Jump to content


Photo

The photographers' thread


  • Please log in to reply
1471 replies to this topic

#1251 Alan Cox

Alan Cox
  • Member

  • 7,670 posts
  • Joined: March 03

Posted 04 June 2013 - 11:41

Another whose photos weren't all quite as they appeared, O Winston Link - I love them, as I do Ansel Adams.
http://www.google.co...img.NAgJbqWDPpQ

Advertisement

#1252 PCC

PCC
  • Member

  • 458 posts
  • Joined: August 06

Posted 04 June 2013 - 15:06

The epitome of methodical, technical photographers was, I suppose, Ansel Adams. I wonder how many of his finished prints looked exactly like the scene as he photographed it. Did he make the sky a little darker, the foliage a little lighter? Add the fact that we probably all see things slightly differently.

Adams himself answers this question in this interview:

"...while the landscapes that I have photographed in Yosemite are recognized by most people and, of course, the subject is an important part of the pictures, they are not “realistic.” Instead, they are an imprint of my visualization. All of my pictures are optically very accurate–I use pretty good lenses–but they are quite unrealistic in terms of values. A more realistic simple snapshot captures the image but misses everything else. I want a picture to reflect not only the forms but what I had seen and felt at the moment of exposure."

#1253 Tony Matthews

Tony Matthews
  • Member

  • 17,498 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 04 June 2013 - 15:11

... O Winston Link

That's more ante-processing than post-processing! Wonderful stuff, and with the batteries of powerful flashes, the complete opposite of Ansel Adams. Lets face it, the only thing that matters is the final image, however you achieve it.

Not sure that batteries of flashes is quite right, but you know what I mean...

#1254 backfire

backfire
  • Member

  • 57 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 04 June 2013 - 15:48

On the subject of Ansel Adams, I remember seeing an interview with him where he told the story of one of his most famous images (I think it may have been at Yosemite), when he saw a a shot from the car but the light was just about to go. He jumped from the car, set up the camera and got one shot with a guessed exposure before the light failed. Apparently it was a bitch to print - but became a big seller.

#1255 PCC

PCC
  • Member

  • 458 posts
  • Joined: August 06

Posted 04 June 2013 - 15:53

On the subject of Ansel Adams, I remember seeing an interview with him where he told the story of one of his most famous images (I think it may have been at Yosemite), when he saw a a shot from the car but the light was just about to go. He jumped from the car, set up the camera and got one shot with a guessed exposure before the light failed. Apparently it was a bitch to print - but became a big seller.

That was his famous Moonrise image. It wasn't shot from the car - that would have been impossible with the equipment he used. He discusses it in the same interview I quoted above.

#1256 Tony Matthews

Tony Matthews
  • Member

  • 17,498 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 04 June 2013 - 17:14

He jumped from the car, set up the camera



That was his famous Moonrise image. It wasn't shot from the car - that would have been impossible with the equipment he used. He discusses it in the same interview I quoted above.

:)

#1257 PCC

PCC
  • Member

  • 458 posts
  • Joined: August 06

Posted 04 June 2013 - 17:21

...he saw a a shot from the car... He jumped from the car, set up the camera and got one shot with a guessed exposure before the light failed.

Oops, sorry, I need to read more carefully. Anyway, the whole story is in the interview.

#1258 E1pix

E1pix
  • Member

  • 9,462 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 04 June 2013 - 18:01

Per Adams and shooting 4x5, sometimes I wonder just how much difficulty plays into the best images...

If the process is harder, do we tend to try harder yet?

If so, is point-and-shoot the antithesis of art, because it's far too easy and automatic to consider putting in much effort?

#1259 kayemod

kayemod
  • Member

  • 7,180 posts
  • Joined: August 05

Posted 04 June 2013 - 18:06

On the subject of Ansel Adams, I remember seeing an interview with him where he told the story of one of his most famous images (I think it may have been at Yosemite), when he saw a a shot from the car but the light was just about to go. He jumped from the car, set up the camera and got one shot with a guessed exposure before the light failed. Apparently it was a bitch to print - but became a big seller.


Ah, well at least that explains the windscreen wipers along the bottom of the photo.


