DB_Gallery

Thanks for the Google advance search advice...believe me, I like to make damn good and sure I covered my bases before I post a question like I did about lenses for ULF.

Yes, that is me, KM, PKM, etc. Obviously I have shot a good amount of Kodachrome, even 25 as recently as January 2011. With the D810, it's base ISO is actually 64 now so you can go into the extended range and pull it one stop to ISO 32 which will still have a lot more dynamic range than Kodachrome 25 did, so pretty darn close if not perfect for you really. I actually use my D810 more than my Nikon 9000ED film scanner now due to how well it reaches into the shadows and the resulting file sizes are bigger than the scanner. I am in the process of obtaining linear V-groove bearings for an X-Y scanning stage to use with the camera...it's likely I will sell my scanner once it is automated in it's programmed movements for larger format stitching. Hope this helps, Dan

I did a job last night in where I used 12800 for max depth of field in medium low light and it just sang! My use of a D610 to backup my 810 was short lived, the 750 is killer...

Dan Fromm wrote: "My wife has given me budget to buy a good grade of full-frame F-mount digital SLR. I'm waiting for Nikon to release the digital equivalent of a Nikkormat that will let meter properly and easily with my AI-converted, AI and AIS Nikkors. Ain't gonna happen." Interesting Dan...I have been using Ai and AIS glass on Nikon F mount digital bodies for 20 years now in a professional capacity, never had an issue with metering. I'd say get your self a slick new D750, put those non-CPU lens data values in and go to town. Meanwhile when I am not shooting my Nikon digital, I will shooting medium format, 4x5 and in the future 16x20 film to make amazing silver gel prints until I die....and I have a few years ahead of me sir. Lenses to cover 16x20 at infinity Dan...remember that discussion?

But that's the thing Karim, a photo credit used to be important for exposure...now the wrong kind of exposure can be leathal for a business. People who use photos for free with the promise of a photo credit and "It will be good exposure" are simply taking advantage of all the amatuers that are practically tripping over each other for that photo credit. If it is so important to you that as a hobby shooter your work has value beyond the fact you do it for your self as so many amateur camera owners claim, then the *only* way to know that value has been reciprocated is that you got paid, period! Otherwise, it is one big game of amatuer camera owners reveling in the sharing aspect of living in the now but living in the past as to it's actual societal and financial value. If you throw a party at your modest home and 35 people show up, I'd say it's likely to be a great party. But if 3,000 people show up in the same sized house....well my friend, like the prospect of easy money with stock or an amatuer camera owner earning a dime with their photography....?...the party is over.

Ellis, wow, that is heartbreaking. I don't doubt I lose a fair bit of exposure and income from not having a web presence....but man am I *much* happier in my work that way. And the really good thing about it is that I have people looking out for me, clients, friends, networking, so I don't think I lose out too much. But to just throw in the towel like that poor guy, well let's just say if I ever had to give it up as a career I would give photography period. Otherwise it would just be too hard to cope with...

<p>I still do fairly well with it but I shoot really hard to get access to niches and even then, present the work in a non-public access, password protected website. It's not like it used to be though when I could pull in 10-20K per month.<br /> <br /> The statement above of producing work for a photo credit is ironically hilarious since I have actually had art directors using a shot in an ad ask me if I want one and I say HELL NO since I don't want wannabes poking around my work, LOL!<br> A photo credit is not valuable anymore Karim...you know that, right?</p>

<p>Karim wrote:</p> <blockquote> <p>I don't think so, Daniel. Digital has so much to recommend it.</p> </blockquote> <p>Nah, think about that statement again, digital as we know it which is now, will be *very* different in 20-30 years while black and white film and the darkroom will be the same niche it is now, you can bank on that.<br> I don't totally hate on digital, I just picked up all kinds of beautiful collateral printed tear sheets from one of my major clients a bit ago, couple of infrared film shots and mostly digital. I also upgraded the snot out of my computers and bought a D810, D750 and X100T, all good. <br> But black and white film buddy boy....now we are talking career longevity for this guy..:-)</p><div></div>

