Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Gear-Fi: Non-Audio Gear and Gadgets › The NIKON Thread (Talk About Nikon Stuff here)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The NIKON Thread (Talk About Nikon Stuff here) - Page 343

post #5131 of 5719
Quote:
Originally Posted by hyogen View Post

 

thanks.  Are you sure about those numbers?  http://speedlights.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Man-Flash-Power-Index_04191.gif

 

I almost ran out and bought a used SB-900 after what you said..

 

Also, aren't IPS monitors sufficiently color calibrated?  Dell makes good ones for around $300.. also I believe most Apple screens such as Ipad screens are IPS. 

If you really want to be careful about colour, the minimum quality monitor you need is an NEC or LACIE. Apple and Dell displays won't cut it. If you are serious about colour, you get an Eizo. Each of those options will likely cost many times what your camera does, and even still needs to be calibrated with external hardware. 

post #5132 of 5719
Quote:
Originally Posted by hyogen View Post

 

thanks.  Are you sure about those numbers?  http://speedlights.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Man-Flash-Power-Index_04191.gif

 

I almost ran out and bought a used SB-900 after what you said..

 

Also, aren't IPS monitors sufficiently color calibrated?  Dell makes good ones for around $300.. also I believe most Apple screens such as Ipad screens are IPS. 

I simply sourced the gn data online. (I havent used a TTL flash for years all I ever use now is broncolor, profoto, or hensel)

 

as for ips monitors, being ips alone does not mean a monitor will be color accurate, and although they tend to be better they still without a doubt need to be calibrated.

 

 


Quote:
Originally Posted by shigzeo View Post

I am also a photographer by trade, but tend to shoot nothing but gadgets and tech. Sometimes, I work at interviews and cover events, but my lens stock is best used for still stuff. Eventually I'd like to pick up an AF lens of some sort, probably a zoom. Nikon's 35-70 2,8D looks pretty good and is not too heavy. But I'll be honest, using the D800 outside is a pain. I'm looking into the V1/V2 for carrying to sporting events for use with my 180/2,8ED AiS; for every day non-work stuff, I hope to get a Fuji X-Pro 1 despite is many many flaws and tiny viewfinder. 

 

The D800 sort of proves to me that if for image quality/resolution Nikon rule, they have lost it with regards to ergonomics and weight. I won't be changing my lenses though. The 28/2,8; 50/2; 105/2,5; 180/2,8 and the Makro Planar I use will be great with adapters. If the Fuji works out, I'll probably sell the D800 and get another Fuji as backup. 

 

Dont think I have ever met a commercial photographer that shoots using a dslr :P I cant remember the last time I photographed a watch without using a medium format bellows camera.

post #5133 of 5719

http://www.amazon.com/NEC-Display-Solutions-P221W-BK-22-Inch/dp/B001IWOB86/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1360716113&sr=8-1&keywords=P221W-BK

 

is the best sub 1000$ monitor I have seen for color, truly amazing. Its discontinued but you can still get them used for relatively cheap I though around 400$, nearly as good as my 2,000 ezio.

post #5134 of 5719
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattimis View Post

I simply sourced the gn data online. (I havent used a TTL flash for years all I ever use now is broncolor, profoto, or hensel)

 

as for ips monitors, being ips alone does not mean a monitor will be color accurate, and although they tend to be better they still without a doubt need to be calibrated.

 

 


Quote:
Originally Posted by shigzeo View Post

I am also a photographer by trade, but tend to shoot nothing but gadgets and tech. Sometimes, I work at interviews and cover events, but my lens stock is best used for still stuff. Eventually I'd like to pick up an AF lens of some sort, probably a zoom. Nikon's 35-70 2,8D looks pretty good and is not too heavy. But I'll be honest, using the D800 outside is a pain. I'm looking into the V1/V2 for carrying to sporting events for use with my 180/2,8ED AiS; for every day non-work stuff, I hope to get a Fuji X-Pro 1 despite is many many flaws and tiny viewfinder. 

 

The D800 sort of proves to me that if for image quality/resolution Nikon rule, they have lost it with regards to ergonomics and weight. I won't be changing my lenses though. The 28/2,8; 50/2; 105/2,5; 180/2,8 and the Makro Planar I use will be great with adapters. If the Fuji works out, I'll probably sell the D800 and get another Fuji as backup. 

 

Dont think I have ever met a commercial photographer that shoots using a dslr :P I cant remember the last time I photographed a watch without using a medium format bellows camera.

Medium format with bellows are wonderful tools. But they are not necessary. In fact, I meet fewer and fewer medium format users among photographers here in Japan. Car photographers and large model photographers tend to stay with MF, but it seems that most are moving to DSLR. Perhaps your location used MF mostly. Generally, Japan is different, even for most product photographs. Bellows, of course, are not an option.

post #5135 of 5719

ahh see I am on the other side of the pacific haha

post #5136 of 5719

id love to live and work in the area for a while though, while im still young.

post #5137 of 5719

Come on over. I don't particularly like Japan as a work environment, though. If you work for yourself, that is one thing, but generally, work environments are pretty poor: employers never pay overtime no matter how long you work, or if they do, it is only after a specified number of overtime hours... lots of bullying in the workplace, sexual exploitation, poor salaries, and always the corporate hand in everything as there are very very few government controls on anything. If things go wrong in Japan, they go very very wrong because no one is there to protect you. But the food is good and post is cheap as is rent (comparatively) and cars are cheap as cheap can be and there are heaps of services for travel within the country. A great place to travel to, and if you work in a foreign environment, a fun place to work. But it is a hell of lies and exploitation otherwise.

post #5138 of 5719

have a big decision to make (will have to stick with it for a long time). 

