Appreciate all the suggestions
Thanks for the suggestion. But i am wondering, why the tripod, especially if you are not using a long lens? A tripod is more of a hassle to drag around than a tele. This time of year, i probably can't do any night photography, it never gets dark. :-) btw, i was planning on bringing both.
I am also going to be making that trip in a few weeks and had some similar questions. I had heard that there is a fair amount of wildlife there, so wouldn't a long lens be very useful?
This is very good advice. Many good photographers mostly use aperture priority. You do generally want to stay away from the full auto setting, as it will offen compromise with a poor choice for a depth of field setting or shutter speed . Full manual is not good for many situations where the lighting and or movement of objects is rapidly changing.
I have 40 years of photography experience (serious hobby, not pro) and a science degree that. That of course does not make me an expert, but INMHO I have found that it gives me a pretty good idea of how knowledgeable an "expert" really is. Over the years I have read many of Thom Hogan's articles and I have found him by far the most knowledgeable source I have seen. Of course, I read articles by many other people and that does not necessarily mean that I always agree with him, but I always find his information useful. If anyone else has someone that they feel has anywhere near his information or knowledge, please tell me. I am always looking for another source of good information. thanks
What lens you use may largely depend upon what you plan on doing with your pictures. If you are going to crop &/or blow up to a large print, then you really want a lens to take advantage of the D850 body. If you are only producing snapshots, then it probably does not really make any difference what lens you use. But, if that were the case, why did you upgrade from the excellent d750 to the incredible d850? I suspect that you wanted as high a quality as possible. If that is the case, then putting a lower quality lens on the camera (unless you just want snapshots) is a waste of the d850. Many of the lenses discussed are good lenses, but will degrade the potential image quality of the D850. Check out Thom Hogan's comments on lenses to use with a D850. It is a year old, but has some very useful information. http://www.dslrbodies.com/cameras/the-d850-blog/the-best-lenses-for-the.html I would also highly recommend getting his D850 guide. In the past I have purchased 3 of his guides for my current & former cameras, and his knowledge of Nikon cameras, optics and the technology of photography is excellent. I have not read the D850 guide (unfortunately do not have a D850 :-) ) but I am sure it is excellent. http://www.dslrbodies.com/books/bythom-complete-guides-/nikon-d850-guide.html
Very informative reply, thanks for the information. I appreciate all of the responses. thanks alot!
jcboy3 wrote:
I have the GH25, and use it with a D750 or D500 and 200-500mm lens. It works well. It does double duty as a multi-row panoramic head, although you have to add a double Arca clamp (which they should have included). It does have a few issues:
1. It uses the horrible black grease used in lots of cheap Chinese gear (although even some Manfrotto gear uses it as well). Very sticky, not viscous. I tore down the horizontal bearing and cleaned it out, replacing with a good silicone grease. I left it in the vertical bearing for damping, because the vertical bearing does not have a friction adjustment (it's indexed).
2. Speaking of the vertical bearing, it's indexed. Which means it will lock securely in fixed positions. The first one I bought, however, was misaligned so it wouldn't lock at 90 degrees. I got them to arrange a swap at my local camera store; the replacement is fine.
3. If you mount the head on the horizontal indexer, you need to use an Arca plate (they provide). This is a single point contact, and it has a tendency to work loose if you use it as a gimbal head while mounted on the indexer. I fixed that by drilling holes in the base and using the Arca security screws as a second/third point of contact. You can get by without doing that if you realize that the indexer should not be attached if you are using it as a gimbal. I like a robust solution, and am always willing to drill some holes in my gear to achieve that result.
So what do I like about it? It's light. It works with lighter lenses (the telephoto zooms are okay). You don't want to use it with a 500 or 600mm prime lens...too heavy. And it comes apart and packs up very compactly (it's like the RRS head, only not as robust). So it doesn't take up a lot of room in my back pack, and hauling it is not a strain. I've used it for shooting the Burton US Open Snowboard Championship...you have to hike up the hill to get there.
I do not recommend the cheaper ProMaster (Wimberly style) head. That one is a real POS.