<p>Howard Vrankin wrote:</p> <blockquote> <p>Besides, how many full time professional photographers have said that digital technology is superior? All of the few whom I've read!</p> </blockquote> <p>You can add one more to the list, but I feel differently about it and don't think digital is superior. I actually think film is superior *for my needs* because I do my best work with it, I am more emotionally connected to the journey and like the feeling of not walking arm in arm with billions of digital toting enthusiast and pros. From a business standpoint it has proven year on year to be one of the best career moves I have ever done. This is with black and white film hand printed in a real darkroom of course, no computers in sight...<br> <br /> Ivo Ivo wrote:</p> <blockquote> <p>Although I shoot film exclusively and love it, in my opinion it's days are numbered - the savage logic of capitalism and the violence of the market will wipe it out.</p> </blockquote> <p>You are familiar with Ilford / Harman...right? They are increasingly profitable as more and more people turn to a more hand crafted approach to arriving at a final image. So I disagree, not only are film's days not numbered but are actually coming back into vogue in fresh new works by talented and influential photographers and enthusiasts alike. <br /> Film will *easily* outlive digital as we know it. The latter is designed to self obsolete, the former is designed for the true artist. </p>

<blockquote> <p>I come from medium format photography and i work on a semipro / pro level.</p> </blockquote> <p>Pssst.....you are either a pro who earns an actual bill paying living full time or you are an enthusiast who collects some part time cash. This is 2014, there is no such thing as "Semi-pro".<br> Just an FYI....</p>

I have the 810 & 750. I love the 750 but find the shutter / mirror noise to be louder than the D800 which was the loudest 35mm SLR I have ever owned. On the other side of that equation, the 810 is the quietest SLR I have ever owned so it seems to be working out.

Yeah....it's pretty bad. I understand they had to get a new platform up and running since the old one was crashing so much but this new concept is just plain bad. I bet they lose up to 10% of overall sales because of lost impulse purchases which happen when a product is easy to find. I think I will call them and just converse about it instead of an email, they deserve to do well as they always have, not lose revenue due to some lame site.

Why "venture" into wedding photography? How about just enjoying your hobby? I don't do weddings but if I did, I would not choose the D750 over the 810 because the 810 is much quieter than the 750. I own both but I think the 810 is a better camera for my corporate journalism work, it is just so quiet. I bought the 750 for ski season and it will be great for that.

The deepest the camera has gone for this type of shoot is two feet since it is in shallow mountain streams, my pocket wizard has worked fine for that, I suspect the wifi might too.

I suppose I will just have to get used to it as it seems ISO, Quality and White Balance now prompt the rear display on by default. I think I will add the custom function toggle of light to dark, dark to light to my menu though as I don't mind it changing in most situations, just don't need it doing that when changing a setting at an event that would see the camera occasionally point towards a spotlight while changing it. Speaking of events, the camera is not as quiet as the 610 or 810 so the 810 is king for low key. On other notes the shooting remotely via wifi and my phone is super slick, will be awesome for a project I am doing on the health of rivers where the camera is in an underwater housing. Also, the metering and white balance are a indeed the improvement over the D610 I expected since it uses the same system as the 810. I am fairly certain they had to do the rear LCD thing because the top right LCD is considerably smaller now. Thanks for aiding in the investigation!

<p>By the way, the camera is fairly impressive, it did manage to focus on a medium contrast subject at 1/80th @ 1.4, ISO 51,200.</p>

Got a D750 question / concern, hopefully there is an embarrassingly simple solution to it. I have only had the camera for a day and have not located the topic in the manual but when changing things like ISO, image quality or white balance, the info now lights up on the back screen which I find pretty distracting over just having it on the top LCD and will likely be a big distraction for some work I do where I have to be low key. I figure this is done because the top LCD is now pretty small so that info would be cramped? For example, the only thing that shows up on the top LCD during a white balance adjustment is the bias, no overall settings like going from auto to tungsten to sunlight. It does show the number for the kelvin setting when selecting that on the back LCD. If anyone knows of a way to disable the rear panel from lighting up and just using the top LCD when changing ISO, quality or white balance, I would love to know...because it is going to be hella distracting when shooting in dark venues.

Where I see the biggest difference in Leica to other camera systems is the way the glass treats slide film. I especially saw it in Kodachrome which is also where I noticed it most in Nat Geo from the late 70's into the 90's. I now shoot mostly black and white and it is not as big a difference if at all, I could bump up 1/2 a paper grade with Nikon glass in printing and no one would be the wiser, especially when using stellar lenses like the 24 & 35 1.4G which also give Leica glass a run for it's money in color. The latter is why I sold almost all my Leica gear, the newest glass from Nikon is nipping at the heels of modern Leitz for thousands less. But I still have one M3 and a fabulous 50mm 1.4 aspheric that I love to shoot black and white in and look forward to doing a project on Fuji Provia 400X. Lenses like the 35mm 1.4 and 50mm 1.4 aspheric still give that Leica look especially wide open, they just pull a much more cinematic and rich tonal range out of medium to low light, it's stunning when it shines... Other than that, it is a state of mind....

