bruce_brown

<p>Nathan, also consider: <a href=" </p>

<p>Fascinating Nikon. New shutter and a new model number. Some 'frames per second'. Good discussion about it all, but I doubt if it will change the stock numbers. Last January11th, Nikon was at 30.7 ... closed today at 17.22. Not bad if you have 8-10k invested ... now worth 4.5 t0 7.5k.... but hell, we've got a new shutter with no 'problems'. Maybe worth it. Loss seems small in comparison, eh? But, now if you serve on the board of a corporation or pension fund with, say, just short of 700million invested, and have the fiduciary responsibility to the Company, the Shareholders, and even, the Pension Fund ... you are likely less jovial about the increase in frames per second of the new D610. This product is a Nikon answer. It's Nikon Management. It's Nikon attitude. It's Nikon, thru and thru. Too bad.</p>

<p>Or Here: <a href="/nikon-camera-forum/00bIeU">http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00bIeU</a></p>

<p>Oh, the seller's ultimate dream ... to create a buyer's <em>frenzy. "Withhold product to enhance demand".</em> They (Sigma) seem to be on the cutting edge of product development, enhancing quality control, applied technology, advertising, and 'market read'. And why not the ultimate dream of 'frenzy' to cap it off? BTW, B&H says 'expected availability' AUG 15. Not that anyone is checking the site daily. </p>

<p> </p>

<p>Dan: You might also try 'Armor All' ... auto store stuff. Do not spray on, but put some in a dish and apply carefully with a Q-Tip. Have a soft cloth at the ready to wipe off any and all excess. Careful not to let it ooze into the workings of the lens. It's silicone, not oil. Will not harm rubber, but actually replace what has 'cooked off', or 'out-gassed', over time from the original rubber (or probably a rubber compound). </p>

<p>Andy: "But I don't think it makes sense to project Nikon making this stuff" Perhaps you are right. Check here: <a href="http://connect.dpreview.com/post/0714061353/nikon-smartphone-point-and-shoot-slump?news">http://connect.dpreview.com/post/0714061353/nikon-smartphone-point-and-shoot-slump?news</a> . Hard to tell what's being said, (as usual). Looks like they might go into the phone business. Not much cutting edge competition there. Field's wide open.</p>

<p>T.Z. So you <em>know</em> about NEX dx ... shhhh ... it's a secret, don't tell. :-)</p>

<p>I still stand with my posts on this subject, but an assistant has taken an interest, searched, and adds this:<a href="http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/lens/concept/vr/en/technology/normal/tripod/">http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/lens/concept/vr/en/technology/normal/tripod/</a> ... ah Nikon ... so much like the US State Department ... foggy bottom. VR 'tripod' actually <em>marked</em> on some lenses, not marked, as such, on the 55-300 lens (and others), but certainly in the instructions of the 55-300. The site does say what it does ... quick translation ... VR 'lite' ... compensating for mirror/and/or shutter movement when mounted on a tripod. More interesting ...it is included on all the 'high dollar' teles, most likely to be used on a tripod. Some of those lenses actually have the 'tripod mode' VR switch, some do not. More interesting still, tripod mode (or a variation) is included in the 399.00/55-300. Ah Nikon ... foggy bottom for sure. But then, steady shot too, I suppose.<br>

Then the OP ... <strong>why</strong> does it <em>seem</em> ok with the 18-200, but not on the 16-85? Unable to <em>precisely, and accurately</em> respond.</p>

<p>Well, of course you can always turn it off. It is also <em>possible</em> that the 'tripod sensing technology' turns it off ... as Nikon does not say what it actually does. To take it a step further, it is also <em>possible</em> t-s-t incrementally turns VR down, up to, and including 'off' as the technology senses less and less 'vibration'. Once again, maybe the t-s-t is merely 'test technology' on Nikon's part, and only included on certain new lenses ... again, Nikon does not say. But then, I recall, years ago I had the privilege of working with an older and vastly more experienced photographer ... he sneered a bit at my auto-metering, auto exposing Nikon, and insisted the only <em>real way</em> to meter was to whip out the Gossen Luna Pro, lever it on, get the reading, and set shutter speed and aperture accordingly. To each his own. Makes it all a great profession/passion/hobby. </p>

