|
Musket posted:The only tool that will 100% read NEF files with Nikon Picture Control settings like ADL/LNR and NPC Color settings is *barf* Capture NX. I dunno, I like the jpgs my D600 puts out for everyday snap shots. It saves me time in lightroom if I expose them right.
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 22:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 19:57 |
|
|
Legitimate Pape posted:I dunno, I like the jpgs my D600 puts out for everyday snap shots. It saves me time in lightroom if I expose them right. Yeah the D600 jpegs aren't that bad. I just took an 8 day vacation to North Carolina and had a blast and took some great shots. Only apparently my brother used my camera briefly right at the beginning and switched the manual dial from U1 to U2 ... which are nearly identical except one was optioned to only shoot JPEG. Goddamnit.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 23:10
|
|
|
Musket posted:Your release button is messed up. Take it to a shop. Agg figured as much. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2013 00:18
|
|
|
I was just down in our studio shooting us acting out a scene for a commercial on our D600 (just an internal thing for a timing reference) using the onboard mic. When bringing it into Premiere I noticed there's an audible little chirp in a pulsing pattern. I'm assuming that's not normal right? It sounds like a small mechanical noise. I'm guessing I have to send it in.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2013 16:13
|
|
|
Today I Learned: That apparently my D80 can't mount my AI-converted 24/2.8 Nikkor-NC. It works fine on the F90 and FM2. It seems to be a DIY conversion and apparently they didn't cut away some part that hits stuff on the D80.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2013 23:12
|
|
|
Quick question. I have a D5100 that I've only had a few weeks, so I'm just starting to get the hang of basic stuff. My dad is visiting and brought some old Nikon stuff he had from his 35mm Nikon, including a Nikkor-P 105mm f2.5. From some googling, my understanding is that I CAN use this lens on my D5100 without any modification, right? I'm getting that in part from this chart: http://www.aiconversions.com/compatibilitytable.htm From somebody who does AI conversions. That is, the D5100 doesn't have anything that would be damaged if I just put this Nikkor lens on. It's just that it will all be totally manual, right? But no chance I damage my D5100 putting it on?
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 00:46
|
|
|
McCoy Pauley posted:Quick question. I have a D5100 that I've only had a few weeks, so I'm just starting to get the hang of basic stuff. My dad is visiting and brought some old Nikon stuff he had from his 35mm Nikon, including a Nikkor-P 105mm f2.5. From some googling, my understanding is that I CAN use this lens on my D5100 without any modification, right? I'm getting that in part from this chart: Yup, you shouldn't have any issues at all.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 01:38
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:Yup, you shouldn't have any issues at all. Thanks, I tried it and it works fine. It seems like it will be fun to play around with. The glass is really nice, and the whole thing just feels so solid. He also has an older Canon zoom lens, and my understanding is that I can pick up an adapter to fit Canon lenses on the Nikon body (something like this, maybe?). I can use that without any risk of having the Canon lens damage the D5100 body, right?
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 02:20
|
|
|
McCoy Pauley posted:Thanks, I tried it and it works fine. It seems like it will be fun to play around with. The glass is really nice, and the whole thing just feels so solid. You could, but it's probalby not worth it. Those adapters feature corrective optics to give you infinity focus, and it normally turns good glass into lovely glass.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2013 02:53
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:You could, but it's probalby not worth it. Those adapters feature corrective optics to give you infinity focus, and it normally turns good glass into lovely glass. Thanks. I guess I should have figured that, with it being a pretty cheap piece of equipment and having something optical in there. I suppose I had at first thought it would just be some mechanical ring. Oh well. Among other older photography stuff, my dad brought some macro lenses to play around with, and was also suggesting I try out a macro bellows with my D5100. I never looked into this before, and from some quick looking around on Amazon (which is probably not enough research on this kind of thing), it seemed like there was only one bellows for use with a Nikon that had anything close to decent reviews. Anyone have any experience with these, and any particular recommendation for a model?
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2013 03:08
|
|
|
McCoy Pauley posted:Thanks. I guess I should have figured that, with it being a pretty cheap piece of equipment and having something optical in there. I suppose I had at first thought it would just be some mechanical ring. Oh well. It all depends on what you want to do for macro. Bellows are great for precision, studio, tripod sort of stuff. If you want to be walking around shooting bugs then you're better off with a macro lens, or extension tubes/reverse mounting.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2013 03:15
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:It all depends on what you want to do for macro. Bellows are great for precision, studio, tripod sort of stuff. If you want to be walking around shooting bugs then you're better off with a macro lens, or extension tubes/reverse mounting. Thanks, that's helpful. Among the stuff he gave me is a macro lens with tubes, so I suppose I'm set for that at the moment, unless I want a different set of tubes. If I decide I want bellows, is that the kind of equipment where as long as the quality is decent, it doesn't really matter which one you get? I mean, fundamentally it seems like a pretty simple device -- as long as the build isn't shoddy, it would seem like brand wouldn't really matter, right?
