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 386

post #5776 of 5786
Quote:
Originally Posted by musubi1000 View Post

I just realized a subtle improvement on the D750.
Nikon moved the OK button to the middle of the 4-way control.
Thus making it even easier to execute commands. Finally!
I was wondering when Nikon would figure that out. Fujis been doing it like that for years.

 

they also made the OK button assignable for 1:1 preview on the focus point on the D750!  A welcome change from my D600.  So far I'm loving the D750 MUCH more for the skin tones, auto white balance, and focusing.  I have no regrets so far not switching to Canon.  This is the review that I needed to see to cement my decision:  http://shotkit.com/nikon-d750/

post #5777 of 5786
Quote:
Originally Posted by OddE View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by hyogen View Post
 

At one point months ago the Canon 135 f2 lens could have almost single-handedly drawn me to Canon, but now I realize it's too long for me--even for wedding photography.  I guess I'll have to shoot in some very large wedding venues and see if I change my mind.  I highly doubt I'll ever buy a 70-200mm lens since it's so big and bulky.  Watching Tony Northrup's video on Canon vs. Nikon recently made me realize Nikon's 70-200mm actually is only 135 or so mm on the long end......

 

-If you want something fast in the 100mm+ range and think 135mm is too long, I'd suggest you have a look at the Nikkor 105mm f/2 DC - the AF leaves a bit to be desired speed-wise, but the focal length is ideal for portraits IMHO, it is fast, with wonderful bokeh and, as an added bonus, it is incredibly sharp and for all intents and purposes distortion-free.

 

My only minor gripe with it is that it takes 72mm filters, and if you use a step-up ring to 77mm, it interferes with the built-in hood.

 

Yes, that's the one I should have gotten, but I do have the 105mm 2.8 VR macro lens.  It is super sharp and the bokeh is not bad.  It survived a fall into a freshwater stream (just dried it in rice for 2 weeks).  I don't use it as much as my 85mm, but it does have better compression of the background so I like to use it. 

 
Almost 2 years ago now I sold all my humble audiophile gear and bought myself a full frame D600--  check out my website which I just completely remade www.justinleewedding.com  I really have the D600 to thank, but I did waste incredible amount of time fixing skin tones and correcting white balance.  I got better at it near the end I guess..
 
First few shots of having my D750 since last week.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

Below are some of my last shots with the D600 which I was very happy with, but overall I disliked skin tones and auto WB inconsistencies with the D600.  The AF was lacking a little bit to keep up with my events sometimes as well.  I have 0 complaints with the D750 so far.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Edited by hyogen - 12/12/14 at 6:58pm
post #5778 of 5786
Long post quoted (Click to show)
Quote:
Originally Posted by hyogen View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OddE View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by hyogen View Post
 

At one point months ago the Canon 135 f2 lens could have almost single-handedly drawn me to Canon, but now I realize it's too long for me--even for wedding photography.  I guess I'll have to shoot in some very large wedding venues and see if I change my mind.  I highly doubt I'll ever buy a 70-200mm lens since it's so big and bulky.  Watching Tony Northrup's video on Canon vs. Nikon recently made me realize Nikon's 70-200mm actually is only 135 or so mm on the long end......

 

-If you want something fast in the 100mm+ range and think 135mm is too long, I'd suggest you have a look at the Nikkor 105mm f/2 DC - the AF leaves a bit to be desired speed-wise, but the focal length is ideal for portraits IMHO, it is fast, with wonderful bokeh and, as an added bonus, it is incredibly sharp and for all intents and purposes distortion-free.

 

My only minor gripe with it is that it takes 72mm filters, and if you use a step-up ring to 77mm, it interferes with the built-in hood.

 

Yes, that's the one I should have gotten, but I do have the 105mm 2.8 VR macro lens.  It is super sharp and the bokeh is not bad.  It survived a fall into a freshwater stream (just dried it in rice for 2 weeks).  I don't use it as much as my 85mm, but it does have better compression of the background so I like to use it. 

 
Almost 2 years ago now I sold all my humble audiophile gear and bought myself a full frame D600--  check out my website which I just completely remade www.justinleewedding.com  I really have the D600 to thank, but I did waste incredible amount of time fixing skin tones and correcting white balance.  I got better at it near the end I guess..
 
First few shots of having my D750 since last week.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

Below are some of my last shots with the D600 which I was very happy with, but overall I disliked skin tones and auto WB inconsistencies with the D600.  The AF was lacking a little bit to keep up with my events sometimes as well.  I have 0 complaints with the D750 so far.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Incredible photos!

post #5779 of 5786

 

 

Here's two pictures I took at a concert with my D5100 and 50mm f/1.8 lens. 

post #5780 of 5786

Thanks very much!  It's funny I had no idea people were processing their photos about 3 years ago when I started to get serious with an SLR.  For a long while my dream camera was the 7D and I thought I had to get that camera to get such vibrant colors.  I forced myself to learn manual mode with my crop sensor and learned the basics from shooting with a fast enough shutter speed and shooting at the lowest possible ISO.  Once I switched to full frame the results are like night and day.  I know lots of people dislike Ken Rockwell, but I wholeheartedly agree with his stance on preferring full frame with a cheap lens over a crop sensor with expensive glass.  Also, using manual mode with Nikon's dual wheel system is so very intuitive and fast.  One of the reasons why I was hesitant to go to Canon was the fact that there is no live exposure meter when changing ISO on the 5D mark 3........I have no idea why one has to tap the shutter each time to get a new reading on the exposure meter....