<p>Peter: I do not want to start a huge argument ... plus I am on a mobile device and quite some distance from base ... don't have the instructions with me, and sure can't get to them. That said ... I have a pretty good retention level ... especially when things are stated differently than they have been <em>forever. </em>The instructions that came with that lens (the 55-300) specifically say it has 'tripod sensing technology' and that VR need not be turned off when on a tripod. I was surprised to read it. Thought I'd try it out ... <em>see if. I HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO DETECT ANY DIFFERENCE AT ALL, ON THAT LENS, TRIPOD MOUNTED, VR ON OR OFF</em>. So I guess nothing was lost in translation, Japanese to English. Whatever the<strong> t-s-t</strong> is, it is on the 55-300, and it evidently works. I have no idea if this 'technology' was a trial, on only the 55-300 lens and none other, or if it is also on all newer Nikon VR lenses. I was able to pull this up on this FS little mobile device I seem to be stuck with ... from the Amazon site for Nikon 55-300 here:<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-55-300mm-4-5-5-6G-Nikkor-Digital/dp/B003ZSHNCC/ref=sr_1_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1374114798&sr=1-1&keywords=nikon+55-300mm+vr">http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-55-300mm-4-5-5-6G-Nikkor-Digital/dp/B003ZSHNCC/ref=sr_1_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1374114798&sr=1-1&keywords=nikon+55-300mm+vr</a> Please note under the section 'Important Warranty Information', then second item down, under Specifications, it says ..."Nikon VR II Image Stabilization, Tripod Detection Mode". The actual instructions that come with the lens, amplify this statement further to say <strong>VR need not be turned off, if on a tripod. </strong> What Nikon SAYS NOW, at least about the 55-300 seems rather clear. I do not know about later released Nikon lenses with VR ... haven't bought a late-release Nikon lens since the 55-300 ... Sigma, OTOH, has my attention, and also a few $$. BTW, I had need to use the 55-300 last week ... I still think it is one of the best dx 'bargain' lenses available from Nikon right now, with or without t-s-t, as it is, can I say it? Skeeter Peter Sharp for just $399.<br /> </p>

<p>Patrick: Good advice so far ... note Nikon DOES HAVE different types of VR (besides I and II). For example with the newer Nikon 55-300, the instructions note<strong> that</strong> lens has 'tripod sensing technology' ... it is NOT NECESSARY to shut off VR when tripod mounted. Don't know if the newer 18-200 has it (besides the 'creep lock' already noted), but maybe. Mike Freeman ... help us out ...screen shot of 55-300 instructions AND instructions from NEWER 18-200. BTW, Nikon does not really say what this 't-s-t' is, but on my 55-300 I've tried and tried, on tripod, VR on and off ... makes no difference at all. I leave it on pretty much all the time.</p>

<p>Ken: Oops ... had to sign out ... gone 'on duty' until after the July 4th thing, but got your Q relayed. Yes, you are quite right, but it depends on the plexi ... my experience has been, sometimes, yes, sometimes not. Very small thing to add, even a shirt pocket (buttoned down pocket, of course ;-) ), handy to have, if needed, can even be used (sometimes) as ND in a pinch. Adds next to nothing to the 'kit' in weight or space. Off again, hope the only fireworks are those shot off in Celebration and Remembrance . </p>

<p>Jamie: Other posters have sort of answered some Q's I had. You ARE UK, yes, as I am not aware of operational Spitfires in the US. Thinking over lens choices, it is difficult. If you could take two, I'd go with the original suggested 24-70, and (revised suggestion), the 70-200, because it has VR I and VRII (use both) BTW, they both take the same filter size (polarizer), if you decide to take a polarizer (I would). Here is a shot of the US TBF Avenger (sometimes called The World's Most Deadliest Aircraft) ... not for the pilots, but for those it flew against. It was shot from aboard a Ford Tri-Motor with Sigma (Bigma) 50-500, 1/2000sec @ 210mm (315mm eq). It's the only lens I had with me, the others were in the car about 1/4 mile away. It was go, or no go. I went. You mentioned Spitfire(s), plural, I think, so the ability to include more (wider) would come into play. We had not-so-good skies, broken clouds, haze, and some fog. But, then, opportunity, sometimes, only takes off once. ;-)</p><div></div>

