paul_k1664875007

<p>Although all my latest camera's (DF, D800) still work with NX2, I wanted to play around with some D750, D810 and later D500 NEF's to see what the improvements were. When the D500 was introduced, NXD was the only (free) option available<br /> <br /> But I ended up with similar problems when I installed NXD to play around a bit with in particular some D500 files, in my case I couldn't process DF and D800 files in NX2 anymore<br /> <br /> Never found out why, ended up just uninstalling and then again (re)installing NXD, but obviously vowed to stay away from NXD if possible.<br /> Did find the whole 'saving as a Tiff in NXD and processing the Tiff in NX2' a bit of a pain anyway, considering the size the Tiff's would end up in (DF approx 95 MB, D800 approx 160+MB)</p> <p>Better alternative IMO and experience is this (free) program<br /> http://www.bagnon.com/raw2nef/<br /> (although the maker is open for donations as a sign of appreciation for his efforts :-) )</p> <p>Basically renames the files in such a way they becomes recognizable for NX2 (eg a D750 file becomes, in the exif, a D600 file, a D810 becomes a D800 file, etc), after which hey can be processed directly (as a NEF, no Tiff's) in NX2 (i.e. NX 2.4.6, not 2.4.7).<br> It has been updated and now also works with a.o. D500 and D5 NEF's,<br> <br /> Works very easy (just drag and drop), and does the job in a quiet way, but well</p>

<p><em>I want everything to be manual. I'm using 4 flashes to light up home interiors. I don't want a flash on camera. I want just the PW on camera with a SB-700 set to manual on the other PW to trigger the other 4 flashes. Does this make sense?</em><br> Makes sense, and life a lot easier<br> - Put the TT1 on your D810<br> - Go into the menu of the D810, option E3 (setting for the pop up flash)<br> - Don't pop up the pop up flash (unnecessary since you won't be using it)<br> - Select CMD mode (commander mode)<br> you now go in a sub menu asking for<br> - Mode and Correction (of the power setting) for the pop up flash => irrelevant since you won't be using it<br> Not 100% sure about the term 'Correction', that's what it's called in the Dutch language menu of my D800's<br> (I'm Dutch, so obviously don't use the English menu)<br> - Channel A => Mode: Manual => Correction: to be determined later after your test shots<br> - Channel B : irrelevant since you'll be using channel A<br> - and turn it of<br> <em>I have 2 D800's and they have identical menus to the D810, and checked the above to be sure</em></p> <p>Now go to your SB700 (or SB900 if you like)<br> - switch it on, that's it (so don't select Master or Remote)<br> Don't worry about whether you have it in M, TTL or whatever mode, the setting you picked in E3 will overrule that<br> - and turn it off<br> <em>I have a SB910 which has the same button lay out on the back as the SB700</em></p> <p>Go to your TT5, and select channel A (since that's the channel you chose on your camera)<br> and mount the (switched off) SB700.</p> <p>As you probably are aware of, the PW's are very picky about the sequence in which the several components are switched on, it should always be 'top to bottom'<br> <br />So with the D810, it's the TT1 first, and then the camera.<br> Similarly with the SB700 on the TT5, first the SB700, then the TT5<br> If you don't follow the correct sequence, things will foul up (learnt that the hard way myself)<br> And you're set to go</p> <p>Be sure to have your SB80's and Yungnuo's in SU4 mode.<br> Take a testshot to see whether the picture is properly exposed, and if necessary change the powersettings<br> - on the SB700 mounted on the TT5 : remotely using the Correction option in the submenu of option E3<br> - On the SB80/Yungnuo manually on the speedlights themselves<br> (yes, that means walking to and fro till you have the correct powersetting)<br> I have the same 'issue' when I'm shooting with my -non TTL- studio flashes :( )</p> <p>HTH</p> <p> </p>

<p>Sorry, I was in the middle of re-editing my first reaction when the system informed me I have exceeded the time allotted for that.<br> <br />So this is what I meant to say (after re-reading your original post):</p> <p>I assume (since it's mandatory if you want to trigger them manually) that your SB80 and Yungnuo flash units are in SU4 mode (is that what you describe as remote?) which will allow them to be triggered remotely by the flash of another unit (irrelevant of whatever mode the speedlights themselves are set in).<br> <br />I also assume you will use the SB900 mounted on the TT1, have those mounted on your camera (not my choice, I find the plastic hotnshoe mount a bit too fragile to carry all that weight), and dial in the (power) settings for the SB900 (as Master) and SB700 (as remote, mounted on the TT5) in the SB900's menu</p> <p>This however also means the SB80's and Yungnuo's will also be triggered by the preflash of the SB900, if that is set in TTL mode, which means they will flash before the actual picture is taken, and leave them depleted on the moment it is.<br> <br /> So in order to have both the SB900 and the SB80/Youngnuo units to flash simultaneously, rather then the SB80 and Yungnuo's prematurely, you have to change the output/metering in the remote settings in your SB900 to Manual (so it no longer emits a preflash)<br> Since you're only using one TT5 as receiver, the choice of channel (A, B, or C) for the receiver is irrelevant, since the Master (trigger) unit will activate all of them anyway.</p> <p>With regard to using the SB900 as a master, and the SB700 as a PW triggered remote, chose the settings for the Master flash (in your case SB900) in the SB900's menu, leave the SB700's in whatever mode you want, without changing the settings of the SB700 to Remote mode, and chose the power settings and mode for the SB700 (as a remote) in the SB900's Remote Flash menu.<br> <br /> The on camera TT1 unit will trasnmit whatever you dialed in the SB900's Remote Flash settings, override the 'old' SB700 setting and make the SB700 follow whatever you dialed in on the Master SB900.<br> So if you have your SB700 on a TT5, don't mess with the Master/Remote setting of the SB700, turn those Off and just leave it in TTL, or whatever you had it in before.<br> <br /> The latter of course means also you will have find out by trial and error the (power) settings/ratio's for the SB700 and SB80's/Yungnuo's that will give you the correct exposure.<br> No really a problem, since you would have to do so anyway as the output of your 'additional' speedlights are not remotely controlled (while being triggered) by the SB900 Master/TT1 anyway.<br> <br /> I use a similar set up when I e.g. mix my SB800's with my Bowens and Hensel studio flash units (which have built in optical flash triggers)</p>

