|
namaste faggots posted:Lol holy poo poo the 28-300L weighs twice as much as the Nikkor. Yeah it's not meant to be a travel zoom for vacationing dads, I think it's more of a "war zone photojournalist" all in one.
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2017 16:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 00:03 |
|
|
I'm struggling to find a solar eclipse filter that will fit my Nikon lenses (52mm I believe) that will also ship to me quickly (I need to receive it no later than thursday, august 17th) and doesn't cost a ridiculous amount (I doubt I'll use it for more than just photographing the eclipse). Any leads? Complicating the search is of course the fact that some loving company named their range of filters "eclipse" even though they're emphatically not for photographing the eclipse.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2017 22:00
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:I'm struggling to find a solar eclipse filter that will fit my Nikon lenses (52mm I believe) that will also ship to me quickly (I need to receive it no later than thursday, august 17th) and doesn't cost a ridiculous amount (I doubt I'll use it for more than just photographing the eclipse). Any leads? Good | Fast | Cheap Pick two
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2017 22:07
|
|
|
I'll be in totality so the filter is just for the crescent phases, which I don't care as much about. So I'll take Fast and Cheap.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2017 22:12
|
|
|
Holy poo poo these things are expensive.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2017 22:17
|
|
|
I might have to just buy some "solar filter foil" from these guys http://tse17.com/eclipse-shop/ and make my own lovely handmade filter.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2017 22:26
|
|
|
Welding goggles?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2017 08:58
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:I might have to just buy some "solar filter foil" from these guys http://tse17.com/eclipse-shop/ and make my own lovely handmade filter. This is what I'm doing. Spending a lot of scratch on a filter you'll use a grand total of 30 minutes every 20 years is a fool's game.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2017 17:00
|
|
|
Would an ND filter work? I have one I need to unload
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2017 19:12
|
|
|
Maybe if it was like 10+ stops.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2017 19:27
|
|
|
I was thinking of bringing my camera to work and taking some pics when it hits, so nice to know my 10stop might stop me blowing the sensor. Not in direct path and nothing great in walking distance here so eh. Maybe just do some bad street photography of people half caring about the sky
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2017 22:17
|
|
|
EL BROMANCE posted:I was thinking of bringing my camera to work and taking some pics when it hits, so nice to know my 10stop might stop me blowing the sensor. Not in direct path and nothing great in walking distance here so eh. Maybe just do some bad street photography of people half caring about the sky I do it once in a while too. Depending on what your work is, they could use the photos as promo photography - the company I work for uses mine as imagery in their brochures and marketing materials.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2017 22:20
|
|
|
a 10 stop visible light ND is not going to stop all the UV and IR light you're magnifying via your lens. This is why they make special solar filters
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2017 22:20
|
|
|
Vancouver BC is supposed to get 90% of the eclipse so should be a cool effect nonetheless, looking forward to taking some pics also https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1343714-REG/formatt_hitech_fc72eclp5_4_firecrest_72mm_eclipse_5_4.html $169 USD gently caress me
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2017 22:23
|
|
|
Theophany posted:I do it once in a while too. Depending on what your work is, they could use the photos as promo photography - the company I work for uses mine as imagery in their brochures and marketing materials. Yeah I'm trying to convince them to let me go to some customer properties and take some photos (we're a landscaping firm, but tend to be small and worth of mouth orientated so there's next to nothing in the way of promo material out there except coverage magazines have done). Would be fun to go out to some multi million dollar place and get a photo of it all next to the eclipse. Sadly the office I work out of is just plain and boring.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2017 22:29
|
|
|
honestly your best bet is to get the same "foil" stuff that folks get to be able to point telescopes at the sun and a rubber band and wrap that around the front of your lens I have a homemade solar filter for my 8" reflector telescope and it allows me to see sunspots. (I didn't make the filter)
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2017 22:36
|
|
|
Yeah it's hard even to get the foil for a reasonable price. The one I linked yesterday is sold out now. I'm debating just not bothering to take direct sun photos outside of totality. My plan right now is to get the total eclipse in the Eastern sky juxtaposed in frame with Mount Jefferson in Oregon. I'll have close to three minutes to get that shot and otherwise I can take photos of shadows on the ground or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2017 00:54
|
|
|
Be careful, even for a 10-stop filter you'd probably need to go f22 at a pretty high speed (and be extra double careful using a DSLR eyepiece, 'cause that's straight lens->mirror->eyeball). The eclipse-specific foil stuff I bought is equivalent to 16.5 stops. I can just barely make out bright incandescent lights through it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2017 03:44
|
|
|
Mirage posted:Be careful, even for a 10-stop filter you'd probably need to go f22 at a pretty high speed (and be extra double careful using a DSLR eyepiece, 'cause that's straight lens->mirror->eyeball). The eclipse-specific foil stuff I bought is equivalent to 16.5 stops. I can just barely make out bright incandescent lights through it. Do not use the eyepiece for a 10d filter at all. Live view only and make sure the aperture is as tight as possible for the lens and it should be fine... You can test on an older camera at whatever time of day the eclipse is supposed to happen where you'll a be, if you have one and are worried about loving up the sensor. There's a pretty big sunspot at the moment, I believe.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2017 06:07
|
|
|
If you could bring one lens on a 5 day hiking trip in Alaska what would it be? How about if it had to be under 400 used?
