Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
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
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

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

 
this thread is locked
jdizzle
Darth Noink
Avatar
69,419 posts
Likes: 57
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Harvesting Nano crystals
     
Jun 06, 2012 21:51 |  #6856

Hehe! I see that everyone here is getting along. ;)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
dgrPhotos
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,501 posts
Gallery: 38 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 50
Joined Apr 2011
Location: Illinois
     
Jun 07, 2012 06:35 |  #6857

jdizzle wrote in post #14542657 (external link)
Hehe! I see that everyone here is getting along. ;)

as usual. ;)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dgrPhotos
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,501 posts
Gallery: 38 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 50
Joined Apr 2011
Location: Illinois
     
Jun 07, 2012 06:36 |  #6858

Dell has the 50/1.8G in stock....
http://accessories.us.​dell.com …5111536&c=us&l=​en&cs=6099 (external link)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Myboostedgst
Goldmember
Avatar
1,908 posts
Gallery: 26 photos
Likes: 655
Joined Feb 2011
Location: Milwaukee, WI
     
Jun 07, 2012 12:13 as a reply to  @ jdizzle's post |  #6859

On a friendlier topic...

A coworker brought in his D300 today to let me play with it for the afternoon along with a few lenses I have been yearning to try (17-55 & 70-300). I highly doubt I will be getting much work done the rest of the day. :lol:

Edit: He also has a 50 1.4. Makes me miss my old 35 1.8. I think it is time to sell the Tamron and go back to primes.


Andrew | Midwest Automotive (external link) | Flickr (external link) | Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
woos
Goldmember
Avatar
2,224 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Dec 2008
Location: a giant bucket
     
Jun 07, 2012 14:18 |  #6860

Myboostedgst wrote in post #14545333 (external link)
On a friendlier topic...

A coworker brought in his D300 today to let me play with it for the afternoon along with a few lenses I have been yearning to try (17-55 & 70-300). I highly doubt I will be getting much work done the rest of the day. :lol:

Edit: He also has a 50 1.4. Makes me miss my old 35 1.8. I think it is time to sell the Tamron and go back to primes.

Hahahahha nice! I hear the NIkon 17-55 is a rockin' lens.


amanathia.zenfolio.com

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ching
Goldmember
Avatar
1,370 posts
Joined Apr 2010
     
Jun 07, 2012 14:20 |  #6861

At what price point you guys will be tempted to buy a D600? Assuming the actual spec is same as the rumor spec. :D


Nikon D800

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Hardcore
Goldmember
Avatar
2,668 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jul 2008
     
Jun 07, 2012 14:25 |  #6862

I will add one more thing about diffraction and the dof debate.

You can easily shoot at f7.1 on a 14mm ultra-wide and get amazing depth of field from 1.78' to infinity. Try that same aperture with a 35mm lens and you will find the the depth of field moves to 9.4' to infinity. Food for thought.


Name: Corey
GEAR
Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
K6AZ
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,250 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 9
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Richmond VA USA
     
Jun 07, 2012 14:34 |  #6863

Hardcore wrote in post #14545950 (external link)
I will add one more thing about diffraction and the dof debate.

You can easily shoot at f7.1 on a 14mm ultra-wide and get amazing depth of field from 1.78' to infinity. Try that same aperture with a 35mm lens and you will find the the depth of field moves to 9.4' to infinity. Food for thought.

Bingo. Unfotunately it seems people on photo boards are obsessed with sharpness and the conventional wisdom is to stop down to the point of absurdity. Every time I ask for a recognized pro who suggests this I'm given a link to a photo website put up by someone I've never heard of before.

I repeatedly asked people to Google diffraction so they might do some research of their own on the subject. I'm going to post just one here by Thom Hogan who did a very good writeup on the subject along with some focus chart shots demonstrating diffraction and the fact that it does more than just produce softness.

http://www.bythom.com/​nikond3xreview.htm (external link)


Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dharrisphotog
Goldmember
Avatar
2,331 posts
Joined Apr 2009
     
Jun 07, 2012 14:36 |  #6864

ching wrote in post #14545930 (external link)
At what price point you guys will be tempted to buy a D600? Assuming the actual spec is same as the rumor spec. :D

If the sensor is better than the D700, I'm in at $2k. Although it will feel like taking a step backwards due to the crazy numbering scheme employed by Nikon.


