You sure the D3100 gives better quality of the D2X? Perhaps marginally as I've seen great photos from the D2X when you don't go over ISO 800.

If I was given between a D3100 and a D2X to choose, I would take the D2X pro body anytime. The handling ergonomics and the sure focusing AF system is enough to get you addicted to pro bodies. That's me lah.

The thing is people are still using DX bodies if they need reach. Period. That is why I still keep my D300.

Wildlife photographers in general usually use DX bodies like D300/D300s for reach and for more pixel density if they want to crop but for pros that have all the required glasses to give them the required reach, they will reach for their D3/D3s/D700 especially when low light performance is required.

At the end of the day, it depends on what the person wants. If you want lightweight, the D7000 is nice.

If I were to choose between a DX body like the D7000 or a FX body like a D700, I would take the D700 because of these 4 things in their particular order;

1. Better subject isolation on the D700
2. Better focusing system on the D700
3. Overall better shadow noise even at lower ISOs on the D700
4. Better handling and feel on the D700 in my hands (I don't mind the heavy weight)

The only considerations that *might* sway me away from the D700 to the D7000 are as follows;

1. Higher MP on the D7000
2. 1080p video on the D7000
3. Lighter on the D7000

If you're speaking purely from D70s to D3100, then your arguments are correct.

FX wide angles lenses are EXPENSIVE. It is far cheaper to use DX bodies with DX wide angles to get wide angles. But quality wise, it seems that only FX lenses are the way to go.

It was correct when the D3/D3s and D700 were launced. But after the D7000 came out, those advantages of the FX system were not so obvious anymore. Not saying that the D7000 is better but the gap between DX and FX is much closer with FX still having the edge.

Don't know man... I've not been using mine for too long I guess.

2005 - D70 (sold in 2007)
2006 - D2Hs
2007 - D40x (sold in 2011)
2008 - D300
2009 - D700

Errr, what do I think?

If you do lots of low light shooting and appreciate subject isolations, the FX is the body to get. Saying that dos not mean with DX you get nothing. With DX, you can still do low light and portraiture with the correct lenses and it's cheaper too. The newer DX bodies somehow brings the gap to FX closer.

Don't be pressured or forced into thinking that owning a DSLR, you must take good pics. Money is yours and if you enjoy using a DSLR taking ordinary pics, so be it. You can ask opinions and weigh on it yourself what you need and don't need. At the end of the day, the money is yours and I feel that the main important thing is that you enjoy and get satisfaction from your hobby. Don't let other people decide how you should enjoy your hobby.

I think one needs to differentiate between weather sealed and water proof. In the industry I work with, you have what you call IP (ingress protection) rating for equipment enclosures. Have a look here;

http://www.aquatext.com/tables/ip_ratings.htm

So while the camera / lens can be rated to resist water droplets, dust can still enter.

It's good to find out what old lenses you still have...

For a good knowledge on what works and what does not, have a look at the link below;

http://www.nikonians.org/nikon/slr-lens.html

Yes, I'm inclined to believe that they are dust sealed also. But that would be very difficult since you have external moving parts.

Did you find the official link?

I saw the other pics too. It would have been better if you shot facing them. Pity most were side shots.

Not bad. I like it.

What CPL are you using? B+W? Use the thinnest one possible but I think you already know this...

A gradient filter is not a CPL.

It's more difficult to use wide angle and get good composition than to use a tele.

CPL on wide angles are generally tricky. The whole frame does not get polarised (i.e. one side gets polarised more than the other side).

Fake green is due to pushing the saturation up.

I too have given up on them. More so now that I shoot with the 14-24.

You still need ND filter. The CPL is not going to cut a lot of light.

Hmmm, this is tricky. I would sun the bag first and make sure it's dry.

This post has been edited by jchue73: Jun 13 2011, 12:15 PM

Out of LR, are your pics different viewing under a different photo jpg viewer? If yes, your LR is corrupted. If not, it could be (although unlikely) that your LCD exhibiting colour shifts...

Perhaps post a sample pic for us to check?

Ahah... Backlight. Does not necessarily have to come from the sun.








Any idea who the speaker might be?

Congrats ! That's fast. How much? From J One?

I have the 1.4D but I've read that the 1.4G beats it slightly in all aspects. However, they mention that there's a look / glow from the older 1.4D that the 1.4G does not have.

Either way, I don't think you can go wrong with either.

Errr... Don't make sweeping statements like that.

Why 35mm f/1.4 since you already have the 35mm f/1.8? For D7000, the 24mm would be nice. 35mm may be a little too tele for street.

Thanks for the info.

If I recall, jumping ship is for people who cannot afford. But keeping both systems is something else !

Anyway, the Canon system is excellent. Any reason to continue using the Nikon?

In other words, what does Nikon have that Canon does not? In the same way, what does Canon have that Nikon does not? Just curious.

Nothing to shout about. I would not pay so much for a f/1.2.

For a 58mm f/1.2 Noct, that's a different matter.