Edited by hyogen - 12/14/14 at 1:30am
post #5781 of 5786

I'm thinking of downgrading my D800 to the D750, mainly because I can't really use 36MP and a lighter camera would be better. I also want the better low-light ISO performance. I managed to find a good write-up from a landscape photographer who wrote up his experiences doing it here: http://landscape.kevin-young.com/nikon-d750-review/

post #5782 of 5786

The D750 looks awesome.  I have the D610 and D7100 both excellent but the D7100 is strictly being used for sports shooting because of the long lenses. If I would lose too much money I would consider selling the two of the m for the D750 but I would lose lot of money but love the small size of those two 24Mp cameras I have .  I love the Fuji Xt-1 for it small and light size.


Edited by Frank I - 12/14/14 at 7:22am
post #5783 of 5786
Quote:
Originally Posted by hyogen View Post
 

Thanks very much!  It's funny I had no idea people were processing their photos about 3 years ago when I started to get serious with an SLR.  For a long while my dream camera was the 7D and I thought I had to get that camera to get such vibrant colors.  I forced myself to learn manual mode with my crop sensor and learned the basics from shooting with a fast enough shutter speed and shooting at the lowest possible ISO.  Once I switched to full frame the results are like night and day.  I know lots of people dislike Ken Rockwell, but I wholeheartedly agree with his stance on preferring full frame with a cheap lens over a crop sensor with expensive glass.  Also, using manual mode with Nikon's dual wheel system is so very intuitive and fast.  One of the reasons why I was hesitant to go to Canon was the fact that there is no live exposure meter when changing ISO on the 5D mark 3........I have no idea why one has to tap the shutter each time to get a new reading on the exposure meter....

I really like how Canon has the little screen on the top and better buttons to actually change ISO. I have to program the function button for ISO on my D5100 (which I just figured out last week, oops). I'm still learning a lot, and just started taking photography seriously the past 4 months. I knew nothing about my camera beforehand and rarely used it. 

 

I have a question, I've read really different opinions: do you use manual focus all the time? I personally have such a hard time with it. I just pick my AF point, focus and recompose. 

post #5784 of 5786
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzziekiwi View Post
 

I really like how Canon has the little screen on the top and better buttons to actually change ISO. I have to program the function button for ISO on my D5100 (which I just figured out last week, oops). I'm still learning a lot, and just started taking photography seriously the past 4 months. I knew nothing about my camera beforehand and rarely used it. 

 

I have a question, I've read really different opinions: do you use manual focus all the time? I personally have such a hard time with it. I just pick my AF point, focus and recompose. 

 

-Maybe I don't understand you, but even my old D80 set ISO from the top display? Push the ISO button on the rear, rotate the rear dial until the desired ISO value was displayed on top between the shutter release and the finder? (Or at least that's how I think it did it; I haven't used it in ages...)

 

As for manual focus, it depends. If I am in a situation where the AF is likely to be confused - say, low light, big-time cluttered foreground or the like, I tend to switch to manual, focus on where the action is and, if possible, make sure I have chosen an aperture small enough for depth of field to be sufficient even if the object is moving rapidly or my focus is ever so slightly off.

 

Also, when doing landscapes, still lifes and other action-challenged subjects, I tend to stick with manual, though AF too would in general provide excellent results. Probably comes down to habit - my first few SLRs were manual focus, and I still shoot several manual-focus only cameras on a weekly basis. Besides, I'd much rather focus manually and get focus where I want it, rather than having to sigh annoyedly and then override the AF when it gets my intentions wrong.

 

How easy or hard manual focus is really comes down to several factors - among them, which focus screen you are using. Most standard focusing screens are terrible for manual focus, IMHO. Good news is, the screen on just about every Nikon is easily interchangeable with a number of more suitable focusing screens.

 

Have a look at split-prism focusing screens if this sounds interesting enough to try out (cost for a decent one: $25 or so).

post #5785 of 5786
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzziekiwi View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by hyogen View Post
 

Thanks very much!  It's funny I had no idea people were processing their photos about 3 years ago when I started to get serious with an SLR.  For a long while my dream camera was the 7D and I thought I had to get that camera to get such vibrant colors.  I forced myself to learn manual mode with my crop sensor and learned the basics from shooting with a fast enough shutter speed and shooting at the lowest possible ISO.  Once I switched to full frame the results are like night and day.  I know lots of people dislike Ken Rockwell, but I wholeheartedly agree with his stance on preferring full frame with a cheap lens over a crop sensor with expensive glass.  Also, using manual mode with Nikon's dual wheel system is so very intuitive and fast.  One of the reasons why I was hesitant to go to Canon was the fact that there is no live exposure meter when changing ISO on the 5D mark 3........I have no idea why one has to tap the shutter each time to get a new reading on the exposure meter....

I really like how Canon has the little screen on the top and better buttons to actually change ISO. I have to program the function button for ISO on my D5100 (which I just figured out last week, oops). I'm still learning a lot, and just started taking photography seriously the past 4 months. I knew nothing about my camera beforehand and rarely used it. 

 

I have a question, I've read really different opinions: do you use manual focus all the time? I personally have such a hard time with it. I just pick my AF point, focus and recompose. 

 

 

 

Which Canon are you talking about?  I was really surprised/appalled to find out that changing ISO on the 5D mark 3 (and probably previous versions also) does not change the exposure meter in real time.  To see the change in the exposure meter, you have to re-meter by half pressing the shutter.....

post #5786 of 5786
Quote:
Originally Posted by Currawong View Post

I'm thinking of downgrading my D800 to the D750, mainly because I can't really use 36MP and a lighter camera would be better. I also want the better low-light ISO performance. I managed to find a good write-up from a landscape photographer who wrote up his experiences doing it here: http://landscape.kevin-young.com/nikon-d750-review/

Ouch!
The Nikon D750 is only $2500 in Canadian $!
redface.gif
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)