Jump to content

GeorgeH

Member
  • Content Count

    25
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About GeorgeH

  • Rank
    Clownfish

Additional Info

  • Show Country Flag:
    United States
  1. Has anyone tried? dpreview mentions a few subtle body changes in their D4s preview, including a slightly deeper grip, AF-ON button easier to press and AF point selector made of plastic instead of rubber. Hopefully those changes will not require much if any change in current D4 housings in order to accommodate the D4s. Thanks.
  2. I shot the D4s for the first time yesterday while covering a Major League Soccer game and was grinning ear to ear as I edited my images. The files are gorgeous, the AF is amazing, and I haven't even tested the high ISO improvements others are reporting. I still have my D3s for underwater and it is still a great body but it would be more convenient to standardize at some point, at least until the new body is introduced in a couple years. I could care less what the pixel peeper testers are reporting; my first experience matched what I was hearing from the sports shooters I know of and respect and the improvements are not subtle. I don't know if I will seriously consider a housing upgrade but was hoping to get a sense of how dramatic a redesign of the D4 housings will be required in order to accommodate the D4s.
  3. Any Nikon shooters that use Nikon Capture NX 2 care to comment on the practical benefits of the two recent updates referenced below? I would be especially interested in dealing with images taken with a Full Frame body and the 14-24 zoom. Thanks. Capture NX 2.4.4 •An Automatic (Underwater) option has been added to the Auto Distortion pull-down menu under Camera & Lens Corrections in the Adjust section of the Edit List. However, the Automatic (Underwater) option is only displayed when all of the following conditions are met: ◦The image was captured with an advanced camera with interchangeable lenses that supports underwater automatic distortion control, and a lens that also supports the function. ◦The image was captured in RAW format or in JPEG format with the camera's Auto distortion control function disabled. Distortion control data New firmware - (L) Version 1.009 [supported cameras] D4 / D90 / D600 / D800 / D800E /D3100 / D3200 / D5000 / D5100 / D5200 / D7000 / D7100 Distortion control data are used to correct barrel and pincushion distortion during shooting and editing. They can be loaded into cameras that support distortion control.
  4. If the goal is purity of in camera capture, why not shoot full frame and not use DX crop as an "advantage" over those not using it? As the original thread title states; I don't get it.
  5. By definition it is cropping. Nikon calls one of the crop aspect ratios “DX crop” for example. If you select one of the crop modes prior to capturing an image you are making a decision to crop a portion of the full frame sized sensor. If my intention was to frame loose and/or gain a greater working distance, I would choose to shoot full frame and crop in post rather than crop in camera for the reasons I mentioned in my original post. In my opinion, a shooter using this crop mode to meet requirements of a competition is not showcasing superior skill while meeting the requirements. The photographer is simply choosing a different approach or gaming the rules to achieve a perceived advantage. Not that I care to enter such a competition and have no dog in the fight. The only reason I would choose DX or other aspect ratio crop options is to increase shutter speed while shooting down field sports where I always need to crop anyway before submitting images for publication or I need card space and a similar fast action scenario where I will need to crop. I shoot a D3S UW and D4s for sports and neither shutter speed or card space is ever an issue so I never use DX crop.
  6. I have little interest in photo contests but even if I did, don’t know where I would choose to crop in camera. I am all for getting it right in camera since I prefer to limit processing time and with strobes it shouldn't require much anyway. I read the justification that cropping in camera demonstrates superior skill. Why? If your objective is to fill the frame, use the entire FF sensor. Cropping in camera suggests you plan to have a greater working distance and choose to discard the outside area of your sensor. Cropping in post does the same thing. How about diopters and filters? Are they acceptable but you should prohibit adjusting white balance and making lens corrections in post? Removing distracting items in the frame and artificially influencing sea life behavior clearly questions integrity and skill but choosing to crop in frame vs. in post? If you plan your dive with a subject in mind, take the setup suited to accomplish the task and set up your shot to fill the full frame. If you get the added benefit of a brighter