Get a Dell refurb from Best Buy. They have Windows 10 machines (10 has been around long enough to have the bugs mostly squashed) for around 150 bucks. Plenty of processing power, etc. My latest arrived this afternoon. It's predecessor was killed by a hacker. Programs go on the machines and data goes on thumb drives.
I greatly appreciate the post by 'via the lens' concerning the info on RAW and .jpeg digital photo formats summarized from the book "The Manual of Photography" by Sophie T; this book was unknown to me until this post. I have a 60 year old Ph.D in Physics (unfortunately not in the specialty of optics) that is now virtually obsolete in light of the accelerating advancements in scientific knowledge since I was last involved in the area. I am, perhaps, at one end of the spectrum of UHH readers and I recognize that I am probably in the minority compared to those who have not had the educational opportunities that I have had. I have been "in" digital photography for only two years. I read every post and every comment on every post every day. I find the accumulated wealth of information available at UHH to be absolutely astounding. My main interest is in focus stacking. I would never have known that this area of photographic endeavor even existed had I not read about it from a post in UHH; probably 90 percent (or perhaps an even higher percentage) of the photo books published for mass reading do not even mention the subject. However, what confuses me the most and what I really don't quite understand about UHH has nothing to do with photography but has to do with some of the posts herein that seem to be oriented only towards incessant 'sniping' by some at the posts of others. Not every post at first glance appears to be of interest to me, but I read them all anyway; who knows what info might be contained therein. Everyone who posts in UHH is a 'serious photographer' within his/her parameters; if he/she were not serious, they would not be reading and posting in UHH to begin with. Personally, I find no justification for me to criticize and diminish any member posts against criteria that are totally unknown to me; and I don't like it when others do so. When my kids from decades ago would get involved in this type of behavior, I would simply say, "knock it off ". I don't know it all. I seriously doubt that anyone at UHH knows it all. It may be a valuable exercise for some to periodically look in the mirror and say, "I also don't know it all".
pfranke - to digress, their are several foto books out on his work. I have a couple. I am always inspired.
frankraney - love the numbers, Very helpful.
via the lens - I will heed your advice.
PIET - Thanx for the input. I have been to Newport a few times and also love the Crabtree exhibit. Crabtree was one of 'the best' miniature carvers ever. Part of the job is making sure the figureheads are in the best focus possible.
LoneRangeFinder - thanx for the reply. Your info corrolates with other comments. I though about a 35mm (don't have that prime either). 35s are 2 to 3 times the cost of 50s. Maybe I'll try the 50 first and go down from there.
Fred - Thanx for the info. The 100mm would tend to flatten the final image (as I understand it): I would like the ship image to look as long and in scale as possible and not look like a pancake: you really want the gun line to look as real as possible, that is an impressive thought provoking site. What about the old Nikon 50mm f/1.8D AF? I am going to have to buy a 'new' lens for this project. I don't even own an easily manually adjustable lens.
Ken Rockwell this likes 50mm a lot: also it is cheap. How do you think it would work? Granted, that 100% of the 'box' volume won't be in focus, but, you can include as much as possible. There in no problem with distance from the model, you can move anywhere you want. Thanks for the product name (I can't get to it from this screen). I hadn't thought it would take 150 to 200 images, but, what the heck, whatever it takes it takes.
I don't have any that are easy to use in the manual mode. I want an older D lens with good manual operation.
From what I have seen about tilt shift lenses is that they would be very cumbersome to use thus causing the focus point to move and thus probably getting a blurred image. Not to mention they are expensive. I think the solution is simpler that shift-tilt.
I am going to photograph some sailing ship modesl in a local maritime museum. I have the Nikon D80, D90, D300 and D7200 camera bodies to choose from. The biggest problem with photographing these model is always how to get maximum DOF over a length of about 5 feet front to back. Imagine a volume 1 foot wide by 5 feet long (front end of the model to rear end of the model) by 4 foot high. The big problem is shooting from the 1 foot end and getting as much of the volume of the 'box' in as sharp focus as possible. Getting everything (the entire volume) in focus with camera alone is not possible. You can't get uniform sharp focus in PP either. Hence the use of focus stacking. All I want to know is what would be a good lense(s) to use with one or all of these Nikon bodies assuming lighting, etc was adequate. I have been a daily reader for six months (this is a fantastic website) and I know there experts out there for whom this is 'old-hat'. I am going to have to buy a 'new' (older prime lens with manual focus) lens but I don't know which one to get. Any other advice I could benefit from would also be gladly accepted. Help me out, please.
Great news. I figured as much, but was just guessing.
I recently purchased a 'refurbished' Nikon D7200 camera body from Adorama. It arrived 3 days later. When it arrived, I opened the box, immediately put in the battery (it came 96% of a full charge), attached a kit 35mm lens and started shooting my front yard straight through an open garage door. Shot 16 photos within 60 seconds after arrival. I put the san disk into a bench computer and started looking at the results. Conclusions: delivery was quick, the camera body looked absolutely brand new, the 16 photos were were superior to those from my D300. When I checked actuation on 2 websites I got numbers of 16 and 20, as far as I could quickly detect everything was perfect. My questions are: does Nikon sell camera bodies as 'refurbished' when they are actually new? (perhaps to reduce inventory?), How do you explain the actuation number of 16 which is what I shot. If the camera was in fact used and had been refurbished, does Nikon reset the actuation number to zero?. My satisfaction: I couldn't be happier! Adorama was selling at a great price and it looks like I got a great product (despite the fact that I am not quite sure exactly what I purchased), In any case, this camera should last for 20 years at least.