Sigma 35/1.4 ART. It's quite sharp wide open and much better built than earlier Sigma lenses, but like any ƒ/1.4 lens it's bulky and slow to focus. The Nikon 35/2 really only has the size/weight advantage in its favor. I can't think of a single good reason to pay $400 for a new one as there are plenty of used copies around. While your D750 will focus the AF-D lenses, the newer lenses with built-in motors (S/G/E lenes) will typically focus faster. If you care about video, the built-in motors are much quieter while focusing.

 

Focus shift is typically more of a problem with the ƒ/1.4 vs ƒ/1.8 lenses, and the worst in my bag has been Nikon's 85/1.4 AF-D. For concerts you probably won't care too much, for everything else it'll probably drive you nuts. But if you're shooting something where you can take your time using live view will sidestep that problem.

The lupine managed to be really the most photogenic of all the flowers

 

D600 • ISO 2500 • Micro-Nikkor 105/4 Ai • ƒ/32 • 1/250th

Got a new-to-me Micro-Nikkor 105/4 Ai and went for a short hike. True to form, the D600's replacement shutter continues to splatter oil all over the sensor.

 

So it's a fair bet that many people reporting no receipt of that message just haven't looked in their spam folders.

 

Yeah, no. If the scammers have figured out how to make their message deliverable and the photo.net admins have not, there are bigger problems than just looking in your spam folder. For the record, I've looked in my spam folder and mail logs and haven't seen anything from photo.net.

We are doing both - we are notifying people of the email earlier today by email and banners our goal is to let people know not to click on it because it was not from us.

 

I haven't received anything other than the two phishing messages. Going back, the last legit email I got from photo.net was a password reset message on July 30th. That password reset message is quite easy to mistake for spam or phishing as you guys don't have DKIM, SPF, or even a reverse DNS entry that would make your mail server look like a legit part of photo.net set up. Seriously, your legit mail comes from buydomains.com.

Yeah it's pretty clear the photo.net user database has been compromised (otherwise how are you pairing names and photo.net specific email addresses). Photo.net admins should not be sending out an email suggesting people ignore the phishing messages. Instead they should be focusing on how they were compromised, and once remedied they should require password resets for all users.

Got back last week from a couple weeks in Cuba. While it's still significantly easier to visit than it was in years past, you still have to fit into explicitly allowed categories. In my case, I went on a "support for the Cuban people" visa designed to promote cultural understanding and exchange. In my case the culture was punk rock. Unfortunately the local cops still aren't 100% okay with this (and neither was the weather, apparently). So here's one of the guys from one of the American bands that played.

 

 

Caught this on the bus to Havana. Pretty sure Health and Safety would have a fit.

 

 

One of the things that surprised me was how many American tourists we encountered, even in the smaller towns. Santa Clara is home to a well known, and one of the only, drag shows in Cuba. The 85/1.4 AF-D is not really what you'd call a great choice for low light, fast moving photography. But even wide open it does pretty well.

 

<p>That looks like a more or less standard barrel connector to me. If you can measure the dimensions, that's a good start. The Wikipedia page also covers the common variations as well as part numbers you could plug into an electronics supply vendor (DigiKey, Mouser, Farnell/Newark, etc.).</p>

<p><a href="http://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/59595/how-can-i-tell-the-size-of-a-barrel-power-connector">http://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/59595/how-can-i-tell-the-size-of-a-barrel-power-connector</a><br>

<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coaxial_power_connector">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coaxial_power_connector</a></p>

<p>Sometimes I question the wisdom of lugging around a large prime with me. On this trip especially I've found myself reaching for the camera phone before the big camera. But last week I got a chance to check out a concert in Kōenji and of course I had to drag the D600 and Sigma 35 along.</p>

<p><img src="https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7383/27072202550_7f03f4b018_b.jpg" alt="" /><br /> D600 • ISO 5000 • Sigma 35/1.4 • ƒ/2.0 • 1/160th</p>

<p><img src="https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7724/27276652631_d97326d280_b.jpg" alt="" /><br /> D600 • ISO 2500 • Sigma 35/1.4 • ƒ/1.4 • 1/80th</p>

<p><img src="https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7786/27302890621_f5989a4ef1_b.jpg" alt="" /><br /> D600 • ISO 5000 • Sigma 35/1.4 • ƒ/2.0 • 1/1600th</p>