D800 | Sigma 35mm 1.4 Art | Nikkor 85mm 1.8G | Nikkor 70-200 2.8G
Gear | Facebook (external link) | Twitter (external link) | Flickr (external link) | Google+ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jdizzle
Darth Noink
Avatar
69,419 posts
Likes: 57
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Harvesting Nano crystals
     
Jun 07, 2012 15:14 |  #6865

Hardcore wrote in post #14545950 (external link)
I will add one more thing about diffraction and the dof debate.

You can easily shoot at f7.1 on a 14mm ultra-wide and get amazing depth of field from 1.78' to infinity. Try that same aperture with a 35mm lens and you will find the the depth of field moves to 9.4' to infinity. Food for thought.

I've shot at f6.3 on my 17 TS-E and there was enough DOF. ;)

IMAGE: http://www.darklightimaging.com/img/s3/v40/p420336211-5.jpg



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
woos
Goldmember
Avatar
2,224 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Dec 2008
Location: a giant bucket
     
Jun 07, 2012 17:54 |  #6866

K6AZ wrote in post #14545990 (external link)
Bingo. Unfotunately it seems people on photo boards are obsessed with sharpness and the conventional wisdom is to stop down to the point of absurdity. Every time I ask for a recognized pro who suggests this I'm given a link to a photo website put up by someone I've never heard of before.

Conventional wisdom these days on forums seems to be to stop down to f/8, and that after that diffraction will start making your images soft, so it's a no-no! lol

The Thom link shows that the spot where diffraction becomes noticeable at 100% is somewhere between F/11 and F/16, on a D3x (D800 is only something like ~20% more resolution than a D3x, so it's pretty similar). However, it also shows that even at f/16, the lines are resolved, but the MTF has dropped. At F/22 you see the lines are no longer resolved at the smallest point. Pretty much exactly what I've been saying. Use F/11 or F/13 without fear, F/16 will start to show softness at 100% but isn't a huge deal usually, F/22 will be soft at 100% and it will be noticeable, but it's not the end of the world if you want that small aperture for creative reasons.

It is also missing the elephant in the room as far as diffraction goes on these regular digital cameras for regular outdoor shooting, however (and why, say, that test chart will produce more noticeable diffraction softness than most normal outdoor shooting will--and why even that test chart example doesn't produce as much softness as one might expect) =p. But I leave that as something to think about. :) Anyway, enough diffraction talk already, I just don't want people to be scared of stopping down if they want more DOF because they feel it's the right creative choice to make. :)

And PFFFFFFT, that 17mm is the awesome, shoo! :P

Yeah, with the D600 coming, I would be selling my D700 now if I had one and was looking to sell. I think Nikon isn't too worried about pushing old used prices down (see the D2x for example). Their logic might be that if they keep old body used values up, people will be encouraged to buy and use them, wheras if they push the value of used bodies down, people are more likely to buy a new body from Nikon (after all, a used sale doesn't generate profit for Nikon)...just some logic *shrug*. I would think, say, $1799 or $1699 for a D600. 2k is a bit close to the D800, but lower than $1500 doesn't leave much room for a D300 replacement (if indeed there is one). Maybe Nikon will surprise us, though.


amanathia.zenfolio.com

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
K6AZ
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,250 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 9
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Richmond VA USA
     
Jun 07, 2012 19:27 |  #6867

woos wrote in post #14546849 (external link)
Conventional wisdom these days on forums seems to be to stop down to f/8, and that after that diffraction will start making your images soft, so it's a no-no! lol

The Thom link shows that the spot where diffraction becomes noticeable at 100% is somewhere between F/11 and F/16, on a D3x (D800 is only something like ~20% more resolution than a D3x, so it's pretty similar). However, it also shows that even at f/16, the lines are resolved, but the MTF has dropped. At F/22 you see the lines are no longer resolved at the smallest point. Pretty much exactly what I've been saying. Use F/11 or F/13 without fear, F/16 will start to show softness at 100% but isn't a huge deal usually, F/22 will be soft at 100% and it will be noticeable, but it's not the end of the world if you want that small aperture for creative reasons.