<p>I assume (since it's mandatory if you want to trigger them manually) that your SB80 and Yungnuo flash units are in SU4 mode (is that what you describe as remote?) which will allow them to be triggered remotely by the flash of another unit (irrelevant of whatever mode the speedlights themselves are set in).</p> <p>This however also means they will also be triggered by the preflash of the SB700, if that is set in TTL mode, which means they will flash before the actual picture is taken, and leave them depleted on the moment it is.<br> So in order to have both the SB700 and the SB80/Youngnuo units to flash simultaneously, rather then the SB80 and Yungnuo's prematurely, you have to change the remote settings in your camera to Manual (which will also have your SB700 go in Manual lash, so not TTL or A etc, mode).</p> <p>I use TT5's both as trigger and receiver units, and I leave the (in my case) SB800's in whatever mode I want, without changing the settings to Remote mode.<br> The on camera PW will follow whatever I dialed in the camera's Remote Flash settings (in the camera's menu), override the 'old' settings anyway and follow whatever I dialed in on the camera. </p> <p>So if you have your SB700 on a TT5, don't mess with the Master/Remote setting of the SB700, turn those Off and just leave it in TTL, or whatever you had it in before.<br> The latter of course means also you will have find out by trial and error the (power) setting for the SB700 that will give you the correct exposure. No really a problem, since you would have to do so anyway as the output of your 'additional' speedlights are not remotely controlled (while being triggered) by the PW1 anyway.<br> I use a similar set up when I e.g. mix my SB800's with my Bowens and Hensel studio flash units (which have built in optical flash triggers)</p>

<p>Apart from Peter Lindbergh, you mention a bunch of different photographers you want to use an inspiration,.<br> But I think you're consequently making things way over complicated for you, as they all use different technical approaches, and distilling a specific 'style' out of it that will/might fit what you're after becomes nigh to impossible<br> From the mirage of photographers you mention I would like to focus on two, whose (technical) approach I have been studying/trying to analyze for some time now.</p> <p>With regards to Peter Lindbergh, and his use of a 'lighttent' it should be noted that in the pictures you quote he also very often uses (what I think are) huge HMI lights (and at times flash units) as additional light sources as 'frontal' lights, as eg is shown in many of his "Deauville' beach pictures http://www.supermodels.nl/Pages/NewsArticle.aspx?id=6656.<br> I tried asking him during meets at some exhibitions of his work I visited a few years ago in Germany, but understandably he was not very much inclined to give away his trade secrets.</p> <p>The Irving Penn pictures you quote are from his "Worlds in a Small Room' series, and the technique differs completely of that of Peter Lindbergh.<br> I am a long time owner of a copy of the book, and the simplicity with which the pictures were shot, respectively taken in New Guinea and Morocco, is quite humbling considering the vast array of technical options we nowadays have at our disposal, and think we can't do without.<br> The series were shot over a long period, starting in 1948 in Cuzco, Peru, and during the 50's and 60's next to the two locations already mentioned, also in eg Nepal, Paris, New York, Crete, Nahomey, under supervision of Conde Nast Publications for Vogue.<br> In the introduction he mentions that his aim is 'dealing with the person himself, away from the accidentals of his daily life' and to distill an image 'the cold light of day would put it onto film'.<br> <br />The latter was also defining in his technical approach, all pictures were shot with daylight only, possible (and preferably) in a old fashioned (northern light) daylight studio (or whatever building he could transform into resembling to that), and eg in the two pictures you show in his portable daylight studio, as described (and illustrated) here http://www.artic.edu/aic/collections/exhibitions/IrvingPennArchives/ethnographic .<br> As you can see his lighting was all (northern light) daylight with at times 'just' a reflection screen, on a Rolleiflex medium format camera, with his B&W shots on, as far as I have been able to research, Kodak Tri-X.<br> The latter may be of some importance to you, since the characteristics of Tri-X are significantly different from those of FP4, more grainy (but that will probably hardly be noticeable on large format) but, especially in daylight more contrasty (I was a long time fan of Tri-x in my filmshooting days, covering well over 25 years) and consequently delivery deeper shadow without supressing the highlights in the process, but yet still with a wide tonal reach.<br> Of course, the pictures are the result of his mastery of his superior technique, both of photography, and of printing mastery, so just getting hold of the materials he used won't automatically result in the same level of results.</p> <p>So I think that you should decide first on what technique you want to limit yourself to, and based on that choice go ahead, for better and worse, and shoot.<br> Based on that you can pick the elements/results you like, and continue to use, while making adjustments on the aspects which in introspect didn't work out the way you wanted.<br> A bit more work, but considering the investment you're planning to make in tent, equipment used (even if you only rent the large format camera, the total expense of camera. film and processing/printing will be considerable) IMO well worth the extra effort.<br> <br />And even if you're final shots will be on film, I would not hesitate to do your initial testing on digital first, just to see how a thought up (sorry if that's not correct, not a native English speaker) lighting set up or back ground rendering works out.<br> <br />My two cents, HTH</p>

