Outstanding shot! I'm not sure if I'm more impressed with the photo, or your patience!

Thanks! If you do try it, I'll be interested to see the results.

Here is how I eliminate ghosts and flare when shooting into the sun, works for any lens, any camera:

1) Take identical two exposures of the same scene, but in one exposure, hold a finger in front of the lens to block the sun from view.
2) Open both images in Photoshop and align them.
3) Put the image with the exposed sun on top of the stack. This is the image exhibiting ghosts/flare.
4) Add an inverse (black layer mask) to the image with the flare.
5) Paint on the layer mask with a big white soft brush to reveal the sun and hide your finger.

This works every time. 100% eliminates the ghosts and flare, preserving better contrast. It sounds like a lot of work, but you get pretty quick at it after you do it a few times.

When you shoot this way, make sure you are in full manual. If you are in Aperture Priority, Shutter Priority, or have Auto ISO enabled, the exposure will change when you put your finger over the sun.

You can do this with or without a tripod. If you are shooting handheld, the framing will be slightly different between the shots, but Photoshop's auto align will take care of that for you at the expense of a small crop.

I've attached an example:
Picture #1: Original photo, with some serious ghosts and some loss of contrast due to flare
Picture #2: The photo where I blocked the sun with my finger
Picture #3: Merged photo using the first two

(Download)


(Download)


(Download)

I use a Nikon D810 and it's native base ISO is 64. ISO 64 is where it's sensor achieves maximum dynamic range and minimum noise, the cleanest image possible. I always try to get to ISO 64, depending on the subject of course.

I shot this at 1/125 f/11 ISO 64. If I had planned this shot for the biker, I probably would have tried to go to 1/800 to freeze his motion. So something like 1/800 f/11 ISO 400. Or maybe I would have given up some depth of field to get a cleaner image and gone with 1/800 f/5.6 ISO 100.

Not a dumb question at all!

I used Photoshop. I used a black and white adjustment layer and modified the layer mask so that it would not apply the B&W adjustment to the biker.

This guy is serious about staying healthy AND fit!

I was walking along beach road one morning last week and saw this guy just a few seconds away. I didn't want to point the camera directly at him, and didn't have time to move the focus point to the edge he was approaching from. I also had the camera configured for landscapes (ISO 64 and slow shutter speed) So he's a little soft from missed focus and motion blur.

(Download)

You didn't mention the camera body you are using. The 80-200 is a screw drive lens, and relies on an autofocus motor in the camera body to drive it. Cheaper camera bodies (D3xxx and D5xxx series) don't have the focus motor. If you have a D3/D4/D5, or D500/D600/610/700/750/800/810/850, you are good to go. D7000,D7100,D7200 DX cameras will work too. I don't think the newest D7500 DX camera has a focus motor though.

I have had the 80-200/2.8D ED "New" (the two ring model) for over a year, and also owned the 70-200 2.8 VR I & VR II for a while. I used all three for shooting indoor sports, so the VR on the 70-200 models was of no help. Main limitations of the 80-200 are it gets just a little bit softer than the 70-200 models at the long end (between 175-200mm) and also has a tendency to backfocus at short range (12 feet or less) when you are zoomed in near 200mm. It focuses maybe 90% as fast as the the 70-200 models, so sure, occasionally you will miss a shot when shooting action that you would not miss with the 70-200. In actual use, especially for sports, the results are nearly the same. The 80-200 is smaller, lighter, much cheaper, and doesn't have an internal AF motor or VR system to break. You can buy good used copies on eBay all day long for about $450.

Totally agree with sandiegosteve here. How big are you planning to print/view at? Standard size prints can hide a ton of noise and very few people besides photogs look at images 100%.

I shot an event this weekend for a public library. Requirements for delivered photos were long edge 1200 pixels, 72dpi. In one of my photos, the subjects were in shadow and I used ISO 18,000 to get the bright look I wanted. Downsized, it looks fine, but viewed at 100% (6.5 feet wide equivalent print; your monitor is about 95dpi) it looks bad.

(Download)

Thanks! It just might be my favorite also!

Some pictures I took tonight in downtown West Palm Beach, around Royal Park Bridge. These were taken with a Nikon D810 and a Nikon AF 20-35mm f/2.8D. These JPEGs are SOOC, only modification I made was a 16x9 crop. I used the camera's HDR function to take three of them, and three are single exposures. I made liberal use of Picture Controls, Active-D Lighting, and White Balance settings to get the look I wanted out of camera.

(Download)


(Download)


(Download)


(Download)


(Download)


(Download)

Outstanding shot, love it. The Canon 7d Mk II is not exactly a "low light monster", and at f/3.5, the Sigma is not the ideal astro lens. This just goes to show that it's the photographer and not the gear!

Shot this early one morning at the Juno Beach pier, Juno Beach FL. This is the JPEG, SOOC.

(Download)

Outstanding capture. You were in the right place at the right time, with a camera and the skills to get the shot, job well done!

Beautiful. Love the framing, love the sunburst, the contrast between the silhouetted trees, the sky, and the subtle colors in the grass. What can you tell me about the lens you used? Does it have straight aperture blades?