|
Delivery McGee posted:There's a D7000 on eBay cheap. But it's been dropped (onto grass). The guy sent the lens in for a checkup, but not the body; says it works perfectly and he continued using the body for weddings for some time afterward, so it's probably good -- I've seen Nikons dropped onto asphalt so hard it broke off a chunk of the magnesium housing, with no ill effects. But I worry. As long as the guy selling the D7k on eBay is saying that it's working 100% fine, I'd go for it. If he's NOT willing to communicate to you via ebay message or in the ad itself that the camera body is in 100% working condition, don't even think about it. With an assertion of 100% working quality, if you recieve it and it does something stupid like turns off randomly every 6th time you use it or anything really, you can get all your money back from him/her.
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2013 17:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 05:28 |
|
|
VelociBacon posted:With an assertion of 100% working quality, if you recieve it and it does something stupid like turns off randomly every 6th time you use it or anything really, you can get all your money back from him/her.  Oddly enough, the example you gave was exactly what happened to my coworker's D700 a few weeks ago when it got a little too rained-on. Went off after every 5 or 6 frames, came back on with a battery reseat. The next day it didn't come on at all. I'm considering getting an '80s battleship of a Nikkor lens instead of a new plastic Sigma for my long lens. Good idea? I figure since I'm getting the camera with a motor in it, I may as well use the feature. Like this thing:  This Sigma is the other option in my current price range. The only screw-drive lens I've used is that beat-to-poo poo 80-200; do they all focus that slow -- doesn't quite keep up with a football player running at me -- or is that just because it (and the bodies I've used it on) were clapped-out newspaper gear? Also, what are y'all's opinions of push-pull zooms? I've never really used one. I own one, a Vivitar that came with my spare OM-1 body, but I only ever used my dad's Zuiko lenses (that he bought along with my primary OM-1 body in 1976. Dammit, Olympus, why can't you be like everybody else and make the digital bodies use the old mount? Conversely, dammit, dad, why'd you have to cheap out and get an Olympus instead of a Nikon F2?).
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2013 02:42
|
|
Bad Angus! Bad!
|
Delivery McGee posted:The only screw-drive lens I've used is that beat-to-poo poo 80-200; do they all focus that slow -- doesn't quite keep up with a football player running at me -- or is that just because it (and the bodies I've used it on) were clapped-out newspaper gear? I don't know. I've got the two ring 80-200 2.8 screw focus version and it's plenty quick on my d300/7k. AF speed wise it certainly shits all over every 70-300 lens I've used.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2013 05:46
|
|
|
spongepuppy posted:I don't know. I've got the two ring 80-200 2.8 screw focus version and it's plenty quick on my d300/7k. AF speed wise it certainly shits all over every 70-300 lens I've used. I have the same lens, it's even relatively snappy on a D200.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2013 07:20
|
|
|
The larger Dxxx motors have no torque issues with AF-D/AF-S screw drive lenses. My former D300D700/D2xs screw drive was able to focus a 80-200mm One Touch Frankenstein lens almost as fast as a 70-200VR1. The D300 ruined a cheap rear end Nikon 70-300mm f/4-5.6G AF because the screwdrive torque was too much. My dad wore that bit down in the mount just from daily use in about 4 months.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2013 15:15
|
|
|
Screw drive lenses are just AF Nikkors. D lenses have distance encoding. AF-S Nikkors are by definition not screw drive. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2013 00:15
|
|
|
Delivery McGee posted:I got outbid. What really worries me are the ones with no actual description other than the copypasted manufacturer's sales pitch. I suppose I could message them, but I've used the Nikon 75-300 you have pictured there, and it's not bad. I'm sure it beats the hell out of that sigma. Still, the best would be if you could stretch your budget/save a bit more and get a used Tamron 70-300 VC. It's quite a bit sharper, and the VC is a nice bonus. If you can't, the Nikon will serve you well enough. Pro screw drive lenses with pro bodies focus pretty drat fast, you would have to get a pretty expensive AF-s lens to go faster, is my guess.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2013 05:32
|
|
|
So I guess Nikon is releasing a D610...I can't for the life of me tell what's actually different about it from the D600.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2013 06:10
|
|
|
1st AD posted:So I guess Nikon is releasing a D610...I can't for the life of me tell what's actually different about it from the D600. Better weather sealing, 0.5 fps increase, rumored processor upgrade (less likely), and the main reason for it all: revised shutter assembly with no oil and dust issues (hopefully).
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2013 07:23
|
|
|
Cheap FX used cameras!
