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

nicksan wrote in post #10730824
I don't use any of the picture styles so that's a moot point.
Yep, try it next time in manual mode and you'll see you can't over/under expose. Pretty useless IMO.

ok thanks nick, will definitely do.

by the way, as far as I can it, FF's advantage over crop is getting slimmer and slimmer every year.

I'm off to bed now

monk3y wrote in post #10730859
ok thanks nick, will definitely do.

by the way, as far as I can it, FF's advantage over crop is getting slimmer and slimmer every year.

I'm off to bed now

Really depends.

I like using primes not only for low light but for DOF play. In that sense, a cropper will never be as good as FF and I suspect FF will always be a step or three ahead of a cropper as far as high ISO noise is concerned.

But again, it depends on your specific needs.

Good night!

nicksan wrote in post #10730933
Really depends.

I like using primes not only for low light but for DOF play. In that sense, a cropper will never be as good as FF and I suspect FF will always be a step or three ahead of a cropper as far as high ISO noise is concerned.

But again, it depends on your specific needs.

Good night!

I love to play with DOF, I just can't afford those fast primes though... when it comes to DOF I do see the advantage of FF.

btw, how much bigger/smaller is the Nikon 70-200mm VRII compared to the Canon IS MKII?

I am not sleepy yet... grrrr

monk3y wrote in post #10730994
I love to play with DOF, I just can't afford those fast primes though... when it comes to DOF I do see the advantage of FF.

btw, how much bigger/smaller is the Nikon 70-200mm VRII compared to the Canon IS MKII?

I am not sleepy yet... grrrr

I went out street shooting with someone who owns the Canon 70-200 II and the Nikon VRII is thinner and feels lighter. It could be that the color of the Nikon made it look slimmer, but I am pretty sure the Canon is indeed bigger.

Same thing with the 24-70. The Canon 24-70L seems to be bigger than the 24-70...and in this instance, bigger isn't better.

nicksan wrote in post #10731111
I went out street shooting with someone who owns the Canon 70-200 II and the Nikon VRII is thinner and feels lighter. It could be that the color of the Nikon made it look slimmer, but I am pretty sure the Canon is indeed bigger.

Same thing with the 24-70. The Canon 24-70L seems to be bigger than the 24-70...and in this instance, bigger isn't better.

I saw some photos of a guy holding the Nikon VRII and it looks slim/thin and light and not as attention grabbing as the canon counterpart.

thanks again, I am really going to sleep now. gotta dream about the 24-70 and 70-200m. haha night!

monk3y wrote in post #10731144
I saw some photos of a guy holding the Nikon VRII and it looks slim/thin and light and not as attention grabbing as the canon counterpart.

thanks again, I am really going to sleep now. gotta dream about the 24-70 and 70-200m. haha night!

I was shooting more baseball yesterday. I had my 200VR + 1.7x TC mounted on my D3 on a monopod. I had the D700+ grip + 70-200VRII danging on my left shoulder and hardly noticed it was there.

BTW, the team I was shooting for lost. It was the Championship game. I have some decent celebration photos of the opposing team. I am conflicted about what to do with them. Do I post them and add insult to injury or do I just leave them be?

nicksan wrote in post #10731186
I was shooting more baseball yesterday. I had my 200VR + 1.7x TC mounted on my D3 on a monopod. I had the D700+ grip + 70-200VRII danging on my left shoulder and hardly noticed it was there.

BTW, the team I was shooting for lost. It was the Championship game. I have some decent celebration photos of the opposing team. I am conflicted about what to do with them. Do I post them and add insult to injury or do I just leave them be?

POST them!

Nice landscapes, Steven. Were you using the 12-24 for all of them? And if so, was it on the wide side? I really like that look. I'm hoping I'm not going to be sorry the 14-24 and I parted ways.

Kristy wrote in post #10729278
But the controls are everywhere.... yikes! How long is it taking you all to get used to the difference. I can adjust my Canon settings in my sleep... using 2 hands and multiple dials seems like a huge adjustment...? *sigh* I'm so stuck on this decision. So many pro's and cons for both sides.... ultimately, it comes down to the focusing system though...

