Share your thoughts, questions, etc, about Nikon (or other related SLR products, but no brand war please) here.
Or if you wanna share your pictures from your brand new camera or lens, or if you wanna see any particular kind of sample pictures from any lenses.
Okay, ready, start talking ! :allteeth:
Oh yeah, I wanna ask a question. Some people have recommended me to take off the Nikon L37c filter from the lens (got it along with the lens). To be honest the only reason why I keep it there is probably because I don't want any dust/finger prints on the lens, and the filter itself is quite expensive, sort of a waste for not using it.
According to them it will affect image quality (plus my filter has some tiny scratches which I think came from wiping the lens when there were still some dust particles). But then again, I haven't seen the real comparison, side by side pictures of a shot taken with and without lens that is showing the difference. Also I assume this L37c is a pretty good filter, won't degrade image quality?
plus my filter has some tiny scratches which I think came from wiping the lens when there were still some dust particles
That's one good reason for using a filter .... better it gets scratched than your front lens element. Scratches from cleaning usually occcur if the lens is wiped while dry or something other than a proper lens cleaning tissue is used.
I suggest you set your camera up on a tripod and do some A-B test shots of various scenes with and without the filter on. Then compare them and see if you can notice a difference. I keep filters on all my lenses. Sometimes when shooting I'll leave them on and sometimes remove them, depending on how critical the shot is.
__________________
I wondered why the golf ball was getting bigger. Then it hit me.
I suggest you set your camera up on a tripod and do some A-B test shots of various scenes with and without the filter on. Then compare them and see if you can notice a difference. I keep filters on all my lenses. Sometimes when shooting I'll leave them on and sometimes remove them, depending on how critical the shot is.
See, this is when the problem starts - I'm very lazy when it comes to doing some A/B controlled tests, hehe..
Maybe I will do it when I'm not in such a lazy mode.
I keep hearing about people saying how a lens filter will "slightly" degrade image quality/sharpness, but never seen anyone actually post some sample images proof.
But have you by any chance done the test yet? Or someone else not as lazy as me willing to do the test? :allteeth:
I found this link of the process of making a lens. It's pretty cool video, if you haven't watched it, go for it, it's worth watching. It makes you feel like buying a lens with chunky glasses. It's from Canon factory, but I guess it's good to have some sort of idea how lenses are made.
I read a book about Nikon history, and saw some pictures of how they actually manufacture lenses in the old times. Pretty fascinating, there were a bunch of Japanese Nikon workers sitting and doing the processing by hand (this was before everything started to get automated in modern plant).
Oh yeah, I wanna ask a question. Some people have recommended me to take off the Nikon L37c filter from the lens
Is it for the 85 f/1.4? If so, the effect will be far less, than say on the 35 I am getting. You may as well keep it until you can find a better on on ebay; it may actually improve the pleasing softness of the portraiture! You really do not need Nikon filters except for the wider angle lenses, where Nikon is able to list the recommended narrow ring style for elimination of vignetting.
Yep, this is good to have a Nikon thread here; sometimes Nikonians is just too active and people just seem to want the highlights. A few random things:
***
I've been reducing the load I carry around, and I came across www.signalandpower.com who carry a useful right angle plug adapter so you can leave the extension cord at home and plug the Nikon battery charger directly into the wall:
***
I got a SB-400 as a really nice Christmas gift from my brother-in-law. Now, I'm using it all the time and plan on getting a SC-29 which will still allow my SB-800's AF assist to work off camera
SB-400
SC-29
***
With the re-introduction of Fuji Velvia 50, I am planning on dusting off the F3 and doing both film and digital when I take my long trip to NZ in June. I've kept only one DX lens, the 10.5 mm and am pretty much done with the lens purchases, except for maybe another copy of the 35 f/1.4 if the one coming is not good, and except for maybe one of the older 55 f/2.8 Micro-Nikkors if I can find an affordable one in like new condition.
***
I really like the Kirk right angle bracket for the D200, that I got from Nikonians awhile back, it really helps with the product photography, since I am using a carbon fiber tripod and this seems to get off-balance easily.