<p>I have a DF but fortunately (knock on wood) haven't met the shutter issue you encountered so far (I shoot in manual exposure, in daylight condition usually Autoiso, little to non EV compensation).</p> <p>Have met it in the past with my D3 at very, very rare occasions, but at that time found it, considering the (in)frequency of it happening, too insignificant to look into (subject surf photography, D3 with 4/600 AF-I + TC 1.4, conditions: bright day, high FPS, AF-C, one point dynamic AF, Auto ISO, manual exposure, shutter speed 1/2000th and up)</p> <p>The D750 has reportedly had some shutter issues, for which Nikon has issued service notices https://nikoneurope-en.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/64946/locale/en_GB .<br> A colleague professional shooter I know has indeed encountered shutter failure on her early series D750 (although the aforementioned service notice only mentions 'shading' due to possible shutter issues).<br> <br />So it may be well worth it to had your Nikon service center have a close look at your D750 (possibly for free under the above service notice?).</p>

<p>As I'm not an expert on making composites of two or more pictures (in which case on a side note it would become digital manipulation, and means the question should be posted on Digital Darkroom) I would do it the old fashioned way.<br> I assume it's not a very long tunnel and the cars therefor will only take a few seconds o pass through it.</p> <p>First determine by playing around a bit what the longest exposure is at which the tunnel stays dark enough for the desired effect, while at the same time recording the passing cards lights in the way to get the light trail effect you're after.<br> You of course can do this well before you're doing the shoot with the model, without the model, and even take the test shots hand held since blurry and unsharp won't be important yet at that moment.<br> If you use a low ISO and close the lens down a few stops, you probably will end up with a shutter speed of several seconds.</p> <p>When you are going to take the actual picture with the model, put the camera on a tripod, and set up the flash. However don't connect the flash to the camera.<br> Dial in the settings you found (1st or 2nd curtain isn't relevant, as you basically want the light running from one side of the picture to the other, not just in front or behind the model).<br> Pose the model, take care you get as little, if possible none, fill in from the available light on the model, as possible, it will risk ruining the effect you're after. And it will also possibly mess up the color/skintone of the model (mixed flash and since it's in a tunnel fluorescent light, not the best combination) so IMO should be avoided as much as possible<br> Wait till you see a car at the beginning of the tunnel, at which moment you open the shutter.<br> While the shutter is open, wait till the car is more or less behind the model, and at that moment ignite the flash (most practical would be some kind of remote trigger which you can operate manually).<br />Close the shutter when the car is past the model and far enough to have the light trial from the head lights long enough to get the effect you like.<br> Check if you have the picture you're after (probably not the first time) and if necessary reshoot.</p> <p>The whole operation resembles old fashion 'light painting' technique, as used in the past to eg (partially) illuminate buildings or landscapes with a handheld of camera lightsource.<br> Joe Mcnally did something similar in this item in his blog http://blog.joemcnally.com/2008/07/02/rollin-with-the-pride-of-midtown/<br> In his picture, the street lights are recorded in the typical yellow/orange color you get when you shoot artificial light (3200-3400K) with the cameras WB on daylight/flash (5500K).<br> If you want to avoid that (although I personally don't find it disturbing in the Mcnally picture), put some daylight-to-tungsten filter over the flash, and put the WB on the camera on Artificial light. Now the flash and artificial light of the (in your case) car lights and tunnel lighting will be (more or less) balanced.</p> <p>On a side note, using flash in a dark tunnel with cars passing by? Hope the driver/drivers are friends of yours who are into the plot so they won't be surprised by the flash when they drive by. From that point of view, the digital composite picture is a safer solution</p> <p>my two cents</p>

