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

I'm not really liking the sound of the Sigma all that much. I mostly wanted a fast prime for narrow DOF, but i'm finding on full frame F2.8 is already pretty narrow, especially once i'm at 70mm so at 100mm+ it should be heaps. I might hold of on the fast prime as the 16-35 will be enough backup for the 24-70.

peterbj7 wrote in post #10592372
That's butter??...!

I could just see that down south. A food artist running after some guy who just put the hulk's head tween a biscuit.

My Weekly dose of Photograph... I am almost exclusively a sunday shooter.

took these right after work today D700+ 70-300mm VR

HTTP response: 403 | MIME changed to 'image/png'

HTTP response: 403 | MIME changed to 'image/png'

HTTP response: 403 | MIME changed to 'image/png'

Nice. I like #3 a lot.
On #2, looks like you've got dust on your sensor already!

See, I have dust on my laptop's LCD right now, so I see stuff like that and just assume it's my display. Then I move the image around a bit and actually find dust spots.

I need to clean this thing.

I'm impressed with Amazon so far. I just email them about the Sigma having focus problem and they're sending me a new one already. next day air.

nicksan wrote in post #10600142
Nice. I like #3 a lot.
On #2, looks like you've got dust on your sensor already!

Thalagyrt wrote in post #10600223
See, I have dust on my laptop's LCD right now, so I see stuff like that and just assume it's my display. Then I move the image around a bit and actually find dust spots.

I need to clean this thing.

thank you ... no no,I hope its not on the sensor, its on the lens, when I switched it was not there anymore, I was worried at first, then I looked at other photos and it was not there I already cleaned my lenses when I noticed these, I'll check later if its ok already...

yeah I like number #3 also...

So I shot some baseball today.

This was the first time I used my Nikon gear for anything remotely close to "action" shooting.

So what's the verdict? It did fine. Nothing out of the ordinary since my Canon cameras used to nail this type of shooting as well. But it's good to know I won't miss a beat with my Nikon gear.

nicksan wrote in post #10602048
So I shot some baseball today.

This was the first time I used my Nikon gear for anything remotely close to "action" shooting.

So what's the verdict? It did fine. Nothing out of the ordinary since my Canon cameras used to nail this type of shooting as well. But it's good to know I won't miss a beat with my Nikon gear.

very sharp nice action shots... the DOF is very very good

but, I noticed your shots are way past 200mm.. yet you don't have any in your sig that's higher than 200mm..what did you use? or if you use a teleconverter does it reflect on the EXIF?

I just noticed it yesteday, I am experimenting on using the back AF button now, but I find it difficult to simultaneously switch between the back AF button and the AF point toggle...

how do you deal with it? I don't like to focus and recompose anymore, I want to use the AF points, its just a pain to do if you want to use other focus points.

monk3y wrote in post #10602165
very sharp nice action shots... the DOF is very very good

but, I noticed your shots are way past 200mm.. yet you don't have any in your sig that's higher than 200mm..what did you use? or if you use a teleconverter does it reflect on the EXIF?

I just noticed it yesteday, I am experimenting on using the back AF button now, but I find it difficult to simultaneously switch between the back AF button and the AF point toggle...

how do you deal with it? I don't like to focus and recompose anymore, I want to use the AF points, its just a pain to do if you want to use other focus points.

I had my 1.4x and 1.7x TC's with me. Yes, the EXIF data would show 340mm for the 200VR + 1.7x TC combo. As you can see, IQ is still excellent and I obviously didn't have any issues with the AF.

I use the back AF ON button exclusively and have never noticed the AF point selection to be an issue. I guess I am so used to it.

BTW, this type of shooting is not what made me switch. The MKIII and MKIV were excellent at action shots outdoors. It's when I go indoors when the problems begin piling up!

nicksan wrote in post #10602196
I had my 1.4x and 1.7x TC's with me. Yes, the EXIF data would show 340mm for the 200VR + 1.7x TC combo. As you can see, IQ is still excellent and I obviously didn't have any issues with the AF.

I use the back AF ON button exclusively and have never noticed the AF point selection to be an issue. I guess I am so used to it.

nicksan wrote in post #10602210
BTW, this type of shooting is not what made me switch. The MKIII and MKIV were excellent at action shots outdoors. It's when I go indoors when the problems begin piling up!

haha yeah maybe.. I did notice a very good improvement in AF speed with the back AF button compared to the shutter AF. I'm not sure why...

as for IQ, yes it is still excellent, it is one of the sharpest nikon lens right? its just too darn expensive haha is this a paid shoot by the way?

The Nikon 200 F2.0 VR seems pretty expensive for one more stop over the 70-200. Not sure why the back AF button would be faster than the shutter either.

I emailed my local store today and put in the order for another D700, grip, 70-200 F2.8 VR II, 16-35 V4 VR, and SB900 I'm not really looking forward to the bill, and my Canon gear's a bit slow selling. I still need to sell a 7D, 40D, 17-55, 100mm macro, and 10-22. I've sold a 24-105, 70-200, and a 40D so far.

tim wrote in post #10602285
The Nikon 200 F2.0 VR seems pretty expensive for one more stop over the 70-200. Not sure why the back AF button would be faster than the shutter either.

I emailed my local store today and put in the order for another D700, grip, 70-200 F2.8 VR II, 16-35 V4 VR, and SB900 I'm not really looking forward to the bill, and my Canon gear's a bit slow selling. I still need to sell a 7D, 40D, 17-55, 100mm macro, and 10-22. I've sold a 24-105, 70-200, and a 40D so far.

yeap...its too darn expensive indeed.

as for your gears, so you have really decided on the 16-35 VR huh?

the 7D prices are really falling fast... they could be had for around $1200-$1400 now brand new, so you might want to consider that.

tim wrote in post #10602285
The Nikon 200 F2.0 VR seems pretty expensive for one more stop over the 70-200. Not sure why the back AF button would be faster than the shutter either.

I emailed my local store today and put in the order for another D700, grip, 70-200 F2.8 VR II, 16-35 V4 VR, and SB900 I'm not really looking forward to the bill, and my Canon gear's a bit slow selling. I still need to sell a 7D, 40D, 17-55, 100mm macro, and 10-22. I've sold a 24-105, 70-200, and a 40D so far.

I tend to agree with what you said about the 200VR, especially now that we have the 70-200VRII. It's almost just as sharp, which basically means it's just as sharp in real life shooting. The extra stop is certainly a nice thing to have, especially if it means I can either double my shutter speed, stop the lens down a stop, or lower the ISO by a stop. But again, whether it's worth the money and the physical punishment you take by carrying the lens is another thing entirely.

Shaping up to be a really nice lineup there Tim! Looking forward to finding out what you think about the 16-35VR.