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2013 11:40
|
|
|
Yeah I'm not stoked about the D600 losing value on the used market barely a year after it was released. The dust and oil problems suck, but a sensor cleaning takes care of that poo poo. It just seems weird to release a new model so soon.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2013 18:29
|
|
|
1st AD posted:Yeah I'm not stoked about the D600 losing value on the used market barely a year after it was released. Its the only way Nikon can save themselves from that embarrassment, in future sales at the cost of "early" adopters. Thanks for beta testing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2013 20:40
|
|
|
So I wanted to get a smallish flash that would work on my d700 and x100 as a fun 'party' flash to use when shooting events, and also fairly cheap. I thought an old vintage flash would work, but almost all of them have trigger voltages that would fry my cameras. Then I stumbled upon an sb-27 on ebay for like $50. Perfect, I thought; a small, unobtrusive flash. fuji x100 with sb-27 by Chris Hayden Photo, on Flickr 
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2013 23:29
|
|
|
red19fire posted:So I wanted to get a smallish flash that would work on my d700 and x100 as a fun 'party' flash to use when shooting events, and also fairly cheap. I thought an old vintage flash would work, but almost all of them have trigger voltages that would fry my cameras. Then I stumbled upon an sb-27 on ebay for like $50. Perfect, I thought; a small, unobtrusive flash. Pictured: the only time in history when I have thought "actually an SB-400 would be a better idea". (No it wouldn't, I doubt it would even work, just get whatever shameflash Fuji sells for the X100s.)
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2013 01:22
|
|
|
red19fire posted:So I wanted to get a smallish flash that would work on my d700 and x100 as a fun 'party' flash to use when shooting events, and also fairly cheap. I thought an old vintage flash would work, but almost all of them have trigger voltages that would fry my cameras. Then I stumbled upon an sb-27 on ebay for like $50. Perfect, I thought; a small, unobtrusive flash. You can get a YONGNUO flash YN560 II or III, the flash will work on the Nikon, and then get the Canon version of the Yongnuo flash trigger 603c, it will work on the Fuji.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2013 03:20
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:Pictured: the only time in history when I have thought "actually an SB-400 would be a better idea". SB400 works just fine on an X100. Most Nikon flashes will work fully manual on an X100 without issue.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2013 04:04
|
|
|
Musket posted:SB400 works just fine on an X100. Most Nikon flashes will work fully manual on an X100 without issue. The best part is that the auto mode doesn't work on the d700 either  Its neat though, the vertical flash orientation makes a cool vignette effect.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2013 04:20
|
|
|
red19fire posted:So I wanted to get a smallish flash that would work on my d700 and x100 as a fun 'party' flash to use when shooting events, and also fairly cheap. I thought an old vintage flash would work, but almost all of them have trigger voltages that would fry my cameras. Then I stumbled upon an sb-27 on ebay for like $50. Perfect, I thought; a small, unobtrusive flash. You know what the best (worst) thing about bringing old thyristor-auto flashes to social events is? "ARGH I'M BLIND STOP IT!" Really, they tend to bring a lot more light than the small onboard flashes most people are used to today.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2013 07:41
|
|
|
nielsm posted:You know what the best (worst) thing about bringing old thyristor-auto flashes to social events is? The smart flash on the x100 is almost good enough in most club situations to not really need an external flash for anything within 6-10 feet pushed to +1 or +2 exp flash comp. Another good use for that flash would be to get a 6foot sync cord and palm the flash for max coolness. Sometimes I do that with my XE1.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2013 17:35
|
|
|
Musket posted:The smart flash on the x100 is almost good enough in most club situations to not really need an external flash for anything within 6-10 feet pushed to +1 or +2 exp flash comp.  still have an old hot shoe sync cord in the closet.I don't think its a thyristor, it has an old version of TTL for film cameras that doesn't work on DSLR's. Minimum power is 1/16 though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2013 17:42
|
|
|
red19fire posted:
Got gels? I hear soundmonkey may have some for sale or did. I had a ton of fun with my X100 as a party camera with an external and gels and draggin shutters.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2013 17:43
|
|
|
red19fire posted:I don't think its a thyristor, it has an old version of TTL for film cameras that doesn't work on DSLR's. Minimum power is 1/16 though. Sure? Nikon has had a few different hotshoe connections. If it has one additional contact (apart from the center and ground) it just provides a "flash ready" signal for the camera. If it has two extra contacts I think it does "flash ready" and a very primitive kind of TTL; my SB-E has two extra contacts and a mode for the EM camera, I think it does some sort of TTL there and uses thyristor when in "FE/FM" mode. If it has 3 additional contacts it probably does full TTL in their old analog protocol.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2013 18:17
|
|
|