Advertisement

#1260 backfire

backfire
  • Member

  • 57 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 04 June 2013 - 18:17

Per Adams and shooting 4x5, sometimes I wonder just how much difficulty plays into the best images...

If the process is harder, do we tend to try harder yet?

If so, is point-and-shoot the antithesis of art, because it's far too easy and automatic to consider putting in much effort?

That is so true, My best pics tend to be taken when my back is to the wall - I cock up the easy ones! When I first went digital, I always tried to imagine I was shooting static set ups as if I was shooting with large or medium format, it's too easy just to snap with a camera that handles just like a 35mmm SLR.

#1261 Tony Matthews

Tony Matthews
  • Member

  • 17,498 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 04 June 2013 - 18:55

Perhaps the answer is to leave home with a card that will only hold 36 (say) images, and no card reader or hard drive to cheat with! Obviously it is possible to pan with medium format, or there wouldn't be any photographs of early motor sport, but it isn't easy. I really enjoyed using my Pentax 67, and with a tripod and waist-level finder you do act very differently to when you are handling a 35mm SLR. Somehow, in my experience, you do take more care over composition, focus and as a result, exposure. By 'as a result' I mean that, having gone to some effort setting things up, you unconsciously don't want to waste that effort by getting the exposure wrong.

Given the spare dosh, however, I would get a Leica M9 B&W, four or five lenses, an A2 printer and and and... well, that's about it, unless Nikon ever make the camera that I really want, which is an FM/FE sized body, 24/36 MP, accepting all the manual Nikkors.

#1262 PCC

PCC
  • Member

  • 458 posts
  • Joined: August 06

Posted 04 June 2013 - 19:17

...unless Nikon ever make the camera that I really want, which is an FM/FE sized body, 24/36 MP, accepting all the manual Nikkors.

Doesn't the D800 fulfill all those criteria?

#1263 kayemod

kayemod
  • Member

  • 7,180 posts
  • Joined: August 05

Posted 04 June 2013 - 19:29

Doesn't the D800 fulfill all those criteria?


Only if you disregard the weight, why are these things so damn big and heavy?


#1264 PCC

PCC
  • Member

  • 458 posts
  • Joined: August 06

Posted 04 June 2013 - 19:43

Only if you disregard the weight, why are these things so damn big and heavy?

A quick google tells me that the D800 comes in at 900g, the FM at 590, so I take your point. Even my F3, which was my main machine for years (and made of brass!) was 'only' 760 grams.

I don't know why they are so hefty - E1 may have a better understanding of this, but I'm guessing that it's due to the substantial electronics inside. That said, even a modest collection of lenses adds a lot more weight to the gadget bag, so I'm not sure the extra 300 g in the body ultimately makes that much difference.

For me size is a less critical issue - a bit more bulk can actually improve ergonomics. I find the D800 handles very, very nicely - and even better if you get the vertical grip (which, I'm afraid, does increase the weight).

Edited by PCC, 04 June 2013 - 19:43.


#1265 Tony Matthews

Tony Matthews
  • Member

  • 17,498 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 04 June 2013 - 19:45

Only if you disregard the weight, why are these things so damn big and heavy?

Yes, weight and bulk. At least the D800 is smaller than the D700. And I have absolutely no need of 90% of the software (OK, I know it doesn't weigh much) that all these cameras have. All the early Nikon manuals start by showing you how to hold the camera - distinctly lacking an all later manuals. Seeing a medium-sized SLR cradled in two cupped hands, all the controls within easy reach, in landscape and portrait format, it all looks so easy, and feels right.

#1266 PCC

PCC
  • Member

  • 458 posts
  • Joined: August 06

Posted 04 June 2013 - 19:58

Seeing a medium-sized SLR cradled in two cupped hands, all the controls within easy reach, in landscape and portrait format, it all looks so easy, and feels right.

You may be pleasantly surprised if you try holding a D800, especially one with the vertical grip. Everything is within easy reach, no matter how the camera is oriented. I found the D300 to be much the same. I skipped several generations of cameras, but I found both of these to be ergonomically far superior to the F3 I used before them.

#1267 E1pix

E1pix
  • Member

  • 9,462 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 04 June 2013 - 21:33

That is so true, My best pics tend to be taken when my back is to the wall - I cock up the easy ones! When I first went digital, I always tried to imagine I was shooting static set ups as if I was shooting with large or medium format, it's too easy just to snap with a camera that handles just like a 35mmm SLR.