It is also missing the elephant in the room as far as diffraction goes on these regular digital cameras for regular outdoor shooting, however (and why, say, that test chart will produce more noticeable diffraction softness than most normal outdoor shooting will--and why even that test chart example doesn't produce as much softness as one might expect) =p. But I leave that as something to think about. :) Anyway, enough diffraction talk already, I just don't want people to be scared of stopping down if they want more DOF because they feel it's the right creative choice to make. :)

And PFFFFFFT, that 17mm is the awesome, shoo! :P

Yeah, with the D600 coming, I would be selling my D700 now if I had one and was looking to sell. I think Nikon isn't too worried about pushing old used prices down (see the D2x for example). Their logic might be that if they keep old body used values up, people will be encouraged to buy and use them, wheras if they push the value of used bodies down, people are more likely to buy a new body from Nikon (after all, a used sale doesn't generate profit for Nikon)...just some logic *shrug*. I would think, say, $1799 or $1699 for a D600. 2k is a bit close to the D800, but lower than $1500 doesn't leave much room for a D300 replacement (if indeed there is one). Maybe Nikon will surprise us, though.

Julian's photo shows quite clearly there is no real reason to stop down to some ridiculous f stop to get enough DOF even on a 17mm lens. As I stated earlier there is also variation in the diffraction effect in different lenses. I shoot a lot of closeup macro work and on lenses such as the Canon 100mm macro (both versions) the effect is quite noticeable at f/11. Also, if you look at Thom Hogan's samples diffraction also affects contrast.


Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Gojira1976
Senior Member
Avatar
940 posts
Joined Mar 2012
     
Jun 07, 2012 20:21 |  #6868
bannedPermanent ban

I have been unable to load my idea of photography lately due to illness and a small fear of possible meningitis that somehow ended up a tad bit pardon my expression, sh1ttier! I do hope to return often if possible and hopefully add some worthy enough photos, because trust me I see my work and for me it is keen, but I am an amateur, and I have a lot to learn, if time permits! I hope to get a light meter soon and hope it can aid me however I am uncertain that it will since my basic knowledge of DSLR and photography limits me! For the record and since I decided to share my shameful grief, I have a pineal brain cyst, and since my pops died young if a separate cancer, I am a bit worried for my wife and children if worse come to worse, but as my wonderful wife said, I will try to stay positive. xD


AMERICO

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
-AP-
Goldmember
Avatar
2,291 posts
Gallery: 190 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 4837
Joined Sep 2008
Location: Florida
     
Jun 07, 2012 21:53 as a reply to  @ Gojira1976's post |  #6869

Yes, I purchased a d70s for my wife some time ago along with an sb600 flash.

The flash is starting to wear out a bit and the pin that keeps it in place and locked on the camera often gets stuck.

So, I am looking for another flash. Can anyone suggest a 3rd party (less expensive) flash that works in ittl mode?

I was thinking a Yongnuo, but I'm not sure which one is best.

Thanks so much..

EDIT.. I would also just add I/she would prefer a smaller one in size similar to the sb600 as well.

Thanks again..


WEBSITE (external link) | FACEBOOK (external link) | Canon 5d3 | SX50 HS | 7D2 |70-200L | 24-70L | 50mm f1.4 | YN-622c | Bunch of lights, a few more lenses and lots of other stuff..

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
imjason
Goldmember
1,667 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Bay Area, CA
     
Jun 07, 2012 22:04 |  #6870

ching wrote in post #14545930 (external link)
At what price point you guys will be tempted to buy a D600? Assuming the actual spec is same as the rumor spec. :D

I'll consider the D600 if its <$2,000 usd. I believe 1,999 would be the magic price point for Nikon. If Nikon goes with the D400 as a high end crop, i can actually see it costing more than the D600. maybe $2500 for an ultra premium super fast APS-C body that will show Fuji what a real pro crop can do. but thats me. In other news, DXOmarks announced recently that the D3200 24mp sensor is the "second" best APS-C sensor ever tested. So whatever the D400 will be, it might just be the most amazing crop body.

I better start saving money and stop drinking the coffee..

IMAGE: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7229/7164864719_fd1f666caa_c.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …s/jfchanphoto/7​164864719/  (external link)
Day 159: Coffee is Expensive (external link) by JFChanPhoto (external link), on Flickr

Canon gear: EOS M, Canonet QL17, SX230HS, S95, SD1200IS
Non-Canon gear: D600, D5000, D70, XG-2, U20
Flickr (external link)

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

777,256 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 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


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


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Suman_m
1263 guests, 338 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.