Mustang Air to Air: The Sequel
/forum/topic/600984/4215

1       2       3              4215      
4216
       4217              4533       4534       end

nrferguson
Registered: Apr 20, 2004
Total Posts: 2456
Country: United Kingdom

Wrei wrote:
This is the latest Fred posted:

Fred Miranda wrote:
Yes, after many hours of server/software tests, the answer were right under our noses. It seems that the "likes" code was one of the main culprits. It's removed from the code at the moment and the site speed is back. I'm working hard to find solution to put it back without causing any slowdown.


Appears you can "like", you can't see the results. You will get notifications, you just can't see them.


That would explain why I've wasted so much time seeing which images of mine people liked, but without success



Wrei
Registered: Aug 01, 2008
Total Posts: 2939
Country: United States

JWilsonphoto wrote:
Should have two cameras waiting for me when I get home Ray, both 5D models. I'm supposed to spend a couple days shooting them and report back. This will be an excellent way to determine whether I need one or not.


...but will you have time to evaluate them?



DanNehmer
Registered: Nov 26, 2009
Total Posts: 313
Country: United States

Tim, Love the images from Road America. That certainly is a beautiful track to watch/photograph from.

Dan



JWilsonphoto
Registered: Jan 16, 2002
Total Posts: 19275
Country: United States

You have a point Ray😏



JWilsonphoto
Registered: Jan 16, 2002
Total Posts: 19275
Country: United States

Actually, I think the question will be, is the camera worth adding, regardless of the version. My knee jerk would be to skip the SR version right off the bat due to the possibility of moire. Moore is something that can creep in anytime there are patterns, fabric, brick, whatever. It's something that is virtually impossible to remedy if it appears so the risk isn't worth the slight increase in sharpness to me personally. The real question will be, does the camera live up to the hype and is it noticeably better than the D810. It's worth taking a look at, but it'll have to be quite something to turn my head from the D810 which I consider the finest architectural/landscape body I have ever had the pleasure of shooting with. Weebeesee



JWilsonphoto
Registered: Jan 16, 2002
Total Posts: 19275
Country: United States

JR told me last night that he has arranged a month long series of photographic opportunities for me in Africa. He had to run so he just gave me the abbreviated version but apparently one of his close associates is the son of the President of one of the African countries and he is arranging a series of visits to the most coveted wildlife sites on the continent for JR and me. Y'all know how I am about putting my commercial schedule on hold, I didn't go on the round the world with Glenn, passed on getting my seaplane rating in Alaska, and dozens of lesser recreational ops, but if this one comes to be, I'm all over it and the chips will fall where they fall.



JWilsonphoto
Registered: Jan 16, 2002
Total Posts: 19275
Country: United States

Guess I had better upgrade to version II of my long glass collection. I'm thinking that (5DS not withstanding) that this would be a D810 shoot from start to finish. A question for the Nikon long glass shooters in our group, do I get the newest versions of the 300/2.8, 500, and 600, or do I throw the 200-400 in the mix?



Go4Long
Registered: Sep 04, 2005
Total Posts: 2013
Country: Canada

Jim,

I'll have the 200-400 with me at alliance. You are certainly welcome to give it a go and see if it's up to your standards. I've been extremely impressed with it. My 500mm isn't the new FL version, but is the VRII and you're welcome to try that as well.

If your interest is solely on optical perfection,the 400mm 2.8 is extremely heavy and ridiculously sharp. At 2.8 it's as sharp or sharper than anything else available, at F4 it is simply unbelievable.



ELinder
Registered: Feb 14, 2010
Total Posts: 1071
Country: United States

While I love my Nikon 200-400 for sports on the D4s, for anything else I'd get the Canon version as long as you also have Canon bodies. From everything I've seen it's much sharper and having a built in 1.4x converter would probably be real useful in the bush. For some reason the few times I've had the 200-400 on the D810 I was less than satisfied. It's not bad, but I expected better.

Erich



JWilsonphoto
Registered: Jan 16, 2002
Total Posts: 19275
Country: United States

Thank you Guys! Your offers and expertise are much appreciated.



JWilsonphoto
Registered: Jan 16, 2002
Total Posts: 19275
Country: United States

Turns out that a couple of my projects here are not quite ready for prime time so they've been added to the list for my next trip. Beginning to Photoshop all the captures from this week and the timing is excellent as thunder rolls and lightning cracks over the tall pines out my hotel window. Man, the weather timing has just been incredible on this trip and I am grateful.

