|
Who's a happy boy? I'm a happy boy!
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2020 20:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 22:18 |
|
|
That's not a camera lens, that's a bazooka.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2020 21:17
|
|
|
I don't see anything, it's just a picture of a table??
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2020 21:43
|
|
|
I’m insanely jelly.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2020 21:51
|
|
|
Since the DSLR thread is archived: Is $900 about as good as it gets for the D610 + 50mm f/1.8 lens (also comes with B-D14 Multi Battery Power Pack + WU-1b Wireless Mobile Adapter)? I was previously planning on buying a used D610 but this kit seems to be cheaper than what I can find used. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1515120-REG/nikon_13550_d610_body_with_50mm.html/overview
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2020 00:34
|
|
|
laxbro posted:Since the DSLR thread is archived: Is $900 about as good as it gets for the D610 + 50mm f/1.8 lens (also comes with B-D14 Multi Battery Power Pack + WU-1b Wireless Mobile Adapter)? I was previously planning on buying a used D610 but this kit seems to be cheaper than what I can find used. You can get a D610 body on eBay for less than $500. That lens usually goes for around $100 used
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2020 00:57
|
|
|
Fools Infinite posted:You should be able to set it to shoot without a lens. You might be able to tether the camera if you don't have a memory card. No cable to tether it. Oh well, not a big deal. Trying to sell it but it looks like it’s not worth all too much anyway so whoever buys it probably won’t care if it’s 14333 or 17963 or whatever the exact number is going to be. Thanks though (and I don’t understand why the firmware doesn’t tell me this since it’s a property of the camera but I digress).
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2020 08:30
|
|
|
mhb are usually very good about testing shutter count for you and giving you more for a low number if you are going a part exchange route
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2020 11:11
|
|
|
Webcam software is out https://downloadcenter.nikonimglib.com/en/download/sw/176.html It is very simple, doesn't install any app, just gives you a new option for "Nikon Webcam Utility" in Zoom or whatever. That is good and it works without any issues. The resolution is decent, not HD but probably the same as live view (1280x960 on my Z6). No control over the camera -- do that on the body. Framerate is 15-20fps. lol. way to go It's still in beta so maybe they'll put out some updated firmware that will give a faster stream??
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2020 02:21
|
|
|
Yeah I used it all today and it's miles ahead of my garbage laptop webcam. Using a nice f/2 lens on a Z6 makes it look decent. It's ok, I like it. It is what it is. Just wish I could use the usb to power it, instead of having a battery in there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2020 08:12
|
|
|
Yeast posted:That's a freaking quality example. Re. this. I happened to have both bodies with me today and made one more comparative example using this intensely red Jetta sitting in the sun. The imager on the D850 I suspect is fitted with relatively pale or permissive filters producing a color gamut essentially no wider than sRGB. The red channel is particularly weak. For many uses this is perhaps not important or even a desirable characteristic: You still have very respectable tonality and dynamic range, and working for screen targets you have a simpler workflow where there's rarely or ever saturation clipping happening while you're loading the raw image into your editing colorspace. From there you can choose to selectively increase saturation in the parts of the image that you know or deem to be too pale. But your D850 will not be able to tell the difference between a red coat of paint and anything more saturated than that. But for "ordinary" and natural colors within sRGB the D850 performs remarkably well in terms of color accuracy. The attraction of the D4s for me is that it produces a more "truthful" wide-gamut image where all the source color information you could reasonably want is there for print or screen uses. You as a creative user of these raw images have to choose how you handle the wide-gamut information. You can for example apply selective de-saturation to only the richest parts of the image. In the attached example I just let the saturation clip and left the processing flat so the hood / bonnet of the Jetta is basically 100% saturated 0º red in the sRGB version of the image while in the source RAW image the color is nowhere close to saturated. Subjectively however IMO this flat processing looks naturalistic and directly usable to me in most cases. Ultra-nerdy side note : I have purchased as a folly a big old piece of lab equipment - a late 1980s Japanese monochromator with a xenon light source and a stepper motor mechanism for the wavelength selector. Also a photo multiplier tube detector accessory plus some reference noble gas light sources to dial in the spectrum and get the PMT calibrated. After I'm done with that and finish hooking it up to a raspberry pi or something I hope I can use it to characterize the color filters and imagers in my cameras. Like, shoot 100 raw photos of a grey target each only illuminated with a different spectral wavelength, then pull out and plot the raw channels, normalized against the xenon light source (which is mostly flat across visible spectrum except a small bump around 450nm).