<p>Joe, I certainly wouldn't expect a split-prism focusing screen in the Df. I'd expect the option to choose from a number of different focusing screens — something Nikon has yet to do for any 100% coverage FX viewfinder. Instead you get a camera that's not a huge step up in terms of manual or auto focusing ability. For the better part of $3,000, I'd expect more. The problem with the focus dot/arrows is that they're simply nowhere near precise enough to be useful at big apertures.</p>

<p>But hey, the faux-retro oobleygook is a nice touch.</p>

<p>With the weather cooperating and fall colors starting to come out in the PNW I decided to take the 20/4 out for a bit of fun. Suddenly 20mm doesn't seem so wide. Unfortunately the 58 doesn't seem to want to focus to infinity after Nikon's latest adjustments to the D600.</p>

<p><img src="http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5498/10388192365_e526c7dc91_c.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p><img src="http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5477/10375651865_c5030288bd_c.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p> <img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7420/10408986956_4682a5fc0a_c.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>Instead of comparing how many different camera bodies have been released in the film vs digital era, take a look at how many different emulsions and chemicals we've seen since the F was released. We're seeing rapid development because digital cameras are still a comparatively immature technology.</p>

<p>Eric, it's not the manual focus that'd be an issue (indeed Canon's video optimized EF lenses uses stepper motors not ultrasonic ones like this 58/1.4). With a G type lens you'd lose pretty much any aperture control on a non-Nikon body which, to me, seems unappealing for both photography and video. Some of the DP review guys have speculated that when paired with a D800E the 58/1.4 would give the Hasselblad 100/2.2 a run for its money. Maybe Nikon's trying to target the medium format market? If so those guy's would better hope Nikon's not going to release a new 58/1.2 in short order.</p>

<p>The Sony is only less expensive than the mainstream competition if you don't factor in the lenses. Their 55/1.8 is... $1000. An interesting pair of cameras to be sure, but it's a non-starter until more reasonably priced lenses are released. Even something like an F-mount adapter that would preserve auto aperture would be a huge enticement IMO.</p>

<p>Eric — I've got the Voigtlander 58 and much preferred it over the Nikon 50s on my D200 (in large part because of the extra 8mm). On the D600 it's still an excellent normal focal length, and I wouldn't mind an autofocus 58mm lens. It'll be interesting to see what kind of resolution it can turn out. At that price though, I wonder what the market will be like. I'm certainly not ready to drop that much cash for something that'll be difficult to use on a non-Nikon body.</p>

<p>Dieter — You should be able to put Leica glass on the new full-frame Sony body with relative ease, no? At most, that'd put you out $2200 for a 36MP full-frame sensor w/o an anti-aliasing filter. Certainly a far cry from a $7000 Leica body.</p>

<p>Matt — What kind of person would want a non-native lens without an aperture ring?</p>

<p>Take something with a big front element and point it at the sun. Done and done.</p>

<p><img src="http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6120/6314021494_c10618f5c4_z.jpg" alt="" width="640" height="512" /><br>

85/1.4D @ ƒ/3.5</p>

<p>Or take something with straight aperture blades and stop it down:<br>

<img src="http://ppcdn.500px.org/43991846/c70937d7b628001291bae0697e51d1dbbefe1ac6/4.jpg" alt="" /><br>

20/4 AI @ ƒ/11</p>

<p>Landrum — Nikon still hasn't acknowledged any problems (compare this to the Pentax/Ricoh response to oil stains on the K5's sensor). But that hasn't stopped a few threads on dpreview (and elsewhere) from popping up complaining about oil on the Nikon provided D610 sample image.</p>

<p>Don — Times change. When the D600 was introduced it was billed as the upgrade for D7000 users. Essentially it's a D7000 with an FX sensor. When the D610 was introduced the D7000 was already a generation out of date. Essentially the D610 is still a D7000 with an FX sensor. It's outclassed by the D7100 in every way except for the sensor (which given the identical resolution means it's down to high ISO performance and crop factor -- neither of which may be an issue for many people). It'd be like VW reintroducing the Beetle, billing it as an upgrade to a Polo, and pricing it like a Golf. Forty years ago, people might have been impressed. Today? Doubtful.</p>

<p>The D70s got a bigger rear LCD, and the D70 got whatever firmware based improvements were made to the D70s. So far the D600's gotten bupkis, and the D610's got a fancy new knob. Should people be falling all over themselves with joy now that Nikon's released a new camera that doesn't officially fix the non-issue with the D600?</p>

