apparently this is called a Sundog. never heard of it before nor have i ever seen one until today. at first i thought it was lens flair but i lowered the camera and saw it was up in the sky a bit to the right of the sun. pretty cool..
CVS_072a.jpg
apparently this is called a Sundog. never heard of it before nor have i ever seen one until today. at first i thought it was lens flair but i lowered the camera and saw it was up in the sky a bit to the right of the sun. pretty cool..
CVS_072a.jpg
Last edited by UnephenStephen; 11-05-2013 at 08:56 AM.
"She said you are the air I breathe
The life I love, the dream I weave."
Unevensong - Camel
After months of research, rentals, testing and decision making - I'm pulling the trigger next week on the Nikon D610 body, 50mm f/1.4G prime, and the SB-700 SpeedLight . . . plus an extra battery, UV filter, strap, etc . . .
Soon it will be 10 years since I purchased the Leica Digilux 2 . . . so I'm deserving of an upgrade considering that length of time alone (especially in this digital age), and the thousands of images ran through that cam, learning curve, etc - - - but will still keep it no doubt.
I'll stick to primes: with a 28mm + 85mm (both 1.8G) in the near future. I've rented the D600 twice over the past year with stellar results, not surprising for a full frame sensor-ed cam . . . but have decided to stay away from a pro-level zoom simply because of the weight/size thing - - - just too massive and HEAVY. That = coupled with the fact that even their fastest (and most expensive) zooms are not viewfinder friendly in low light scenarios (clubs, bands, indoor events) - but all of that thought pattern may change too - we will see. My eyes are not what they used to be - - - - that's for sure.
I've analyzed the hell out of this scenario - input is appreciated.
i like my Nikon though its only a mid-range camera as opposed to high end or professional level. this is where i got that info..
model tree
looks like yours is one step above mine (D5100) so it should be a decent camera. mine is a good one except that i'm still getting somewhat inconsistent results because of the kit lens that came with it (18-55). my next step is to get a new zoom lens with a greater focal range (thinking of a Tamron 18-270 ($450)). then maybe a wide-angle (10-24).
"She said you are the air I breathe
The life I love, the dream I weave."
Unevensong - Camel
It's a tough call, really. My personal preference is Canon glass, but it really comes down to the system design you're most comfortable with. If you've played around with the Nikon line enough to have good comfort and familiarity with their body control design, then Nikon may be the better choice.Originally Posted by WHORG
I had been a long-time Nikon devotee until I switched from my FE2 kit to a Canon pro-sumer auto-focus (film) body with pro lenses. Making the move from a manual camera to the Canon digital line was no big problem at the time, and my research into glass quality revealed issues with Nikon's glass at the time (~15 years ago). But, I believe Nikon have gotten their act together, again, since that time.
There are really no good options for long pro zooms that are truly fast enough for focusing in very low light. Part of it also has to do with how the body handles the aperture blades before tripping the shutter curtain. If the body stops down the blades while focusing (let's say you've chosen f/5.6 for the setting), then no lens will be good for that situation. But, I don't believe Nikon bodies do that--hopefully there are no digital bodies that do that, these day (no excuse, now).
Both Nikon and Canon have very comparable pro-level long zoom lenses in the 70-200mm range that are constant f/2.8--which is the pretty much 35mm pro level standard. I have never seen any lenses in that range any faster than that. Of course, both brands charge quite a lot for that glass, so cost is going to be a factor.
Sigma do have a 120-300mm f/2.8 stabilised lens at $3.599, which is insane considering the quality control issues that plague the company.
Tokina have pretty much nothing, any longer, except in short primes.
Tamron now offer a 70-200mm f/2.8 stabilised lens. but at $1,499, I'd prefer to put my money toward Canon or Nikon glass. Not that Tamron is horrible, they're just not at all in the same class. And, anything costing more than $1k--to me--justifies saving a bit more for the "real thing".
Unfortunately, the 70-200mm lens range is pretty much "it" for the fast, fixed aperture pro lenses. Beyond that, most manufactures have too difficult a time producing a usable lens outside the transitional f/3.5-5.6 range.
But, my preference is to get a low to mid level digital body, and put the big funds into the glass. The sensors (apart from crop-factor vs. full frame) are pretty much comparable unless you go full-on professional.
Nice. You even got a bit of the halo and the horizon flare from the induction zone.
I read somewhere that Canon changed their lens mounting a few times over the past several years - and this sort of scared me. That coupled with the fact that I still have a few old Nikon lenses from the 1980's that will definitely work on this new body: but manually of course.