:up: Yep. I read something Galen Rowell wrote 30 years ago and never forgot it... he'd pretend with his F3 that it was a 4x5 and expensive to shoot — finding the best scene to use in that brief moment of best light — and as an extension making it "unaffordable" to miss any image. There's a ton of wisdom in such a mindset. When I went "up" to 4x5 I'd already had years developing how to "shoot on the cheap" — and really had to when carrying maybe 100 sheets on a 14-day backpack, and paying about $500 on those sheets processed. The mindset got to a point of needing only two exposures total covering my bracketing with 50 Velvia, and only failing on properly exposing an image 3-5% of the time. Both brackets were typically usable so overall 80-90% of all we exposed made it into the files.

Perhaps the answer is to leave home with a card that will only hold 36 (say) images, and no card reader or hard drive to cheat with! Obviously it is possible to pan with medium format, or there wouldn't be any photographs of early motor sport, but it isn't easy. I really enjoyed using my Pentax 67, and with a tripod and waist-level finder you do act very differently to when you are handling a 35mm SLR. Somehow, in my experience, you do take more care over composition, focus and as a result, exposure. By 'as a result' I mean that, having gone to some effort setting things up, you unconsciously don't want to waste that effort by getting the exposure wrong.

Given the spare dosh, however, I would get a Leica M9 B&W, four or five lenses, an A2 printer and and and... well, that's about it, unless Nikon ever make the camera that I really want, which is an FM/FE sized body, 24/36 MP, accepting all the manual Nikkors.

Always loved your style, old chum. :wave:

A quick google tells me that the D800 comes in at 900g, the FM at 590, so I take your point. Even my F3, which was my main machine for years (and made of brass!) was 'only' 760 grams.

I don't know why they are so hefty - E1 may have a better understanding of this, but I'm guessing that it's due to the substantial electronics inside. That said, even a modest collection of lenses adds a lot more weight to the gadget bag, so I'm not sure the extra 300 g in the body ultimately makes that much difference.

For me size is a less critical issue - a bit more bulk can actually improve ergonomics. I find the D800 handles very, very nicely - and even better if you get the vertical grip (which, I'm afraid, does increase the weight).

I think weight is a good thing... first, durability (like the F3, bombproof!), and for me a heavier camera is far easier to balance and use. I picture shooting with a feather, and how worthless that'd be.

Yes, weight and bulk. At least the D800 is smaller than the D700. And I have absolutely no need of 90% of the software (OK, I know it doesn't weigh much) that all these cameras have. All the early Nikon manuals start by showing you how to hold the camera - distinctly lacking an all later manuals. Seeing a medium-sized SLR cradled in two cupped hands, all the controls within easy reach, in landscape and portrait format, it all looks so easy, and feels right.

Yep Again. :up:

You may be pleasantly surprised if you try holding a D800, especially one with the vertical grip. Everything is within easy reach, no matter how the camera is oriented. I found the D300 to be much the same. I skipped several generations of cameras, but I found both of these to be ergonomically far superior to the F3 I used before them.

My D800E should be here late this week. I'm going from an F3, F4, and F100, and a rather strange and bellowed wooden box, in waiting on Nikon to build this sucker. Free shooting starts soon, but I'm still going to pretend each image is costing me a small fortune.


Thanks for the great input, Guys. :up:

#1268 Tony Matthews

Tony Matthews
  • Member

  • 17,498 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 04 June 2013 - 21:48

You may be pleasantly surprised if you try holding a D800, especially one with the vertical grip. Everything is within easy reach, no matter how the camera is oriented. I found the D300 to be much the same. I skipped several generations of cameras, but I found both of these to be ergonomically far superior to the F3 I used before them.

Well, I've handled a D800, my son has one, and I've had a D700 for a few years. Oddly, I still find an FE/FM nicer to hold. The F3 is slightly angular, the F4S is better. Slightly OT, and it must seem like a whinge, but I get a bit frustrated by the constant change of batteries and chargers, it means extra bulk and weight if you have, say, a D700 as back-up to a D800 or D4.