<p><em><a href="/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?topic_id=23&msg_id=000zsy" rel="nofollow"><strong> Look at this photo.net thread</strong></a>, with reports from some users who had trouble with the F100 and others who did not.</em><br> The thread you refer illustrates my point. It was started in august 2000 and essentially bled to death in October of that same year.<em><br /></em><br> The various 'complaints' filed are all over the place, varying from battery consumption to LCD screens, basically the variety of complaints that are inevitable when an huge number of the same item is sold.<br> Compare the number of complaints with similar threads on modern DSLR's and it really becomes insignificant, also with on the other hand the fair share of very satisfied users in same thread in mind.<br> <br />Especially the last reaction is illustrative of the kind hyped up internet indignation which is so common nowadays, but was fortunately rare in those days, as witnessed by the lack of confirmatory reactions since.<br> Nikon however was sensitive to that kind of internet buzz, and the replacement of the plastic prongs for metal ones was as far as I understood from NPS, and from other F100 users who also didn't have any problems with them, more to as a precaution to silence any further hysteria rather then practical necessity. <br> <br />I did a search on Paul Chinn, but found no results on a photographer by that name nor photography/F100 related results, so can't comment on your referral to him. Nor have I found the, based on what you claim, deluge of complaints that apparently should be found on the internet. If any complaints can be found, they are from years after the introduction of the F100, mostly made by avid amateurs, not from the users who got the F100 shortly after the introduction in 1999.<br> I however don't see your comments reflected in the F100 reviews of well respected and proven professional photographers e.g. Bjorn Rosslet or Thom Hogan, nor in the feedback of many F100 users, nor my own experiences with it/having worked with it, rather then statements based on 'I read an obscure thread somewhere on the internet' or ' a photographer I know (but no one else does) says so'.</p>

<p><em>With the F100, there were early problems, particularly with the rewind mechanism</em></p> <p>Actually, by today's 'standards on what can do wrong with a DSLR, eg Nikon: problems with AF/F800 (although I have two and never had any issues regarding the AF, or anything else for that matter), dead batteries syndrom/D200, broken motherboard/D2H, or Canon : problems with AF : Eos 1DIII/IV/7D, the F100's 'problems' with the rewind mechanism was really 'much ado about nothing'.</p> <p>It was the beginning of the sort of hysteria that is so common on the internettoday, and concerned the camera's film rewind fork the prongs of which were made of some kind of plastic.<br /> Just like nowadays someone posted something about it, which was then picked up and then got blown out of proportion on. There were reports (I never saw them, nor had NPS Netherlands seen that kind of damage when I asked them about it at that time) that the prongs could under certain circumstances break of, which lead to Nikon replace them for free as a precautionary measure.<br /> I had it done on my F100 (still have it) as part of the free yearly camera service/cleaning NPS members are entitled to, even if I never had never noticed problems/issues with them. But it was for free, and a plus in case I wanted to sell the camera.</p> <p>However IMO the Dynamic AF of the F100, which was still in it's infancy back then, was a much bigger problem.<br /> When used with a manually selected AF point it worked great, as a single point, and in conjunction with other AF points for eg focus tracking, much like the single (much bigger) AF point of the F90/F90X.<br /> But if fully relied upon for fast moving subjects (similar to using todays 3D AF) it really wasn't up to it.<br /> Fortunately that has improved very much since in the DSLR's.</p> <p>Choosing between the F5 and F100 is a bit like the choice between a D3 and D700.<br> <br /> The F5 has a bigger body, bigger battery, somewhat bigger battery capacity, removable prism, more easily interchangable focusing screens, better data back.<br> <br /> The F100 has almost as good AF, is smaller, lighter, cheaper.<br> <br /> Back then I went for the F100 (and kept using F90X's on the side)</p>

<p>I already use Bowens Gemini monoheads with the S-mount lightmodifiers like barndoors, snoots. grids etc for 'focusing' the light.<br> I also am a long time user of Hedler C12 tungsten lights , which fit quite nicely inside the diameter of the Bowens S mount<br> My solution was to combine the two together, without breaking the bank.</p> <p>Bowens has an adapter on to which you can mount a speedlight on one side, and use the above mentioned S-mount light modifiers, as well as eg softboxes etc. on the other side, on any normal lightstand.<br> The official items is pretty expensive, but there are plenty of cheapo, but still all metal, knock offs around.</p> <p>Got a few of the cheap ones, and, while I left the L shape bracket onto which normally the speedlight would have been mounted on, removed the hotshoe mount itself.<br> I then got a metal strip of about 2 cm wide and 3mm thick, and took a piece of approx 15 cm. Bent that piece in an L shape and after some measuring drilled a hole in each 'arm'.</p> <p>With a simple bolt and butterfly nut I mounted the DIY L shaped bracket on the L shape bracket of the speedlight/bowens adapter where other wise the speedlight hotshoe would have been.<br> And with another bolt (actually a Hama 5124 camera screw, which has the proper size to fit the Helder C12) I then attached the Hedler C12 on the other size of the DIY L shaped bracket.</p> <p>Since the Hedler has forced air cooling there's no risk of seriously overheating the adapter nor attached light modifiers (all of which are all metal anyway) and with a few pieces of tape I can keep the power cable of the Hedler away from the back end'fan of the Hedler where the hot air is blown out of the lamp.<br> It may not look as slick as any manufactured made solution, but nothing similar is on sale anyway, and the costs for making the DIY solution are most likely a fraction of what, if such a thing was for sale, a store bought solution would have cost.</p><div></div>