I'm seriously considering their 24-70mm f/2.8 medium zoom - as it covers the focal lengths of my current Leica: which I'm perfectly satisfied with. I can rent longer glass if I need the reach. Problem is - I'm scared of the weight - that lens is a fucking brick, along with the body and a Speedlight: I'm looking at about 5 pounds easily. Not only that - the lens is about $1,800 - - - bringing the total cost of the body, lens, flash, filter, extra battery, etc . . . upwards of $4,000. To be honest - I'd rather have just one lens like this scenario - something that covers my optical needs and seriously kicks ass image-wise. What are your thoughts Greg ???
I've peeked through my friend's Canon equivalent - and the 2.8 is pretty bright in the viewfinder for composition - - - plus he states the medium zooms lock onto autofocus much better than most others (longer) - - -
Get one lens (24-70/2.8) - or 3 (faster) primes ??? Just about the same cost/weight . . . but having to change lenses all the time introduces a cleaning regimen into my process . . .
Decisions . . . it's all good though and I'm not bitching . . . I just want to spend the money I've been saving for the past 10 years in the manner that suits my photography style exactly . . . you know what I mean ???
Disclaimer: I typed this without my contacts in, so brave the grammar and typos at your own risk...
Canon changed their mount a bit between full manual bodies and the auto-focus line. The auto-focus "EF" lenses would not fit the full manual bodies. All EF lenses will fit *any* EOS digital body. HOWEVER, the "EF-S" lenses (for digital bodies with a crop-factor/small sensor) will only fit EOS bodies that accept the EF-S lens mount; in other words, "EF-S" lenses won't work on full-frame sensor bodies, or older crop-sensor bodies. All "L" series lenses are "EF" and will fit all EOS bodies.
But, if you are absolutely certain that your existing Nikon lenses will work on the D610 body, you may have already posed a perfect reason to go with the Nikon.
Yeah, the longer pro-level lenses are absolutely huge, heavy, and expensive. BUT, the clarity is unsurpassed in the format (at least in the Canon "L" series glass). The higher priced Nikor lenses may compare well with the Canon L glass, now. But, I haven't looked at the graphs.
The problem with a single all-purpose zoom is that you're going to lose speed, apart from the shorter range wide-to-normal zooms. Both Nikon and Canon have a24-70mm f/2.8, but the Canon comes in at $2,300--compared to the Nikon's $1,800 price tag--although, the Canon is also "L" series glass, which I think may still be better than the Nikon glass.
A very popular all-purpose L series Canon lens is the 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM. Most AP photographers and paparazzi use these, but also many model photographers. It obviates changing lenses for anything but the widest end. Unfortunately, it's a honkin' 7.2" long with a 77mm filter diameter, 3.7lbs, and comes in at $2,700. But, it's internal focus. It is a lens I want, but one I will probably never get.
Whether to choose several primes, or a reasonably "general purpose" zoom (or two) and maybe a good 100mm prime/macro, possibly a good wide angle, too, all depends on your regular use. Since you're doing a lot of club photography, if you want ot use the new kit, you might a good, ultra fast, wide angle prime. and some other lens(es) to build on.
My kit suits what I do: landscapes and macros. I have a 15-35mm L, a 60mm prime macro, and a 70-200mm L zoom, all f/2.8 and all very heavy and expensive. I also have a backpack for the trail.
If you have a range of lenses for your Lecia that you find optimal for what you do, than I'd try to match that range as closely as possible with what you end up getting. But, the better lenses will be larger, heavier and much more expensive--even some of the fast primes.
I've used my 70-220mm f/2.8L in concerts with no problems composing or auto-focusing, at all. The auto-focus lock really depends on the sensor and auto-focus system, at that point. A long L series f/28 lens is going to provide excellent AF speed if the body is capable of it.
I have rarely had to clean the rear element of my lenses, or the camera sensor. But, I have developed some extremely conscientious lens changing habits over the years, and I never leave the rear cap off a lens in the bag.
Yup. It ain't an easy decision. If you have the ability to rent the body and lenses you want to consider, spend a day with the kit you would like to buy and see how appropriate it is. If you can do it with both brands, then you're better off.
But, remember to test out those Nikon lenses you already have.
I've rented the D600 body already - and have verified the older Nikon lenses fitting & operational (manually). The D610 is basically the same body -
That body is big enough as it is - and I hesitate to make things more painful. I'm too old to carry around such weight these days -
Another fast prime come tax day (the 28mm f/1.8) is a solid goal for the near future - - - the 50/1.4 should do well for now with my style and direction.
jk
What's fucking crazy is how you can easily talk yourself into this stuff - - - and I'm absolutely not blowing more than I've saved/budgeted for this adventure right now.
