Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Nikon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Nikon Cameras
Thread started 05 Feb 2010 (Friday) 20:14
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

Got a Nikon? Share your thoughts and photos here or ask a question! (II)

 
this thread is locked
zincozinco
-Followers of Fidget-
zincozinco's Avatar
4,420 posts
Joined Oct 2007
AndalucĂ­a
Feb 29, 2012 13:43 |  #4951

Yah thats cool, i know what you mean, cant remember my 100l doing it...


Living the life, overexposing...
Webexternal link, Blogexternal link Name: Mike, Maik, Micke or just zinco.

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
tim
Light Bringer
tim's Avatar
50,590 posts
Joined Nov 2004
Wellington, New Zealand
Feb 29, 2012 13:49 as a reply to zincozinco's post |  #4952

zincozinco wrote in post #13991281external link
The weirdest thing is going on. I put the d700 on mode "a" with my nikkor 105 VR ( it also hsppened on my 85 pce) the aperture dont go below 3.2 and sometimes up to 4. I van turn the wheel all i want but never reaches 2.8, why is that. I tried eith different iso, jpg tiff nef etc etc. Has this happened to someone else?

Nikon reports the actual aperture, Canon reports what you told it to use. This is a physics thing, properties of light stuff, I don't really understand the details, but the closer you get the less light you get.


Professional wedding photographer, solution architect and general technical guy with multiple Amazon Web Services certifications.
Read all my FAQs (wedding, printing, lighting, books, etc)

LOG IN TO REPLY
zincozinco
-Followers of Fidget-
zincozinco's Avatar
4,420 posts
Joined Oct 2007
AndalucĂ­a
Feb 29, 2012 14:11 |  #4953

tim wrote in post #13991427external link
Nikon reports the actual aperture, Canon reports what you told it to use. This is a physics thing, properties of light stuff, I don't really understand the details, but the closer you get the less light you get.

well if you dont, how will i, looking at your " call sign" :) :)


Living the life, overexposing...
Webexternal link, Blogexternal link Name: Mike, Maik, Micke or just zinco.

LOG IN TO REPLY
KenjiS
"Holy crap its long!"
KenjiS's Avatar
20,538 posts
Gallery: 82 photos
Joined Oct 2008
Buffalo, NY
Feb 29, 2012 14:42 |  #4954

tim wrote in post #13991427external link
Nikon reports the actual aperture, Canon reports what you told it to use. This is a physics thing, properties of light stuff, I don't really understand the details, but the closer you get the less light you get.

I wish the Canon bodies reported that as well... I dont really understand why they dont


Gear, New and Old! RAW Club Member
Wanted: 7D Mark II or EOS 6D
Deviantart (external link)
Flickr (This is where my good stuff is!) (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
dgrPhotos
Cream of the Crop
dgrPhotos's Avatar
Joined Apr 2011
Illinois
Feb 29, 2012 14:57 |  #4955

Another delay on the D4. Hope whatever it is it's specific to the D4. ;)




LOG IN TO REPLY
monk3y
Totally Saturated
monk3y's Avatar
46,161 posts
Joined Aug 2009
Cloud and Honey
Feb 29, 2012 18:21 |  #4956

tim wrote in post #13991427external link
Nikon reports the actual aperture, Canon reports what you told it to use. This is a physics thing, properties of light stuff, I don't really understand the details, but the closer you get the less light you get.

KenjiS wrote in post #13991832external link
I wish the Canon bodies reported that as well... I dont really understand why they dont

here's good explanation about it I think.. from Thom Hogan

I have news for you: all of the fixed focal length Micro-Nikkors aren't actually fixed focal length. In order to keep from being enormously long when focused at 1:1 magnification, Nikon (as well as many other macro makers) plays with the optical formula in order to keep from having an ever telescoping lens barrel. In macro work, you wouldn't want that, anyway,as a lens barrel that telescoped significantly to get to 1:1 would reduce working distance and potentially start hitting things in your scene at close working distances. Thus, at 1:1, this lens becomes about f/4.8 and does not extend even a millimeter. The aperture loss is actually a bit less dramatic at lower magnifications and the non-extension is very much welcome for macro use.


www.monk3y.comexternal link | My GEAR

LOG IN TO REPLY
jdizzle
Darth Noink
jdizzle's Avatar
69,419 posts
Joined Aug 2006
Harvesting Nano crystals
Feb 29, 2012 22:04 |  #4957

I'm not sure if this has been posted but, here's a ISO 12800 from the D4.

http://gizmodo.com ...eo-low-light-high-qualityexternal link




LOG IN TO REPLY
tim
Light Bringer
tim's Avatar
50,590 posts
Joined Nov 2004
Wellington, New Zealand
Feb 29, 2012 22:41 |  #4958

12,800 is a bit better than the D700 is at 6400. It's not a huge jump though IMHO.