Glenn and I were texting back and forth last evening as the sky began it's beautiful display. There was a broken ribbon of strata and small cu at about 2,000' that stretched for 30 or 40 miles, it would have been perfect for air to air. Florida has the best skies for air to air work, constantly morphing, beautiful colors and backdrops, it is simply a matter of picking which gorgeous formation one wants as the canvas for the subject. So hot and dry in North Texas, I haven't seen a pound for a month.



Go4Long
Registered: Sep 04, 2005
Total Posts: 2013
Country: Canada



ELinder wrote:
While I love my Nikon 200-400 for sports on the D4s, for anything else I'd get the Canon version as long as you also have Canon bodies. From everything I've seen it's much sharper and having a built in 1.4x converter would probably be real useful in the bush. For some reason the few times I've had the 200-400 on the D810 I was less than satisfied. It's not bad, but I expected better.

Erich


Is yours the VRII? I had a similar experience with the VRI, but the II is much improved.

If I was building a kit from scratch and travel restrictions and budget was a non issue I'd probably go 300 2.8 400 2.8 and either a 500 or 600. If travel restrictions are a consideration take out the two shorter primes and go with the 200-400



JWilsonphoto
Registered: Jan 16, 2002
Total Posts: 19275
Country: United States

Thanks Steven! No budgetary restrictions and travel will be on private livery............what's not to like about any of that?!



Go4Long
Registered: Sep 04, 2005
Total Posts: 2013
Country: Canada

Then yes, while the 200-400 is quite good, the 300mm and 400mm Nikon primes are really in a class of their own.

And as all of us photographers know...it's hard to beat free.



JWilsonphoto
Registered: Jan 16, 2002
Total Posts: 19275
Country: United States

I'd rather not lug two systems if I don't have to. Absent the 5DS blowing me away, I think the Nikon primes and a couple of additional D810 bodies to eliminate frequent lens changes would be the way I would lean. My mind these days runs to 4K video and I guess I could bring the Sony PXW-X70 for that. A gentleman on one of the cinema forums where I have become a regular made an interesting post the other day. He had an opportunity to view his video creation (captured on the X-70) in a theatre on a 15' tall screen. He anticipated less than startling results, but to his surprise his 4K film was, in his words, spectacular. That little camera is really quite amazing given it's size and cost. The 4K upgrade last month boosted my investment by another $399 but to have that camera as a back up, and sometimes a primary along with the FS/7 is really wonderful. At least some of my forays into video equipment aren't requiring a do over

Sachtler, long time maker of video supports and heads, is sending me a new set of carbon fiber "sticks" with a head they recommend for the FS/7 and F-55 cameras. They apparently have a great demo program, all on their own nickel, where they send out gear for videographers to use for a couple of weeks just to make sure it's what you need. Should have listened to Jay and Rob's advice early in the game, but I looked at those and winced at six to 10 grand for a tripod head combo and here I am. Oh well, ya don't know what ya don't know sometimes.



rkelley
Registered: Jun 21, 2009
Total Posts: 554
Country: Canada







Jan-Arie
Registered: Dec 24, 2005
Total Posts: 4097
Country: Netherlands

No Budget let's kick the piggy bank and go for it...



ELinder
Registered: Feb 14, 2010
Total Posts: 1071
Country: United States

Go4Long wrote:


ELinder wrote:
While I love my Nikon 200-400 for sports on the D4s, for anything else I'd get the Canon version as long as you also have Canon bodies. From everything I've seen it's much sharper and having a built in 1.4x converter would probably be real useful in the bush. For some reason the few times I've had the 200-400 on the D810 I was less than satisfied. It's not bad, but I expected better.

Erich


Is yours the VRII? I had a similar experience with the VRI, but the II is much improved.

If I was building a kit from scratch and travel restrictions and budget was a non issue I'd probably go 300 2.8 400 2.8 and either a 500 or 600. If travel restrictions are a consideration take out the two shorter primes and go with the 200-400



It's the current VR2 version. I really should try it out again and fine tune the focus with it on the 810. It could be I was seeing the tolerance difference between the 16MB on the D4s and the 36MB on the 810. Just bought a Sidekick, so it's the the perfect opportunity to try it out.

Erich



ELinder
Registered: Feb 14, 2010
Total Posts: 1071
Country: United States

At medium distances, the lens is certainly no slouch!

Erich



rkelley
Registered: Jun 21, 2009
Total Posts: 554
Country: Canada







1       2       3              4215      
4216
       4217              4533       4534       end