<p><em>Your Instant film is most likely daylight balanced so either your light gets up to 5000/5500K or you filter either the light source (when mixing with daylight) or your camera if the light (or multiples) is the only illumination...HMI will be expensive and filtering a tungsten source will burn through filters if not placed at a sufficient distance (at movie shoots they have 4x4' frames placed a couple of feet in front the light source). Also, you're loosing quite a bit of light, whereas your camera needs quite a lot.</em><br /><em> So there isn't really a slam dunk solution.</em><br /><em> The best and cheapest i can think are fluorescent daylight, Kino Flo, Lowel Scandles which you can't really dim down. Otherwise i would look at LED Fresnel, the standard here being ARRI.</em><br /><em> As for your reference, Helmut usually traveled with a Metz CT45 for his Hasselblads and rented strobes. If you're thinking of Peter Lindbergh, who's are the master of continuous hard light (so many really...Herb Ritts...), that was a 1.2K HMI or the big ones 4 or even 12k on location and mostly 4K HMI in the studio. The large ones have the genius advantage of creating a hard light out of a very large fresnel, hard and soft to the same time...</em></p> <p>Well, a very nice, theoretically sound, statement<br> But from a real world point of view, not exactly very realistic recommendations for a beginner who wants to make his first steps into playing around with 'hard continuous light'</p> <p>I think I can safely say that if someone starts to take his first steps into this area, it won't be on anything resembling a film set. Nor will he have the money to invest into $1,000+ Kino Flo light sets http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/Kits/ci/12435/N/4232862101 or other sophisticated HMI lighting set ups.<br> A nice touch to mention the very basic set up Helmut Newton used to work with (did see him at work on location once, using just a simple Pentax SLR, a Polaroid Image instant camera, and - what looked like - a Hasselblad 500CM, and indeed just Metz 45CT flash) and in fact contradicting the whole 'Kino Flo, Lowel candles, LED' statement.</p> <p>So from a personal working experience, rather then theoretical, point of view I can only repeat that you really can, without risk of melting, maybe only of a little warping, tape a sheet of lee filter on a redhead of C12 at a distance of 10 inches or so by simply taping it on the barndoors.<br> And really don't need a 4'x4' frame and sheet of filter (just look at the lighting of many on location interviews on television, just a lamphead with a sheet of diffuser filter taped on the barndoors</p> <p>I can assure you you can get really good results even if only with a simple tungsten lamp, be it redhead, Hedler C12, or whatever you can depending on your finances get hold of.<br> <br />To illustrate that a slow tech/low investment set up (just one or two 1000W halogen lights, with or without an umbrella/diffuser, and with or without a simple collapsible reflection screen), all taken way - for professional use by the models or their agencies -back when in my film shooting days.<br> So with film speeds between ISO 64 and IS) 320, and a 2.8/80-200 Nikon AF-D lens wide open (being an aspiring photographer I for a long time didn't have the money nor - based on my shooting technique back then - need for a faster dedicated 'portrait' lens in those days ) : )</p> <p>http://www.pbase.com/paul_k/image/61044463<br> (cheapo tungsten film lamp/Kaiser Kino Leucht, silver umbrella, silver reflection screen Lee tungsten/daylight conversion filter on the lamp)</p> <p>http://www.pbase.com/paul_k/image/61052702<br> (cheapo tungsten film lamp/Kaiser Kino Leucht, silver umbrella, silver reflection screen)</p> <p>http://www.pbase.com/paul_k/image/121732318<br> http://www.pbase.com/paul_k/image/61052700<br> (cheapo tungsten film lamp/Kaiser Kino Leucht with Hensel standard flash reflector + grid)</p> <p>http://www.pbase.com/paul_k/image/121732325<br> (cheapo tungsten film lamp/Kaiser Kino Leucht, silver umbrella, silver reflection screen Lee tungsten/daylight conversion filter on the lamp)</p> <p>and a more recent shot<br> http://www.pbase.com/paul_k/image/161540859<br> (Hedler C12, with Hensel standard flash reflector + grid, Lee diffusor filter on the lamphead, Nikon DF )<br> The studio was left unharmed after the shoots, nothing burned down, and I still have/use most of the filters I used back then (why replace something when it's not broken/melted, but only maybe a little warped)</p> <p>And yes, I have a big closet with all the photographic paraphernalia/hardware I collected over the years :)</p> <p> </p>

<p><em>I had previously considered a redhead bootleg but was a bit worried about fire risk, particularly in a home environment</em></p> <p>Well, they do get pretty hot, as is to be expected since they lack forced air cooling. But from experience I don't think they provide a real fire hazard, on condition of course they're used in a sensible way (no paper or cloth on the housing).<br> When I used them I would tape (using simple masking tape) sheets of Lee filter on the barndoors (which do get pretty hot) without any problems (apart from hardened out glue residue on the barndoors, and due to the heat warped (but not melted) sheets of filter material</p> <p>Advantage though is that they (both original and knock offs) usually come with a swivel mount that allows them to be put on a lightstand (although that doesn't take an umbrella) and barndoors.<br> Also the lamp housing allows the filament to be moved forward and backward which make can give the light a wider or smaller angle.<br> <br />But the Hedlers of course are much smaller, although they need an additional swivel head/umbrella mount, and of course additional barndoors.<br> But compared to the redheads they do cool down much faster after usage.</p>