viewfinder, less water between the lens and subject, and more light control, why crop in camera? Shooting ambient light might give you the faster shutter speed mentioned with the D800 but are of little value when using strobes. If you want to fill the frame why not move closer or bring a longer lens? If shooting unpredictable subjects that are likely to move out of the frame faster than you can track them, appropriate technique and skill would suggest you frame a little looser. I have no problem if a specific contest has rules prohibiting cropping in post. Should cropping in camera be prohibited as well? I don’t agree it is the preferred technique that demonstrates superior skill of the photographer using a setup that allows them to frame tight while using the full frame vs. the photographer that wants greater working distance and crops in camera. Granted cropping in post allows for more control for framing conventions like rule of 3rds and straight horizons and I'll give skill kudos to the photographer that can nail that in camera but that holds true for FF images and images cropped in camera. The main image is the same size and the lighting and depth of field are captured the same on the sensor whether you crop in camera or in post given the same equipment configuration and distance to subject.
  7. Just returned from taking the 105 f2.8D out for some night Lumpy hunting and while it is much harder to find the subject and lock focus, it gives me the background and Bokeh I was looking for. This required almost no editing. Depending on what I'm trying to shoot, I won't hesitate to take the 105 D. Thanks for the replies.
  8. Anyone care to share experiences with the Nikkor AF Micro 105/2.8 D on a full frame body? I have used the 60mm AFS Nikkor and it focuses very fast and is reasonably easy to use but I am disappointed in the background or Bokeh in some images from the two times I have used it. I’ve only had the housing in the water a few times as I am a relatively new diver having just passed 50 dives. I assume the AFS VR version has improved focus speed but the D version is the one I own and the optical quality is very close. My concern is during topside use, the AF 105 f2.8D has a tendency to hunt and it can be a slow process while the lens moves the focus from one extreme to the other and back again before finally locking on at times. By then a skittish creature would be long gone. With a good focus light, even in the dark green waters of Puget Sound, I am hoping it will be up to the task. I can see times and subjects I would want the option of the shallower depth of field I would get with the 105 D and the additional working distance. Thank you.George
  9. Over a year later and sorry, but I wasn’t prepared to wait 200 dives before attempting underwater photography. I did plan from the start though to develop reasonable buoyancy control and planning before adding the additional task loading of UW photography. I took my 50th dive Saturday, November 17th, and took my D3S underwater with me for the event. I’ve taken it with me on a two recent dives but ran into an issue where the Live View button was pressed as soon as I reached 10 feet or so, leaving me without access to the LCD. Saturday I moved the Live view lever up and away from the guide and for the first time had some feedback after taking shots. Not that I made any changes; I was content for this dive just to get the feel of the housing and know I was capturing something. Now I can begin the journey of understanding strobe positioning and power combined with appropriate SS and aperture settings based on lens and port configuration. Plus I need to work on how to do that reverse frog kick. Buoyancy control is definitely more of a challenge while attempting to set up a shot with a large housing and a couple strobes. I was beginning to feel good about my rapidly improving SAC rate that increased significantly on my Saturday dive with a camera. I assume that will drop as I get more comfortable. It has been a long process testing my patience. A lot has happened. Of course the D4 was released, which I now use for my sports photography, but the D3S is still a fine camera and it is nice to have a third body on the sidelines at times anyway. Here is the token first shot of a tiny squid that was not happy to see me. Obviously the hot spot and shadow tell me my strobe positioning was not ideal but it is a start. What a blast I had. The dive was too short and my constant grin was making my mask leak. I can't wait to start working on becoming an UW photographer.
  10. My images from this shoot shows 1/8000ss in the exif data. Could this be a software bug or did I miss something in my settings? With an incorrect flash bulkhead, I needed to improvise and shoot ambient light. The housing does need some corrections for identified issues; AF/ON control didn't work and the flash bulkhead was Nikonos, not the requested Ikelite. Could the housing be forcing the shutter speed as well? I decided to shoot aperture priority with a 60mm macro, selected auto ISO, max 6400, f8, min 200ss. The exif data reads 1/8000ss for all the images. That can't be right. Why might the exif be incorrect? Thanks.