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2020 08:22
|
|
|
frumpykvetchbot posted:Fantastic Post God that really shows it right. The D850 makes that golf look about 7 years older than it actually is.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2020 06:38
|
|
|
I’m curious about whether the above could be an artifact of the RAW profile? The D4S image just looks more saturated overall to me, in the window reflections and the grass, etc. Seems like the D850’s raw profile could be set up for less saturation and I’d be interested to see if just bumping that slider up a little bit gets you into the same world.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2020 18:15
|
|
|
I've heard the trend is that newer cameras use color filters that allow in a slightly wider range of frequencies, as a way of improving low light performance. I would be interested in seeing the results of testing (I couldn't bring anything interesting on the subject up on google, but maybe I am just not searching for the right phrase).
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2020 18:52
|
|
|
powderific posted:I’m curious about whether the above could be an artifact of the RAW profile? The D4S image just looks more saturated overall to me, in the window reflections and the grass, etc. Seems like the D850’s raw profile could be set up for less saturation and I’d be interested to see if just bumping that slider up a little bit gets you into the same world. Increasing saturation in processing raw images from the 850 definitely makes them appear more similar to a flat processed D4s image of the same scene. (But they're subtly different in really rich colors.) Here's a scene with a good spread of hues and saturation levels. The D4s version on top and D850 thing on bottom. If you take the 850 section and just bump the saturation you get very close indeed.  But why is it so? I'm very open to the idea that my understanding of the handling of raw color processing is somehow flawed. I'm perhaps naively trusting the raw loader with a camera specific input profile and flat / neutral processing selected, to produce an accurate transformation of sensor channel color values into the selected working or output colorspace. In any case I can't by just bumping up the saturation get things like LED and neon signage and stage lights to look anywhere near as good and true on the 850 as they do with the D4s.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2020 22:05
|
|
|
I mean, different raw processors handle the data differently. Capture One looks different from Adobe Camera Raw looks different from the built in Nikon raw processing. It's not necessarily huge differences, but it's not just like a specific colorspace transform lookup table like going from cineon or slog3 or whatever to Rec.709. Nikon could have shifted how they approach really saturated colors in their raw processing since, or Adobe might have changed their process for mirroring the built in camera profiles, etc. What raw processor are you using?
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2020 22:44
|
|
|
laxbro posted:Since the DSLR thread is archived: Is $900 about as good as it gets for the D610 + 50mm f/1.8 lens (also comes with B-D14 Multi Battery Power Pack + WU-1b Wireless Mobile Adapter)? I was previously planning on buying a used D610 but this kit seems to be cheaper than what I can find used. Don’t know if you’re still looking, but I’m selling my D600 + Tamron SP 45/1.8 + TAP in console on eBay right now for $632. The shutter count is low and while there is some dust (the bane of d600’s) on the sensor, it’s pretty minimal (my a6000 had it worse after about a year of use) and only visible at stupid small apertures. (The dust is not at all why I’m selling it. I just do a lot more with video than digital stills these days, and it is not a good camera for video compared to my Fuji)
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2020 13:43
|
|
|
Anybody found an issue with the webcam utility where it just forgets the camera? Instead it just shows Nikon Webcam Utility on the screen. Have to uninstall the driver, then re-install to get it to work. Not that bad of a hassle, but annoying.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2020 00:27
|
|
|
I own a Nikon N60 SLR and a Nikon D7500. From my research, it sounds like no lenses that support auto focus on the D7500 will work for the N60? Are there any Nikon (or other company) film cameras that support auto focus with crop sensor lenses.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2020 23:06
|
|
|
Rewrote this all in an edit for clarity: There are two different issues at play here: the crop of the sensor, and the autofocus system in the lens. You aren’t going to want to use lenses designed for a crop sensor on a film body no matter the autofocus system, as film is “full frame” and you’ll get some vignetting. There are exceptions, like I think the 35mm DX is OK if you don’t stop down, but you’ll generally be better off using full frame glass. You can use full frame glass on the D7500, you’re just paying in weight, size, and money for image circle you won’t be using. Second, the N60 only works with AF-D lenses where there’s a screw drive in the body, and not the newer AF-S system that has the motor in the lens. There are no screw drive focus AF-D crop sensor DX lenses for Nikon because the existence of those cameras is after the introduction AF-S where the motor is in the lens. However, your D7500 does have a screw drive motor for AF-D lenses, so you can use full frame AF-D lenses on it that will work with the N60 too. Finally, the N60 is like a sub $20 camera at this point, so you could just replace it with an N65, which does support AF-S for also around the same $20. You would still want to use full frame glass with it though. powderific fucked around with this message at 23:35 on Oct 10, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2020 23:26
|
|
|
Does high speed flash sync work with the goofy pop up on camera flash to speed light flash communication thingy? God that was terrible wording. I have a D750 and a SB 700 and I’m wondering if I need a wireless communicator for high speed flash sync beyond the Nikon infrared thing if I’m only 5 feet away and doing basic studio stuff.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 05:37
|
|
|
It’s called CLS and auto fp sync should work. Whether that’s enough for your needs maybe just test it out and see? Or we’re gonna need more info on what you’re trying to do. If it matters I don’t think you can have the pop up flash set to go and still do fp hss, they usually don’t have enough juice for fp sync.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2020 12:22
|
|
|
Heated Gaming Moment posted:Does high speed flash sync work with the goofy pop up on camera flash to speed light flash communication thingy? It worked fine on the D800. But if you have a chance, give the Godox / Flashpoint stuff a try. I've completely converted my studio and field lights to this system. It is RF based and includes some cool and powerful strobes that are both cheap and works well with Nikon TTL (and also Canon and Sony.)
