Outline ·
[ Standard ] ·
Linear+
Photography Nikon D40/D40x/D60/D5000 V5, Best entry level DSLR from Nikon
|
project-o
|
May 31 2009, 01:48 PM
|
|
I'm guessing it is because of the Exposure Bias Setting. It should be at 0EV (-0.7 is 2/3 of a stop under expose). What lens are you using ? Another thing you can do is add a bounce card to the flash if the ceiling is too high. QUOTE(kevyeoh @ May 31 2009, 01:42 PM) ok...from the file properties.... top left picf-stop: f/5.6 Exposure bias: -0.7step Exposure time: 1/20sec ISO Speed: ISO-1100 Focal length: 85mm Max aperture: 5 Bottom left pic:F-stop: f/5.6 Exposure time: 1/10s ISO speed: ISO-200 Exposure bias: -0.7 step Focal length: 1.5mm Max aperture: 5 This post has been edited by project-o: May 31 2009, 01:49 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
TSkimurastanley
|
May 31 2009, 02:41 PM
|
|
Try restore the exposure bias to 0eV and try
|
|
|
|
|
|
alpha_company
|
May 31 2009, 05:23 PM
|
|
QUOTE(zellleonhart @ May 29 2009, 12:12 PM) Indeed very bulky. i am a D40+ Di622 user. When you sling the D40 mounted wih di622 on your neck the di622 which is heavy will make the whole camera points downwards, which is kinda weird and bulky. The lens is pointing downwards instead of forward =.= But performance wise Di622 serves me well, I haven't tried Sb600, because I can't afford it and I don't have friends who own it... yeah.. but i use cybertik mz45 flash.. combined with the almost half a kilogram of tamron 17-50 f2.8 it points down like there's no tomorrow. even without the flash it points down too... maybe i need a battery grip..to balance it out
|
|
|
|
|
|
project-o
|
May 31 2009, 05:36 PM
|
|
Tamron 17-50 f2.8.... rich we are  How's the performance of the 17-50 f2.8 ? QUOTE(alpha_company @ May 31 2009, 05:23 PM) yeah.. but i use cybertik mz45 flash.. combined with the almost half a kilogram of tamron 17-50 f2.8 it points down like there's no tomorrow. even without the flash it points down too... maybe i need a battery grip..to balance it out
|
|
|
|
|
|
alpha_company
|
May 31 2009, 05:47 PM
|
|
thought of getting the 18-200VR for wedding shots. but a lot of people recommend me to get the tamron 1750 f2.8. glad i did.
for close up pics, f2.8 is fine, but for normal portrait wedding shots, the sharpest pic u can get with this lens is at f4-f5.6.
but one thing about it though, comparing it against my friend's nikon 18-55 & tamron 70-300 and my previously owned nikon 55-200VR, you will notice that it weighs a lot...man is it heavy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
TSkimurastanley
|
May 31 2009, 05:55 PM
|
|
QUOTE(alpha_company @ May 31 2009, 05:47 PM) thought of getting the 18-200VR for wedding shots. but a lot of people recommend me to get the tamron 1750 f2.8. glad i did. for close up pics, f2.8 is fine, but for normal portrait wedding shots, the sharpest pic u can get with this lens is at f4-f5.6. but one thing about it though, comparing it against my friend's nikon 18-55 & tamron 70-300 and my previously owned nikon 55-200VR, you will notice that it weighs a lot...man is it heavy. Agree with the last statement. It's really heavy for a 17-55mm lens
|
|
|
|
|
|
project-o
|
May 31 2009, 05:56 PM
|
|
18-200VR is out of the question.... it is expensive.. and not as sharp as the Tamron 17-50. Only thing that I didn't really like about it was that the built in motor is quite slow (as in slower than 18-135). So other than the 17-50 ... you don't have a Tele lens..or a Super wide ? QUOTE(alpha_company @ May 31 2009, 05:47 PM) thought of getting the 18-200VR for wedding shots. but a lot of people recommend me to get the tamron 1750 f2.8. glad i did. for close up pics, f2.8 is fine, but for normal portrait wedding shots, the sharpest pic u can get with this lens is at f4-f5.6. but one thing about it though, comparing it against my friend's nikon 18-55 & tamron 70-300 and my previously owned nikon 55-200VR, you will notice that it weighs a lot...man is it heavy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
alpha_company
|
May 31 2009, 06:01 PM
|
|
QUOTE(project-o @ May 31 2009, 05:56 PM) 18-200VR is out of the question.... it is expensive.. and not as sharp as the Tamron 17-50. Only thing that I didn't really like about it was that the built in motor is quite slow (as in slower than 18-135). So other than the 17-50 ... you don't have a Tele lens..or a Super wide ? no uwa-ultra wide lens.. dont need it anyways.. thinking of getting a tele 70-300 VRii lens...but still not sure as i need to buy a dslr bagpack and battery grip.
