Hmmm... Last time you ask, I already mention.



I might want to try this at 14mm.

That's a good advise ! Hope you don't get poisoned and straight away buy a D3s.

If you want fastest FPS, best noise performer, do you buy a D3X?

Errr, base on KLIMS alone, I think last year standard jatuh already.

Bangkok.

Made here? Oh no.

Electronics is different. Everybody can do. With the DSLR, there are still a lot of mechanical parts involved. That is what I'm more worried.

At least they have much more experience than us. They started producing low end DSLRs for Nikon 6 years ago.

We are all too familiar that QC here and QC in Japan are two different things no matter what they say. We are talking about mechanical shutter assembly. Not sensors which I'm confident we should be fine.

Where is this?

The SB-800 has a lifespan of 5 years before SB-900 replaced it in 2008. The SB-900 still has some life in it.

Good question. It depends... Shooting a black or dark coloured object or background, the camera metering is usually fooled and will blow the exposure. So naturally you'd want to use negative EV compensation to bias the camera body metering.

Likewise, if you're shooting white / bright object or background like snow, the metering would be fooled and would underexpose. So you should use positive EV compensation to bias the camera body metering.

Flash or no flash, just use the rules above.

Yes you can. But like I mention if the camera is faced with those types of scenes, the camera's meter will be tricked. Perhaps if you shoot RAW, you still have a lot of room to repair exposure errors.

The buttons are there. Practice and practice and it becomes 2nd nature to you. You don't need to lift your eyes off the viewfinder and you can make EV changes. I leave flash as it is and just configure the camera.

I will only quickly glance to see if the exposure is correct. To check if focus is spot on or not, I usually do it at home. I trust the lens and camera to get focus correct.

Fair enough. Hopefully you realise that owning the 35mm f/1.8 (or any good lens for that matter) does not do magic and automatically get you better pictures. You will be faced with different problems which is mostly user related.

On a side note, it does not matter if it's FX or DX lens. Once mounted on a DX body, the 50mm FX lens gets a 75mm FOV.

A 35mm f/1.8 DX lens gets an equivalent of 52.5mm for FOV.

Thom Hogan just posted a mini review of it. Have a read.

http://bythom.com/nikon-p300-review.htm

Yes, skill + equipment goes hand in hand.

Muddy? In the centre part or at the side of the image? If you look at other objects in the image, do you get them sharp or the whole image is muddy? What wide angle lens is this?

f/5.6 on wide angle should dispel most problems with misfocus as it gives quite a huge DoF.

If you already got the D7000, then stick with it lor. Selling it would wasteful since you'll be at a lost.

If this was posted before you bought either Nikon body, you need to know what type of shooting you are interested or is your priority. The D300s has better AF focusing performance and better controls and ergonomics. I would think much like why you got a 1Ds Mk II in the first place.

In general, the D7000 is better but when it comes to AF and position / layout of controls, the D300s is better especially for sports or for birding. If you're not into sports photography, the D7000 is fine.

Besides, the 24-70 is a little long on a 1.5x DX body. It's more suited for FX body.

Depends on your budget. The D7000 + kit lens is quite cheap. Shop around.

Not too sure but I believe Nikon will honour the warranty if you have any problem.

Congrats. How much? With kit lens?

Wah... You're on the roll. Good price. Where did you get it? Your favourite Foto Selangor?

I agree. For me, the D700 is about right since I'm used to a D2 body.

I like it.

You forgot the mother of all wide angles... AF-S 14-24mm f/2.8.

There's also the AF-S 16-35mm f/4 VR.

I believe using an external mic would help solve the audio problem.

Anyway, you buy a D7000 for video? If you're thinking more into video, perhaps you should be looking at the Canon instead.

Much better.

Can you show examples? What subject are you trying to capture? Portraiture?

