Nikon D90 V10, V10 but D90 still going strong
Nikon D90 V10, V10 but D90 still going strong
|
|
Nov 11 2010, 08:28 PM
Return to original view | Post
#41
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
All Stars
12,505 posts Joined: May 2007 From: Triumph in the Skies Status:In LoV3 Again |
24 inch Ultrasharp
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 11 2010, 08:40 PM
Return to original view | Post
#42
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
All Stars
12,505 posts Joined: May 2007 From: Triumph in the Skies Status:In LoV3 Again |
Yeah. Too big
A little bit can't get used to it as my previous was just my lappie LCD. |
|
|
Nov 12 2010, 09:38 AM
Return to original view | Post
#43
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
All Stars
12,505 posts Joined: May 2007 From: Triumph in the Skies Status:In LoV3 Again |
QUOTE(FaezFarhan @ Nov 11 2010, 10:10 PM) Ohh saw you asking in the thread. How much bro? Model? U2410 I bought an Acer 24inch full-hd last time. But noise in pics seems so clear on that monitor. And it's not that sharp QUOTE(geekster129 @ Nov 11 2010, 10:25 PM) Got the same issue when I got my 24" LCD. Feels like the whole thing covers my field of vision. Now i feels a lot better... lol Same here.QUOTE(KIEN18 @ Nov 11 2010, 10:35 PM) Yes. With HDMIQUOTE(kimurastanley @ Nov 12 2010, 09:24 AM) 5.9k |
|
|
Nov 12 2010, 09:42 AM
Return to original view | Post
#44
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
All Stars
12,505 posts Joined: May 2007 From: Triumph in the Skies Status:In LoV3 Again |
^
You damn funny. Buy and sell non stop. I can live without 17-55 why not you ? Get 24-70. Even better than 17-55 |
|
|
Nov 12 2010, 10:33 AM
Return to original view | Post
#45
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
All Stars
12,505 posts Joined: May 2007 From: Triumph in the Skies Status:In LoV3 Again |
24-70 better. Wide can get 14-24 to compensate
|
|
|
Nov 12 2010, 10:46 AM
Return to original view | Post
#46
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
All Stars
12,505 posts Joined: May 2007 From: Triumph in the Skies Status:In LoV3 Again |
Same to 17-55 la. And bokeh is not a must in photo la.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 12 2010, 10:58 AM
Return to original view | Post
#47
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
All Stars
12,505 posts Joined: May 2007 From: Triumph in the Skies Status:In LoV3 Again |
QUOTE(Str33tBoY @ Nov 12 2010, 10:51 AM) haha... Bokeh is for kids that new to photography maybe i like bokeh quiet alot... erm... i might might journey might not end in FX... tight on budget... i think dx will do... Ok. Jk QUOTE(celciuz @ Nov 12 2010, 10:54 AM) Those lens won't give much bokeh on DX. After I got the 85mm f/1.4, I realized my 70200 f/2.8 bokeh is really ~_~. LOL. Comparing zoom with primes |
|
|
Nov 12 2010, 11:01 AM
Return to original view | Post
#48
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
All Stars
12,505 posts Joined: May 2007 From: Triumph in the Skies Status:In LoV3 Again |
|
|
|
Nov 12 2010, 11:08 AM
Return to original view | Post
#49
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
All Stars
12,505 posts Joined: May 2007 From: Triumph in the Skies Status:In LoV3 Again |
|
|
|
Nov 12 2010, 11:13 AM
Return to original view | Post
#50
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
All Stars
12,505 posts Joined: May 2007 From: Triumph in the Skies Status:In LoV3 Again |
QUOTE(celciuz @ Nov 12 2010, 11:11 AM) Sure... but now I realize how heavy 70200 was. LOL, before this used to lugging the 70200 around so actually don't feel it. Now used to weight of the 85mm hahaha ._. Damn am getting weaker after using primes. Now you know how I feel when I get 70200 after been using prime for years ! |
|
|
Nov 12 2010, 11:17 AM
Return to original view | Post
#51
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
All Stars
12,505 posts Joined: May 2007 From: Triumph in the Skies Status:In LoV3 Again |
Even now my 70200 most of the time sleeping in dry box except during assignment. Normal photo walk ? Prime all the way !