|
|
|
|
|
|
project-o
|
May 31 2009, 06:06 PM
|
|
Better to get a backpack..and the grip if it is useful. Too bad my sold already or else would offer you a good price
|
|
|
|
|
|
alpha_company
|
May 31 2009, 06:12 PM
|
|
y did u sell yours?
what brand?
what backpack you guys recommend?
This post has been edited by alpha_company: May 31 2009, 06:15 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
project-o
|
May 31 2009, 06:18 PM
|
|
Mine was a YXTM grip. Most of the brands are about the same. Sold it b'cos I didn't need it anymore and the vertical shutter button was not as useful as I thought. After selling this and kit lens went and got 35 f1.8 lens.
|
|
|
|
|
|
shutterdll
|
May 31 2009, 06:23 PM
|
Getting Started

|
QUOTE(kevyeoh @ May 31 2009, 01:42 PM) ok...from the file properties.... top left picf-stop: f/5.6 Exposure bias: -0.7step Exposure time: 1/20sec ISO Speed: ISO-1100 Focal length: 85mm Max aperture: 5 Bottom left pic:F-stop: f/5.6 Exposure time: 1/10s ISO speed: ISO-200 Exposure bias: -0.7 step Focal length: 1.5mm Max aperture: 5 1/10s must have very steady hand and the baby cannot move too much. invest in external flash will help a lot
|
|
|
|
|
|
alpha_company
|
May 31 2009, 06:24 PM
|
|
the vertical shutter no use because cant af. yxtm? not phottix ka? google and see OWNUSER (nice grip design)  ), Phottix & the d60 grip with lcd on the back.. heard from my friend got a new d60 grip from meike.
|
|
|
|
|
|
project-o
|
May 31 2009, 06:30 PM
|
|
YXTM, Phottix, Hahnel and another brand "Battery Grip" are about the same.. look about the same... price about the same except Hahnel a bit higher b'cos with spare battery and remote. I've heard of Ownuser grips and seen pics but have not seen the real thing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
TSkimurastanley
|
May 31 2009, 07:00 PM
|
|
QUOTE(shutterdll @ May 31 2009, 06:23 PM) 1/10s must have very steady hand and the baby cannot move too much. invest in external flash will help a lot  He's indeed using the SB-600 to shoot. Only problem is the pics still underexposed
|
|
|
|
|
|
General_Nic
|
May 31 2009, 07:18 PM
|
|
QUOTE(kimurastanley @ May 31 2009, 07:00 PM) He's indeed using the SB-600 to shoot. Only problem is the pics still underexposed maybe SB-600 not powerful enaf? lol, jz jk, no harm meant
|
|
|
|
|
|
TSkimurastanley
|
May 31 2009, 07:37 PM
|
|
QUOTE(General_Nic @ May 31 2009, 07:18 PM) maybe SB-600 not powerful enaf? lol, jz jk, no harm meant  may be the exposure bias was turned to -0.7 that causes this
|
|
|
|
|
|
Firdaus92
|
May 31 2009, 08:07 PM
|
|
Guys, I got a friend who want to sell SB600 for price range between RM450-RM500 he said. He's still thinking about it. Should I go for it?The condition is overall still good. 9/10 if I might say.
|
|
|
|
|
|
AlphaBeta
|
May 31 2009, 08:09 PM
|
|
yea it is cheap..IF the condition is good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
TSkimurastanley
|
May 31 2009, 08:09 PM
|
|
QUOTE(Firdaus92 @ May 31 2009, 08:07 PM) Guys, I got a friend who want to sell SB600 for price range between RM450-RM500 he said. He's still thinking about it. Should I go for it?The condition is overall still good. 9/10 if I might say.  if the condition is still good, that's a pretty cheap price for a second hand SB-600. Jst go for it
|
|
|
|
|