Professional wedding photographer, solution architect and general technical guy with multiple Amazon Web Services certifications.
Read all my FAQs (wedding, printing, lighting, books, etc)

LOG IN TO REPLY
jdizzle
Darth Noink
jdizzle's Avatar
69,419 posts
Joined Aug 2006
Harvesting Nano crystals
Feb 29, 2012 22:46 |  #4959

It's hard to tell since I'm on a work monitor. Here's another source I found.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/nik​on-d4/nikon-d4A7.HTMexternal link




LOG IN TO REPLY
Yohan ­ Pamudji
Goldmember
Yohan Pamudji's Avatar
2,994 posts
Joined Jun 2007
Mississippi
Feb 29, 2012 23:07 |  #4960

Seeing as how a lot of my recent shooting is with an Olympus E-P1 (Micro 4/3, 2x crop sensor), that's my frame of reference. I also shoot a 5D Classic, but I've been staring at a lot more E-P1 shots lately. I know these are JPGs but still the D4 "only" looks about 3 stops better than the E-P1. ISO 12800 on the D4 looks like ISO 1600 on the E-P1 with better color fidelity but worse noise. I'm not sure if I should be impressed or not as the physical size alone dictates a 2 stop difference, plus the E-P1 is old sensor tech. Should I be expecting more? Are we finally hitting diminishing returns in terms of cleaning up high ISO noise?




LOG IN TO REPLY
dgrPhotos
Cream of the Crop
dgrPhotos's Avatar
Joined Apr 2011
Illinois
Mar 01, 2012 04:05 |  #4961

I've had both an E-P2 and D3s and they shouldn't even be mentioned in the same sentence. :lol:




LOG IN TO REPLY
dgrPhotos
Cream of the Crop
dgrPhotos's Avatar
Joined Apr 2011
Illinois
Mar 01, 2012 06:42 |  #4962

Just received a generic email from B&H:

Dear DANXXXX XXXXXXX:

Thank you for your pre-order of the exciting new Nikon D800Edigital SLR camera.
We know you're excited about this camera and we're as enthusiastic to get it to
you as you are to receive it.

This moment we do not know how many cameras we'll receive from Nikon USA nor do
we know the exact date we'll receive each shipment from them. As this situation
evolves we will update you with whatever information we're able to share.

Your patience and patronage are both greatly appreciated. Thank you.

The wait continues....




LOG IN TO REPLY
DavidR
Goldmember
DavidR's Avatar
Joined Nov 2008
Titusville, Florida
Mar 01, 2012 07:55 as a reply to dgrPhotos's post |  #4963

^
I received the same email from B&H about my D800 pre-order.


David
Feedback

LOG IN TO REPLY
ching
Goldmember
ching's Avatar
1,370 posts
Joined Apr 2010
Mar 01, 2012 10:38 |  #4964

^^ same :D


Nikon D800

LOG IN TO REPLY
Yohan ­ Pamudji
Goldmember
Yohan Pamudji's Avatar
2,994 posts
Joined Jun 2007
Mississippi
Mar 01, 2012 10:43 |  #4965

dgrPhotos wrote in post #13995769external link
I've had both an E-P2 and D3s and they shouldn't even be mentioned in the same sentence. :lol:

I didn't say they were close :) But 3 stops difference isn't really that much considering that the physical sensor size alone counts for 2 stops and E-P2 has an old sensor to boot. If it really is only 3 stops difference then the difference with a newer sensor like in the Panasonic GX1 or Olympus E-M5 is 2 stops or less. That doesn't sound great for a cutting edge FF sensor to me, but maybe I haven't been paying attention to FF and more strides have been made on the little sensors compared to FF, where FF is coasting on the strength of its sensor size instead of maximizing its potential with cutting edge tech.




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

536,698 views & 0 likes for this thread
Got a Nikon? Share your thoughts and photos here or ask a question! (II)
FORUMS Nikon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Nikon Cameras


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.01084 for 6 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.04s
Latest registered member is Richlevy
621 guests, 378 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6106, that happened on Jun 09, 2016