#1269 elansprint72

elansprint72
  • Member

  • 3,343 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 04 June 2013 - 22:03

Well, I've handled a D800, my son has one, and I've had a D700 for a few years. Oddly, I still find an FE/FM nicer to hold. The F3 is slightly angular, the F4S is better. Slightly OT, and it must seem like a whinge, but I get a bit frustrated by the constant change of batteries and chargers, it means extra bulk and weight if you have, say, a D700 as back-up to a D800 or D4.

Much as I like the D700, it does feel like a boat anchor around my neck. It is always a pleasure to use my 1969 Nikon F (which I used to think was a heavy camera!).

#1270 Tony Matthews

Tony Matthews
  • Member

  • 17,498 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 04 June 2013 - 22:57

I agree. A D700 with MB-D10 battery pack and 24-70 2.8 (plus socking great hood) is a pain to lug around, even on its own. If you want other lenses it's even more weight. I also get a bit self-conscious, because of the sheer bulk of it all, it's hardly discrete. This doesn't always apply, it depends on circumstances...

#1271 elansprint72

elansprint72
  • Member

  • 3,343 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 05 June 2013 - 21:33

I agree. A D700 with MB-D10 battery pack and 24-70 2.8 (plus socking great hood) is a pain to lug around, even on its own. If you want other lenses it's even more weight. I also get a bit self-conscious, because of the sheer bulk of it all, it's hardly discrete. This doesn't always apply, it depends on circumstances...

Today I did a (non-motorsport) assignment using nothing more than a 5mp Leica Digilux 2. Possibly the first/last reliable digital camera that was "produced by Leica" ;-)

If I won the euro-Lottery tomorrow I would cross the road to avoid a Leica outlet; having been a member of their user-forum for 5+ years and having read too many DOA stories regarding VERY expensive lenses and camera bodies. This surely is a company trading on past glories and the gullibilty of idiots with open wallets.

#1272 Bloggsworth

Bloggsworth
  • Member

  • 7,454 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 05 June 2013 - 21:44

Even the things that are not in the least digital are now ridiculously expensive - A split image/microprism screen for my OM1/2 was about £20, I just got one for my Nikon D3200 and it cost £126 including import duty!

#1273 elansprint72

elansprint72
  • Member

  • 3,343 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 06 June 2013 - 12:53

Even the things that are not in the least digital are now ridiculously expensive - A split image/microprism screen for my OM1/2 was about £20, I just got one for my Nikon D3200 and it cost £126 including import duty!


I lost a Nikon lens hood at Donington the other week RRP to replace was getting on for 50 quid. A spare battery costs as much as a car battery.

#1274 kayemod

kayemod
  • Member

  • 7,180 posts
  • Joined: August 05

Posted 06 June 2013 - 13:04

I lost a Nikon lens hood at Donington the other week RRP to replace was getting on for 50 quid.


That's happened to me two or three times with Nikon lens hoods, but each time I've found Hong Kong replacements on eBay that are absolutely indistinguishable from the genuine article, just some barely noticeable changes in the lettering. Possibly even turned out in the same factory and on the same machinery as the genuine Nikon stuff, but apart from the cunning lettering change which would fool all at a glance, I defy anyone to tell the difference. Type something like HN-23 or HB-42 into eBay and see what comes up.

#1275 Tony Matthews

Tony Matthews
  • Member

  • 17,498 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 06 June 2013 - 15:34

http://www.flickr.co...645325/sizes/o/

I'm not 100% confident about posting links, but I hope this works. It is a panorama that my son posted on flickr earlier today, he hasn't let me know how many images were used yet, and there are a couple of little glitches on the horizon, but the reason for showing it is that if you look at the full-size version on flicker you will get a very good impression of the D800 resolution. Well, I was impressed!

Edited to say that you seem to have to sign up or sign in to see the biggun - on Facebook (yes, I know, don't nag!) it comes straight up. If I can find a short cut I'll post it.

Edited again to say the new link works.

Edited by Tony Matthews, 06 June 2013 - 15:45.


#1276 PCC

PCC
  • Member

  • 458 posts
  • Joined: August 06

Posted 06 June 2013 - 15:51

http://www.flickr.co...645325/sizes/o/

I'm not 100% confident about posting links, but I hope this works. It is a panorama that my son posted on flickr earlier today, he hasn't let me know how many images were used yet, and there are a couple of little glitches on the horizon, but the reason for showing it is that if you look at the full-size version on flicker you will get a very good impression of the D800 resolution. Well, I was impressed!