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2020 16:48
|
|
|
frumpykvetchbot posted:It worked fine on the D800. Good to know. One speedlight is enough for me for now, but I might consider Godex in the future. powderific posted:It’s called CLS and auto fp sync should work. Whether that’s enough for your needs maybe just test it out and see? Or we’re gonna need more info on what you’re trying to do. If it matters I don’t think you can have the pop up flash set to go and still do fp hss, they usually don’t have enough juice for fp sync. I had tried it out and could not get it to work when I posted, but I have since been successful. Kinda cute for a first try. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 03:17
|
|
|
On a D3200 is there a way to adjust the focus of a lens through menus? I was trying to take some photos of some stars but moving the focus ring manually was wobbling everything and difficult.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 22:29
|
|
|
Crankit posted:On a D3200 is there a way to adjust the focus of a lens through menus? I was trying to take some photos of some stars but moving the focus ring manually was wobbling everything and difficult.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 22:58
|
|
|
My partner wants to get into photography so I'm seriously considering getting her a half decent camera and teaching her to shoot. I'm trying to stick to a budget of around €200 for body+lens as I expect that she'll invest in her own setup when she's ready (and she can borrow my 70-200 lens for whatever). Is a D3300 a decent starting body?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 00:38
|
|
|
That's a crop frame, so be aware of what it means for lens compatibility. But I have been learning with a D3200 and I found it a good camera to learn on, particularly as I was shifting from film to digital when I got it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 00:42
|
|
|
Anything full frame will be waaaay out of budget, this is just a starter set and I'm planning to get her a Sigma 18-50mm to go with it unless I miraculously find a D3300 with a lens.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 15:43
|
|
|
Ashex posted:Anything full frame will be waaaay out of budget, this is just a starter set and I'm planning to get her a Sigma 18-50mm to go with it unless I miraculously find a D3300 with a lens. The D3300 can take af-p lenses with a firmware update so that's a good shout. The sigma 18-50 is also a bloody good lens but getting both for under $200 seems like a tall order. While f mount isn't long for this world, there is a huge selection of lenses to keep anyone happy for years to pick up on the cheap.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 16:06
|
|
|
Mega Comrade posted:The D3300 can take af-p lenses with a firmware update so that's a good shout. I did shop a round a little and it looks like I'll be going over my budget by €50-70 to squeeze the lens in. I just don't know a cheaper standard lens that I would be comfortable buying someone as their first.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 17:19
|
|
|
The nikon 35mm dx isn't a bad choice for a first/only lens for someone learning photography.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 18:28
|
|
|
This is kind of a lot, but I'm asking about this on a different forum, and need a second opinion. Please behold this sequence of dog images. Would you consider this hit rate to be about what you'd expect for a D600 with a Tamron SP 45mm 1.8, wide open? I keep going back and forth as to whether or not this thing is functioning as well as it should. I know the D600/D7000 AF module wasn't a high point for Nikon but the focus accuracy seems very 'coarse'. First three are C-AF 3D Tracking. Last two are S-AF single-point center.     Also check out these pictures of perfectly still and not quite in focus plants. S-AF single point center.  (you'd have to open this one in a new tab to see how truly out of focus it is)  I feel like I get a consistent back-focus on subjects like these. It's not completely consistent.. sometimes the subject will be in good focus, but I get a lot of misses where something behind the intended target gets it instead. However, setting AFMA to something that corrects for that (about -16) will cause good focus 'test subjects' like, say, fence or flagstone pictures to be way way front-focused. e.g. -  So I've left it all at 0 adjustment for the shots posted (except for that last one). The fine folks over the the 'D Preview' forums seem to think that my expectations of focus accuracy are totally out of line with what the D600 can deliver, that I'm maligning someone's favorite camera which is unconscionable, and