Foggy14 wrote:

Here's a b&w conversion, taken with the 28mm 2.8, from one of my favorite local trails.


Awesome capture and conversion. I would normally just pass this up as bad lighting, but very well done!

These are older, and from my now gone, and beloved, Nikkor 28mm f/2.8 AIS, and hand held Nikon D700. those were, and are my faves, despite the lack of skill, composition, or creativity!


_DSC5582 by aNikkorGuy, on Flickr


_DSC5598 by aNikkorGuy, on Flickr



_DSC5592 by aNikkorGuy, on Flickr

MDoc9523 wrote:
Reagan wrote:
I bet Ray has already pre-ordered

Reagan
Not yet but I told melody I was going to sell my camera and buy the new one she said "oh my God I am living with Reagan " So the legend lives on

James Markus wrote:
Reversed Nikkor 20mm ais

The 28 2.8 ais does offer nice contrast, sharpness, and bokeh. A couple from a friends model railroad. One taken at f16 and the other at f2.8. Thanks for looking.
Scott

MDoc9523 wrote:
Chuong, On the D7100 a 300 mm lens would give the same Field Of View as a 450mm lens would on a D600.
If you employ the 1.3 extra crop value on the D7100 the 300mm would have the equivalent FOV of a 600mm lens However the MP would be reduced to 15.2 MP instead of 24 MP. You are correct that you could crop this after in post but with the D7100 you can see what you are getting in the camera. Clear as mud?
If you crop the image of the D600 to equal the 450mm FOV of the D7100 The IQ would theoretically be better on the D7100 because you would be cropping away many MP's of information from the 24 MP D600
I usually end up cropping most of my images so I prefer the extra reach of the D7100

Very interesting conversations the past couple of days. Battling to see now since the other eye also affected but at least they're only blurry.

This whole FX vs DX debate is also interesting but a bit of a red herring if one is a wildlife photographer since the magnification factor with the same lens is identical. The crop factor gives the impression that there is higher magnification but when the FX is cropped to DX size the area occupied by the subject taken from the same distance with the same lens is excatly the same. DX comes into it's own in this field since the user sees much more of the subject and if using MF is able to focus better.

The difference is what is seen through the viewfinder. Where FX scores over DX is at the wide end eince the larger sensor permits more information to be captured and allows for wider images straight out of the camera.

However, given unlimited funds a D800 + a 600mm f4 will probably give better results than a D7000 + a 400mm f5.6 but when one looks at Jose's images it is a very moot point. With my available funds it isn't even an option since the D800 body is over $3000 while the D7000 body is about $1100. Despite the fact that the D7100 is advertised at the same price as the D7000 in the US in SA the prelaunch price is $400 higher!!

Now the question is - do I visit my kids later this year or just buy a new camera?

Oosty wrote:
MDoc9523 wrote:
Chuong, On the D7100 a 300 mm lens would give the same Field Of View as a 450mm lens would on a D600.
If you employ the 1.3 extra crop value on the D7100 the 300mm would have the equivalent FOV of a 600mm lens However the MP would be reduced to 15.2 MP instead of 24 MP. You are correct that you could crop this after in post but with the D7100 you can see what you are getting in the camera. Clear as mud?
If you crop the image of the D600 to equal the 450mm FOV of the D7100 The IQ would theoretically be better on the D7100 because you would be cropping away many MP's of information from the 24 MP D600
I usually end up cropping most of my images so I prefer the extra reach of the D7100

Very interesting conversations the past couple of days. Battling to see now since the other eye also affected but at least they're only blurry.

This whole FX vs DX debate is also interesting but a bit of a red herring if one is a wildlife photographer since the magnification factor with the same lens is identical. The crop factor gives the impression that there is higher magnification but when the FX is cropped to DX size the area occupied by the subject taken from the same distance with the same lens is excatly the same. DX comes into it's own in this field since the user sees much more of the subject and if using MF is able to focus better.

The difference is what is seen through the viewfinder. Where FX scores over DX is at the wide end eince the larger sensor permits more information to be captured and allows for wider images straight out of the camera.

However, given unlimited funds a D800 + a 600mm f4 will probably give better results than a D7000 + a 400mm f5.6 but when one looks at Jose's images it is a very moot point. With my available funds it isn't even an option since the D800 body is over $3000 while the D7000 body is about $1100. Despite the fact that the D7100 is advertised at the same price as the D7000 in the US in SA the prelaunch price is $400 higher!!

Now the question is - do I visit my kids later this year or just buy a new camera?

Hi Peter,

Thanks for the update on the eyes. I am watching as I really do seem to be 1 day behind you so it's nice to see what I have to look forward to (or not look as the case may be).