|
|
|
Nov 12 2010, 11:23 AM
Return to original view | Post
#52
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
All Stars
12,505 posts Joined: May 2007 From: Triumph in the Skies Status:In LoV3 Again |
LCD effect ? What effect ?
|
|
|
Nov 12 2010, 02:00 PM
Return to original view | Post
#53
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
All Stars
12,505 posts Joined: May 2007 From: Triumph in the Skies Status:In LoV3 Again |
QUOTE(KIEN18 @ Nov 12 2010, 11:24 AM) oic.. ok... Added on November 12, 2010, 11:25 am erm, actually i'm asking will the LCD..too wide or other issue lah.. will the photo which capture by slr get weird? looks blur etc? QUOTE(faareast @ Nov 12 2010, 11:29 AM) QUOTE(KIEN18 @ Nov 12 2010, 11:34 AM) Ultrasharp LCD are meant for graphic and photo designing. So ? QUOTE(FaezFarhan @ Nov 12 2010, 01:57 PM) D90 ---> D7000 = Waste of $$$ |
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 12 2010, 02:16 PM
Return to original view | Post
#54
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
All Stars
12,505 posts Joined: May 2007 From: Triumph in the Skies Status:In LoV3 Again |
|
|
|
Nov 12 2010, 02:34 PM
Return to original view | Post
#55
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
All Stars
12,505 posts Joined: May 2007 From: Triumph in the Skies Status:In LoV3 Again |
Normal Nikkor lens zoom ring
|
|
|
Nov 13 2010, 11:23 PM
Return to original view | Post
#56
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
All Stars
12,505 posts Joined: May 2007 From: Triumph in the Skies Status:In LoV3 Again |
QUOTE(celciuz @ Nov 13 2010, 01:45 PM) If you see clearly, the @f/2.8, 200mm more smooth bokeh. Will look again using my Ultrasharp when I back to my workstation room tomorrow.QUOTE(FaezFarhan @ Nov 13 2010, 02:44 PM) I think nearly the same bokeh and DOF for 85mm at 85 1.4 and 70200mm at 200 f2.8. Or it is my eyes f/2.8 both, 200mm more smooth Just wanna see » Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... « QUOTE(Bliz @ Nov 13 2010, 09:52 PM) I did wor |
|
|
Nov 13 2010, 11:35 PM
Return to original view | Post
#57
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
All Stars
12,505 posts Joined: May 2007 From: Triumph in the Skies Status:In LoV3 Again |
At my usual shop in PG. Depends on which type of client
btw. a note I copy from Photomalaysia. Credit to headache792. QUOTE While existing d90 users (like me) contemplates on upgrading to the well-argued d7000. My opinions are as follows : Very well said.1. keep your d90, If you wish to shoot or only shoot stills. I personally find the d90 performs well under great pressure, not to mention I fell into a river with it, that time it was coupled with a 24 - 70 f2.8 (don't bother asking). But the body survived and to this very day i'm still happily shooting with it, not a single problem yet. 2. My domain is mainly gig and concert photography, I had used various lenses from the kit lens to the 50mm f1.4 to the 24 - 70 f2.8 and it really delivers, ISO 800 - 3200. Burst not fast enough? I think 4fps is more than enough. 3. For a polycarbonate body, it is quite robust and it fits my hand nicely, for the 720 video, please do ask yourselves, what would you do with the 1080? Alright, so you really wanna shoot videos and make mini films. Fine, but please do remember that shooting nice, pro-looking videos does not sorely relies on the body itself, It also means a new set of prime lens, a badass external mic, a badass video rig and of course this also means more 'investment' needed. And also, It's a cropped sensor, so to go as wide (for that film look) you would need a super wide prime lens (which are obviously, very very expensive). 4. the d7000 is definitely something, I dig the 100% VF area, the extra AF points, the magnesium-alloy body. This easily is a contender to the semi-pro d300s 5. Sometime Ken Rockwell speaks through his a*s. Don't listen to him. the d90 will survive for the years to come, If you really want an upgrade, keep your money, treat yourself to a better glass. It will all come to sense later. 6. To my fellow d90 comrades, I do really hope you would justify your options thoroughly. If you want to my view my work with the d90. I can provide you the link to my blog and my Flickr. |
|
|
Nov 13 2010, 11:50 PM
Return to original view | Post
#58
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
All Stars
12,505 posts Joined: May 2007 From: Triumph in the Skies Status:In LoV3 Again |
And to Ken Rockwell fans. Ready this !
