|
A high sync speed is nice to have when you want to have some fill light when shooting a subject against the setting sun. The higher the sync, the more you can open up your aperture Rondo of the Sun and Moon by CorneliusK, on Flickr 35mm, f1.4, 1/1000s, sb-900 on a sync cord for HSS
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2012 15:56
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 4, 2024 00:41 |
|
|
Even if you are indoors, you may wish to raise ISO and lower flash power to bring up the ambient light, or simply to conserve batteries or to reduce overheating. Lower power flashes are also less distracting and intrusive.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2013 19:32
|
|
|
Shooting in compressed 12bit raw gives you a 14 file buffer which isn't too bad. If you really need a huge buffer just shoot jpgs? That being said I do expect Nikon to come out with a D400, as there is still a sizable gap between D7100 pricing and D600 pricing. Also interesting is the fact that Nikon first launched the D7000 with 16mp, and then later on an FX cam with the same pixel density (D800 with 36mp) If they do the same with the D7100 we will be looking at a 54mp FX camera somewhere down the line (D4x anyone?)
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2013 20:49
|
|
|
I feel that the design philosophy of the D4 is not just speed, it is also more consistent performance throughout the entire ISO range, as opposed to the other current gen Nikon cameras. Surely there is a place in the DX line for such a camera as well?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2013 04:44
|
|
|
You are right that it is not a very big difference and for most people I'd imagine that the D800's specs will be more suitable. It is only for the small subset of people who shoots a large volume of pictures at high isos (events? weddings? sports?) that will prefer something like a D4. Perhaps Nikon may decide that the market for these is just too small for them to bother with a dx D4.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2013 05:26
|
|
|
I have read somewhere before that the AF sensors in Nikon AF modules are taking readings from an area equivalent to an f5.6 aperture. I.E. they are measuring if the lens is being stopped down to f5.6, even when it is not. Some Canon DSLRs, like the 7D and the 5DII, have f2.8 sensitive AF sensors which are taking readings from an f2.8 area, but there aren't any Nikon cameras with this feature AFAIK. The problem is that some lenses, especially fast lenses, have this issue called focus shift, whereby the point in focus actually shifts depending on the aperture used. So an AF sensor which is only taking in readings from the f5.6 image circle of an f1.4 lens may detect that it in focus, but the imagine will appear to be out of focus at f1.4. How this problem is mitigated in modern DSLRs is that there is a look up table inside each lens which tells the body how much focus shift that particular lens has, so the AF system is able to compensate for it. Obviously this doesn't work when you are using a manual lens faster than f5.6 with focus shift, as there is no look up table for the camera body to compensate by. This is further aggravated by the fact that current AF modules are not absolutely accurate, especially in poor light and on subjects with poor contrast. One way to overcome this is to do a custom AF fine tune of the lens at the aperture you are mostly intending to use the manual lens at, or at a median aperture as a compromise. Do this by setting the lens at that aperture and then focus on an AF target from near to far and watching when the AF point lights up. Adjust the af fine tune until you get a satisfactory result. This works as you are using the point where the green dot begins to appear from the near side, not just the entire range where the green dot appears. Hope my explanation is clear enough!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2013 16:43
|
|
|
This is where I had got it from, I should have posted this in the first place http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/50045281 She also did some testing of her own http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/50073569
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2013 18:42
|
|
|
I've seen some amazing work done with the Sigma 10-20, it should prove more than sufficient for tripod work.
|
|
#
¿
May 9, 2013 06:34
|
|
|
The equivalent with VC would be this. If you can live without VC (not a big deal at this focal length range), you can look at this. The 35dx will work fine at close focus but not when you focus it at anything beyond 20 feet or so. Remo fucked around with this message at 13:26 on Jun 7, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2013 13:24
|
|
|
It is a bit late for this but you really need to consider the total cost of moving over to FF inclusive of the required lenses. There is little point in buying a camera early (unless the deal is extremely good), if you lack the lenses to utilize it fully with. It's always better to save up and wait for prices to drop, until you can make a decisive migration.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2013 14:10
|
|
|
I saw some charts where people test the actual ISO vs the stated ISO of cameras, and there are some cameras which have slight deviations. E.g. the camera's 12,800 ISO ends up being only 10,000 ISO. Basically its the manufacturer fudging the numbers. Not very noticeable in real life generally though.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2013 04:30
|
|
|
I have heard amazing things about the VRIII in the new 70-200 f4. Personally I have a 70-200 f2.8 vrI, you can see the VR effect through the viewfinder but I can at most handhold it 1 stop slower than 1/fl. I do have extremely shaky hands though.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2013 16:38
|
|
|
You can look at the Sigma 85mm f1.4 also, its fantastic. It should also be cheaper than the 1.4D.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 25, 2013 04:09
|
|
|
There is a Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 zoom which you may wish to check out. Reviews look promising.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2013 05:06
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
I had damaged my D700 by carrying it via a rapidstrap with a 70-200 attached to it. Basically the weight of the lens had separated the base plate of the camera slightly from the rest of the camera, from the front there is a 1-2mm gap between the front plate and the base plate. Camera still works but it will occasionally shut down and restart by itself. I tried sending it for repair but the local service center (singapore) told me it would take 1-2 weeks to do a complete check of the camera, which is very difficult for me for now as I have a lot of shoots scheduled for the next few weeks. I would like to know if anyone has had experience with similar type of damage to their cameras as well as how much it costs to repair, or if its even repairable in the first place.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2013 19:27
|
|
|
Its still attached to the camera but not very firmly, think of it as being partly ripped off. My gut feel is that it is likely beyond economical repair (taking into account the typically high rates charged by my local service center), and that I may need to get a D600 to replace my dear D700. But would like to hear if anyone has any similar experiences with their cameras.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2013 19:39
|
|
|
I was changing between a few lenses that day and it was more convenient to just keep the sling mounted on my camera tripod mount, a very poor decision in hindsight. Here is a pic 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2013 03:30
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 4, 2024 00:41 |
|
|
Ok I managed to find out what went wrong with my camera - the screws holding the base plate came loose over time, it was not obvious to me previously as they were under the rubber base cover. 5 minutes with a screwdriver and the base plate is once again securely attached to the rest of the body. Lessons learnt - avoid using heavy lenses while slinging the camera from the tripod mount, and check the base plate regularly for any looseness.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2013 06:56
|
|