<p>The 600 AF-I, and later version with improved AF-S, were the first versions of the 600mm with AF, built and weight were based on the older manual focus units, and consequently they were big and heavy beasts.</p> <p>Owned and used the 600 AF-I myself for surf photography for several years, worked like a charm optically and AF speed wise even with a 1.4 TC http://www.pbase.com/paul_k/image/129061055 but lugging it (together with 2 D3's, a 200-400 VR, monopod and other small stuff) around for several miles over a loose sand beach under the burning sun was a back breaking job.</p> <p>The later AF-SII, and VR models are quite a bit lighter and 'smaller' (still big beasts anyway), and yes, that really is a major plus.</p>

<p>I would go for the Hedler C12's. The RMSP for eg a three lamp set is ridiculously high, but can be found for (just as ridiculously) low 2nd hand prices (On the Dutch version of eBay - called Marktplaats .nl - there e.g. currently is a working C12 lamp + lightstand + bag for sale for little over US40) . Only possible issue could be to find appropriate barndoors and other lightmodifiers to go with them.<br> <br />As far as power consumption is concerned, you can of course always put lower watt bulbs in them. I e.g. have several multi lamps sets of Hedlers lying around, some with 1250W bulbs, some with 1000W bulbs and some with 350W bulbs.<br> I especially use the last ones when I need some extra light, but want to shoot with my aperture wide open and high ISO. Since the bulbs are used at their full, but lower output, rather then being dimmed down with possible consequences for the color temperature (tungsten normallt 3200-3400K, but dimmed ? ? ? K)<br> Or you could go for Redheads. Again the classic Ianiro units will come at a hefty price, but there are plenty of much lower priced, while still pretty good quality (since the lamps are technically very simple, there's less electronic hardware to mess up), around, for as low as US $ 61 for a 800W unit.</p> <p>I wouldn't tinker around with trying to mount filters on your Polaroid camera, due to the small diameter of the lens most likely to take too much time and effort to find an appropriate sized filter.<br> Better just put some sheets of tungsten/daylight conversion filter (eg Roscoe 1/2 Blue CTB Color Conversion Gel Filter, only $ 6.48 a piece) on the lamps instead.</p> <p>Haven't worked with LED units as I shoot digital and consequently want to stay away from possible color temperature and wavelengh, and never considered HMI light because of the high cost, especially since I already have several Hedler C12 units lying around.</p>

<p>Thom Hogan wrote a pretty decent review - including comments on the usefulness for general photography - of this lens back in the days when he was actually reviewing equipment.</p>

<p>First remark: did you check the battery condition of the EN EL4A on a D2 or D3? They wil die eventually, and that can't be seen on the status light of the charger (MH21 I assume?) where, if you leave the battery on the charger long enough, it will show as 'fully charged' no matter the condition. The D2 and D3 have an option in the menu that will also show the condition of the battery from 4 (excellent) to 1 (close to death).</p> <p>Second remark: if by any chance the EN EL 4a is indeed dead, why not use (rechargable) AA batteries instead. Used to do so when I had/used a D300/MB10 combo, and still do nowadays with my D800/MB12. </p>

<p>I've been using Eye Fi mobi cards for a couple of years now, very on my DF and D800, in combination with a Samsung tablet (although I have the app also installed on my Macbook).<br> I use the Eye Fi Mobi card, which can only send jpeg's, but sending RAW files is no realistic option anyway. (eg D800 NEF's are even when compressed well over 40MB, the DF's ones around 20MB)<br> The app is easy to install, the Wifi works well within a range of, in my experience, maximum 4 to 5 feet between camera (with card) and tablet. If not used for a longer spell, you may have to toggle the Wifi setting of the tablet a little to reconnect, but not a major issue.<br> Prices of the Eye Fi cards have gone down considerably, so in hat respect no big risks either.</p> <p>I use it eg during shoots with models, in studio and outside, to be able to show them the pictures taken immediately on a bigger screen then the LCD of a DSLR, and thus better discuss what's right, in which case showing the pictures in a larger format helps boost moral, or wrong, in which case having the pictures around makes it much easier to explain.<br> Or e.g.when shooting catwalk, in which being able to show the pictures taken on a larger format immediately after the show makes it an excellent sale boosting tool.</p> <p>I'm not a social media junkie, so I really don't care whether I can 'automatically' upload them or whatever, or if I can't do that for 'free' . Since 'free' usually also means waiving the rights/copyright of the picture (see the terms and conditions of eg Facebook and Instagram) that isn't a viable option for a working photographer anyway.<br> If I do need to get/want for whatever reason a picture taken on line asap, I simply transfer the selected picture (why dump all pictures taken immediately on line anyway) to my phone using bluetooth, and then upload the picture on the preferred site with my phone.<br> <br /><br /></p>