Edited to say that you seem to have to sign up or sign in to see the biggun - on Facebook (yes, I know, don't nag!) it comes straight up. If I can find a short cut I'll post it.

Edited again to say the new link works.

Worked perfectly and looks very impressive, thanks for posting it.

The resolution of the D800 beggars belief. It's a huge hard drive hog - RAW files are typically 45-50 Mb. But it sure gives you a lot of pixels to play with. It also behaves unreasonably well at high ISO settings.

#1277 elansprint72

elansprint72
  • Member

  • 3,343 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 09 June 2013 - 23:11

Have any of the great and the good from this forum been to this place in Stoke?

http://www.swiftgall...o.uk/index.html

#1278 Roger Clark

Roger Clark
  • Member

  • 6,013 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 10 June 2013 - 06:30

Have any of the great and the good from this forum been to this place in Stoke?

http://www.swiftgall...o.uk/index.html

I went last week to the "Lunch with Stirling Moss" charity lunch and will go again next month when Tim Dyke is talking about his model making exploits. It's an excellent gallery with a good selection of photographs, all very well presented.

#1279 Bloggsworth

Bloggsworth
  • Member

  • 7,454 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 10 June 2013 - 07:54

Solved the camera weight problem by lying down on the job...

Posted Image

Advertisement

#1280 E1pix

E1pix
  • Member

  • 9,462 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 10 June 2013 - 08:25

The resolution of the D800 beggars belief. It's a huge hard drive hog - RAW files are typically 45-50 Mb. But it sure gives you a lot of pixels to play with. It also behaves unreasonably well at high ISO settings.

Finally getting mine Wednesday (the E). :)

#1281 kayemod

kayemod
  • Member

  • 7,180 posts
  • Joined: August 05

Posted 11 June 2013 - 12:14

Bad news for anyone here wanting a new Nikon, this is a page from an e-mail that they sent me today.

http://store.nikon.c.....l_category}--

Take more than this to make me consider a Canon though.

#1282 Bloggsworth

Bloggsworth
  • Member

  • 7,454 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 11 June 2013 - 13:00

Bad news for anyone here wanting a new Nikon, this is a page from an e-mail that they sent me today.

http://store.nikon.c.....l_category}--

Take more than this to make me consider a Canon though.


Careless of them! Mind you, they did offer me a free Nikon beach towel if I spent over £100. It seems that the shortage only effects "Professional" cameras, but doesn't include the D600 full-frame which, at nearly two grand, I consider a professional sort of price.

#1283 Tony Matthews

Tony Matthews
  • Member

  • 17,498 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 11 June 2013 - 13:13

Bad news for anyone here wanting a new Nikon,

Available else where for £500 less (D800 and E), £1,000 less on the D4.

#1284 kayemod

kayemod
  • Member

  • 7,180 posts
  • Joined: August 05

Posted 11 June 2013 - 13:16

Careless of them! Mind you, they did offer me a free Nikon beach towel if I spent over £100. It seems that the shortage only effects "Professional" cameras, but doesn't include the D600 full-frame which, at nearly two grand, I consider a professional sort of price.


Don't think I'll ever need a beach towel that badly, and I'm always careful not to advertise the brand more than I have to. I've always replaced Nikon straps with the much better OpTech ones, and would never consider a branded jacket or camera bag, though I've seen photographers with the Nikon logo covered with black tape, and I'd never bother to go that far.

I agree about the D600, I vaguely considered buying one, but was dissuaded by a Nikon repairer friend. The D600 has metal top and back plates, but most of the innards are moulded plastic, and apparently the fits & sealing aren't what they should be, it's causing problems with dust and grease getting where it shouldn't be, some owners have had a lot of problems with that, and Friend told me that he thinks Nikon have been buying back D600s from disgruntled owners. He does a lot of sensor cleaning, and reckons that he's done more D600s recently than everything else put together, but what can you expect for almost £2000? Unless I can convince myself that I really need a D800, I'll probably stick with my excellent D300 a little longer.