QUOTE Ken Rockwell is the Chuck Norris of photography I posted this before I think Ken Rockwell's camera has similar settings to ours, except his are: P[erfect] Av[Awesome Priority Tv[Totally Awesome Priority] M[ajestic] Ken Rockwell doesn't color correct. He adjusts your world to match his. Sure, Ken Rockwell deletes a bad photo or two. Other people call these Pulitzers. Ken Rockwell doesn't adjust his DOF, he changes space-time. Circle of confusion? You might be confused. Ken Rockwell never is. Ken Rockwell doesn't wait for the light when he shoots a landscape - the light waits for him. Ken Rockwell never flips his camera in portrait position, he flips the earth Ken Rockwell ordered an L-lens from Nikon, and got one. Ken Rockwell is the only person to have photographed Jesus; unfortunately he ran out of film and had to use a piece of cloth instead. When Ken Rockwell brackets a shot, the three versions of the photo win first place in three different categories Before Nikon or Canon releases a camera they go to Ken and they ask him to test them, the best cameras get a Nikon sticker and the less good get a Canon sticker Once Ken tested a camera, he said I cant even put Canon on this one,thats how Pentax was born Rockwellian policy isn't doublethink - Ken doesn't even need to think once Ken Rockwell doesn't use flash ever since the Nagasaki incident. Only Ken Rockwell can take pictures of Ken Rockwell; everyone else would just get their film overexposed by the light of his genius Ken Rockwell wanted something to distract the lesser photographers, and lo, there were ducks. Ken Rockwell is the only one who can take self-portraits of you Ken Rockwell's nudes were fully clothed at the time of exposure Ken Rockwell once designed a zoom lens. You know it as the Hubble SpaceTelescope. When Ken unpacks his CF card, it already has masterpieces on it. Rockwell portraits are so lifelike, they have to pay taxes On Ken Rockwell's desktop, the Trash Icon is really a link to National Geographic Magazine Ken Rockwell spells point-and-shoot "h-a-s-s-e-l-b-l-a-d" When Ken Rockwell went digital, National Geographic nearly went out of business because he was no longer phyically discarding photos For every 10 shots that Ken Rockwell takes, 11 are keepers. Ken Rockwell's digital files consist of 0's, 1's AND 2's. Ken Rockwell never focus, everything moves into his DoF Ken Rockwell's shots are so perfect, Adobe redesigned photoshop for him: all it consists of is a close button. The term tripod was coined after his silhouette Ken Rockwell never produces awful work, only work too advanced for the viewer A certain braind of hig-end cameras was named after people noticed the quality was a lot "like a" rockwell Ken Rockwell isn't the Chuck Norris of photography; Chuck Norris is the Ken Rockwell of martial arts. Ken Rockwell never starts, he continues |
|
|
Nov 14 2010, 08:45 AM
Return to original view | Post
#59
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
All Stars
12,505 posts Joined: May 2007 From: Triumph in the Skies Status:In LoV3 Again |
QUOTE(FaezFarhan @ Nov 14 2010, 01:55 AM) "Before Nikon or Canon releases a camera they go to Ken and they ask him to test them, the best cameras get a Nikon sticker and the less good get a Canon sticker" 105VR. I say no to third party tho SP90 also not bad. Macro lover around me usually use thatByw, anyone using macro lens? Thinking of SP90 instead of upgrading to D7000. Used my friend's macro last time and loved every second of it |
|
|
Nov 14 2010, 01:46 PM
Return to original view | Post
#60
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
All Stars
12,505 posts Joined: May 2007 From: Triumph in the Skies Status:In LoV3 Again |
|
|
Topic ClosedOptions
|
| Change to: | 0.0329sec
0.71
6 queries
GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 20th December 2025 - 05:19 AM |