***
I now pretty much use the 10.5DX for all of the trade show photography work; I find it amazing that the other photographers there have not caught onto this. It makes for great shots, especially when there are a great deal of people in the booth and it is just so compact.
***
After trying Capture NX, I am taking it off my PC; it is sooooo much slower that Photoshop CS and really takes so much getting used to. I'll just stick to the RAW plug-in.
***
Is film dead? Nope! I am thinking that processing locations will reduce their costs to keep it still fairly attractive for those with legacy cameras. So keep that brick of Velvia in the fridge and don't sell the F3. If you don't have one of these "flagship" Nikons, I recommend scooping one of the mint ones available on ebay: here
and here
***
Nowing that they have approached the limit of affordable lens/DX Imager capabililty, the new "pro" standard will most likely be the D3. I feel really bad for all the D2x and D2xs users that shelled out $4K plus; I hope they got their use out of it. I can't even bring myself to sell the D2h; the loss (price drop) was just incredible. The D3 will essentially relieve the user from having to have such an exacting, tiny, dense DX imager that could be quite susceptible to motion, lens issues, etc. I have found the D200 to be more forgiving in that way, but then again, I was fortunate to get a couple of really great lenses.
Thanks for the link. That was very useful. Its funny cause I work at a plant and if I show up on the production lines I might get a sample from the line for my office. I wish I could do that in that plant. :allteeth: I would wait next to the 85mm L line and natch one. :allteeth:
Is it for the 85 f/1.4? If so, the effect will be far less, than say on the 35 I am getting. You may as well keep it until you can find a better on on ebay; it may actually improve the pleasing softness of the portraiture! You really do not need Nikon filters except for the wider angle lenses, where Nikon is able to list the recommended narrow ring style for elimination of vignetting.
I am thinking to take it off (maybe after I bought a screw in rubber lens hood for the lens) and see how it goes.
Originally Posted by stevesurf
With the re-introduction of Fuji Velvia 50, I am planning on dusting off the F3 and doing both film and digital when I take my long trip to NZ in June. I've kept only one DX lens, the 10.5 mm and am pretty much done with the lens purchases, except for maybe another copy of the 35 f/1.4 if the one coming is not good, and except for maybe one of the older 55 f/2.8 Micro-Nikkors if I can find an affordable one in like new condition.
So what are you gonna bring to NZ? As far as I know usually NZ trip involves a lot of hiking, you probably better off with lighter gear I think.
Originally Posted by stevesurf
Nowing that they have approached the limit of affordable lens/DX Imager capabililty, the new "pro" standard will most likely be the D3. I feel really bad for all the D2x and D2xs users that shelled out $4K plus; I hope they got their use out of it. I can't even bring myself to sell the D2h; the loss (price drop) was just incredible. The D3 will essentially relieve the user from having to have such an exacting, tiny, dense DX imager that could be quite susceptible to motion, lens issues, etc. I have found the D200 to be more forgiving in that way, but then again, I was fortunate to get a couple of really great lenses.
When is the PMA by the way? I'm curious to see if that guy who said that the new body will be out then was right or not.
I like the idea of a filter as a "first level defense" against exposing the lens to wiping, smudges or impact. I'll gladly take the supposed degradation in quality for that reason. You have to know yourself and what you are comfortable with.
If you have a quality filter (multicoated on both sides, made of quality glass), you'll only be loosing, say, 0.5% light transmission, which I can definitely live with.
For my use I'd never miss the difference, as my most critical application I have is making 8x12 prints and hanging them, or using a shot as wallpaper.
It's certainly different if you have a uber buck lens. I think my D70 body is the weakest link anyway, not my filter or my lenses. I'll plan to pick up a D80 body sometime in the next year or two, when the price gets to where the D70 is.
For those of you that shoot digital, since the Nikon wb setting for incandescent light is pretty bad, what do you guys do about it? I adjust wb manually through Photoshop but it would be a lot less hassle if there was a trick to do it through the camera. I had this problem on both the D70 and the D50 and it's plagued on the D40 as well, is it like this on the higher end D80/D200 as well?
The NIKON Thread (Talk About Nikon Stuff here)