Perhaps you're experiencing this problem on a wide angle lens.

https://nikoneurope-en.custhelp.com/app/ans...etail/a_id/4585

Or perhaps the lens itself is soft. I read that the older Sigma 10-20mm f/4 - 5.6 is much better.

Yes, wide angles can be tricky as per the article I posted above.

It's the other way around. DX bodies have greater DoF than FX.

You can check it for yourself;

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

For landscape or macro, it is actually better to use a DX body.

What you did is correct. But remember that 50mm on FX body is 33.3mm on DX. Plug in the 33mm focal length and f/1.8 for DX body at 10 feet subject distance and you will get total DoF 1.99 feet instead of 1.29 feet for FX.

I assume you're using flash under tungsten lighting?

Use tungsten gel (or any type of gel to match ambient lighting) and set to tungsten WB on the camera. Adjust accordingly in RAW.

LOL

You obviously have not encountered problems with matching the flash WB with the ambient WB or p[robably do not realise that is a problem in the first place. If you do not correct the WB light from your flash to match the ambient lighting, you will get different colour lighting from the ambient and from your flash in your pics. Correcting WB on the subject in PP (as a result of light source from the flash) will produce horrible outcome on the background and vice versa.

If vearn27 wasn't using flash, doing custom WB would be the best. But if you use the default flash in tungsten ambient lighting, you would have problems getting correct WB in your pics if your flash is not WB corrected.

Like I mentioned in my reply above, even PP in RAW would give horrible "corrected" WB in PP if the flash WB is different from the ambient WB. Your method is correct if vearn27 does not shoot with flash.

Not possible if you use flash that is not WB corrected.

This post has been edited by jchue73: Aug 9 2011, 06:05 PM

You can never get exactly the correct WB. Approximation close to correct is very good enough already.

What I suggested was not the be-all-end-all solutuion. It gives your subject and background closer WB so that any WB fine tuning in PP can produce better results.

There are a few ways;

1. Shoot without flash with a very good high ISO camera like a D700/D3/D3s.
2. Shoot with the flash only acting as fill light and not as the main light.
3. Use something like the Xrite Colour Checker Passport (http://xritephoto.com/ph_product_overview.aspx?ID=1257). No experience with that but I suspect that it will not work if you have two different sources of light with different WB.

I still use method 2 with a corresponding colour gel which helps to get the ambient and flash WB to be as close as possible but if there are differences, the light source from the flash would not be dominating the subject lighting. Just enough to give highlight and lift shadows.

It's more like welcome to the red underwear camp.

On a DX body, the 35mm is always a more preferred focal length than the 50mm.

Yes, using the colour gels would not guarantee perfect results but it helps close the WB gap between the ambient and flash so that any WB fine tuning in PP can achieve better results.

Don't think that works when flash is used though...

Not so bad lah. Sigma does their own R&D too. There are no equivalent Canon or Nikon lenses that Sigma produces;

200-500mm f/2.8


300-800mm f/5.6


120-300mm f/2.8


What lens is that 105-200mm?

Before you jump the gun and look down on manual focus lens, do note that these lenses are one of a kind and if you take the 58mm f/1.2 Noct Ais manual focus for instance, the cheapest one goes for about USD 3k.

Speaking of manual focus lenses, I was actually stunned and poisoned by how beautifully the Zeiss ZF.2 Distagon 35mm f/1.4 rendered images on the D700. If it was presented to me when I was thinking about the Nikon AF-S 35mm f/1.4, I would have been very tempted to go with the Zeiss.

Yes, SB-700 and SB-900 automatically detects WB when you use the coloured gels.

But no harm to manually specify the WB. Old habit coming from SB-800.

Like I mentioned, the gel does not give exact WB during shoot. It makes the WB on the subject and the surroundings WB as close as possible. After that, you can tweak the WB in PP to give it more yellowish etc accordingly to your liking.

Great that Nikon took care of your problem.

You never updated your firmware?

Whoa... Get the latest and greatest version.

That's front focus. Not Ford Focus.