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2013 03:19
|
|
|
Hi, Looking for some guidance! I have a Nikon d3200, the 35mm 1.8 lens, 55-300mm lens and the kit 18-55mm. I am really happy with my camera body (though may upgrade to a d7100 next year), the prime lens and 55-300 lens but I really hate the kit lens. I tend to keep switching between the two lenses I like but obviously, I have nothing wide and the constant switching is inconvenient. I would like an upgrade to the kit lens, that has a range I would find useful and is good in low light. I have looked around and am quite taken with the Tamron sp 24-70mm 2.8 usd vc lens. The reviews seem excellent, but obviously its very pricey. I don't mind paying for a quality lens as I would like to pursue photography work in the future and I enjoy gig photography as a hobby and would like to improve my pictures so I can get onto better venues! My questions are: Does this lens autofocus with the D3200 because I really can't work out tamrons naming system! Secondly, am I being silly wanting this lens, is there a cheaper alternative, I am overlooking? The 2.8 aperture is important to me. The 24-70 seems a useful focal length to be but I would be happy with similar.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2013 21:44
|
|
|
24mm is not terribly wide on a crop sensor, but you may not need something very wide either way. When you do use the kit lens, how often do you hit the wide end? As for the autofocus, can't answer. I'm not sure if Tamron ever had any naming distinction between lenses for Nikon's two AF systems.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2013 21:54
|
|
|
nerd_of_prey posted:Hi, Looking for some guidance! I have a Nikon d3200, the 35mm 1.8 lens, 55-300mm lens and the kit 18-55mm. I still have teh 17-50mm 2.8 Tammy (it will AF on the D3200) NON-VC(its sharper than the VC lens) for sale in teh gear thread about 20 pages back, im gonna update my post for it in the gear thread. The 24-70 is an FX/Full Frame lens so it wont be a FOV of 24-70. You want the 17mm-50mm lens for DX cameras that will give you the same FOV.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2013 22:14
|
|
|
I think USD means it has a focus motor in the lens.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2013 22:15
|
|
|
Yes, the new Tamron 24-70 has an internal silent motor. It should work find with the D3200. I got one a couple weeks ago, and I've been pretty impressed with it. My only gripe is that it get some chromatic aberration toward the edges of the frame (on a crop sensor) at wide angles, but that's correctable.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2013 22:31
|
|
|
Just ordered a like-new Tamron 70-300 VC USD for the d7k. Super excited! Also, went to some big local garden and felt like a dipshit after laying on my stomach at the side of a pond to get some ~duckshots~ at eye level, figuring that the 8-10 Canadian geese chilling out nearby would be too easily startled if I tried to get close enough with my 50mm prime. After 2-3 minutes of getting lovely photos of this boring duck I stand up to walk back to the path and the geese have completely maneuvered behind me and are all fanned out and advancing towards me making whatever sound it is they make. I guess they must get fed by other visitors. Unfortunately they were all in the shade so all the pictures turned out pretty uninteresting but it definitely was an experience.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2013 04:20
|
|
|
There is a Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 zoom which you may wish to check out. Reviews look promising.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2013 05:06
|
|
|
Did Nikon ever make an autofocus 135mm other than the f/2 defocus control?
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2013 23:18
|
|
|
Beastruction posted:Did Nikon ever make an autofocus 135mm other than the f/2 defocus control?
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2013 23:38
|
|
|
....why would you need another 135mm for Nikon?