My other recommendation would be to consider the GH-13 gimbal head made and sold by Rob Pleas. It's a smaller gimbal head as well, not suitable for the big primes but great for the telephoto zooms. I've worked with him on some design changes from his original version; I think it's pretty good now. All roller bearings. Good Arca mount. Not a Wimberly copy. But US made (which is nice, when available). And inexpensive, and very easy to tear down to clean and lubricate. He has a nice flash mount adapter as well, if you are into the "better beamer" approach. There are some British heads, but most are Chinese. Not saying that's bad, but it's nice to get some American gear every once in awhile.
I have the GH25, and use it with a D750 or D500 an... (
show quote)
Hunts has the Promaster GH25 Professional Gimbal Head Kit on sale for about 1/2 price ($150). Is this Gimbal head any good? I am thinking of using it for a Nikon D750 with a 200-500 lens. There are other options even less expensive. Does anyone have a suggestion. I will not be using this all that much, so I would rather keep the cost to under $150, But I do not want to get something that works poorly. Thanks
Thanks for the reply. Yes, that is pretty much how I use Lightroom also.
My issue is that I already have mapping data in Elements and cannot find any way to import it to Lightroom. When I move a photo from PSE to Lightroom , mapping data that was with the PSE photo is lost. This is location data that was added in PSE, using the PSE map to select location. So, if anyone has any ideas, I would greatly appreciate it. I have thousands of pictures that I have lost ( in LR) the location data.
Thanks,
dcampbell52 wrote:
I too, use Lightroom subscription. I do use the mapping feature but am NOT married to it. However, I don't have the gps feature on 2 of my cameras, so in my spare time, I occasionaly go back to my "imported" photos and manually add them to the map. Doing so, automatically adds the "generalized" gps data to the photo. It may not be exactly correct but it gets me within a mile or two of the spot.
Thanks for the suggestions. Some additional info on my question. The mapping capability is within the Photoshop Element Organizer part of PSE.
lamiaceae wrote:
No idea, I have not used PSE since version 9. I use Ps CS6. If you have the subscription CC version of Lr you have Ps CC and might have convertible tags, location and cataloging info from PSE to Ps. Lr works completely differently, and not with the actual image files. But I am sure someone on the UHH can explain how to import tags or "cataloging" info into Lr if it is possible. If you need and want it you may want to start GPS tagging your images if your camera has that feature for future use in Lr CC. Good luck...
No idea, I have not used PSE since version 9. I u... (
show quote)
I have PSE ( V13). I recently converted to a Lightroom classic cc subscription. I have many photos in PSE that were tagged with their location using the PSE mapping capabilities. So I can go into PSE and use the mapping feature to display where the photo was taken. ( at least I could do that before before Adobe broke it, (works in PSE 15)...but that is another long discussion). these photos were not shot with gps data. all locations were determined thru PSE mapping. This means that it seems that PSE did not insert any coordinates into the photo metadata, but must keep that info somewhere in the PSE catalog.
So, my question is: does anyone know how I can capture that location data for my conversion to Lightroom? I would hate to loose all of that information. Any suggestions are greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
As everybody's basically said, there's no functional reason to do raw + jpeg, unless you really want to for convenience. I'm not sure if this is true with all raw files, but most (all? Canon, Nikon ) of them contain an embedded jpeg anyway.
www.dpreview.com/forums/post/35018795
Both platforms will work fine. It's not clear if your computer guy was just trying to sell you something, or he doesn't understand computers . You could get a PC or Mac platform that would work just fine . The important factor is to make sure you have a fast enough processor and enough memory. At least 8Gb. You need to be more specific about what the current problem is.. Your hardware ? RAM? What software are you using? The included software with windows 10 isn't the best for photo editing, but it should work. What do you mean by " kicking you out"? Crash? Or out of resources?
Stay away from Walgreens unless you just want some quick small proofs. they compress the crap out of all your pictures. No matter what you send them you end up with a compressed picture between a half a Meg and 1mb or a little larger. Costco is much better, but takes several days. with Walgreens, i can get pictures in about an hour.
Peterff wrote:
Sorry. Wrong. You don't know what you are talking about in this situation. You're probably trying to help but 'alternative facts' don't actually help.
Hey, i was just trying to help. I had no idea that shutter count was not a standard metadata item. Is it really necessary fir such a nasty response?