It would be nice to have unlimited funds for sure, but for you if I remember you have a daughter over here in Switzerland? If you bought the camera here you would save over $350 on the list price in SA. (Approx 11,500 rand instead of 14,700 at today's exchange rate). Also if you do come to Switzerland and to the North part of the country if you want you are welcome to drop me a line and meet up.

Anyway, there will always be the D7200 in a couple of years time, or the D900 with 80MP or Canon will re-introduce their old mount system and we'll be rushing out to buy up as much cheap old Canon MF glass as possible.

Slightly off topic, but especially for John and anyone else who does panorama shots:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p015d4ks

nikkor 28mm 2.8 ais,nikon d700.



_DSC9608 by aNikkorGuy, on Flickr


_DSC9604 by aNikkorGuy, on Flickr


_DSC9684 by aNikkorGuy, on Flickr

Thanks for all the kind words on the Doors series.

Some really great flower shots on the last few pages Ray, Chuong and Americo.

Lovely macro shot James, welcome to the club of the ill and injured at the moment, hope the knee is better quickly.

Great shot Scott
Great shot on the ladybug


Nikkor 50 1.8 Ai

Nikkor 50 1.8 Ai by Ronny Olsson, on Flickr

MDoc9523 wrote:
Reagan wrote:
I bet Ray has already pre-ordered

Reagan
Not yet but I told melody I was going to sell my camera and buy the new one she said "oh my God I am living with Reagan " So the legend lives on

James Markus wrote:
Reversed Nikkor 20mm ais

James Markus wrote:
Thanks Ray and Kevin. It is an Anti-Static Duster. I've had a bad knee/leg the last 6 weeks...so, I have been sticking with what is at hand.

kwoodard wrote:
That is what makes macro so fun. Common place items, from a unique perspective, makes for interesting work. Might try and do some this weekend.

Granted, it will have to take a back seat to a more interesting development. The college I work at may be publishing some of the shots I have taken around campus in a school publication. It will be handed out to all the faculty and staff as well as parents who come in to learn about the school. I wish I could watermark the images in some way, but I can't... I hope to at least get a photo credit in the publication.


Congrats Kevin, always fun to have your work published. I hope they're compensating you.

mp356 wrote:
The 28 2.8 ais does offer nice contrast, sharpness, and bokeh. A couple from a friends model railroad. One taken at f16 and the other at f2.8. Thanks for looking.
Scott


I like both of these Scott. The first one looks like it could be around here especially since it's the Norfolk and Western.

How close were to the engine in the second one?

leighton w wrote:
James Markus wrote:
Thanks Ray and Kevin. It is an Anti-Static Duster. I've had a bad knee/leg the last 6 weeks...so, I have been sticking with what is at hand.

kwoodard wrote:
That is what makes macro so fun. Common place items, from a unique perspective, makes for interesting work. Might try and do some this weekend.

Granted, it will have to take a back seat to a more interesting development. The college I work at may be publishing some of the shots I have taken around campus in a school publication. It will be handed out to all the faculty and staff as well as parents who come in to learn about the school. I wish I could watermark the images in some way, but I can't... I hope to at least get a photo credit in the publication.


Congrats Kevin, always fun to have your work published. I hope they're compensating you.

I doubt there will be any compensation, I hope for credit... What I would like is to go from a temporary worker to staff. That would open a lot more doors for me.

Couple of images from yet another day of cold wet rainy weather in Maryland. The second one though reveals the promise of spring. Lots of lichen on trees this year.

Both with the 400 5.6 AIS, f8, first one at I think 1/60s and the other one at 1/125s. That's about all the light I can get this morning with 1000 ISO

Samy

A bit of a break to back up a few pages and look at posts and images.

Mark, very nice set of doors (and some windows). Hope you and Peter get past the pink eye quick.

Ray, your pet eagle's just matched for your 300 4.5! Superb again.

Jeff, Broken Hill Trail b&w is wonderful. Very nicely seen, captured and processed.

Chuong, the backlit flower against the black background is terrific.

Chin, very nice image of your dog and great treatment of the background with the 50 1.2 AIS.

James, what a macro with the reversed 20!

Scott, cool work with the model train set. I really like your second wide open shot.

Americo, nice image of the ladybug against the really pleasant background.

Ronny, quite a Zeiss collection there!

I was going to say this thread is slowing down with a few of the regulars taking a hiatus. But that's quite a few photos just in the last 4 pages!

Raindrops and bokeh.

A bit more light at f/2.8. This is the 105 1.8 AIS.

And a black and white version of raindrops and bokeh..