<p>Of course you can use a 2/135DC for landscape, why shouldn't you?<br> After all, if you disregard the DC function (IMO more of a gimmick then a real added value, and I have a 2/135mm DC myself) and the fast aperture number, it's just a 135mm.<br> Way back in the film days (in the 60's and 70's) the 'standard' set for the ambitious amateur photographer were a 3.5/28mm, a 2.0/50mm and a 2.8/135mmm, with the 135mm considered the 'telelens' (long fast lenses were not as affordable back then as they are nowadays, or at least people were as willing to go into debt to buy one as nowadays. The 'attraction' of credit cards I assume).</p> <p>But of course landscapes were not really what this lens was designed for, but rather for portrait etc. So if not used for that portraits/people, it's just a fast 135mm lens, and then the fact that it's a 20+ year old design starts to weigh in. The 135mm DC is designed with a specific use in mind, and will shine if used in that way, but question marks can be placed when it's used for other, more general purposes.<br> And at that moment of course the DXO lovers can start sharpening their knives over the fact that the Otis, Batis, Fotus, Art or whatever name lenses apparently need to have these days, are 'sharper', have less Chromatic Aberrations, etc. (which of course is more important then whether the picture is actually any good).<br> A bit like the 1.4/58mm AF, which in many reviews is considered outclassed by lower priced competitors based on DXO and MTF charts, but in the hand of m the actual users cherished for the unique way of image rendering and bokeh.</p> <p>So IMO, if you already have it, sure, why not use it for landscapes. Maybe not the first and best pick, but you have to work with what you got.<br> But if on the other hand landscapes are what you intend to use it for most of the time, there probably are, technically speaking, better, and maybe even cheaper, alternatives around.</p> <p> </p>

<p>To begin with, you'll be needing flash equipment, in order to be able to capture the dancers while they're moving ( I have experience with shooting dance and catwalk, and therefor am in a position that it's obviously impossible to ask a dancer/model to 'hold' a position mid movement in order to focus, adjust the lighting etc). Depending on your finances those flash units can be speedlights, or studio units like eg monoblocs.</p> <p>Speedlights are relatively cheap, and have the advantage of very short flash duration times. But you'll be needing multiple, powerful, units and complementary batterypacks to be able to still get fast recycle times when you're shooting with your aperture closed down, or if your lens isn't fast (like the 3.5 lens you're having right now).<br> So in the end the total costs can easily get as high, or even higher, then buying studio flashes (especially if you get cheapo Chinese units, which I BTW recommend to be very careful with, considering the often reported problems with their built quality).</p> <p>Studio units are nice, especially since they come with modelling lights, which will enable you to see beforehand what your lights are doing (and how the shadows will look like). But as said, good ones don't come cheap, and you'll need powerfull ones; not so much for the output at full power, but rather because when you dial the flash settings lower, the recycle times (and consequently duration of the flash) will get faster/shorter, and better 'freeze' the movement of the dancer (yes, there are 'special ultra fast' studio flash units on the market, but that feature comes at a premium).</p> <p>The whole 'umbrella, softbox,o ctobox' thing really isn't that important. At the moment octoboxes are rage, and seem, based on the opinion of the internet experts the 'must have's'. But a couple of years then same was said about softboxes (vs umbrellas). A bit surprising, since the only difference basically is the shape, rectangular vs octagon (sure there is a difference in light fall off in the corners, but tht's not really relevant for the lighting of a wide area you'll be after).<br> For the photography you describe for starters you'll just be needing light modifiers that give a wide evenly distributed light. IMO overthinking about grids etc is a bit premature, since I have the impression you don't have any experience with studio lighting, and first have to learn the basics. <br> And the easiest light modifiers to begin with are simple umbrella's, cheap (so you won't afterwards regret having blown a ton of money on what maybe turned out the wrong choice), and easy to work with (give a lot of evenly spread light, so less issues with unwanted shadows) and are easy to handle and transport (Just fold them open, or fold them closed, try that with a softbox)<br> Even despite the fact I have a number of studio flash units (Bowens, Hensel) with all the 'mandatory' accesories (softboxes. snoots, grids. barnsdoors) at my disposal, I still rely on the experience I have gathered in the past shooting (on film) with 'simple' halogen tungsten lights with umbrellas eg http://www.pbase.com/paul_k/image/61052707</p> <p>I can't look into your wallet, but my suggestion would be two (preferably) studio flash units with umbrellas for the 'frontal' lighting of the model, two flash units (studio would be nice, but speedlights might do the job just as good) for the lighting of the background.<br> Of course some kind of reflection screen always comes in handy (in the beginning simple styrofoam shelves from your local DIY market are more then enough).<br> And don't forget you'll be needing lightstands for your flash units as well. Since you'll be shooting inside, no need for fancy radio triggers. You can trigger on flash unit with a cable or a cheapo 'dumb' radio trigger (no need for TTL steering) and trigger the other units via an optical slave (studio units have a built in cell most of the time, just like the higher end speedlights. Otherwise you can find such optical triggers for e.g. under US $ 7 a piece on the internet)</p> <p>But before getting al that equipment I would rather read up on studio lighting, and in particular the kind of lighting you want, first, plenty of 'tutorials' on that around on the net, eg https://photoflex.com/pls/the-pure-white-background-done-right (not affiliated with them in any way or form)</p> <p>HTH</p> <p> </p>