The owner of the Photobackpacker / Renaissance Photo Tech product line is closing shop after a ten year run in order to retire. I recently invested in a rather expansive and comprehensive kit for my 4x5 equipment and I have to say the stuff is brilliant. The P3 pack is about as comfortable a pack as any I have ever used, certainly far more than a photo-brand pack. The backerboards, lens and camera cases are super light and work incredibly well with each other and even other packs as a system and the cascading film holder cases are marvelous to work with in the field. Simply put, the system he is selling that can be used with a lot of formats is in another league. There is a thread in the "Gear" section of Large Format Forum that spells it all out and even gives a discount code. I not sure what all he has left in stock but it is well worth the money if you are looking for a great way to just more than carry a few bits of gear. It's amazing stuff! http://www.photobackpacker.com/

I am replacing my 610 with the 750 for a couple reasons. I have used the 610 as a backup camera and a sports ( snow ) camera since the frame rate is plenty fast enough for that. But the higher ISO noise is a bit much and the AWB & AE are no where near as good as my 810. So it makes jobs harder in that the two cameras put out such different files. In addition to the extra speed, I notice it uses the same new meter as the 810 so I am willing to bet that in terms of color tone and exposure consistency, the 750 will pair well with the 810. I think it is great Nikon is introducing these new cameras, the price point is right where I want it for otherwise disposable digital...I have never paid 6K for a darn computer camera and never will.

I think it is all priced right at or even below where it should be given that it is a niche. I don't find Ilford to be that much cheaper than Kodak, but then I have never bulk rolled film, too much hassle and risk of scratching. Black and white film is now a great niche, even if it doubled in price I would have no issues paying for it, well worth it

<p>It all depends on what you want, or in the case of a pro, need from a camera.<br /> The main things I had issues with in the D800 was how loud the clacking shutter is, slow the frame rate is and how hit and miss the focus was.<br /> <br /> I'm about 16,000 frames into the first D810 I bought, picked up a second a few weeks ago when I saw how much better the metering is in the D810 over my previous backup, the D610.....same with the AWB. I don't do landscapes with the D810 or any digital for that matter, that is the realm of medium and large format black and white film for me. What I *do* use it for is high end action oriented advertising & corporate journalism where quiet is king.<br /> <br /> So for my needs, the D810 blows the D800 out of the water in nearly every regard. Even the resulting files have a bit more bite if great glass is used. And the shutter noise...wow...the D800 was damn near as loud as a Hasselblad in overall head turning effect and the D810 is by far the quietest 35mm SLR I have ever used. The vibration is virtually nonexistent, for kicks during a recent ad shoot I hand held my 35mm 1.4G in starlight at ISO 12,800 for one second. In five frame bursts, two of the three were TACK sharp!<br /> <br /> Everyone is different, I despised the shutter and mirror in the D800, especially after it blew apart on a shoot at 85,000 frames. The D810 is a *Killer* upgrade for me.</p>

<p>With sheet film as expensive as it is and gas even more so, for pete's sake, don't cheap out on the processing. A Jobo 3010 Expert Drum on a Beseler motor base will give you the best looking, streak and scratch free bitingly sharp film you have ever seen. If I am running a lot of film, like 40+ sheets, I will use both 3010 drums on my CPP2, if 30 or less, I will use the motor base. <br> <br /> As much as I tried to like trays and the Mod54, anything other than the 3010 drum is just a waste of time and energy in my opinion.</p>

I had a Mod54 a couple years back, after scratching sheet film that cost me hundreds of dollars in man hours, gas money and film to shoot, I bought a Jobo 3010 and a motor base and realized what a waste of time and money the mod was. I now have a CPP2 and two 3010 drums, will get third.... I can not for the life of me figure out why people spend hundreds if not thousands on shooting 4x5 only to use some pain in the rear developing method that wrecks the film.

<p>Glad to hear he is doing better, nice guy for sure...<strong>. </strong> I bought 10 light trap seals from him a number of years back. I also bought the repair manual he sells for repairing film backs, I own ten of them and it tells you exactly how to make the light trap seals your self. That being said, I just ordered ten more light trap seals, cheap insurance.</p> <p> </p>