 

35 + 85mm or 

 

50 + 105mm or

 

50 + 135mm

 

And I'll have an ultrawide angle like a 14mm.  I'm going to be doing engagements and weddings.

 

Which combo should I pick? 

 

 

 

I like using 85mm for somewhat tight indoor stuff..  I feel like it could be a little too short for weddings, though.  Can't be far back enough to not be distracting..  Also, the problem with 105mm lenses are that perhaps they're too sharp because they're macro lenses (will show too much facial blemishes, etc)...and possibly aren't as fast in focusing in the non-macro range. 

 

For outdoor portraits, I feel that 85mm is sometimes a little too short again, because I can usually always back up farther (and I have a loud voice that carries :D  )

post #5139 of 5719

the 105mm is not a good choice at all. Having used it the focus ring is so fine for macro that you will be spinning it WAY more than a normal lens to pull focus, and this also makes AF slower.

85mm is a fantastic portrait length, so is 50.

35 on a full frame can end up giving distortion because you will need to be so close to fill the frame if it is 1 subject.

 

I think there is still kind a debate because most consider 35mm to be human field of view (on a FF sensor) and on the other hand there is the nifty 50 which most think is the most versatile portrait prime.

That being said my favorite lens for dslr is the 85 1.2 ( its like a glass softball when you hold it, super heavy for a 85)

 

It depends for standing portrait 85 and 50mm are king, but if youre not controlling the shoot it really depends. I've used 70-200 countless times at weddings because it gives you the range you need when you cant get close during a ceremony etc..

 

Personally I think 135 is too long for most uses (in a portrait sense) its a great lens when you already have a strong kit, but if youre only able to get a 3 lens kit I am not sure its the best choice.

 

With a 14mm already I would get the 35/50 and the 85 (if I am forced to stay within the choices given)

because they will serve a good range of uses 

 

Again I still think 70-200 is great for wedding where you want to be in the shadows and less intrusive, but to get a decent zoom its quite a bit more money :P

post #5140 of 5719

On a small side note longer lenses may be more suited toward your style if you really enjoy compressing the background. 

post #5141 of 5719

If that 105 isn't a modern AF, it takes only a few small turns to get it from close focus of 0,9m to infinity. I use the 105/2,5 AiS religiously outside of work and have used it from time to time on the few portraits I do. I'm just not a people person.

post #5142 of 5719

Thank you.  The new Sigma 35mm 1.4 has no distortion but it's super expensive.  I think for that money I'd rather go with something like an 85mm 1.4 or 135 f2 DC.  It pains me how good the Canon 135 f2L is and how cheap it is...like $720 like new. 

 

Also, I think the 85mm 1.8 AF (non-D) which I'm using is fine and the 1.4 won't really add much more bokeh. 

 

The 105mm 2.8 micro VR (pretty new lens) would give me greater DOF than 85mm 1.8, right?  I think the calculator says that it's almost 2x more DOF meaning less bokeh (but with more compression maybe it'd look about the same)..

 

I guess I might as well get the 70-200 2.8 and hope that it's as sharp as a prime.  Which 70-200 is the one to get?  I really don't want to spend more than $1000 on this one lens..  The 70-200 to get on Canon's side was the 70-200 2.8 II with IS (VR). 

post #5143 of 5719
Quote:
Originally Posted by hyogen View Post

I guess I might as well get the 70-200 2.8 and hope that it's as sharp as a prime.  Which 70-200 is the one to get?  I really don't want to spend more than $1000 on this one lens..  The 70-200 to get on Canon's side was the 70-200 2.8 II with IS (VR). 

 

If your budget is $1000, than there is only one single lens you can buy - Tamron 70-200. Optically it is a great lens. LAcks IS/ OS/ VR, but that can be overcome with technique to some extent. 

 

another one is Sigma 70-200, and if you get lucky, you might find a used one for around $1000. It is not as good optically as the Tamron, but adds IS and better build quality, even though the Tamron is not so bad in that department either. 

 

Going up in Price you have the new version of Tamron 70-200 with VC (Tamron's IS that is really good) and USD. This one goes new for $1499. 

 

Canon and Nikon 70-200s are way above the price range you mentioned. 

post #5144 of 5719

Nikon's 80-200/2,8D can be had for less than 1000$ and is built like a tank and has wonderful optics. It also has an aperture ring and so can easily be used on any Nikon SLR.

post #5145 of 5719

Dont get too caught up on bokeh, most lenses are not nearly as sharp wide open. I love fast glass too but I rarely ever use 1.2 on my 85 because its simply not needed.  f/2 is the lowest I tend to use because if I open up any more the Dof is too small to get both eyes in focus.

 

if you go for a 70-200 I would shoot for some form of IS or VR as its pretty helpful if you happen to shoot hand held with less than 1/200 SS

Look at lens weights too, because hand holding a 3lb lens on a 2lb body for 3 hours is going to start to make your images suffer from shake.

if you plan on only ever shooting outside in bde you'll be fine without VR because I cant see you stopping down more than f/10 anyways ( depending on your camera most hit DLA at around f/10 anyways )

 

That being said off brands tend to always be a better value, but like most things you get what you pay for.

 

If you are like me you're favorite zoom is your feet, and so if you really want long glass the 135mm might be a better fit. The if you shoot a wedding and want a zoom just grab one from a rental house for 40ish dollars a day depending on the area.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Gear-Fi: Non-Audio Gear and Gadgets › The NIKON Thread (Talk About Nikon Stuff here)