24mm is not that wide on FX. 35mm on FX is quite nice actually.

Street price? Pretty much everywhere I ask, these are the prices I get. RM 4.9k for the 35mm f/1.4 and RM 6.5k for the 24mm f/1.4.

Thanks for the feedback especially on the bit about no surcharge on CC. Perhaps you bought other extra stuff?

I've bought more expensive stuff before but some shops still insist on 2% surcharge.

BTW, congrats on the new lens.

If I want to view pics only, I would be more concerned about the quality of the screen. Not how many apps can be supported.

Using RAW / NEF, you have much more room to edit. It used to be that the JPG files from the camera are very lousy and have low resolution and therefore not so suitable if you want to edit and do fancy stuff on it. But nowadays with high MP cameras, JPG files that come out from the camera are quite good already if your target output is 4R printing or just for posting on the web. If you shoot correctly in the first place, I don't see why the outcome should be different. So if you just do minor editing, the end result should be about the same if you shot it with RAW / NEF and convert. If you need to do major editing, RAW / NEF would be better.

BTW, you can also shoot RAW / NEF and edit using Photoshop / Lightroom under ACR. Just that only the WB information is recognised. Other settings like Picture Style etc is ignored under ACR.

Lets just say that RAW / NEF files are digital negatives of your picture.

During film days, your basic source of your picture is your film negatives. RAW / NEF files are like film negatives but in digital form. Everything is contained in it.

So if you want to manipulate or do poster size printing, getting your pics extracted from RAW / NEF is the best.

Canon T&S lenses are famous. I've not seen a comparo since Nikon came out with theirs after releasing FX bodies. But Canon have the widest T&S lens 17mm f/4 which Nikon's widest is only 24mm f/3.5.

You are not familiar with the legendary 58mm f/1.2 Noct?

You have samples?

The 58mm f/1.2 Noct owns them all.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/58.htm

Yup, I've read elsewhere that for the price of the 1.8G and fantastic performance you get, the 1.8G is bang for the buck. Of course if you need f/1.4, then you need it.

Bokeh wise, I'm told the 1.8G still rendered better out of focus. I may be wrong.

Depends on what you are going to use it for. DX or FX body?

I personally find that on DX bodies, the 50mm is too long for general photography. For portraiture, perhaps ok.

No point owning the best lens only to not use it because you are not comfortable with the focal length.

Hmmm, sounds interesting. Almost all updated lens turns out better than the lens they replace.

Agreed. Shallow DoF needs a static subject. Very difficult if the subject is constantly moving. But once you nailed the subject, you get a very satisfying feeling after looking at the results. Simply mind blowing.

If you love shallow DoF, then you'll love 24mm f/1.4 and the 35mm f/1.4. Oh, not forgetting the 85mm f/1.4 too.

Getting DoF separation at wide angles is simply mind boggling.

Actually, the better lens would be the 17-55mm f/2.8 DX lens but between the two you listed above, I would go for 16-35mm f/4 for the work you do.

You can sell the 17-55mm f/2.8 later if you upgrade to FX.

That is why for me the 50mm is neither here nor there on DX.

I've not tried the cheap 50mm f/1.8D lens that I have on the D700 too much. I guess it's because the quality is not too good? Perhaps the 1.8G would change that.

If you want f/1.4 on the Nikon 50mm, you'll want it more for light gathering ability. For bokeh, the 1.8G renders smoother bokeh than the 1.4G and 1.4D if I'm not wrong.

+1

Zeiss Distagon lenses are also MF. So what's wrong with MF?

But I digress... I have no idea if Nikon would make the the new f/1.2 (if they ever make one) that surpasses the quality of the Noct in my opinion or if Nikon would ever make another Noct. The Noct's specialty is in rendering images in low light at wide open but normal day to day use, it's quality is easily exceeded by today's lenses. So making a AF-S 50mm f/1.2 that exceeds the quality of the Noct at normal daylight shooting usage should be doable.

At that time when SB-800 was the latest and greatest and brand new was around RM 1.2k, you seldom see 2nd hand price below 1k.

I would say that don't expect the 2nd hand prices of SB-900 to be cheap. In my opinion, if you want cheap, RM 1350 for 2nd hand seems about right. If you're not comfortable paying those prices for 2nd hand, get it new.

I guess... But nobody has rights in Malaysia.

Once I was shooting inside the performance of Cirque du Soleil in Macau the other time and was stopped half way because while changing settings, the AF assist light came out. They requested me to delete the photos which I did. Well, I guess they have the right to do so since they indicated no photography of any sort is allowed.

The other instance is in malls like KLCC or within KLCC grounds, you are not allowed to shoot with a DSLR. Small camera ok.

That's correct. Just like high-end bodies, the D7000 will work in A (Aperture Priority) or M (Manual) modes with AI / AI-S lenses. P (Program) or S (Shutter priority) exposure modes will not function. For lower end bodies, the AI / AI-S lenses will mechanically couple to the new Nikon bodies but M (Manual) exposure mode only as metering will not work. You need to cuba-cuba.