that I must be using it all wrong. I kind of hope I am, because this kit is up on eBay as I type. If the D600 acts like I've hopefully illustrated it does, but for someone else, do you think they'd have grounds to be pissed, or return it? I'd say from experience that you can try to use it for indoor available light candid event shooting, but that you'll definitely miss focus on some golden moments due to the inconsistency of even single-point S-AF with back-button focus on the center point. Live view CDAF, while slow as hell, is way more accurate and sharp. I did take it to my local camera shop and had them put it up on the LensAlign. It came back 'good' in their estimation, but that was a pretty controlled environment and at pretty close range. It seems to be smaller subjects at about 8-10ft where things start to get iffy. SMERSH Mouth fucked around with this message at 02:46 on Dec 8, 2020 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2020 02:38
|
|
|
Wide open at f/1.8 will not be the sharpest aperture for your lens and the depth of field will be quite narrow meaning small movement after focus could put the small part you want in focus out of focus. Your shots do not look bad to me in terms of focus however. To test your systems Print out a focus test chart (just google for one), pin to the wall in an area with good light and no wind. Put your camera on a tripod aimed at the chart with your general subject distance keep everything horizontal so the focal plane is flat perpendicular to the ground when pointed at the chart. Go to live view, zoom in on the chart, manually focus the lens until it's in focus on the screen, now test your AF did the focus change and beep and and now the focus is worse or did it say the same or even get better? Try it the other way around let the AF find focus and then see if it gets worse or better with manual adjustment. If you focussed better manually your AF needs adjustment or something is wrong if not your AF is fine and you are moving after focus or need a narrower aperture to compensate for the narrow focal plane, or your expectations for sharpness are off, which can happen once you start really pixel peeping and suspecting a problem with your camera.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2020 10:21
|
|
|
Edit: It’s kind of a moot point now. Bought a beat up old used D800. Focus is night and day, even with the extra detail making it more critical. The 600 missed focus on my dog at rest; the 800 keeps his eye in focus continuously as he chews a toy even in minimal room light. Not better than my X-T30, but it’s doing more than good enough. While going through this process perhaps made my focus sharper when it “hit”, the number of misses was still high. I am comparing the results to my X-T30 with a 35mm f/2, which is more like f/2.8 on full frame, but the rate of sharp images I get with that camera+lens is much higher. I did make a video of me taking the dog shots, in case anyone can find something in my technique to point out. Although I’ll say it was kind of awkward trying to hold the iphone up to the eyecup. If it makes any difference, I’m using back-button focus. https://youtu.be/9Wx_JNNT2Zg SMERSH Mouth fucked around with this message at 02:17 on Dec 15, 2020 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2020 00:18
|
|
|
Could anybody suggest a nice, lightweight telephoto? I'm looking to do some shooting from a kayak, so want to keep stuff relatively small and light. To be used with a Z6/Z50 or D600
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2020 03:50
|
|
|
The 70-300 AF-P is supposed to be really nice for that kinda use case.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2020 04:01
|
|
|
OK cool, I'll take look at that one. Also eyeing off the Nikon Z 24-200... Not the fastest, but I just want something light and sharp. Ken Rockwell likes it though!!! 
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2020 04:08
|
|
|
I’m interested in that too — not totally sold on super zooms, but lately feel like it’d be handy. But tamron has a similar one with faster apertures for e-mount that I’m hoping they’ll make for z at some point.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2020 04:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 22:18 |
|
|
Anyone ever have VR actually make things WAY blurrier when used around 1/125 on a D810? My Tamron 45mm goes to poo poo when VR is engaged and used at shutter speeds that would normally be hand-holdable without VR. The problem is VR is all or nothing, not shutter speed dependent. I know to turn it off for tripod use. This wasn’t a problem with the lens on a D600.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2021 00:23
|
|