<p>I had the 1st version of the 2.8/80-200 AF ED and later the 2nd edition 2.8/80-200 AF-D ED.<br> The latter was my bread and butter workhorse for nearly twenty years, used intinitally on film bodies like F801 to F100, and later on DSLR's from D70S, D1/D1H/D1X/D2X to D3 for anything from event, to fashion, to catwalk.<br> <br />Even wide open the IQ of the 2nd version was more then acceptable wide open on the aforementioned camera's, just like the AF speed, while the lack of a tripod foot wasn't a real issue.</p> <p>However when I upgraded to a D800, the softness wide open, especially at 200mm, became quite evident and overly noticeable, and may seem like a haze when used on finely detailed subjects.<br> So with much regret I sold it as part of my upgrade to a 2.8/70-200 VRII. Much sharper wide open at 200, while the focus breathing is not an issue since I use primes when I shoot close up portrait/beauty, tripod foot is nice, don't use the VR.</p> <p> </p>

<p>Daylight from big windows or big very diffused light source on the right/upper right side, depending on size of the windows/lightsource possibly a reflector for fill on the left side (although that does not show in the reflections in the eyes)<br> Given the 'lack' of extreme sharpness most likely no flash (which in any case would be useless for video)</p> <p>If the pictures were in color, WB would probably/obviously be daylight; for shooting in b/w that would be less relevant.<br> Given the indoor location WB would most likely be on the cool side, but whether to set for a warmer or cooler WB/tone<br /> is a matter of personal choice/preference</p>

<p>You get what you pay for</p> <p>I have gradually over the years bought an number of PW TT'5, and have found them very reliable both with my speedlights (SB600, SB800, SB910 and even SB400, all used in CLS and manual mode) and my Bowens and Hensel monolights (only need an extra, if somewhat expensive, cable).<br> I have both the SU800 and AC3 controllers, so being able to adjust and even switch off any of the speedlights and some of the monolights (some of the monolights have a built in optical slave which bypasses the TT5 even when it's switched off) while on the go is part of my normal work flow.<br> <br />Phottix has the Odin range which offers similar possibilities, at a lower price, which are also well reputed, although some compatibility issues have been reported with some newer Nikon camera models</p> <p>If you don't need TTL, PW has the well renowned Plux III and cheaper Plus X, while Phottix has the lower priced Strato range<br> Both brands have an excellent reputation as far as functionality and reliability is concerned, even if not the cheapest one around.</p> <p>There are plenty of cheapo radio triggers from other manufacturers around.<br> But in the end you get what you pay for, and the 'extra' money you spend for a higher marker segment product usually turns out well spend in the end when issues about quality and compatibility arise which demand after market customer service.</p>

<p>I use it as a rule when I want to shoot in Manual mode, as I prefer to keep control of the shutter speed and aperture chosen, but have to shoot under circumstances with constantly changing light and there's no time on constantly adjust the shutterspeed and aperture.</p> <p>Under those circumstances, and considering the subject ,<br> e.g. catwalk http://www.pbase.com/paul_k/image/162166713<br> fashion on outside location http://www.pbase.com/paul_k/image/162085894<br> 0r surf, shore to sea http://www.pbase.com/paul_k/image/129060792<br> Auto ISO is ideal.</p> <p>I don't use it under circumstances when I have total control of the light, or can take enough time to change my camera settings while shooting, eg in a studio http://www.pbase.com/paul_k/image/161552195 , or with portraits, stills, architecture, landscapes or other types of static subjects.</p> <p>Auto ISO already was available with eg the D2X and D70S, but I only started using it with the D3 where it also became usable in Manual Mode and with the full range of shutter speeds, including those over 1/250th.</p> <p> </p>

<p>For starters, judging by the backrest, you're using different chairs, with different colors of upholstry, in the 1st and 2nd picture<br> This causes an extra problem, since it make it harder to correctly judge the difference between them</p> <p>But from the histograms in the 'technical overview' picture I get the impression that the 2nd picture is considerably over exposed (as shown by the histogram which peaks at the edge of the right side).<br> Also the light on the white background in the 2nd picture obviously is quite overexposed as is shown by the spill that over exposes the edge of the seat of the chair.</p> <p>Don't know your lighting set up, but to get a subject properly lit, and the background white, you'll have to separately light the background, and the subject, as discussed here http://www.photo.net/photography-lighting-equipment-techniques-forum/00Ih9u</p> <p> </p>

<p>Not an issue of how many meters you put between your background and subject.<br> Problem is that even if you've put the speedlight behind the subject, it's basically still directly in front of the camera, even if bounced against the background. Still remains a lot of frontally towards the lens camera/lens aimed light, with the resulting flare and over exposure</p> <p>You can easily go close to the background, but instead of placing the flash almost straight behind the subject, put it sideways and aimed in an 45 or 60 degrees angle (whatever you prefer) on the background.<br> In order to get an evenly exposed (whitish) background, place a second speedlight opposite of the first one, similarly sideways and in an angle.<br> And of course you'll need a third speedlight on/near the camera as the main light for your subject.</p> <p>This type of shot (properly exposed subject against a white background) is close to impossible to do with only one speedlight.</p>