+1

D7000 boleh. You can refer here;

http://www.nikonians.org/nikon/slr-lens.html

You need to ask yourself in that one year, how many missed opportunities because of not wide enough or not having the required reach.

If you can live with it, then by all means get either the 16-35mm f/4 or the 24-70mm f/2.8 that suits you.

Aiks, I'm no sifu. Glad to share and still learning myself.

I think you missed out D70... Their built-in flash can also act as commander.

Else if your camera does not have commander mode, just set your speedlight to SU-4 mode and get your built-in flash to trigger it. But the triggered flash needs to be set manually and you will not have TTL.

When subject is moving, it's more difficult to capture and nail the focus wide open when DoF is razor thin. Static is easier. Moving + low light + thin DoF = recipe for disaster

You need a good body with more reliable AF. Use AF-C and use single focus and rely on cross type sensors like the middle ones. Then hope for the best.

Having a lens that's fast on the focus is aslo part of the success equation. Currently, the AF-S 24mm f/1.4, AF-S 35mm f/1.4, AF-S 50mm f/1.4 (and the other 50mm variants), AF-S 85mm f/1.4, AF-D 105mm f/2.0 DC and AF-D 135mm f/2.0 DC portrait lenses unfortunately aren't exactly speedsters when it comes to focusing. They are fast but not enough when the subject moves under low light. That makes nailing focus a little more difficult. The only hand holdable ones that are fast focusing when coupled with pro bodies are the AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8, AF-S 80-200mm f/2.8, the mother AF-S 200mm f/2.0 !

Especially f/1.4

---

Added on June 18, 2011, 11:45 pmYup. It's considered in the lucky category.

This post has been edited by jchue73: Jun 18 2011, 11:45 PM

Needs practice. Steady your hands by putting them close to your body. One hand on the body and the other hand support the lens. Shoot no slower than 1/320 shutter speed.

Yeah, FX more forgiving apparently.

If you shoot JPG, yes the high ISO noise reduction matters but if you shoot RAW, it will depend on what which RAW convertor are you using?

If you use ACR under Lightroom / Photoshop, yes the settings don't matter in RAW as they are ignored but if you convert the RAW under View NX2 or Capture NX2 by Nikon, yes the settings matter.

High ISO NR will make the details in the picture very mushy and washed out. It's best to leave it at minimum setting or set it no NR at all.

Very intense. If looks could kill...

Yup, only JPG is affected but for RAW, see my post.

Those are your friend's setup? Punggol Reservoir is in Singapore if I'm not wrong. Those lenses are mounted on Gitzo tripods with Wimberley type gimbal heads which makes maneuvering the body + lens setup to track birds almost effortless.

You changed lenses under dusty conditions? I believe the problem you have does not affect the picture but it's a nuisance when viewed in the viewfinder. If you're lucky, the string would just disappear over time.

Nice. I think this one is one of your better shots.

Forgot about this. Nice one. Really like this.

I'm not too sure how the D5100 AF behaves or where the controls are. What subject are you shooting? If your subject is still and does not move (can pose for you), stick with AF-S. If you're shooting fast moving subjects, stick with AF-C. You can stick with AF-C all the time but you must be aware that your focus shifts when you recompose.

Whether to shoot in aperture or shutter priority, it also depends. For sports when I want to decide if I want to freeze the subject or want motion blur, I would choose shutter mode. My lenses don't have VR and I would use shutter priority + Auto ISO when required to keep the shutter speed high in low light. For everything else, I use aperture priority.

Try and test. Sometimes for more control, I put the controls in Manual mode especially in low light. The shooter has all the control.

I usually leave the camera at continuous mode. If you need one shot, just press once and the camera will only take one shot.

On a D5100 or cropped sensor cameras, you would not want to go beyond f/11 to avoid difraction limits. I would stay with f/8 and be there !

On if using f/1.8 to take landscapes is a good idea, my reply is depends. If you're shooting at night, then you have a good reason. If you shoot daytime, your shutter speed might hit the 1/8000 limit.

You can actually get all your subjects in focus if you use hyperfocal technique. The hyperfocal distance for 50mm lens shot at f/1.8 on the D5100 is estimated around 70.2m from your camera. Focus at that location and everything else in the frame would be in focus.

In general, you would want to stop down the lens for 2 reasons;

1. To get enough DoF

2. Because most lenses are not sharp when shot wide open and performs better or best when stopped down

If you have a 58mm f/1.2 Noct or the 24mm f/1.4 or the 35mm f/1.4, these lenses are often shot wide open for night shots because wide open, their performance is excellent.

When you buy the new memory card, doesn't it already come with the plastic holder?

Nice. Well done.

I think it would be better if you crop to exclude the bottom tarmac.

Well it can be but if you're talking about Gitzo tripods, they cost as much if not more than the Wimberleys.

Cheap way is to go with CF tripods like Benro + Manfrotto 393 gimbal.