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2017 16:54
|
|
|
Probably my Tamron 90 mm macro. You could argue it's on the long end, but I personally don't care much for wide angle landscapes and instead prefer picking out details, and you probably won't need to photograph in super close quarters.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2017 17:32
|
|
|
I'm starting to think all I really need is my 50mm 1.8D, but the lens I use most often in Alaska is my 18-35 3.5-4.5 which you can get for ~$350 used.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2017 20:27
|
|
|
huhu posted:If you could bring one lens on a 5 day hiking trip in Alaska what would it be? How about if it had to be under 400 used? I think you will want a superzoom lens that can reasonably do both big landscapes and picking out wildlife. You will be compromising of course, because a superzoom has a lot of elements which presumably degrade image quality. There are inexpensive superzoom options, like the Tamron 18-200, and more options if you are willing to buy used or (especially) rent a high-quality lens. A superzoom is also heavy. If you want to save weight, I'd go with a fixed aperture lens equivalent to Nifty 50mm depending on if you're full frame or cropped frame (crop frame do 28mm). You won't get the best landscapes and you won't pick out e.g. a bear at 2 miles away or whatever, but it'll be compact and light and perform well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
Anyone here have experience with Nikon pro bodies (D3-D5)? I heard they confirm focus differently while in af--s (more like Canon bodies in this aspect) than non-pro nikon bodies. Specifically the af point flashes once when pressing the af button, then flashes again on focus confirmation, while the non-pro only flash the af point once at the initiation of focus. Is this the case?
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2017 05:42
|
|
|
We're expecting our first child in a few months and I would like to pick up a 50mm lens for my 7200 so I can take some newborn pictures when she arrives. Based on my research so far, I'm leaning toward Nikon's 1.8G. Anyone have any recommendations on lenses they think might be better?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2017 23:30
|
|
|
The 7200 is a crop sensor so if you want the fov of a 50 then get a 35. The Nikon 35 dx version is the one you want.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 00:20
|
|
|
I'm fairly well-invested into Canon, but goddamn if I could snap my fingers and switch all of my gear over to Nikon equivalents I'd do it in a heartbeat. The new D850 is nuts. http://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/dslr-cameras/1585/d850.html
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2017 19:18
|
|
|
dakana posted:I'm fairly well-invested into Canon, but goddamn if I could snap my fingers and switch all of my gear over to Nikon equivalents I'd do it in a heartbeat. The new D850 is nuts. I'm pretty steamed that a year after I switched to fuji, Nikon finally returns to making a slightly less powerful version of their flagship beast camera, a la the d3/d700.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2017 19:24
|
|
|
red19fire posted:I'm pretty steamed that a year after I switched to fuji, Nikon finally returns to making a slightly less powerful version of their flagship beast camera, a la the d3/d700. The thing that was most surprising to me is how they're adding features like focus peaking & stacking, zebras, 4k and 8k timelapses without shutter actuations, and WiFi & Bluetooth while still delivering fantastic specs in terms of weathersealing, autofocus, burst rate, and resolution.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2017 19:37
|
|
|
It's almost like Nikon is interested in making and selling the best product they can, instead of frustratingly price engineering their whole range.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2017 22:17
|
|
|
Mightaswell posted:It's almost like Nikon is interested in making and selling the best product they can, instead of frustratingly price engineering their whole range. Yet they still took out the 2nd card slot in the D7300, which was a pretty dick move.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2017 22:25
|
|
|
Nikon's WiFi implementations are a loving joke, though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 02:02
|
|
|
dakana posted:I'm fairly well-invested into Canon, but goddamn if I could snap my fingers and switch all of my gear over to Nikon equivalents I'd do it in a heartbeat. The new D850 is nuts. The Nikon D850 Doubles as a 35mm 45.7MP Film Scanner.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 16:04
|
|
|
Hot drat that 850. Welp anyone want my second body 810 with battery grip? 😀
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 22:21
|
|
|
Canon: slightly better lenses Nikon: much better bodies can't they just
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 22:50
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
I need like $10,000 CAD for a D850 plus lenses tyvm thread
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 22:59
|
|
|
Who wants to buy a d750
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 23:47
|
|
|
The 850's trick is the in-body inversion. You can just use the same accessories on the body you have. You can live with 24MP scans, trust me.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2017 10:35
|
|
|
The D850 is so tempting. Probably will get it the second its on sale for a decent price (EU land). I originally wanted to get a FX body at some point to complement my D500 for high res shots of static subjects, and to avoid having to switch lenses all the time, but with those specs the reason to keep my D500 is to always have a camera ready. And for the 3 extra FPS, since also getting the grip + big battery + charger will probably be out of my reach for a while.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2017 10:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 00:03 |
|
|
TheBananaKing posted:Nikon's WiFi implementations are a loving joke, though. No kidding, I can't even figure out what their intended use is at all.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2017 15:18
|
|
