TwinFin16 wrote:
I'm going camping this weekend and was curious if anyone had any tips for shooting around the campfire? I'll be using my D300s w/the Nikon DX 35mm F1.8
I know I'll probably have to shoot around 1 second at F1.8-2.8 but What should I set my ISO at and should i rely on white balance (auto)?
Thanks UH.
Do you have a flash with wireless mode? I previously discussed a technique to use off-camera flash to enhance the glow of the fire so you can light the faces of the campers better:
http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-36319-2.html
Edmund Dworakowski wrote:
The rumer is that Nikon will soon come out with a new low cost Full Frame body the D600. At $1600.00 would you go full frame or stick with DX ? I shoot a D300s and have a large investment in DX glass and would wait for a hopefully spectaclar D400. What is your opinion ?
I'm in the same boat as you are. I keep toying with the idea of FX, but still really like my D300 and have a lot of DX glass. Since I'm in no hurry to rush out and buy the latest thing, I'm willing to wait until we know real details of the elusive D600 and D400.
mrblackett wrote:
http://www.ebay.com/ctg/Nikon-D2X-12-4-MP-Digital-SLR-Camera-Black-Body-Only-/100110181?rt=nc&_dmpt=Digital_Cameras&_pcategid=31388&_pcatid=782&_pdpal=1&_trksid=p5360.c0.m2000019
The D2X is an APS-C crop sensor.
Opus wrote:
Ask yourself if a full frame is needed for the photography that you do. Unless you intend to make giant enlargements or you have some full frames lens you are probably better off staying with what you have.
Full frame isn't necessarily about making big prints. Other advantages are typically lower noise (especially at higher ISO settings), higher dynamic range, shallower depth of field capabilities, to name a few. I agree with you about the lens choice issue, could be a problem considering the OP's budget.
rpavich wrote:
I'm thinking about buying one for my eyeglasses! I have two lick-happy pugs.
Sounds like you already have the perfect lens cleaning system, Lens Pugs. :-)
hrsail wrote:
Thanks all. I am leaning toward Sony NEX 5N. Price seems reasonable and able to use my old Nikor lenses with adapter.
I have the NEX 5N and am having lots of fun with it, mainly for the reason you mention here. I have many old, excellent quality lenses that I can use with the adapters. I thought I'd have to retire all of the glass from my film cameras, but now my old Nikon, Topcon and Zeiss lenses have been given a new lease on life. The focus peaking on the NEX cameras makes using manual focus very easy.
As much as I hated paying for the add-on viewfinder (seemed quite expensive for such a little thing), I think it makes the camera much better. The NEX 7 wasn't out when I got mine, it has the built in viewfinder and higher resolution sensor. I think it would be a great option for not a lot more money than the 5N + viewfinder.
dickparkans wrote:
How about trying Portrait Professional? The upgrade version works with RAW.
Sorry for the off-topic reply, but I've seen the "dead people" avitar before - on your t-shirt! Hi Dick, hope things are going well across the street. :-D
GoofyNewfie wrote:
stevenkl wrote:
I gave her my little ILC for her birthday and shes' gone wild with it! She is shooting videos for Youtube...
OK, I give,. What's an ILC?
It's Interchangeable Lens COMPACT (as opposed to all of the other interchangeable lens cameras, e.g. SLR, MF). It is the term Popular Photography magazine uses to refer to all of the M4/3, Sony NEX, and other cameras in that category. It may have caught on as the generic term in some other publications, too.
treadwl wrote:
I really like what you did with the water in the second shot. Keeping the bear sharp and the water soft really adds drama to the photo. Got to remember to try that technique.
I always love seeing your version of "Wild America" thanks for sharing these.
Larry
I like that effect, too. I wish I had the talent to politely ask the bear to hold still for the long exposure :)
MT Shooter I wrote:
MT, your comment about Thom Hogan surprises me, I always thought he thoroughly used the gear before reviewing it.
Definitely not. Recently he wrote a scatching review of the Nikon D800. Most likely due to the fact that he was not allotted time with a pre-production model from Nikon as time was short and there were only 5 samples available in the US. His review was actually laughable! He has done this several times over the years with pre-production reviews.
If you look under the review section of Hogan's site there is no D800 review yet. His commentary is posted as an introduction
SteveR wrote:
My understanding is that you may have to plan your visit months in advance to get on the list. One advantage...when you take your photos there won't be a bunch of tourists in your shot.
Yes, advanced planning is a must. I haven't been there in about 10 years, so I'm anxious to go back soon. Even if you can't make it to the Wave, the entire Paria plateau is open for exploring and there are tons of opportunities for photography. All of my pictures are on film, so no posts right now.
jerryc41 wrote:
Even paperweights serve a purpose. You could always hollow-out Lens A and use it as a mug.
Brilliant! And since it was previously the best lens in the world, I'm sure it has weather sealing so my coffee doesn't leak all over the papers it's weighing down.
jerryc41 wrote:
Opus wrote:
Yes his opinions often are in conflict with something he had written earlier, that's why so many people hate him.
I like to think that he is adjusting his opinion based on newer, better equipment. Lens A could be the best in the world - until Lens B comes along.
...at which point Lens A suddenly is declared a useless paperweight that was never any good in the first place. Then maybe rave lots about Lens B only to tell everyone that lens sharpness doesn't matter anyway. Such is the hyperbole of his writing style.
Seriously though, it's certainly appropriate to adjust opinions to account for new products and technology.
I find his information to be generally fine, but I tend to rely on other reviewers more often. To me, some of his opinions tend to color the reviews a little too much, and often seem to contradict each other. Such as (I'm paraphrasing and inserting some tongue-in-cheek commentary of my own)...all anyone needs is a D40 because it's light weight - anything heavier hurts his neck...a D3x is a terrible camera because it's too expensive ...nobody needs more than 6MP because he can make billboard size prints with 1MP files...all third-party lenses are junk...people who shoot RAW are wasting their time...lens sharpness doesn't or shouldn't matter to anyone...nobody needs anything but an f/1.8 normal prime...
True, there are some bits of wisdom behind some of these comments, but certainly keep that grain of salt handy.
MT Shooter wrote:
Rockwell is generally pretty accurate and unbiased, if not sometimes overly opinionated in his reviews. His tests are usually based on field shooting with the cameras and lenses he reviews and as such are usually more accurate than the virtual lab reviews you get from many other sites. Also, he doesn't do reviews of anything that is not "hands-on" as so many other reviewers tend to do. (ie: Thom Hogan)
MT, your comment about Thom Hogan surprises me, I always thought he thoroughly used the gear before reviewing it.
Help me help you. If you found these comments useful or even a complete waste, please send a generous donation to CSIDave@givemelotsofmoney.com :-)
bawlmer wrote:
I'm curious what and where you purchased. I'm looking for a ball head that will mount on top of my existing tripod. I found one for cheap, but....it kinda looks cheap and I'm not fond of the knobs used to adjust its position.
They sell direct from their website, www.acratech.net
They are certainly not cheap (at least by my standards), but less than some of the other premium products out there, and very well made.