#1285 Bloggsworth

Bloggsworth
  • Member

  • 7,454 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 11 June 2013 - 13:17

Worked perfectly and looks very impressive, thanks for posting it.

The resolution of the D800 beggars belief.


Women won't thank you for that! I had complaints like "I never knew I had hairs growing all over my nose!"

Posted Image

#1286 kayemod

kayemod
  • Member

  • 7,180 posts
  • Joined: August 05

Posted 11 June 2013 - 13:20

Available else where for £500 less (D800 and E), £1,000 less on the D4.


True, but apparently all 'professional' Nikons are in short supply right now, you might have problems finding a dealer with any to sell. Has a ship sunk on its way from the Far East or something?


#1287 Tony Matthews

Tony Matthews
  • Member

  • 17,498 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 11 June 2013 - 13:53

True, but apparently all 'professional' Nikons are in short supply right now, you might have problems finding a dealer with any to sell. Has a ship sunk on its way from the Far East or something?

I checked with one that I have used, and those bodies are listed as 'in stock', otherwiseI wouldn't have posted that! :) Doesn't mean they aren't up to date with their stocklist, but they are very good normally.

#1288 PCC

PCC
  • Member

  • 458 posts
  • Joined: August 06

Posted 11 June 2013 - 15:47

Unless I can convince myself that I really need a D800, I'll probably stick with my excellent D300 a little longer.

Whether or not the switch is worth it probably depends on what you do. I switched from the D300 to the D800 for one reason only: I shoot mostly architecture (including interiors), and I needed a full-size sensor so that my wide angle lenses (especially the 24 PC lens) remained wide-angle. I wanted to stick with Nikon because I wasn't willing to replace all my lenses. That eventually led me to the D800.

I have no complaints about the D800, but then I had none (apart from sensor size) about the D300 either. The former does give me a lot more pixels, but then I could produce 2x3 foot prints with the D300 that were good enough to hang on a gallery wall. The D300 is a great camera. So, before laying out all that money, I expect you'll want to consider carefully whether the extra that the D800 gives you is really that important.

#1289 Odseybod

Odseybod
  • Member

  • 1,122 posts
  • Joined: January 08

Posted 11 June 2013 - 16:22

I have no complaints about the D800, but then I had none (apart from sensor size) about the D300 either. The former does give me a lot more pixels, but then I could produce 2x3 foot prints with the D300 that were good enough to hang on a gallery wall. The D300 is a great camera. So, before laying out all that money, I expect you'll want to consider carefully whether the extra that the D800 gives you is really that important.


Interesting, thank you. Still very happy with my D300, though it's starting to look a little battle-scarred in places (really must get the cracked top display window replaced one day) - was slightly shocked a month or so ago to discover that I couldn't renew its extended warranty, as it's exceeded the 5-year age limit (where did those years go?!). But it still seems to do pretty much everything I want in a predictable way - do slightly miss the ultra-wideness of the 24mm on the old F2 occasionally but I can always load some funy old-fashioned film into that if I'm pining for it too much (would be different if that requirement was part of my everyday working life, of course).

#1290 kayemod

kayemod
  • Member

  • 7,180 posts
  • Joined: August 05

Posted 11 June 2013 - 17:14

I have no complaints about the D800, but then I had none (apart from sensor size) about the D300 either. The former does give me a lot more pixels, but then I could produce 2x3 foot prints with the D300 that were good enough to hang on a gallery wall. The D300 is a great camera. So, before laying out all that money, I expect you'll want to consider carefully whether the extra that the D800 gives you is really that important.


That pretty much says it all, I've been looking for an excuse to spend a silly amount of money 'upgrading', and haven't been able to find one yet. Like Odseybod I missed the the full-frame aspect after my F4, but solved that by buying a DX 12-24 Nikkor, which is an excellent lens. There is one thing that bothers me slightly about recent Nikons though, anyone else get the impression that quality control standards may be slipping? I know it's not always to be taken seriously, but I've just checked the D800 feedback on Amazon, and while most rate the thing highly, some of what's said is a bit worrying, much of it (apparently) from professional photographers. Amazon D600 feedback is not surprisingly even worse.