nielsm posted:Sure? Nikon has had a few different hotshoe connections. If it has one additional contact (apart from the center and ground) it just provides a "flash ready" signal for the camera. If it has two extra contacts I think it does "flash ready" and a very primitive kind of TTL; my SB-E has two extra contacts and a mode for the EM camera, I think it does some sort of TTL there and uses thyristor when in "FE/FM" mode. If it has 3 additional contacts it probably does full TTL in their old analog protocol. If it does, I haven't figured it out yet. It does do 'flash ready' on my fm2 and has 2 extra contacts, but for some reason A(uto) mode shoots at full power no matter what adjustments I make to flash exposure on the camera. The D700 can make it do rear sync, slow ambient and a kind-of red-eye mode, but no power adjustments. I'll be pumped if I can figure out how to make it do a -1 fill flash, but I don't think the camera communicates with the flash at all. According to Nikon, the 'primitive' TTL is D-TTL, and only late model film cameras (post-F4) and the d100/D2xx line had the ability to do it as a legacy mode, but they switched to i-TTL about the time they started making DSLR's. Either way, 1/4000 sync speed can't be beat  E: I think the thyristor or auto mode does work, I get the same histogram with the lights on or off in my apartment. Neat. Only way to get auto -1 is to set the flash to f/4 and the camera to 5.6. red19fire fucked around with this message at 19:37 on Oct 10, 2013 |
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2013 19:19
|
|
|
A friendly reminder that many old flashes have very high trigger voltages on the flash shoe. You shouldn't use anything with >250v on anything modern. Some cameras are lower, like the X100 is 50v max. It is entirely possible to burn out the flash circuit with prolonged use.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 18:52
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:A friendly reminder that many old flashes have very high trigger voltages on the flash shoe. You shouldn't use anything with >250v on anything modern. Some cameras are lower, like the X100 is 50v max. It is entirely possible to burn out the flash circuit with prolonged use. You really shouldn't be using anything with more than like 12 volts on the hotshoe, although the PC port (if it exists) can usually (not always) handle up to like 250V. It would probably be a good idea to read the camera manual so you don't blow your camera up to save a few bucks on a flash.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 19:16
|
|
|
I'm looking at getting a good telephoto lens to go birding with but with my D3200 I'm having trouble finding much of a range of options that will still support autofocus since the body doesn't have a motor, so I'm dependent on the lens. It looks like my best option at the moment might be the Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G (maybe with a teleconverter?). I was looking at other brands (particularly Sigma with the 150-500mm F5-6.3) but it looks like most of their telephoto lenses require a motor in the body? Or was I reading this wrong? Trying not to get a >$1500 lens! I'm going to do some renting first but the local rental place doesn't seem to have any Sigmas.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2013 20:34
|
|
|
Kenshin posted:I'm looking at getting a good telephoto lens to go birding with but with my D3200 I'm having trouble finding much of a range of options that will still support autofocus since the body doesn't have a motor, so I'm dependent on the lens. If you go the 70-300 route, Tamron makes a bitchin' one that I believe has an internal focus motor.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2013 20:35
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:If you go the 70-300 route, Tamron makes a bitchin' one that I believe has an internal focus motor. It does. Tamron 70-300 VC USD is the one.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2013 20:41
|
|
|
Looks like I was reading it wrong, the Sigma lenses with HSM do have built-in AF motors.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2013 21:10
|
|
|
Kenshin posted:I'm looking at getting a good telephoto lens to go birding with but with my D3200 I'm having trouble finding much of a range of options that will still support autofocus since the body doesn't have a motor, so I'm dependent on the lens. You could rent online, looks like lensrentals.com rents Sigmas.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2013 04:56
|
|
|
VelociBacon posted:It does. Tamron 70-300 VC USD is the one. This is by far the best lens to get unless you're willing to get a $1500 lens.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2013 13:07
|
|
|
300mm is a bit short for bird photography. It can be done but I can pretty much guarantee you will be wishing for more reach real quick and those slower lenses won't take a teleconverter. Maybe look at the Nikon 80-400 VR? Not sure how those rate but some versions seem to sell used for around the same amount as the sigma 150-500, ~$700 or so going by ebay. I'd trust nikon glass over an older sigma or tamron.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2013 15:00
|
|
|
800peepee51doodoo posted:300mm is a bit short for bird photography. It can be done but I can pretty much guarantee you will be wishing for more reach real quick and those slower lenses won't take a teleconverter. Maybe look at the Nikon 80-400 VR? Not sure how those rate but some versions seem to sell used for around the same amount as the sigma 150-500, ~$700 or so going by ebay. I'd trust nikon glass over an older sigma or tamron. The old 80-400mm doesn't have AFS and the new one is crazy expensive.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2013 16:35
|
|
|
800peepee51doodoo posted:300mm is a bit short for bird photography. It can be done but I can pretty much guarantee you will be wishing for more reach real quick and those slower lenses won't take a teleconverter. Maybe look at the Nikon 80-400 VR? Not sure how those rate but some versions seem to sell used for around the same amount as the sigma 150-500, ~$700 or so going by ebay. I'd trust nikon glass over an older sigma or tamron. 300mm on a crop sensor is plenty decent for starting out in bird photography, especially in an urban environment. I'd maybe like a bit more out in the wild but "just a bit farther" is something that's always going to be at the back of your mind. Just plan ahead, know what your limitations are and put yourself in a location that works with your gear.  DSC_0201 by jankyangles, on Flickr 3100 with the POS 55-200 kit lens. I liked the water and just hung out for a few hours snapping away at the birds that came by. and before I knew what rotation was  I've since traded up to the very fantastic Tamron 70-300 VC. Another glowing recommendation even on a lowly D3xxx.