  11. I am in St. Thomas as I type this and am just checking in so thanks to all for responding. Some great advice here. Love the cell phone analogy. I ended up taking the 60mm macro and packed a pair of Ikelite strobes that I hadn’t tested because I couldn’t connect the sync cord to the bulkhead at the pool but didn’t try that long since it was crowded and would have been a nuisance in the pool anyway. Having never seen either, I came to the realization after awhile my housing shipped with a Nikonos instead of an Ikelite bulkhead so I shot natural light. Since this is my Wife’s vacation and not a dive vacation, I only scheduled one dive. I went with a divemaster, just the two of us, on a shore dive in fairly shallow water. The housing felt pretty negatively buoyant so I attached a single arm segment on each handle and slipped a few small sections of a noodle from the pool to them and that helped lighten the load and balance the housing very nicely. The diving part was so much simpler in the warmer water in a 3mm vs. a drysuit with heavy undergarments. I am hooked like I knew I would be. I am getting the bulkhead corrected and looking forward to adding flash, even more necessary in dark Puget Sound water. Thanks again to all. I plan on progressing slowly and will get some more dives and training in before I attempt too much with a camera but I was very pleased with my ability to handle the housing. I don’t have much to edit with while I’m here so can’t be sure how they turned out but here is a token example of my first UW outing.
  12. Valid points and I predicted this response but was also hoping to get a reply to my question. Buoyancy skills are what I have been working on for the last 7 months and I feel I'm getting to that point but will ask someone to observe and confirm in St. Thomas before I proceed. I have made the choice not to take my camera underwater so far while I have been working on the skills you mention. Not that I feel obligated to justify on a forum but I do have respect for the ocean, coral and my personal safety. My current diving is cold water with a drysuit. I can manage horizontal descents and keep my fins off the bottom. Pool sessions have been no problem with the housing. On a dive Sunday I descended and was hovering about 4 feet off the bottom while my dive buddy crashed feet first into the sea floor, fumbled about a bit on his knees, and proceeded to start kicking, feet down, leaving a large cloud all around us. I don't plan on being that guy and am objective enough to forego the photography if I am not able to handle the housing as well as I did in pool sessions. Thanks for your concern and I have followed that advice for over half a year and I am clear headed enough to know not to continue if my buoyancy control is the least bit questionable. I'll just hand the body off and enjoy the dive, practice for a few more months, and try it again later.
  13. I'm a new diver with an Aquatica housing for my Nikon D3S that I have been admiring in my office while I develop the skills to finally take it in the water. I'm thrilled to have added a D4 to my kit and would have waited to get a D4 housing if I knew my diving skills would take as long to develop but I am keeping a D3S and it is no slouch. I'm heading out to St. Thomas and am considering taking my D3S underwater since I have a dive master there I know and trust to take me on some conservative dives. If I only want to take one configuration, what should I take? 15mm fisheye or 60mm micro are what I am considering but I also have a 105 and the 14-24. I don't plan on attempting anything challenging and just want to get a feel for managing the body in the water so results aren't all that critical. I'm thinking the micro so I don't have to pack the big dome but if St. Thomas is more suited to wide angle images, I can go that way. Thank you.
  14. Thanks Ben. I got push back when I suggested the backdrop idea but after looking at their Santa pictures from past years I think I'll see if I can persuade them. My wife, who I never imagined attempting scuba, offered to try the discover scuba and that floored me. Now I have a dilemma; blow off shooting the Eagles Seahawks game or play in a pool?
  15. Assuming I have a way to rinse the kit off, I like the idea of an empty soft cooler just to set a dripping housing in while adding some protection against those bounces. If I didn't have anything to rinse with first, the sealed cooler would keep the housing and strobes from drying off as fast and since I live very close to Puget Sound, allow me to get home to do a proper job before the salt dries.
×
×
  • Create New...