<p>Jamie: You already got some good advice, especially the link. I don't do flying much by myself, but I co sometimes, in Vintage ... it's great, as other fellows own the plane, and I just get to shoot, or fly just a little. I have a moment here, so let me share a few 'near earth' or 'near injury' experiences as a shooter. If it is possible, as suggested, talk to the pilot, or organization doing this. It sounds like they have done it before, and hopefully will brief you before you take off. BETTER YET, don't wait for the briefing just before you take to the air. Visit the airfield a week before, look at your plane (not one like it), especially the windscreen, and it's general condition and see if it's all scratched up, dirty, or clean, and asked to be briefed, that is, what's going to happen, what are we going to do, how close will the Spit be etc. Have your chosen gear with you, and check your zoom range on the ground. Let them know you plan to take pictures and ask what they suggest. Almost for sure, if there is an airplane about, there is also someone about who shoots. Keep your neck strap on all the time. At no time set down a lens, filter, flash, or anything, including eyeglasses, or sunglasses, that has the slightest chance of becoming airborne. Secure ALL gear, including a camera bag if you have one. I wrap the strap from mine around my ankle, kind of snug, and I absolutely zip it shut if I get into it, only for a moment. Flash, you say? Sometimes. With a wide angle, and some fill, there are great shots to be had of your pilot at the controls, with the Spit out his front screen. I have been aboard a 6 passenger, as a passenger, not the shooter, talking to others, saw 'photo' mount the flash, but did not 'connect' quickly enough, and off it flashed. Too bad he did not advise the pilot before we took off or just before he fired it. Kind of rough weather anyway, but the pilot, quite surprised, did not know it was a very bright photo flash, and we had a very, very exciting 6-8 seconds. Good thing all the gear was tied down, except for the newspaper onboard. Also, take earplugs. They may give you some, or even mike you up with muffs, but take them anyway. There is a lot of photo advice out there on this subject, lenses and such, VR I and VR II on or off, but almost for sure you will want a polarizer, and almost for sure, the 70-200 will be too much in your situation. Yor camera is 'crop-sensor', yes? I would think quality zooms, and leave the primes at home (unless it's a WA for some inside stuff). This is a classic case, as you might imagine, where it is difficult to 'zoom with your feet'. I think I would opt for Nikon 24-70/2.8 if I had just one, but it has no VR. Shoot a few test shots, high shutter, and look. Then back off the shutter speed until the props tips on the Spit look a little 'smeared'. Could go on with this lots more, as it is one of my favorite activities, for the last 43 years, starting in the USMC at 22. Best of success, and as I believe they said 'back when' as the Spitfires were scrambled, the Squadron CO would say, 'good hunting'.</p>

<p>Robert Wayt: Trauma, I see no trauma at all ;-) ... congrats to you and she !! Rodeo Joe ... wow factor ...+++ , thanks all ... laptop being pulled away by co-workers to look, and gasp, at each and every one.</p>

<p>Vladimir: Here: <a href="http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/english/new/new_topic.php?id=379">http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/english/new/new_topic.php?id=379</a> </p>

<p>And ... Lemonade Lilley. All D600 14-24</p><div></div>

<p>The Food ...</p><div></div>

<p>Driving thru the foothills last weekend ... the came across a small town Summer Fest. </p><div></div>

<p>Andrew: Thx. As an aside, and an priori feedback on Samsung Galaxy S4 ... my wife got one last month ...'PLASTIC' aside, we have been together 32 years ... I try to take it away, and we will have BIG problems. Architect type ... occasionally TRY to loan the D80 or even the D7000 with the Sigma 8-16 for her work ... waves the Samsung and says 'if I have THIS, I would want either one of those things ... WHY?? More 'PLASTIC'... two 'factoids' ... recalling the back-yard pool party in the film "The Graduate" '67-'68?? ... Dustin Hoffman, the newly minted college graduate, with his parents and the next door neighbors ... next door guy is a techno ??? ... pulls Hoffman aside and says ..."I have just one word to say to you about the future ... PLASTIC" One more, far, far more relevant ... circa 1982, in Austria. Fellow by the name of Gaston Glock is making entrenching tools (read, shovels), out of 'PLASTIC' for the Austrian military. A PLASTIC shovel for the military to dig ... in dirt and rocks? Very successful. Found out the Austrian Military was soon to conduct 'pistol trials' to replace the aging Walther PPK (I think), designed in 1929 - all steel and very durable. Glock had NO EXPERIENCE at all with firearms, but designed a very simple (13 or 15 parts TOTAL), durable 9mm pistol that beat the bejeebers out of all others, including the all- steel Walther, the Beretta, Colt, S&W, Steyr, and others. It was made (mostly) of the same materials as the shovel, PLASTIC. Turned out to be far more durable, more reliable, easier to fix, and lighter ... by a lot in all categories. Today, the Glock is easily the most prolific law enforcement sidearm in the US, if not the World. It's mostly PLASTIC (as some would say) ... stainless steel barrel, springs, and slide, but the frame is PLASTIC, and the whole thing is virtually impervious to heat, cracking (even when run over by a vehicle), salt water (perspiration) and very high and very low temperatures. You can fill in the blanks as to HOW FAR the technology has jumped since the mid-eighties, OR, pickup now, what Sigma is calling ... 'Thermally Stable Composite', not 'plastic' (lower case). The times continue to change, as to materials, technology, and durability ... kind of exciting, especially if you have Samsung Galaxy S4 (I'm told) ;-)</p>