Maker Of Shoes fucked around with this message at 17:35 on Oct 17, 2013 |
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2013 17:32
|
|
|
The price on that Tamron isn't bad either. I'll see about renting both that and the Sigma 150-500mm (I've had good experience with a Sigma before, the 70-200mm, so I have no qualms about trying another one out) over the next month or so before I make any decisions. I'll also be renting the Nikon 300mm f/4 lens next week just to see how things go (though that's a $1400 lens and isn't really in the running at the moment)
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2013 18:41
|
|
|
Kenshin posted:The price on that Tamron isn't bad either. It's also got the current gen vibration control which is drat good.  DSC_4562 by jankyangles, on Flickr Shot by my fiance, hand held standing up from my driveway and who has never held a DSLR in her life. (I set it up and handed her the camera) Maker Of Shoes fucked around with this message at 19:02 on Oct 17, 2013 |
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2013 18:55
|
|
|
Hell, this was handheld at 300mm, 1/20 of a second shutter.  DSC_0513.jpg by MrDespair, on Flickr The VC on the tamron is quite good.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2013 19:50
|
|
|
8th-snype posted:The old 80-400mm doesn't have AFS and the new one is crazy expensive. Well thats dumb. Maker Of Shoes posted:300mm on a crop sensor is plenty decent for starting out in bird photography, especially in an urban environment. I'd maybe like a bit more out in the wild but "just a bit farther" is something that's always going to be at the back of your mind. Just plan ahead, know what your limitations are and put yourself in a location that works with your gear. Sure, I just outgrew a 300mm zoom in about 30 seconds and got a 400mm 5.6 prime as soon as I could put the cash together. For me, the 300 zoom was a waste of time because I am more interested in wild birds. Urban areas, zoos, tame duck ponds, etc you can use a lot less, for sure. It all depends on what you want to do. Careful, though, Kenshin. You start getting into bird photography and you can find yourself staring down into a yawning, bottomless money vortex.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2013 20:13
|
|
|
Finally bought a D7000 (with 18-105mm kit lens, $750; good deal?), should be here tomorrow. I'm torn on whether to get a battery grip. One of my coworkers is for, one against, one didn't comment but uses his (they run D700s). Against: less bulky, lays flat against your side, runs forever and a half on a single battery anyway. For: vertical shutter button (which I rarely use, but I like to know it's there if I'm doing a lot of verticals all at once), better balance. I'm thinking of eventually getting one and a cheap battery, both third-party; if I don't like it, I'm out $50 and it may come in useful if I ever go on an extended trek away from power outlets. What are your opinions on the battery grip? Can you run it on one battery with the grip and use the other battery compartment for storage? Edit: we have a Nikon 80-400 screw-drive at the paper. Nobody uses it, and the general consensus is that we should've spent the money on another D700 body instead. The 70-200mm that everybody has one of is usually enough, and if one of us needs something longer we prefer the 300mm f/2.8 prime. YMMV; we mainly use the long lenses for football, and football is usually at night. It may be good for daytime birding. On the other hand, we don't use it for daytime baseball much, either -- it's just too heavy to be worth the effort. The autofocus, as you'd expect on a camera-driven lens of that size, is annoyingly slow. I've used it a few times at daytime college football games, and it's nice for getting super-tight "two faces and a football" shots, but between the weight and the fact that half the time they run down the sidelines, the 70-200 is more practical. The 80-400, in short, feels like a kit lens writ large. Chillbro Baggins fucked around with this message at 00:10 on Oct 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2013 23:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 05:28 |
|
|
Delivery McGee posted:What are your opinions on the battery grip? Can you run it on one battery with the grip and use the other battery compartment for storage? I have a d7k also, I thought the 18-55 was the kit lens but that's a good deal you got. I paid $600 for just the camera body. I don't use a battery grip because if I have a telephoto lens on there and it's hanging by a strap, even with my hand steadying it, I want it to be lens-down so that it's applying an even and mild force to the lens mount. If it was orientated flat against my hip for example with the telephoto sticking straight out I'd worry about the weight of it enacting strange and unusual forces on the lens mount. If I did more portrait or sports photography I'd pick one up. I also very rarely change my focus point so it's one less thing to care about if my camera is cocked 90 degrees over (the nikon battery grip has another d-pad style thing for moving your focus point).
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2013 00:02
|
|