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2013 23:41
|
|
|
I had the little sister, the 105 F2, for two years and it was awesome. I only sold it because it was a one trick pony. Slow focusing and inconvenient unless shooting portraits, but it was insanely perfect for shooting people.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2013 04:31
|
|
|
1st AD posted:....why would you need another 135mm for Nikon? I don't have a thousand bucks to spend on a lens, and it's too useful a focal length to only have one of.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2013 04:54
|
|
|
Beastruction posted:I don't have a thousand bucks to spend on a lens, and it's too useful a focal length to only have one of. Uh...get a 70-200mm, an AI 135mm, or some variation thereof that fits your price range. We absolutely do not need more than one autofocus 135mm prime.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2013 05:26
|
|
|
There are multiple AF lenses for most other focal lengths, e.g. 85mm f1.4G/f1.4D/f1.8G/f1.4D, 35mm f2D/f1.4G, 24mm f2.8D/f1.4G etc, it's not an entirely unreasonable question, especially given the exotic nature of the 135mm DC. Sigma is rumoured to be working on a 135mm prime though, and Nikon has recently filed a patent on a 135mm f1.8 too, something to keep in mind if you can wait.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2013 06:00
|
|
|
On small formats 135mm is an exotic focal length. The only reason it exists is because it was the longest lens to which a rangefinder could be coupled. You can't really compare it to 85mm or 35mm and be serious.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2013 06:25
|
|
|
Remo posted:There are multiple AF lenses for most other focal lengths, e.g. 85mm f1.4G/f1.4D/f1.8G/f1.4D, 35mm f2D/f1.4G, 24mm f2.8D/f1.4G etc, it's not an entirely unreasonable question, especially given the exotic nature of the 135mm DC. The 135 f/2.8 E-Series owns serious bones if you can give up precious AF for a a really awesome lens. And takes 52mm filters because Nikon engineers are loving wizards or something.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2013 09:43
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:The 135 f/2.8 E-Series owns serious bones if you can give up precious AF for a a really awesome lens. Pffft that's nothing, I have a 240mm lens that takes 52mm filters (it's an f/9 LF lens  ).
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2013 12:18
|
|
|
8th-samurai posted:Uh...get a 70-200mm, an AI 135mm, or some variation thereof that fits your price range. We absolutely do not need more than one autofocus 135mm prime. The AI 135mm F/2 is awesome. I find myself shooting the 80-200 at 135mm a lot, so I'll take it out when I can afford to manually focus. Also I just realized that the focus is off on my 80-200, so I have to focus on the forehead or eyebrows to get the eyes in proper focus.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2013 18:28
|
|
|
8th-samurai posted:Pffft that's nothing, I have a 240mm lens that takes 52mm filters (it's an f/9 LF lens  I have a 300mm lens that takes 52mm filters(it's also an f/9 LF lens )edit: It's also a Nikon lens
MrBlandAverage fucked around with this message at 20:11 on Jul 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2013 19:31
|
|
|
8th-samurai posted:On small formats 135mm is an exotic focal length. The only reason it exists is because it was the longest lens to which a rangefinder could be coupled. You can't really compare it to 85mm or 35mm and be serious. It can't be particularly exotic if it was popular and cheap enough to get a Series E version, and there must be something it's good at to justify the defocus control model. So it's surprising that they never released another autofocus option. SoundMonkey posted:The 135 f/2.8 E-Series owns serious bones if you can give up precious AF for a a really awesome lens. I already have the Series E, but sometimes I'm lazy and just want to point and shoot.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2013 21:32
|
|
|
Just a reminder that there's literally no reason not to buy a 105/2.5 unless you are a chump.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2013 23:49
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Just a reminder that there's literally no reason not to buy a 105/2.5 unless you are a chump. This. The 105mm f/2.5 one of the best lenses Nikon has ever made.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2013 06:35
|
|
|
8th-samurai posted:This. The 105mm f/2.5 one of the best lenses Nikon has ever made. There's a couple BGN ones on KEH for ~$175 too.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2013 06:52
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:The 135 f/2.8 E-Series owns serious bones if you can give up precious AF for a a really awesome lens. 135mm divided by 2.8 ≈ 48mm?  My f/2 version is 72mm, because 135/2=67.5 You don't even need to strictly stay on the right side of it if you're prepared to sacrifice some vignetting, which is inherently much lower on a long lens. Comically oversized lenses like my Sigma 18-50/2.8 with a 72mm thread (where naïve math says 18mm aperture should suffice for 50mm focal length — and it does, on tiny f/2.8 pancake primes!) need it for other reasons, such as internal zoom and focus requiring a larger front aperture to accomodate the angles created from the recess, or using internal baffling to avoid a turned edge (using oversize elements for your image circle lets you benefit from the "sweet-spot effect" and often easier/cheaper production in general.) 
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2013 19:45
|
|
|
Adorama has a refurbished Nikon D7000 (body only) on Ebay for $599.99 http://www.ebay.com/itm/Nikon-D7000...fepn=5337259887 I'm thinking about making the jump from my 5 year old P&S to this. Anyone here able to tell me its a good buy for an entry level hobbyist?
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2013 03:25
|
|
|
Hughmoris posted:Adorama has a refurbished Nikon D7000 (body only) on Ebay for $599.99 It's the perfect camera for an entry level hobbyist as it's extremely well priced and has most of the features that the more expensive full-frame cameras feature. It's sensor is also fantastic. I bought my D7000 a couple months ago and couldn't be happier with it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2013 03:55
|
|
|
It's a pretty great camera.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2013 14:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 19:57 |
|
|
Wolf on Air posted:135mm divided by 2.8 ≈ 48mm? All this autism and the term "entrance pupil" wasn't used once?
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2013 05:54
|
|