#1291 Bloggsworth

Bloggsworth
  • Member

  • 7,454 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 11 June 2013 - 18:36

That pretty much says it all, I've been looking for an excuse to spend a silly amount of money 'upgrading', and haven't been able to find one yet. Like Odseybod I missed the the full-frame aspect after my F4, but solved that by buying a DX 12-24 Nikkor, which is an excellent lens. There is one thing that bothers me slightly about recent Nikons though, anyone else get the impression that quality control standards may be slipping? I know it's not always to be taken seriously, but I've just checked the D800 feedback on Amazon, and while most rate the thing highly, some of what's said is a bit worrying, much of it (apparently) from professional photographers. Amazon D600 feedback is not surprisingly even worse.


Funny you should say that, I have recently had to send back two 55-200mm DX lenses, the first started jiggling the elements about as I pressed the shutter if the Anti-vibration was turned on, it was replaced by one which wouldn't autofocus - They are the only items of photographic equipment I've had to return since the Fujica Rapid half-frame camera with clockwork autowind which I bought in about 1967 and dropped within hours of buying it. I took it back to Dixons and they replaced it without demur.

Posted Image

#1292 PCC

PCC
  • Member

  • 458 posts
  • Joined: August 06

Posted 11 June 2013 - 19:15

There is one thing that bothers me slightly about recent Nikons though, anyone else get the impression that quality control standards may be slipping? I know it's not always to be taken seriously, but I've just checked the D800 feedback on Amazon, and while most rate the thing highly, some of what's said is a bit worrying, much of it (apparently) from professional photographers.

I haven't had any issues at all, and I've been using it for not quite a year. I do make a point of being very careful with it - it's basically a computer with a lens in front of it, so I assume I can't treat it like I used to treat my F3. But it hasn't thrown me any curves.

To be clear, I didn't mean to sound lukewarm about the D800. It is outstanding. It's just that, unlike E1, I no longer make my living with a camera (although I do use it in my work). So, it required a particular, intractable problem with the D300 (sensor size and its impact on effective focal length) to justify the cost of switching. And as that problem is quite specific to the shooting I do, I wanted to be clear about where the problem was - and where it wasn't.

#1293 elansprint72

elansprint72
  • Member

  • 3,343 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 11 June 2013 - 22:04

http://store.nikon.c...CFVMbtAodslAASw

Unfortunately, if the cap fits... it is out of stock tooooooo.........

Edited by elansprint72, 11 June 2013 - 22:07.


#1294 kayemod

kayemod
  • Member

  • 7,180 posts
  • Joined: August 05

Posted 11 June 2013 - 22:08

http://store.nikon.c...CFVMbtAodslAASw

Unfortunately, if the cap fits... it is out of stock tooooooo.........


If I were ever to go as far as even thinking about wearing anything like that, my wife has been instructed to shoot me.


#1295 PCC

PCC
  • Member

  • 458 posts
  • Joined: August 06

Posted 12 June 2013 - 14:41

Finally getting mine Wednesday (the E). :)

So... has it arrived yet? :)

#1296 Bloggsworth

Bloggsworth
  • Member

  • 7,454 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 12 June 2013 - 19:09

So... has it arrived yet? :)


He's sitting there impatiently drumming his fingers waiting for the battery to finish charging...

#1297 David Beard

David Beard
  • Member

  • 4,886 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 12 June 2013 - 19:51

I'm quite pleased with this. HDR from a single RAW file, and a bit of subsequent messing which I would be unable to repeat :-(
Anyone like it, or is it Marmite?

Posted Image



#1298 Bloggsworth

Bloggsworth
  • Member

  • 7,454 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 12 June 2013 - 20:10

More like hot Bovril - Amazing how small the Lotus was when compared with the old dinosaurs.

#1299 PCC

PCC
  • Member

  • 458 posts
  • Joined: August 06

Posted 12 June 2013 - 20:52

I'm quite pleased with this. HDR from a single RAW file, and a bit of subsequent messing which I would be unable to repeat :-(
Anyone like it, or is it Marmite?

Posted Image

Gorgeous!

The only thing I might wish for is a slightly less cluttered background, which would make that wonderful silhouette jump out even more. But your use of depth of field helps with this a lot.

Advertisement

#1300 Tony Matthews

Tony Matthews
  • Member

  • 17,498 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 12 June 2013 - 21:57

Very nice indeed!