Did you test metering? Many digital bodies rely on information from the lenses to use the metering functions. If the body will work on full manual settings, and you can use the Speedlight in full manual mode, then you're good to go. The unfortunate thing with the auto-focus film bodies, and the digital bodies that followed, is that they began relying on communication from the lenses for the metering systems to work.
Oh, I do know what you mean! Photo gear is an illness ;-)
You guys will definitely want to check out this article:
http://fstoppers.com/model-maker-tur...oint-and-shoot
Hartford from E side of CT river..
RiverPark2_40-41-42_HDR4_1500.jpg
RiverPark2_56-57-58_HDR2_1500.jpg
"She said you are the air I breathe
The life I love, the dream I weave."
Unevensong - Camel
I switched directions at the last minute on the DSLR pathway - - - I (once again) borrowed a friends D700 with a few lenses, flash, etc - - - for a long weekend just to test the waters one final time. It was on a short travel trip - so it was a good opportunity for me to determine if this style/size/weight kit would fit into both my needs and lifestyle.
It did not - - -
Instead I opted for a mirrorless solution: Fuji X-Pro1. It's an APS-C sensor, interchangeable lens body with amazing output . . . beautifully made (all metal) and on the smaller side. Their glass is amazing - and not cheap in the least. I got the smaller mid-range zoom (18-55, fast at f/2.8) when purchasing the body - - - and the wife picked me up the 23mm - f/1.4 (35mm equiv) for a Christmas/birthday present. Plus the strobe and a few filters, high-speed memory cards, nice case, grip - - -
I've been saving away about $25 per month since 2004 (when I got my Leica) - so I knew this was coming.
I'm getting it all up an running this weekend. Fuji is excellent about firmware updates - shit - even the lenses come with an SD card to tell the camera what framing lines to display in the viewfinder - plus AF algorithms, etc . . . so I'll have a bunch of sitting around to do before actually taking photographs.
It will most certainly be a big step up for me - but I am very happy with the optical output, size/weight and overall capability of the system that I tried before making this purchase.
To each their own - - - camera's are only tools = = = good photography is in your head.
~JK
my sisters dog..
Ellens_46-47-48_HDR_LA-2_1500.jpg
Ellens_49-50-51_HDR-2_1500.jpg
Last edited by UnephenStephen; 12-14-2013 at 07:59 AM.
"She said you are the air I breathe
The life I love, the dream I weave."
Unevensong - Camel
how would i accomplish something like this?
blur_sample.jpg
usually you focus on something in the foreground but this shot looks like all background. maybe auto-focus was turned off and they deliberately and manually defocused on whatever was the subject?
Last edited by UnephenStephen; 12-22-2013 at 03:43 PM.
"She said you are the air I breathe
The life I love, the dream I weave."
Unevensong - Camel
This is a hard one. It actually looks like a Photoshop job to me. The edges of the lighted "bubbles" are a little too crisp, and there is no effect from the aperture blades on them. But, I could be wrong.
If you wanted to try this, it would most probably be Christmas lights on a black background. Manually defocusing in either direction should get you the same or very similar results. But, I would expect the edges to be soft, and the orbs to have a more hexagonal appearance due to the aperture blades.
this one has the same effect but with a more discernible subject. maybe this will have more of a clue..
blur_sample2.jpg
"She said you are the air I breathe
The life I love, the dream I weave."
Unevensong - Camel
That one looks as I expect it to. Soft edges on the bokeh, all the lights are the same shape, and there is evidence of the aperture blades on the orbs.
Compare to the first image that has extremely sharp edges to the orbs of light, no evidence of aperture blade effect (which is not impossible with certain high-end lenses), and differently shaped orbs (circular and ovate/elliptical). The only thing that I can think of that would make the first image done in-camera would be high-end fish-eye glass, with the image cropped toward the left side of the frame. The barrel effect on the fish-eye would cause the elliptical effects, as well as the direction change in the ellipses above and below centre.
Also, a sheet of glass between the camera and the lights in the first image on which the lights were projected/reflected, and the lens focused on that sheet of glass may help sharpen the edges of the orbs, and possibly distort the the light orbs toward the left of the frame.
Now you've got me thinking about a ton of tricks to do in still photography.
Josef,
The camera you bought is a stranger to me - haven't sen it (or similar) before. Enjoy it - I'm looking forward to seeing more stellar pics.
