I have the 300 2.8 and the Sigma 150-600. I prefer the image quality of the 300 even if I have to heavily crop, but the Sigma is the one on the camera most of the time when I'm out and about because it's lighter, and the extra length comes in handy when you are photographing a hawk halfway across a field. And finally if I drop it and have to replace it - I won't cry nearly as hard as I did when I dropped my Nikon 600 f4.
Dr.Nikon wrote:
Get a Nikon P900 or its new replacement ..., or the Samsung 60 Bridge and don't look back .. you'll have the reach of a mega zoom when you need it and a wide angle instantly when you need it .. decent pics on the fly .., no muss .., no fuss ...enjoy Africa ..I assume Safari style ..no heavy lenses to pack around and get dirt in ..when in the bush ...no time for set up ..
I am waiting on the new Nikon P900 Bridge replacement with a 1000 mm reach .. and multiple image stabilization features ...
It all depends on the reason for your Africa trip ... if it is a serious photo shoot trip ...a real camera and prime lenses as I have ....otherwise .. a fun adventure with lots of photo opportunities just to capture all of the sights.., animals ... take the best bridge camera made ...and enjoy your vacation .., especially if you are going with a significant other .. who doesn't want to spent the whole trip as an assistant to your photography ... that would be boring ..
My thoughts..
Get a Nikon P900 or its new replacement ..., or th... (
show quote)
I know several people that have purchased the P900 for trips to Alaska (perk of living on the Alaska Highway) and they have been very happy with the results. And although I have never used it I have seen the photos and they are from average to incredible.
I bought my D300 as refurbished and it's going on 116,000 images.
The eye, because you have to be able to see, and then the finger, to control the timing. The rest isn't anywhere near as relevant.
For years as a photojournalist I carried three lens that did over 90% of what I needed on film. A 28mm 2.8, A 50 1.4, and a 105 3.5, so the one lens that does all of that on a crop sensor will in the area of a 17-70 2/8. Of that doesn't cover it you have moved into the realm of needing a specialty lens. And depending on what direction your work takes that would either be a ultra wide angle, a short telephoto, or a monster telephoto. Nikons 18-105 and 18-135 would be great if you could find one with optics that didn't match that of a coke bottle. The 18-140 also fits in that realm - but I've never used it so no idea. The 18-200 or 18-300 are both compromises and so do nothing great, but everything sort of OK.
FrankR wrote:
The position that there is no such thing as a wild horse, that horses are a non native species is not supported by paleontological or modern molecular genetic evidence. The horse originated in America and spread to every continent except Australia and Antarctica. While it is true that the species did disappear (some claim as recently as 7,600 years ago) from North America, they are in fact, a native species which developed here. The designation of feral or non native have no basis in science or fact and were applied to serve interests other than science.
The position that there is no such thing as a wild... (
show quote)
A load of horse pucky. The horse was introduced to the new world by the Spanish. They made it into the west around the 1700's. You can trace the advancement of the horse through the Americas by their adoption by the Native tribes.
I find the 300 2.8 to be considerably sharper than the zooms. Never used it with the teleconverter, but many times I prefer the image from the 300 that is cropped, than from the high zooms, and I've got an OLD 300 2.8 so no VR in it.
Hot soapy water. What you are trying to remove is the oil that is used in the forming process of the bottle.
ken hubert wrote:
How about less cattle on the land. That's where the problem stems from!
No that is not where the problem stems. The problem stems from A) there is no such thing as a wild horse. They are feral horses - that is a domesticated animal that was released to the wild. B) horses are an introduced species and are not natural to the country C) There was a reason why horses were called hay burners back when they were used for everything. A horse will starve to death of land that a cow will grow fat on. D) they destroy the range and make it unfit for other natural animals of the ecosystem D) the problem comes from all of the above and a large number of uninformed people that have a attachment to a feral animal and so protest any kind of control methods to keep their numbers in check. E) what should really be done, is eliminate the feral horse from the country entirely because they were never meant to be there in the first place.