<p>Dieter — Canon, Fuji, and Pentax have all owned up to problems with their cameras and initiated service campaigns. None has suffered financial ruin as a result. Owning up to the problems would have put the rumors to rest. Instead, the rumor mill is working overtime.</p>

<p>Mike — B&H has the D600 (new) + 24-85, monopod, bag, SD card, extra battery, etc for $2200, which is still a fair bit cheaper than $3700. As best I can tell Nikon's UK pricing defies logic. Or that could be a sign that Nikon does not expect the D600 to be very durable, $3700 is what it takes to make a profit with the UK's strong consumer protection laws.</p>

<p>Eric - Did that lack of QC extend to the Japanese plants? Both the X100/S and the D800/E are made in Japan. Politics aside, I usually worry a lot less about country of origin and more about the people in charge. Apple, for instance, has successfully made a quite a reputation for getting complex, high quality gadgets assembled in China.</p>

<p>Stephen - Levi's (now) has a premium range that's still made in the US, it's funny how these things come full circle.</p>

<p>Shun - I agree the D600/D610 situation is quite similar to the D70/D70s, and SB-900/SB-910. IMO that's the entire problem. Sure, it hasn't sunk Nikon yet, but that's not a great predictor of the future... especially in the face of increased competition on all fronts.</p>

<p>Blackberry (née Research in Motion) was able to coast for a while with two tone deaf CEOs and a product lineup that was hardly customer driven. Sure, their current phones (Q10/Z10) look fantastic. I'd even rate BB10 as far more user friendly (and attractive) than Android, iOS, or wince. Fat lot of good it's done them now though.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>If you choose not to switch, you only have yourself to blame for any further dissatisfaction.</p>

 

<p>However, I am sure you find that "the other side" has its share of problems. You will realize it when you get there.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Shun -- so rather than have Nikon bring its customer treatment up to par, I should switch to Canon? My impression is that you're selectively acknowledging what I've written, especially the bits where I repeatedly acknowledge problems with competitors' products. That's almost as bad as your willingness to <a href="/nikon-camera-forum/00c1wC">only post good reviews of Nikon gear on Photo.net</a>. You may not formally work for Nikon, but your criticism is nonetheless a bit disingenuous.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>When the 18-300mm DX came out last year, Nikon asked me whether I wanted to review it. I told them directly that such as super zoom would unlikely to be great. I would be happy to review it as long as they don't mind me pointing it out that it is, at best, a mediocre lens. We eventually decided that it is best that I don't review that lens.<br>

</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The Thom Hogan nine-year-old piece skewering Nikon's service is here: <a href="http://www.bythom.com/repair.htm">http://www.bythom.com/repair.htm</a>, and IMO, he says it best when he says "<em>A bit of an aside, as this article is about process, not function: the camera came back fixed".</em> Nikon fixed my camera, and I'm sure that they've fixed many D600s. The process leaves a lot to be desired, however.<br>

<br>

Aside from the obvious financial functional motives (it works, for now), I haven't seriously considered switching since buying the D600 because I'd much rather keep the camera and lenses and see Nikon bring themselves up to the customer service bar set by Canon, Fuji, Pentax, and Tamron. Lest you think I'm being shrill, people are already <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikon-d610?comment=7452611367">complaining about oil on the D610 sensor</a>. The image in question is here: <a href="http://chsvimg.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d610/img/sample01/img_01_l.jpg">http://chsvimg.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d610/img/sample01/img_01_l.jpg</a> (before assumptions are made: no, I don't see any spots in that picture).</p>

<p>Going back a bit further than the past week, I took the D600 along with me on a road trip to Northern California and then back down the coast (and tried to use a non-stabilized lens to shoot from a moving car):</p>

<p><img src="http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3756/10165787726_a5d5494114_c.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>Got a chance to see a friend's band perform (that's a giant dancing hot dog in the background):</p>

<p><img src="http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3737/10122823123_9407c8552b_c.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>Got a chance to see Bonnie Raitt perform:</p>

<p><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7426/10095514953_89cf3df41e_c.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>A good place to start would be Lloyd Chambers' site: digilloyd.com. Among other things, he's spent a lot of time going into great detail about the Zeiss offerings. http://diglloyd.com/index-zf.html</p>

<p>Or, rent them and see how you like them. LensRentals.com (customer, no affiliation otherwise) will take a few days (a week?) rental off of the cost of some new Zeiss and Sigma lenses if you rent the lens then buy a new copy from them. Even if you rent from someone else, there's no substitute for your hands on impressions.</p>