<p>This will be my last on this. High quality plastic? Low quality plastic? Don't believe Sigma calls it plastic at all ... their words are 'composite material' Want to know the difference between 'low quality' plastic and 'high quality' plastic ... as you call it? Go to Baskin-Robbins and get a cup (not a cone) of peanut butter and chocolate (my favorite) or perhaps pistachio (lots of nuts), or tutti-fruity (its seasonal) ...I go for a small cup, trying to hold 158lbs and run a mile or two w/ a 9:15 average ... then go plunk down $899 for the Sigma lens, twist it on to your Nikon, or whatever, shoot a few frames thru it, print an 11x14 or a 16x20 print. NOW you know the difference ... what you ate the ice cream with (the spoon) is 'low quality' plastic... what you took they very high quality pictures with is...'high quality' plastic (as you insist on calling it). Sorry about the dots ... I most of the time have a pa (personal assistant) as I am 65yrs old, made a few $ here and there, and mostly don't have the time, or inclination to work a keyboard on ...ah ... well I won't say it. Let me add one more ... nah, I won't ... just got some more dots, and a frown from the pa. CHEERS, and the VERY BEST to you in your studies, and research. </p>

<p>And more ... got some very young interns looking over my shoulder ... far enough away that they can't give me a dope slap for not including it ... technobabble? ... how about your whole camera? Remember film, and the first digital camera ... not much comparison. How about your cell phone? How about the system that heat/cools your house? How about ... the internet. Nonsense, eh what? Also, because there are cheap goods from one country (actually every country), to quash all seems ... not ... well, relevant and as others have suggested, mildly racist. Please note, also, after WWII, and well into the late 50's and early 60's, items from (gasp) JAPAN were widely regarded a low-grade ...well, you know. </p>

<p>Likewise all the same is true with metal ... heat treated? Shop with ISO standards? Alloy? What mix? Machined? To what tolerances? The list is long and continuous. There is a saying ... 'Performance, It's Everything'. Read the reviews FROM, NOW, EVERY SOURCE, on this lens ... 'nuff said, 'high quality plastic' notwithstanding. Also note patents have been filed for 'liquid lenses' (new technology, ugh !) ... stay away at all costs if they come into production in the future, as they are not 'glass' ... far to similar to an ... eyeball. Also, I understand there are some great buys on buggy whips ... no production 'shortcuts' or lack of 'testing' then, just good, solid wood and leather.</p>

<p>Dan: I don't know about a D3 or an assortment of pro lenses in Haiti ... sure the locals could rip that stuff off, but sell it to ? or where? Got some real first hand accounts of other goods, though. My niece is married to a Dr. on the Big Island of Hawaii ... she joined him in a mission to Haiti awhile back to help out , in country, for a few weeks, with some other medical types. Took a large collection of shoes and clothing she no longer used (they have some $$, paid the airline extra, extra, to load on the plane)... when she opened the boxes, in country, at one of the Churches just outside the Capital, it created an instant ... not riot, but 'situation' that caused the 15 or so in the mission to abandon and withdraw from the area, immediately, as it became quite 'uncontrolled'. Likewise, I am sure you have been to, say, France, and possibly Mexico ... probably been very lucky with your gear. Many, many, many, have not. There are many places in the world, where 'low-profile', and common-sense discretion can be 'preventive'. OTOH, physical size, demeanor, and amount of travel notwithstanding, luck is a wonderful thing ... you only miss it, and remember it, and lament ... when it runs out.</p>

<p>Nico: Absolutely EVERYTHING you said was true ... 15 years ago. Don't know how much you follow technology/manufacturing/innovation ... but the Space Shuttle would not be 'up there', and the Mars Rover be "roving' without ... whatsit? ... 'high quality plastic' ... NASA isn't particularly known for 'cutting costs' ... or using materials that are 'theoretically tough'. Additionally. open the hood, or bonnet, of almost ANY new automobile and you will see, I guess, 'high quality plastic'. This would include BMW, Porsche, and ... Mercedes Benz. The Benz motto, incidently, from Daimler himself, way back when, was ... 'Das Beste Oder Nicht!' ... 'The Best Or Nothing!'...anyone that thinks that company , is using 'high quality plastic' ... to ... cut costs ... is cosmically mis-informed. </p>