I have only ever used FX lens on my D300
James R wrote:
=========
Yes... Down-Loading, anything, can get you problems. So with that said - KNOW your source. Always KNOW.
The [PDF] files that I D.L. are good - as I can tell the difference. One again KNOW the source.
When I pass on ANY [PDF], I KNOW that it is true and good. I just do NOT pass along the LINK to the site (sometimes I do IF that is What the person wants). I send files that have been through a good "scrubbing" and do Not contain CRAP linking to ANYTHING. Some people like the link - Well! They might be taking a chance. However those as well have been checked and are good that I have on file.
One does take the chance with the links - With total files, no. I will send to anyone that wants them good and true [PDF] files for their edification, education and help. Never ever had problems.
Sorry if you did. Check them before just Jumping in.
The file that I am intending to send is a [PDF] of Bryan Peterson's books - I have most of what he had written. Just "Private Message" me and I shall send.
-0-
========= br br Yes... Down-Loading, anything, c... (
show quote)
I'm not talking about that stuff. I'm talking about the information itself. So much of it is just wrong.
James R wrote:
=============
Yes!
I have a very good [PDF] "library" I keep on what I call my "Information Drive" (It's a 500 Gig. Portable) .. However. I can Up-Load to my KINDLE "Fire". and read books on that. Bought it as an 'Open-Box' item at Best-Buy for I think Under 100 bucks a few years ago. There are a LOT of [PDF] files Out There to have - some (like e-Books you purchase) - However - Most are No Charge to D.L. and save for later reference.
-0-
I would be very leery of anything that was downloaded from the net. I had the misfortune to be housebound for a week or so with nothing better to do than peruse the net, and most of the stuff that I found was not just bad, but down right wrong. It may sound good to those that don't know better but most of what I found was parroting of popular urban myths.
imagemeister wrote:
John Hedgecoe put out some excellent books back in the eighties when I was teaching - I used one of his books as a text for my basic photo class. The Time/Life series on photography is excellent also. These books were film based but did give you good basics. Today, you would have to add digital/sensor and software to the basic mix.
"Camera & Craft" by Focal Press is one of the better recent books I have seen.
I would second this recommendation - everything you need to know about photography in one book. The best part is, because it was written back in the days of film and actually printed, it doesn't have much if bad information, unlike many of the books etc you find today
Robeng wrote:
Nikon Professional Service, free to photographers that use Nikon equipment.
Rob
Not quite. You need to be a photographer that has at least two Pro level Nikon bodies to apply. Not sure about now, but it used to be D2, D3, D4, and I would imagine now a D5 bodies were the only ones that counted as pro.
billnikon wrote:
When I did PROFESSIONAL WEDDING PHOTOGRAPHY I had two meetings before the wedding with the bride and covered all bases. At the rehearsal I always meet with the presiding official and went over the wedding shots I was going to take. We always agreed he/she would make an announcement before the wedding starting exactly what were the rules of the church with regards to photography during the ceremony. I NEVER HAD A PROBLEM. We headed 99% of the problems expressed here AHEAD of time. I had an excellent reputation with the clergy in my area. During the wedding when their was a prayer, I prayed along with everyone else.
I know there have been many discussions about folks doing their relatives a favor taking snap shots for their wedding. But it's like I told someone once, "So, you hire a friend to roof your house, do plumbing for you or allow a friend to pull your teeth, or allow a relative will do an operation on you to save you money? Really? So when it comes to weddings, leave it to the pro's. We all will get along better. That's why their is a profession for photographers too.
When I did PROFESSIONAL WEDDING PHOTOGRAPHY I had ... (
show quote)
I really am beating this dead horse. None of that matters when the guests don't bother to pay attention and more and more that is what happens at a wedding. You have two dozen people with their cell phones standing up at the alter getting their shots. That is after the priest has said no photos. I also was at one wedding where the priest actually stopped the ceremony and would not continue until one cell phone expert left the church. And they damn near had to call the cops to get him to leave because he was entitled to be wherever he wanted to be to get "The Shot".