It took a few weeks to get used to it. Even now sometimes I forget how to do something that I don't do on a regular basis. i.e. was going to do some comet shots the other day and forgot how to put my camera in bulb mode. But pretty much every normal setting falls into routine, just like using the canon cameras.

monk3y wrote in post #10730309
what do you guys consider as short? I am around 5'10" and I am considered tall here in our country.

I am 5 feet three and a half inches tall or short !!!! Lol.

Mark

sprite wrote in post #10731731
I am 5 feet three and a half inches tall or short !!!! Lol.

Mark

My wife tells me all the time she wishes I was taller. Do I get upset? Nooooooo. But when I tell her I wish she was more like a Victoria Secrets model, she gets all upset.

Women...

Auto ISO and TTL flash metering works just fine together. The camera will shoot at whatever ISO you have set unless after the flash meter it won't be able to put out enough juice, at which point the camera will bump the ISO to whatever ISO is necessary within your set limit right before the shutter opens to get the exposure with the flash at 1/1 (might be 1/2, not sure.) If you review the photo and the ISO is shown in red then it's bumped it for that shot.

nicksan wrote in post #10731823
My wife tells me all the time she wishes I was taller. Do I get upset? Nooooooo. But when I tell her I wish she was more like a Victoria Secrets model, she gets all upset.

Women...

Thanks for giving me a chuckle,yes women are a very strange breed sometimes, Ducks for misile avoidance.

monk3y wrote in post #10730859
ok thanks nick, will definitely do.

by the way, as far as I can it, FF's advantage over crop is getting slimmer and slimmer every year.

I'm off to bed now

Sometimes the increased DOF on a cropper is nice. I've actually not had enough DOF at f4 with the d700, missing candid group/pair shots...

nicksan wrote in post #10731823
My wife tells me all the time she wishes I was taller. Do I get upset? Nooooooo. But when I tell her I wish she was more like a Victoria Secrets model, she gets all upset.

Women...

Hahahahaha

Good Morning/Good Evening guys

nicksan wrote in post #10731186
I was shooting more baseball yesterday. I had my 200VR + 1.7x TC mounted on my D3 on a monopod. I had the D700+ grip + 70-200VRII danging on my left shoulder and hardly noticed it was there.

BTW, the team I was shooting for lost. It was the Championship game. I have some decent celebration photos of the opposing team. I am conflicted about what to do with them. Do I post them and add insult to injury or do I just leave them be?

well, if you compare the 70-200 with your 200+d3 set up I am sure it will feel lighter

Permagrin wrote in post #10731600
Nice landscapes, Steven. Were you using the 12-24 for all of them? And if so, was it on the wide side? I really like that look. I'm hoping I'm not going to be sorry the 14-24 and I parted ways.

It took a few weeks to get used to it. Even now sometimes I forget how to do something that I don't do on a regular basis. i.e. was going to do some comet shots the other day and forgot how to put my camera in bulb mode. But pretty much every normal setting falls into routine, just like using the canon cameras.

yes,thank you Ms. Permie. as much as I can, I usually use around 12mm... it has that certain look that uhhmm I don't on my other lenses. (the wideness maybe?) haha

sprite wrote in post #10731731
I am 5 feet three and a half inches tall or short !!!! Lol.
:p well, ok I thought since most of you here are caucasians, you were referring to 5'8" or something as short hehe

Mark

Thalagyrt wrote in post #10732212
Auto ISO and TTL flash metering works just fine together. The camera will shoot at whatever ISO you have set unless after the flash meter it won't be able to put out enough juice, at which point the camera will bump the ISO to whatever ISO is necessary within your set limit right before the shutter opens to get the exposure with the flash at 1/1 (might be 1/2, not sure.) If you review the photo and the ISO is shown in red then it's bumped it for that shot.

even with 3rd party flashes? how do you set the limit before the iso bumps up? I did not notice it in the auto ISO menu

sprite wrote in post #10732522
Thanks for giving me a chuckle,yes women are a very strange breed sometimes, Ducks for misile avoidance.

hahahaha...

Mr. Clean wrote in post #10733096
Sometimes the increased DOF on a cropper is nice. I've actually not had enough DOF at f4 with the d700, missing candid group/pair shots...

I haven't noticed this on the D700, however they are indeed aparent on my f/2.2-2.8 shots. sometimes though I can't help but use that aperture due to badlighting.