I see Sony just came out with (what might become) a new type of camera - somewhere between a superzoom and a DSLR - with less zoom, better quality glass, but NOT an interchangeable lens. I don't have any interest in it, and it's overpriced anyway, but it might be interesting to watch. See here - and here
QFT !!
Regards,
Duncan
I've waited until this week to actually power up the new camera - especially since one of the lenses is actually a Christmas gift - plus Fuji just released their latest body firmware on 12/19 - - - so I have some time (off work) this week to accomplish all of this
I came to the realization that a big body with a slew of lenses just was not my style - - - I can get this whole new rig (body w/lens attached, 1 extra lens, hoods, flash, small stuff - - - all into a 10" X 5" X 7" (width, depth, height) case - just under 5 pounds total. Picked up Adobe Lightroom 5.3 through the university at an academic discount, running on a new I7 laptop, 16GB RAM, and a solid state drive - so things should run pretty well on that PC platform I think.
Lots of companies are entering the mirrorless market - with big advances in technology. It won't be long before FF sensors are packed into such small bodies (ala Leica) - at a fraction of their price. Not many people can justify $15K on a body, 2 lenses and a flash unit (Leica) - not me anymore . . . when this new Fuji system delivers similar output (at least to me) at 1/5 the price for the same quantity/size gear . . . to each their own.
I'll start taking some initial shots over the winter break - - -
Maybe I'm getting lazy - or maybe I'm getting old - - -
jk
The Fuji X-Pro1 seems pretty capable. I've never been very fond of rangefinder bodies, although years and years ago, one of the camera on my wish list was a Mamiya 7. Never did get it (or, even get a chance to play with one). I was always more comfortable with SLRs, as a I didn't have to compensate at all for framing.
What can you see through the viewfinder of Fuji? Is it a simple rangefinder lens? Or, does it display more real-time information/image data?
Happy Holidays..
Wfield_EH_195-196-197_HDR_1500.jpg
a little Xmas card from Wethersfield
"She said you are the air I breathe
The life I love, the dream I weave."
Unevensong - Camel
Regards,
Duncan
It's not a "rangefinder" in that sense - read on . . . .
The viewfinder is truly a technological feat . . . it can switch from optical to EVF:
1. Optical view finder - straight wide-angle view out of the front of the body. When a lens is attached - bright framing lines appear within the optical image: showing your actual image dimensions (changing with every lens depending on focal length). When the zoom is on the body - these same framing lines will shrink-grow in relation to your focal length on the zoom. This optical viewfinder is incredibly bright and clear - great for low light composition. In addition - aperture, shutter speed, exposure override, etc - - - all appear as an overlay on the optical image. Downside is that the "longer" lenses (especially with hoods) can enter the "view" on the right side - - - upside is that you can see things outside of your framing dimensions . . .
2. Electronic - at the flip of a switch, the viewfinder changes to an EVF - which takes it's data directly off the sensor. Similar to what I've experienced on the Leica for years now - - - it too is very bright and clear. Your image is displayed as "through the lens" - with all the same data parameters described above.
This viewfinder is one of the best/new features on this camera.
Auto focus is by contrast detection - and works blindingly fast now that the firmware updates have been implemented . . . it can also manually focus if that's your style.
The body is definitely on the smaller side: but I picked up the "grip" attachment, which provides a larger area on the R side of the camera. The whole affair is definitely on the heavier side - as the body is all metal and very solidly built - lenses are all metal too - - -
The 23mm f/1.4 (35mm equiv) is super sharp wide open - and an excellent low light performer. The cam/sensor kicks ass up to 6400 ISO beautifully - I look forward to some natural low-light photos in this same regard.
The zoom (18-55mm f/2.8-4 which is 28-85mm equiv) provides me the same compositional focal length as the Leica - and is most useful for the majority of my family/travel pics.
Everything came in a tad under $3k - which was within my budget. Hopefully - I'll be happy for another 10 years !!! We will see - - -
Wow. That is an impressive viewfinder. I would probably be a little disconcerted by the EVF view at first, but I guess it wouldn't be much different from operating a video camera. Would definitely motivate me to try out a body like that, though; especially if it's got macro lenses.
My big problem is not so much the weight of my kit, but the combined weight and overall bulk of it all. Carrying 20lbs of kit in a very small package is better than 20lbs filling an entire backpack.
EVF is great, because it's WYSIWYG. I.e. the exposure etc. that gets onto the EVF is exactly what hits the sensor. Makes it easy to compose and to handle exposure etc. through the viewfinder.
On the other hand - it isn't as clear as a real view, or a mirror.
Regards,
Duncan
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks