PDA

View Full Version : Nikon D700 Shots



JTL
08-14-2008, 08:39 AM
Well, I guess I'll get things started...

I certainly hope this thread isn't lonely for too long. When some of you decide to give yourself over to the D700, you too will know the true power of the dark side...you know, like shooting lightning bolts from your fingertips and such! :D

All taken with the Tammy 28-300 VC. All pics sharpened at 50 in NX2

Who needs HDR image combos when you have active D-Lighting combined with the increased dynamic range of a FF sensor? The force is strong with this camera...
http://jtl.smugmug.com/photos/351685089_oTBCx-L.jpg

http://jtl.smugmug.com/photos/351686232_QEPFP-L.jpg

Do you think Lizzie went sushi cold stone goth? :D
http://jtl.smugmug.com/photos/351682735_nHhFv-L.jpg

http://jtl.smugmug.com/photos/351683950_GYBw9-L.jpg

http://jtl.smugmug.com/photos/351683315_pEteX-L.jpg

swpars
08-14-2008, 12:58 PM
Good lord! That second shot is stunning!

The saturation is just killer.

JTL
08-14-2008, 02:14 PM
Good lord! That second shot is stunning!

The saturation is just killer.Thanks Sam! BTW, Those were all shot on the "Vivid" custom setting. Whenever I get home, I'll post the EXIF info.

And remember, those are with the not-so-great Tammy!

Here's a fun outing...take a CF card to a camera store, put it in a D700 and shoot a little. Go home and check out the shots. You will be saving up for one from that moment on. :D:D:D

I think the old arguments about the body not being that important are not true anymore when it comes to the D300, D700 and D3...the body DOES matter as much as the glass. At least to me it does! :D;):)

achuang
08-14-2008, 07:08 PM
Stop tempting me JTL. I was in a camera store yesterday asking about something else while they were looking it up I walked over to the DSLR cabinet and saw the D700, SB900. And now this. I was a little surprised to see how much larger the pentaprism was compared to the size of the D300, then I remembered the whole thing has to be bigger for the full frame sensor. I'd love to have a D700, but don't have the money. Great shots, and very nice DR. #1 and 2 are my favourites. I see the VC works in the last 2 shots.

JTL
08-14-2008, 10:08 PM
Stop tempting me JTL. I was in a camera store yesterday asking about something else while they were looking it up I walked over to the DSLR cabinet and saw the D700, SB900. And now this. I was a little surprised to see how much larger the pentaprism was compared to the size of the D300, then I remembered the whole thing has to be bigger for the full frame sensor. I'd love to have a D700, but don't have the money. Great shots, and very nice DR. #1 and 2 are my favourites. I see the VC works in the last 2 shots.LOL! Listen, if I had the means, I would contribute to a "D700 Fund". :D I do believe you're due for an upgrade, my friend...even though you do some pretty amazing stuff with your D70s. ;)

And, thank you for the compliments! :)

VC on the Tammy does indeed work. A very suspiring lens. There was someone over on the Canon Forum (Maybe TenD?) who said the Tammy 28-300 VC was soft on a Canon. But, while it's certainly not up to pro specs, on the D700, it is a fine performer...I have zero complaints about it. Even the supposed zoom creep that I read about every 5 minutes has not been an issue.

Turn
08-14-2008, 10:48 PM
I am impressed

very sharp, colours look fantastic and exposure is spot on, good composition and 100% crops look fantastic

JTL
08-14-2008, 11:24 PM
I am impressed

very sharp, colours look fantastic and exposure is spot on, good composition and 100% crops look fantasticThank you, sir!

Did you think the close-ups were 100% crops? They're not! Those are the same subjects shot at 300mm. This lens is pretty good even at 300mm at night...nothing to complain about...and you know how I love to complain! :D

Alright, I do have one big complaint about the Tammy...it does distort very badly...and at almost every focal length...you can really see it in the first shot...

achuang
08-15-2008, 01:44 AM
LOL! Listen, if I had the means, I would contribute to a "D700 Fund". :D I do believe you're due for an upgrade, my friend...even though you do some pretty amazing stuff with your D70s. ;)

And, thank you for the compliments! :)

VC on the Tammy does indeed work. A very suspiring lens. There was someone over on the Canon Forum (Maybe TenD?) who said the Tammy 28-300 VC was soft on a Canon. But, while it's certainly not up to pro specs, on the D700, it is a fine performer...I have zero complaints about it. Even the supposed zoom creep that I read about every 5 minutes has not been an issue.

LOL, thanks JTL that'd be nice :p 3 years with the D70s and it's still going strong. Megapixels don't concern me whatsoever. I wish I had the D700 purely because of the high ISO performance, fast AF and increased DR. Thanks for the compliments.

How's the AF speed on the Tammy? I'd guess even not being an AFS equivalent it'd be pretty quick on that body.

JTL
08-15-2008, 01:54 AM
LOL, thanks JTL that'd be nice :p 3 years with the D70s and it's still going strong. Megapixels don't concern me whatsoever. I wish I had the D700 purely because of the high ISO performance, fast AF and increased DR. Thanks for the compliments.

How's the AF speed on the Tammy? I'd guess even not being an AFS equivalent it'd be pretty quick on that body.No problems with the AF...quick and accurate...those night shots were no problem at all...but I think a lot has to do with the D700's AF and metering...it's just so far superior to any other camera I've tried (never tried a D3)....

eddie_dane
08-15-2008, 10:45 AM
nice shots JTL, you have inspired me. I just got through shooting an event with my D200 and D50 in an indoor coliseum in low light and I am convinced now to get the D700.

lukeap69
08-15-2008, 12:51 PM
JTL

1st and 2nd shots are amazing. You must be very proud of your new toy. The force is really strong.

Luke (Canon Shooter)

JTL
08-15-2008, 03:05 PM
nice shots JTL, you have inspired me. I just got through shooting an event with my D200 and D50 in an indoor coliseum in low light and I am convinced now to get the D700Thank you, Eddie! This thing is a low-light monster. Now I'm really starting to wonder what it would do with some 2.8 or better lenses...yikes...I'll be broke...but happy! :D


JTL

1st and 2nd shots are amazing. You must be very proud of your new toy. The force is really strong.

Luke (Canon Shooter)Thank you, Luke! It's not so much a matter of pride...but a matter of finally feeling comfortable with a digital SLR...and having a creative tool that does everything that I want and need it to do. ;)

lukeap69
08-15-2008, 11:38 PM
Nicely said.

I think that is one of the important aspect of choosing gear is to be comfortable with it.

Congratulations!

eddie_dane
08-16-2008, 03:14 PM
Thank you, Eddie! This thing is a low-light monster. Now I'm really starting to wonder what it would do with some 2.8 or better lenses...yikes...I'll be broke...but happy! :D

Yes! I'm currently using a Tamron 28-75mm 2.8, Sigma 70-200 2.8, Nikkor 35-70 2.8 and a 50mm 1.8 (although the 50mm rarely gets used in my work as much as I wish it could). All of which, I am itching to get strapped to something that can shoot those ISO's.

JTL
08-20-2008, 09:39 PM
What? No one else has got a D700 yet? I'm waiting to see other's shots! Well, in the meantime, here's a couple more. Nothing exciting...but, next weekend hopefully I'll really show everyone what this thing can do...

Once again, all shot with the Tammy 28-300 VC...ain't nothin' wrong with it for general everyday shooting. Reasonably sharp, great color and contrast. If it weren't for the distortions, it would be a darn near perfect walk-around lens...

Yikes! It's The Flower From Another World!

http://jtl.smugmug.com/photos/355987477_hyHjY-L-0.jpg

Make = NIKON CORPORATION
Model = NIKON D700
Software = Capture NX 2.0.0 W
Date Time = 2008-08-20 23:01:06
Exposure Time = 1/60"
F Number = F8
Exposure Program = Normal program
ISO Speed Ratings = 1600
Metering Mode = Pattern
Light Source = Flash
Flash = Flash fired, compulsory flash mode, return light detected
Focal Length = 300mm
Color Space = sRGB
Quality = RAW


Step into the frame..., pick a flower...and...welcome to ISO 3200 without compromise...

http://jtl.smugmug.com/photos/355957184_mjGrY-L.jpg

Make = NIKON CORPORATION
Model = NIKON D700
Software = Capture NX 2.0.0 W
Date Time = 2008-08-20 23:01:06
Exposure Time = 1/60"
F Number = F10
Exposure Program = Normal program
ISO Speed Ratings = 3200
Metering Mode = Pattern
Light Source = Flash
Flash = Flash fired, compulsory flash mode, return light detected
Focal Length = 200mm
Color Space = sRGB
Quality = RAW


Manly Mushrooms...

http://jtl.smugmug.com/photos/355958212_rSsyE-L.jpg

Make = NIKON CORPORATION
Model = NIKON D700
Software = Capture NX 2.0.0 W
Date Time = 2008-08-20 20:56:45
Exposure Time = 1/60"
F Number = F8
Exposure Program = Normal program
ISO Speed Ratings = 1600
Metering Mode = Pattern
Light Source = Flash
Flash = Flash fired, compulsory flash mode, return light detected
Focal Length = 300mm
Color Space = sRGB
Quality = RAW

Rooz
08-20-2008, 11:18 PM
iso3200...lmfao
you showoff bastard !!

JTL
08-20-2008, 11:38 PM
iso3200...lmfao
you showoff bastard !!Just you wait until I get a real lens! Then I'll really show you! :D

swpars
08-21-2008, 09:27 AM
JTL, out of curiosity, what is your lens roadmap with the D700?

Are you going for a 14-24/2.8 to go wide?

Possibly a 105/2.8 VR Micro-Nikkor for macro?

JTL
08-21-2008, 11:09 AM
JTL, out of curiosity, what is your lens roadmap with the D700?

Are you going for a 14-24/2.8 to go wide?

Possibly a 105/2.8 VR Micro-Nikkor for macro?Hey Sam! You're a mind reader! :D

14-24: Yep
105 Micro: Yep
24-70 2.8: Sitting on the fence. If they come out with an AF-S 24-120 (or 70 or 105) f/4 VR by PMA, that's what I really want, so I'll wait and see. But if PMA comes and goes and no new f/4 zoom, then the 24-70 2.8 goes in the bag.

I would also like to see an AF-S 70-200 f/4 VR

I'm also curious about the 80-400 but haven't shot one...don't know how hard they are to find for rental to test it out, but will start my research beginning of next year...

fionndruinne
08-21-2008, 01:59 PM
Just get a 50mm Nikkor... the pics will likely be so sharp some of our computer screens will shatter.

JTL
08-21-2008, 02:54 PM
Just get a 50mm Nikkor... the pics will likely be so sharp some of our computer screens will shatter.Good idea. I've been thinking about it...but not sure whether the 1.4 or the 1.8. I've shot the 1.8 before and liked it but I need to go play with a 1.4 before I make my mind up. But, I think I want to wait and see if they come out with an AF-S version of either first...

Edit: After doing some research and comparing images, I just ordered the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 HSM...low light here I come...

Actaeon
08-21-2008, 10:09 PM
Wonderful shots JTL.

I went ahead and picked up a D700 earlier today with the 28-300mm Tammy and the MB-D10 grip. Its so new, I am still working on charging some of my batteries right now.

I'm also quite broke, so no lenses for me for a little while. I am interested in picking up either the 85mm or 50mm 1.4 lenses, I haven't decided on which yet (any recommendations?)

I haven't had the chance to play with it too much, but it is absolutely an amazing camera from my quick running around. The build quality and fast response is amazing. I haven't had a photoshoot or anything worthy of taking pictures, so no pics to show yet :).

JTL
08-21-2008, 10:46 PM
Wonderful shots JTL.

I went ahead and picked up a D700 earlier today with the 28-300mm Tammy and the MB-D10 grip. Its so new, I am still working on charging some of my batteries right now.

I'm also quite broke, so no lenses for me for a little while. I am interested in picking up either the 85mm or 50mm 1.4 lenses, I haven't decided on which yet (any recommendations?)

I haven't had the chance to play with it too much, but it is absolutely an amazing camera from my quick running around. The build quality and fast response is amazing. I haven't had a photoshoot or anything worthy of taking pictures, so no pics to show yet :).Well, a big congrats! :) You are going to love it.

And, thank you for the compliment! :)

I'm doing my first real shoot with it this weekend (been playing up till now). The absolute best thing so far, and most fun, has been getting the camera setup exactly how I want it. Between what I've done and some of Rooz's tips (from the D300) I don't need to go to the menus for any shooting situation. This is an absolute revelation for me. Also, what people have overlooked because of getting so hung-up on the FF and the great high ISO capability is that this camera has the best metering system and best autofocus system I've ever seen (although the D3 is probably the same). Every shot is nailed (even with my crap lenses). It amazes me and makes me smile every time I snap the shutter.

As far as lenses go, depending on what you shoot, I don't think you can buy a better lens than the 85 f/1.4...especially for a FF camera. It's shockingly good...and IMO worth every penny. e_dawg has one so maybe he'll see this and comment, or you could PM him. As far as the 50mm goes, after looking at a bunch of sample images, I decided to go with the new Sigma 50mm f/1.4 HSM. Now, Nikon will probably announce a new 50mm AF-S next week just to mess with my head...:D:D:D

I would also put a SpeedLight on your list of future purchases. i-TTL and the whole CLS thing is great. The first time you shoot wirelessly with the flash off camera, you'll do a dance (I know I did!). Oh, and you should just bite the bullet and pick up Capture NX2...it really does the best job with the D700 NEFs and the new interface is pretty good. And, one more thing...pick up a DK-19 eye-cup...you'll thank me for it! ;)

BTW, did you sell your D40 and 18-200?

Well, I'm really looking forward to some of your shots. We can make this the official D700 thread.

Happy shooting! :)

fionndruinne
08-21-2008, 10:55 PM
Sounds like the Sigma is really the way to go, as long as you're not looking for a small old-fashioned minimalist prime. If it drops in price any time soon, I will be seriously tempted to go for it.

JTL
08-21-2008, 11:06 PM
Sounds like the Sigma is really the way to go, as long as you're not looking for a small old-fashioned minimalist prime. If it drops in price any time soon, I will be seriously tempted to go for it.Hey, you made me spend $500.00! :D:D:D. I wasn't thinking about a prime today until you mentioned it, and then I became obsessed! :D:D:D

Actaeon
08-22-2008, 06:59 PM
I did end up selling the D40 and 18-200 VR earlier this year (March-ish) to get some cash. I was in the middle of a move and cash was tight at the time. I've been aching for another camera. Deciding to go with cheap, I bought a Panasonic TZ5 as a camera. It does fantastic 720p video, and has a 10x optical zoom (I think it ends up being 35-350mm equivalent). That was fine for taking pictures of normal stuff, but I got bored and frustrated with the delays since I was spoiled by the D40 and the other DSLRs I've played with.

I previously played with a 5D, 30D, D300, D80, and D40. Based on that experience I was saving up for a D300 and another 18-200, but then the D700 was announced about a month ago. My main justification for upping up to the D700 was for the its very low-light High ISO capabilities. If the D300 had the same type of High ISO/Low Noise combo with the smaller sensor, I would have probably sprung for that instead. But the smaller sensor is not technically capable of doing it right now, so the D700 was my choice. I don't regret it one bit. Do you have a link to Rooz's tips? I'd like to see it.

Honestly, I don't do anything serious enough to warrant needing a Full Frame, but it sure was tempting! And you are 100% right on the focusing/metering. This thing blew the other SLRs I've played with out of the water. Absolutely amazing.

I haven't had the chance to shoot anything yet. I had accidentally purchased the non VC 28-300mm Tammy, so I ended up returning that, and no local stores have it the VC in stock. I am flying out on Sunday and needed a lens quick so I could use it, so I opted for the 50mm f/1.4 after seeing it was 1/3 the price of the 85mm. No zoom, but this thing is absolutely amazing with the D700 in low light.

In the office, 3200 ISO, F1.4, and its pretty dark in here (darker than any other office I've been in), and its taking pictures without any issues at all with pretty quick shutter speeds (1/320s, 1/400ths, etc).

How do you like that eye cup? I've never used one. Do you mind explaining why it would be beneficial? More comfortable?

On my To Buy List for now is...

Tamron 28-300mm 3.5 - 6.3VC
Speedlight SB-900

I'll also take a look at Capture NX2, is there a demo of that available? I currently use PS CS2 or CS3, depending on which computer I'm on.


Anyway, I'll run around later today or Saturday morning taking pictures of various flowers around the house, maybe of the cat. Expect to see lots of blur as the DOF is very very tiny on this 50mm 1.4 :).

Actaeon
08-22-2008, 08:54 PM
Got some pictures of the kitty cat.

Pictures were taken with a D700 and Nikkor 50mm f/1.4

ISO-1600
50mm
Terrible lighting in my apartment
No flash
These were just resized "low quality" JPGs. I took the NEF, but too lazy to convert for these.


http://www.actaeonlf.com/images/cat1.jpg
1/100s

http://www.actaeonlf.com/images/cat2.jpg
1/125s
http://www.actaeonlf.com/images/cat3.jpg
1/60s

JTL
08-22-2008, 09:08 PM
There's not a link to Rooz's tips...he's just been giving me advice along the way...all of it good (now, now, K1W1...be nice! :D:D:D).

Too bad about the Tammy...but, you did the right thing...the VC is indispensable.

As far as a NX2 demo version goes...my D700 came with a 30-day trial version in the box. FYI, the current version of Adobe Camera RAW doesn't fully support the D700 NEF files...and D3 conversions with ACR, which are currently supported, definitly do not look as good as those done with NX2. For me, if I'm going to go through the extra step of shooting RAW to get the best quality, then it makes little sense not to use the best NEF converter, IMO. ;)

And the eyecup...yes...100% more comfortable. It folds back for regular use but can also be flanged outward (like a cup) to cut out any stray light. Plus, it helps keep your nose off the LCD. For $20.00, it's the best photographic investment I've ever made. Below is a link to a shot of it in the open position (imagine it folded inward against the camera body to get an idea of what it looks like in the closed position).

http://www.nikonusa.com/Find-Your-Nikon/ProductDetail.page?pid=4787

I'll post some more shots on Sunday...I already know they'll be killer...:;):D:D:D;)

JTL
08-22-2008, 09:19 PM
Got some pictures of the kitty cat.
Hey! Kitty!

Man...now I really can't wait till my Sigma 50mm f/1.4 arrives! That is seriously smooth background blur!

O.K. Here's another secret weapon...this gadget allows you to bounce the on-board flash! It's cool, it's cheap, and it works (within reason)! Comes in "standard" and "warming"...might come in handy till the SB-900 arrives...

http://www.amazon.com/Professor-Lightscoop-Standard-Universal-Cameras/dp/B0017LNHY2/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1219461385&sr=8-1

Actaeon
08-22-2008, 09:46 PM
I am a bit sad about the Tammy as I was traveling shortly and I wanted something to shoot with that was flexible to use. But you are right, it was the right thing to do, and I didn't want to "waste" $400-ish on a lens that I don't want and won't be happy with.

I assume you like your Tammy 28-300 VC very much? I've read some favorable reviews online...

I'll take a look at the NX Capture and see how that works out and I'll look at the Eye Cup piece, its only $8 on Amazon from Adorama.

If the Sigma is as nice as the Nikkor, then you will love it. The background blur is amazing when focusing on one small spot, though it is difficult sometimes to get the whole object "in focus" with such a large aperture. This can be seen in the First Cat picture where his nose/paw is in focus, but everything else seems a little out of focus.

I do love this f/1.4, especially combined with the low-light capabilities of the FX sensor, you can take pictures in very dim settings and still have a reasonable shot. However, having a fixed focal length and pretty long minimum distance to focus is a bummer when its your only lens! 50mm on a FF is too short but not wide enough! On another note, it is difficult taking pictures of the cat when hes trying to crawl all over you and you can't get the camera to focus :).

My shots look a bit "dull" too, nothing really stands out. Maybe the apartment and setting is just too brown and gray? I'm sure the yellow bulb doesn't help either. Any ideas? I'm using the "Normal" color mode.

Oh well, I can't wait to see your shots from your Sunday shoot.

JTL
08-22-2008, 10:17 PM
Tammy is great...except it does have some bad distortions...especially at 28mm...but it's mostly correctable in post. As far as the camera settings go...I started with "Vivid" and then cranked the sharpness to the max and saved it as a custom setting. Haven't changed it since and don't think I will. Also, I have Active D-Lighting on and set to "High". I have been very, very happy with the way these settings are working...

Actaeon
08-23-2008, 04:36 PM
I took another indoor shot today. Thanks to your tips on Vivid and High D-Lighting, I'm a bit happier about how this stands out compares to the cat photos. I was using Standard and Auto D-Lighting before.

Since we're on the topic about settings, were you aware of the Portrait, Landscape, and D2x settings for the D700? I haven't tried them out yet (I just loaded them on about 30 minutes ago), but its a pretty neat feature I wasn't aware of.

For the pic.. environment was a kitchen counter using the kitchen lighting...

Body - Nikon D700
Lens - Nikkor 50mm f/1.4
ISO - 3600
Focal Length - 50mm
Shutter Speed - 1/15 second
Aperature - f/8
Color Setting - Vivid


Used a trial version of NX2 to play around with some of the exposure settings, but I didn't spend more than 2 or so minutes post processing. NX2 seems like a pretty neat tool! I will play around with it a little bit more before I decide to purchase or not. I then just resized it in Photoshop and uploaded it.

http://www.actaeonlf.com/images/colors2.jpg

Actaeon
08-23-2008, 08:21 PM
I was bored so I did a few more shots outside of the apartment. Took a walk around. The bench picture really shows how tiny the DOF really is on the 1.4.

http://www.actaeonlf.com/images/pics/DSC_0786.jpg



http://www.actaeonlf.com/images/pics/DSC_0810.jpg



http://www.actaeonlf.com/images/pics/DSC_0837.jpg


http://www.actaeonlf.com/images/pics/DSC_0843.jpg


http://www.actaeonlf.com/images/pics/DSC_0857.jpg

Turo
08-23-2008, 09:15 PM
Actaeon, will you trade cameras with me? Pleeeeeeease?

Visual Reality
08-24-2008, 10:07 AM
I'd love a D700...but the shallower DOF is bad for landscape and macro work which makes me hesitate to make the jump. I'd need a smaller aperture for a lot of shots which would require a higher ISO to compensate for the loss of light...I think I'll stick with APS-C for now. It may not be a real issue with the ISO ability the sensor has, but you also run into diffraction having to stop down too much for landscapes. In that case the crop sensor may actually let you produce better images.

fionndruinne
08-24-2008, 08:07 PM
Sigma claims their 50mm f/1.4 is designed to have creamier bokeh than the legacy fifties. It'd be interesting to see some comparison shots posted as to whether that's true.

erichlund
08-24-2008, 11:08 PM
I'd love a D700...but the shallower DOF is bad for landscape and macro work which makes me hesitate to make the jump. I'd need a smaller aperture for a lot of shots which would require a higher ISO to compensate for the loss of light...I think I'll stick with APS-C for now. It may not be a real issue with the ISO ability the sensor has, but you also run into diffraction having to stop down too much for landscapes. In that case the crop sensor may actually let you produce better images.

Landscape??? You get a wider angle from the same lens. So for instance, the 17-35 is really a super wide at 17 and a wide at 35, where on DX it's wide and normal, respectively. You get shallower depth of field (bonus when you need it), AND, you get diffraction limit back to something more normal like f16 or so. What's the D300, something like f11? And since the camera has the high ISO capabilities lacking on the smaller sensors, that doesn't even seem to be a limit. Besides, REAL landscape shooters use tripods and the best ISO for the camera (200 in the case of the D700).

JTL
08-24-2008, 11:37 PM
I'd love a D700...but the shallower DOF is bad for landscape...You must not shoot a lot of landscapes! FF is a landscapes shoooter's dream and where it comes into it's full potential...

JTL
08-24-2008, 11:38 PM
Sigma claims their 50mm f/1.4 is designed to have creamier bokeh than the legacy fifties. It'd be interesting to see some comparison shots posted as to whether that's true.I should have mine in a week or so. I'll post some shots and give you the unvarnished skinny...good or bad...

JTL
08-25-2008, 12:18 AM
A few more shots...

http://jtl.smugmug.com/photos/358562908_Tb4g7-L.jpg

http://jtl.smugmug.com/photos/358555992_JU2EX-L.jpg

http://jtl.smugmug.com/photos/358560388_j34gm-L.jpg

re.ac.tor
08-25-2008, 02:17 AM
Thanks for sharing those images JTL and Actaeon! The detail that the D700 produces is quite astounding!

Looking forward to more from this machine!

re.ac.tor

Visual Reality
08-25-2008, 04:00 AM
Landscape??? You get a wider angle from the same lens. So for instance, the 17-35 is really a super wide at 17 and a wide at 35, where on DX it's wide and normal, respectively. You get shallower depth of field (bonus when you need it), AND, you get diffraction limit back to something more normal like f16 or so. What's the D300, something like f11? And since the camera has the high ISO capabilities lacking on the smaller sensors, that doesn't even seem to be a limit. Besides, REAL landscape shooters use tripods and the best ISO for the camera (200 in the case of the D700).
I wasn't aware the diffraction limit changed that much.

So if all of your apertures shift a stop or two, and your ISO does as well, all should remain equal with the difference being field of view...

JTL
08-27-2008, 11:02 AM
Thanks for sharing those images JTL and Actaeon! The detail that the D700 produces is quite astounding!

Looking forward to more from this machine!

re.ac.torYou are welcome! The thing is great, in all seriousness. People can say that the 5D is "sharper" all they want. It's about so much more than that. So much more. To shoot it is to know. And anyone who shoots a D700 and doesn't like it...at least on some level...has to be a liar or an idiot (in my most humble opinion, of course! :D). It may not be the camera for everyone, but there's no denying that it is a marvel.

Actaeon
08-27-2008, 09:19 PM
People can say that the 5D is "sharper" all they want.

The 5D is a fantastic camera, and it does so amazingly well for such an older body.I certainly hope my D700 lasts this long. So, I'm not to take anything away from it, but from everything I've read, its just due to the default sharpening enabled on the camera's settings is different. I have read that the Canon In-Camera sharpening is just on a higher setting.

I could mention a few other things that the D700 excels at compared to the 5D, but I'm sure everyone already knows.

That said, both are amazing cameras and I am certainly very happy with my D700.

Here is a pic I took at a nice food joint.

It looks quote a bit graiy in picture. This was mostly because of the post processing I had done, (Shadow protection, constrast changes, etc). The RAW isn't as "noisy".

http://www.actaeonlf.com/images/pics/DSC_0943.jpg

Actaeon
08-27-2008, 09:21 PM
Thanks for sharing those images JTL and Actaeon! The detail that the D700 produces is quite astounding!

Looking forward to more from this machine!

re.ac.tor


No problem at all! I love this hobby. I'll keep sharing as I take more. Feel free to provide some C&C, I'd love to hear your feedback.

JTL
08-27-2008, 09:49 PM
Here is a pic I took at a nice food joint.

It looks quote a bit graiy in picture. This was mostly because of the post processing I had done, (Shadow protection, constrast changes, etc). The RAW isn't as "noisy".Love, love, love the shot. It has great mood and is very nicely executed.

Was that with the Nikon 50mm f/1.4?

Visual Reality
08-28-2008, 04:10 AM
Here's to the D800, with 1080p/24 recording capability. Don't think they'll do it? Just wait...

Actaeon
08-28-2008, 05:24 AM
Thanks JTL, I had saw the candle at the dinner table, and I thought it would have made up a great shot. Normally I don't pull out this gigantic SLR at dinners, but this place is actually part of a museum and hotel, with much of the artwork inside of the restaurant.

http://www.proofonmain.com/proof/

The shot was taken with the 50mm f/1.4. The only lens I've got for now :).

Here is the info...

Body - Nikon D700
Lens - Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 D
Focal Length - 50mm
ISO - 1400
Aperture - f/2.8
Shutter - ?? 1/50 ??
Flash - None

Actaeon
08-28-2008, 05:27 AM
Here is another shot that I took at "Proof".

Body - Nikon D700
Lens - Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 D
Focal Length - 50mm
ISO - 4500
Aperture - f/3.5
Shutter - ?? 1/30 ??
Flash - None



http://www.actaeonlf.com/images/pics/DSC_0970.jpg

Actaeon
08-31-2008, 04:27 PM
JTL,

Any luck getting your Sigma 50mm f1.4 yet? I'd love to see how it performs (sharpness, bokeh, autofocus speed) on the D700.

I saw this post earlier today on Dpreview on the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 vs the Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 using a D3. Some good photos there...

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=29147090

cvicisso
08-31-2008, 06:53 PM
OMG!! Guys, those images are all awesome! Thanks for sharing. Yep, a D700 is in my future... albeit pushed back a bit more by my inevitable D90 purchase. If I had the cash, I would surely get both.

JTL - the flower pics you posted earlier (IMHO) really show off the shallow DOF potential of the FF sensor, specifically because they were shot at relatively SLOW apertures (~f/8-ish). Nice, subtly blurred backgrounds without the need for faster glass. THAT plus the inherent ISO advantage I could get very, very used to. :D I should create a link to those shots and remind myself to go there every time I'm tempted by the 'advantages' of 4/3. You could never ever get that kind of creative control with the smaller Oly sensor unless you had some seriously fast (and expensive) glass.

Nikon APS-C seems to be a happy half-way-point (between 4/3 and FF) for me for now, until I can afford a Nikon FF some day.

Thanks again, guys!!

JTL
09-04-2008, 02:31 PM
JTL,

Any luck getting your Sigma 50mm f1.4 yet? I'd love to see how it performs (sharpness, bokeh, autofocus speed) on the D700.

I saw this post earlier today on Dpreview on the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 vs the Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 using a D3. Some good photos there...

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=29147090
Sorry! I was away for a few days and thankfully nowhere near a computer! :D

So, Sigma4Less called me and said "Oh we're terribly sorry...we took your order but only the Canon mount is in stock...not the Nikon...sorry for the mistake...". So, looks like there will be no 50mm f/1.4 going to Italy with me. Oh, well. But, they did me a favor maybe...because Nikon has answered the call and will be announicing an AF-S 50mm f/1.4 possibly as early as next week (but maybe the week after). I think that with the quality of the Sigma setting a high bar, there is no way that Nikon does not aim to beat it. But, of course, the Nikon lens will debut at a price-point higher than the Sigma. Nikon sees people shelling out $500.00 for the Sigma, so I'm thinking they think they can get $600-$800 for their's. And we thought 50mm lenses were cheap! Ha!

JTL
09-04-2008, 03:01 PM
OMG!! Guys, those images are all awesome! Thanks for sharing. Yep, a D700 is in my future... albeit pushed back a bit more by my inevitable D90 purchase. If I had the cash, I would surely get both.

JTL - the flower pics you posted earlier (IMHO) really show off the shallow DOF potential of the FF sensor, specifically because they were shot at relatively SLOW apertures (~f/8-ish). Nice, subtly blurred backgrounds without the need for faster glass. THAT plus the inherent ISO advantage I could get very, very used to. :D I should create a link to those shots and remind myself to go there every time I'm tempted by the 'advantages' of 4/3. You could never ever get that kind of creative control with the smaller Oly sensor unless you had some seriously fast (and expensive) glass.

Nikon APS-C seems to be a happy half-way-point (between 4/3 and FF) for me for now, until I can afford a Nikon FF some day.

Thanks again, guys!!Thank you!

Interesting that you mention creative control because that was my entire justification for not only going full frame but going with the D700 specifically (although, there will always be a better tool...things are really moving fast these days).

I'll be posting some more pictures later, some at ISO 6400 that really show off the high ISO and dynamic range capabilities of the D700. The thing is simply a pleasure. It makes me happy to use it because I don't need to fight with it. Beside the few minor complaints that I've posted, it's been a very satisfying experience so far. Have you put one in your hands yet and tried it? Maybe you shouldn't...because there's no way that you try it and not buy it! :D:D:D

Actaeon
09-04-2008, 09:03 PM
Sorry! I was away for a few days and thankfully nowhere near a computer! :D

So, Sigma4Less called me and said "Oh we're terribly sorry...we took your order but only the Canon mount is in stock...not the Nikon...sorry for the mistake...". So, looks like there will be no 50mm f/1.4 going to Italy with me. Oh, well. But, they did me a favor maybe...because Nikon has answered the call and will be announicing an AF-S 50mm f/1.4 possibly as early as next week (but maybe the week after). I think that with the quality of the Sigma setting a high bar, there is no way that Nikon does not aim to beat it. But, of course, the Nikon lens will debut at a price-point higher than the Sigma. Nikon sees people shelling out $500.00 for the Sigma, so I'm thinking they think they can get $600-$800 for their's. And we thought 50mm lenses were cheap! Ha!

Sorry to hear about the lack of the shipment, but perhaps it was for the better. Hopefully Nikon announces some nice new Lens at Photokina. I just got the 50mm f/1.4, but if the optical quality and autofocusing is even faster with the new lens, I'm all for it! I'll sell this at a loss to get the newer one if its better.

fionndruinne
09-04-2008, 11:32 PM
New 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor comin' out! Sure you don't want to wait for that?

JTL
09-05-2008, 07:59 AM
New 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor comin' out! Sure you don't want to wait for that?Ain't that what I said? I gues it wasn't clear when I said that Sigma4Less "did me a favor"... :confused::confused::confused:

fionndruinne
09-05-2008, 02:45 PM
Sorry, I just don't like reading your posts.:p

JTL
09-05-2008, 07:34 PM
Sorry, I just don't like reading your posts.:pWell, then, all I can say is that you look pretty damn stupid for responding to them! :p:rolleyes::p

fionndruinne
09-06-2008, 02:04 PM
I said I didn't like it, not that I don't do it.

Don't make me shoot your portrait at 18mm.:mad:

:rolleyes:

JTL
09-06-2008, 10:43 PM
Don't make me shoot your portrait at 18mm.Now that's funny! :D:D:D

JTL
09-06-2008, 10:54 PM
More shots coming...but I really don't feel like messin' with the computer, so, slow it goes...

This one shocked me a bit. The camera (and lens) really picked up the subtlety of the light just after dawn. I never used a camera that did this so well. For all intents, it's exactly as the scene actually looked. Active D-Lighting gets an A+.

http://jtl.smugmug.com/photos/367174806_hXLmQ-L.jpg

Model = NIKON D700
Exposure Time = 1/250"
F Number = F8
Exposure Program = Normal program
ISO Speed Ratings = 200
Metering Mode = Pattern
Focal Length = 28mm
Color Space = sRGB

Visual Reality
09-06-2008, 11:49 PM
Not bad, for artifically adjusting exposure. Sure multiple exposures would be the more accurate way to capture all of the detail, but that looks pretty darn good for a single image.

Just be careful not to kill all of the shadows by going overboard with the Active D...some shadow is good to have for contrast ;)

Rooz
09-09-2008, 05:27 AM
More shots coming...but I really don't feel like messin' with the computer, so, slow it goes...

This one shocked me a bit. The camera (and lens) really picked up the subtlety of the light just after dawn. I never used a camera that did this so well. For all intents, it's exactly as the scene actually looked. Active D-Lighting gets an A+.



Model = NIKON D700
Exposure Time = 1/250"
F Number = F8
Exposure Program = Normal program
ISO Speed Ratings = 200
Metering Mode = Pattern
Focal Length = 28mm
Color Space = sRGB

what lens is this with J ?

eddie_dane
09-09-2008, 05:44 AM
I can't tell you how much I appreciate a regular person posting their informed impression of the D700. Reviews are great but I relate to this sort of testimony much more when it's my money on the line. I plan on getting a D700 around the end of October and this makes me feel much better about my choice.

JTL
09-09-2008, 11:20 AM
what lens is this with J ?The Tammy. I'm telling you, Rooz, if it weren't for the distortions, this lens would be great...

JTL
09-09-2008, 11:30 AM
I can't tell you how much I appreciate a regular person posting their informed impression of the D700. Reviews are great but I relate to this sort of testimony much more when it's my money on the line. I plan on getting a D700 around the end of October and this makes me feel much better about my choice.Thank you. I'm glad it helps. I've tried to be objective and state the things that bug me along with the things that I like (there are some of my impressions in this thread as well: http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=40269 ), although, I suppose the tendancy is to want to like a new purchase, but, at the end of the day, only two things matter to me: Do I like the results? and Does the camera handle well? I can unequivocally say yes to both. I know there will always be a better camera, but for now, this one is exactly what I want and need. Right now, after the Sony announcement, it's looking a bit overpriced. Hopefully the price goes down a little before you buy.

I promise a couple of more shots later...:)

eddie_dane
09-09-2008, 12:25 PM
Right now, after the Sony announcement, it's looking a bit overpriced. Hopefully the price goes down a little before you buy.

Well, I've had the D50 and D200 for a while now and quite comfortable with the nikon line and until I see the Sony perform in low light (which I really need right now), I'm not that worried. I suspect that even the D3X won't have the same low light performance as the D3/D700 due to pixel density but I could be wrong. In either case, I see a new nikon that will do what I want and I'm happy.

FLiPMaRC
09-09-2008, 01:31 PM
:cool: Great shots! Good to see you're happy with the switch :)

Actaeon
09-15-2008, 02:33 AM
So, I just spent far too much money for D700 stuff earlier today...

Heres what I've just ordered about 20 minutes ago.

Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8 (USA Warranty)
Nikon SB-900 Speedlight (USA Warranty)
2x Nikon EN-EL4a Batteries
2x Nikon BL-3 Battery Doors for MB-D10 Grip
Nikon MH-21 Battery Charger for EN-EL4a
Nikon 77mm NC Lens Filter
Nikon 52mm NC Lens Filter
Nikon HR-2 Lens Hood
Nikon LF-1 Rear Lens Cap
Nikon Lens Pens Pro Kit
Nikon DK-19 Eyecup

I picked this up at Fry's the other day...

8x Energizer AA NiMH 2450mAH Rechargables (for the Flash)
Energizer AA NiMH 15 Minute Charger


I'll admit, all of this did cost a pretty penny, well, alot of pennies actually, but all the small stuff is relatively cheap compared to the lens alone. I hope its worth it.

Hopefully Nikon doesn't release something that obsoletes the 24-70mm at Photokina 2008. I know the lens was just announced, so its very unlikely, but I'd be a little upset if they did. I really dislike they left out VR on a lens that cost this much, but supposedly the sharpness and speed is unbeatable. Who knows, maybe VR in the next version.

I still need that 14-24mm f/2.8 and 70-200mm f/2.8 replacement, those are definitely on my wish list. Then I need to think about the telephoto and macro department. For telephoto I can't decide whether I want a dedicated lens, or a TC for the 70-200mm. After the purchase today, those probably won't happen for a little while :).

Oh well, look forward to getting this stuff soon!

Jonathan

Visual Reality
09-15-2008, 04:17 AM
All good stuff, but why waste your time with Energizers anymore? Get Eneloops and be done with it man. Personally I wouldn't waste my time with the filters either, but that's me.

Don't worry about the loss of VR. You'll appreciate it much more on a lens like the 70-200.

Envious of your setup...but I got a house to buy next year...so for me, full frame waits until D800 at least.

aparmley
09-15-2008, 04:54 AM
Dude, the 24-70 AF-S is brand new. It took 10 (or so) years for Nikon to refresh it finally last year. I think you're good.

Sounds like they took you a little on the accessories. But, the expense was just a drop in the bucket compared to the body and lens.

Rooz
09-15-2008, 05:38 AM
just curious..why do you need 2 batteries and 2 doors ? the grip only takes one battery plus one in cam, (which you already have ?). you have some serious long life there !! lol

congrats on he 24-70. it looks to be one of the best lens' on the market so look forward to your results.

Actaeon
09-15-2008, 10:54 AM
I tried finding the Eneelops, but I didn't find any at Frys. Since I already had a load of AA NiMH batteries (for the Wii and other devices in the house), I went with this charger. It is alot nicer than the stupid 8 hour charger I had a couple of days ago. I decided the filters would be used to protect the lens. I don't mind paying a little bit extra for some "insurance".

Yeah, I don't expect them to replace the 24-70 f/2.8 with a direct replacement, but something like an 18-80 f/3.5 VR for much cheaper would certainly be irritating. I suppose having f/2.8 is nice, but I can't say I would have still gotten the 24-70 if such a lens was available.

No salesmen or pressure involved with the accessories. I took at what I think I'd like to have, and picked up "all the small things" so I wouldn't have to worry about it later. That said, even with the flash included, that was just a drop in the bucket compared to everything else.

I wanted 2 batteries and 2 doors for easy swapping if I'm out shooting. 2 Batteries would come in handy if I didn't have a power outlet available, or wanted to charge one while shooting the other. Though I am beginning to think I'll run out of CF Cards before I run out of battery shooting with RAW+JPEG.

Can't wait for the lens arrive so I can run out and shoot something.

erichlund
09-15-2008, 01:01 PM
Be careful with that 15 minute charger. It is fast, but you cannot leave the batteries on it full time like you can with a slow charger. When they are done, you are supposed to remove the batteries AND unplug the charger. If you don't, you'll burn out the charger. DAMHIKT.

Actaeon
09-17-2008, 11:04 PM
Thanks Eric, the 15 minute charger seems to shut off when its done. I had left them in there while doing errands around the house and it just sits there, no fan, just a green LED telling me it was done.

I got the 24-70 2.8 today. I got home from work late and it was Dark when I could play with it, but I did a small bokeh test, and it looks great! See below. I focused on the "50" next to the 50mm, 1:1.4D. The "flowers" were about 1 inch behind the back of the lens and maybe 2.5 inches from the focus point. No editing other than a resize and compression into JPG. It sure looks nice and smooth!

http://www.actaeonlf.com/stuff/DSC_1917.jpg

erichlund
09-18-2008, 12:41 PM
Must be a newer model. Mine would not shut off unless you unplugged it, and it did have a fan.

achuang
09-18-2008, 05:51 PM
The charger is the least of your worries if it's one of those 15 minute chargers. Your batteries won't last anywhere near as long as a slower charger.

Actaeon
09-20-2008, 08:24 PM
Took some pictures earlier today. I'd love to hear some feedback. Some PP was done in CaptureNX, and I resized for the web.

Here is my car...

http://www.actaeonlf.com/stuff/car_web.jpg

cvicisso
09-20-2008, 11:08 PM
Actaeon, love the pic and the car! Good composition (IMHO). The only criticism is really just a personal preference: I don't like static car pics. If you could get someone to drive it while you snap a panning shot, I think it would be more impressive. Cars weren't made to be parked on the side of the road - let's see some motion! :)

Actaeon
09-20-2008, 11:28 PM
Thank you cvicisso! I haven't had too many opportunities to get panning shots of my own car, but they do make some excellent shots. My GF doesn't know how to drive a manual yet, but shes learning :), maybe one day soon and I can get some nice panning done.

Meanwhile, I do take the car out for some fun every once and a while. Not the best picture by any means, but here is one taken by my brother with my older D40 and 18-200.

http://www.actaeonlf.com/stuff/autox_web.jpg

cvicisso
09-21-2008, 06:15 AM
My GF doesn't know how to drive a manual yet, but shes learning :), Don't do it!! You're much better off with your GF not driving you car... believe me! ;)

Meanwhile, I do take the car out for some fun every once and a while.Wow - you weren't kidding! That looks like a lot of fun. Is that RX-8 modified at all? I've heard that those things fly! :D

Rooz
09-21-2008, 06:53 AM
Took some pictures earlier today. I'd love to hear some feedback. Some PP was done in CaptureNX, and I resized for the web.

Here is my car...



very nice car.

imho, there are some issues with this pic. the black is clipped in too many places and there is somethign wierd happening with the overall colour. you picked a tough time to shoot, sun streaming down on one side of the car casting the bonnet and other side of the car in shadow.

you got yourself a cool subject there, i'm sure you can come up with better shots of it. (not that i'm one to give advice on car pics mind you lol)

Actaeon
09-21-2008, 07:23 AM
Don't do it!! You're much better off with your GF not driving you car... believe me! ;)
Wow - you weren't kidding! That looks like a lot of fun. Is that RX-8 modified at all? I've heard that those things fly! :D


Haha, the "fastest" car she has ever driven was a 98 Ford Contour, so this would be quite a bit of power for her. Fortunately the car is very forgiving if she ever gets too crazy, but I am a little scared of what will happen to my clutch when shes through with it. Maybe I should get something else and teach her? :)

The RX-8 handles quite well, but it really is down on power compared to other sports cars. As long as you can keep up the momentum, you'll have a blast. It is rated as one of the best handling cars available and one of the most fun. My car is prepared for SCCA B-Stock for Autocross/SOLO. The "stock" class I run limits what types of modifications I can do, but here is what I've got...

Koni Adjustable Shocks
http://www.modacar.com/Merchant2/struts_honda_files/koni_yellow_struts.jpg

2 sets of Kumho V710s - 245/45/18
http://www.vetteracer.net/About_Pages/The_Car/Media/ku_ecsta_v710_ci2_l.jpg

Racing Beat Exhaust (previous owner had this installed)
http://www.mazdatrix.com/8pics/8exhaust/RX8muffler.3.jpg

The only other modification I can do is add a Front Sway Bar, but I haven't decided which one I want yet.

Cars and Photography are my two favorite hobbies, but they both happen to be extremely expensive :). Thanks for the interest.

Jonathan

Actaeon
09-21-2008, 07:38 AM
very nice car.

imho, there are some issues with this pic. the black is clipped in too many places and there is somethign wierd happening with the overall colour. you picked a tough time to shoot, sun streaming down on one side of the car casting the bonnet and other side of the car in shadow.

you got yourself a cool subject there, i'm sure you can come up with better shots of it. (not that i'm one to give advice on car pics mind you lol)

Thanks Rooz, I appreciate the feedback.

Sorry, I'm not sure what you mean by "clipped" though. The color does look a bit strange, but I liked the result. The car is black, and the blue on the vehicle is the reflection from the sky. The hood almost looks like I added some sort of ND filter that you'd use for the sky to play with the effects. To be honest, the car looks better here than it does in person. It was actually quite dirty when I took these shots.

You are right, it was a "tough time" to shoot with the shadows. I was trying to avoid the harsh sunlight of midday and go for something in the evening. I originally wanted the car facing the other way so the light was hitting the "front" instead of the rear. However, the "long" shadows were quite difficult to keep myself out of the frame while getting the composition I wanted. So I had to get the car facing this way instead with the sun pointed at its rear, hence the result you see here.

I am flying out this weekend (I'm actually at the airport right now), so I won't be able to take shots of it for quite some time (several weeks). However, besides a possible panning shot that cvicisso had wisely recommended (still trying to think of a way to do that), do you have any possible suggestions or links to shots that you've seen that you think would be interesting? I was thinking as far as landscape/car shots go, this one was quite nice.

Thanks again for all the feedback.
Jonathan

Visual Reality
09-21-2008, 06:40 PM
Cars and Photography are my two favorite hobbies, but they both happen to be extremely expensive.
You're telling me...I'm selling my 2001 Trans Am WS6 to get out of rent and into a house...one thing at a time.

Actaeon
09-22-2008, 05:59 AM
You're telling me...I'm selling my 2001 Trans Am WS6 to get out of rent and into a house...one thing at a time.

Nice! Any shots of it?

My brother had a 93 Trans Am (LT1) and I loved the torque and sound that thing made. The LS1 Trans Ams are nicer, but when he had his, they were still brand new and quite expensive. Just like everyone else, I loved the WS6.

I think that despite the 5th gen's F-Body design was dated way back in '93, it still looks great now. Great "timeless" design even after 15 years.

Jonathan

JTL
09-22-2008, 12:41 PM
I'm baaaaaaack! Italy shots to come...:)

Hey Jonathan...congrats on your new gear. If Nikon doesn't make an f/4 24-120 soon, I'll be forced to buy the 24-70 f/2.8 as well...isn't that a shame? :D:D:D

BTW, while I was gone there was so much news...a stock market crash, mega buyouts, a terror attack and the Canon 5D mkII! And, while it achieves a new plateau in the industry...it's not the camara I was looking for, so I'm still happy with my decision...although, by comparison, the D700 is now WAY overpriced...I mean WAY, WAY overpriced. And forget about the D3! It's been nuked from a price perspective! Does an extra 4fps and better weather sealing really command a $2,000 premium, especilly given the 5D mkII's resolution and other features? I don't think so. All I know is that the D3x had better be 24mp, shoot at least 5fps, have 1080 HD video mode and not be a penny over $3,000 or Nikon can forget about it and pack it up again for another few years...

So, my only regret is that I didn't wait a little longer...because the price of the D700 has to come down once the the new 5D ships...if Nikon actually wants to keep selling it...;)

Visual Reality
09-22-2008, 04:22 PM
Nice! Any shots of it?

My brother had a 93 Trans Am (LT1) and I loved the torque and sound that thing made. The LS1 Trans Ams are nicer, but when he had his, they were still brand new and quite expensive. Just like everyone else, I loved the WS6.

I think that despite the 5th gen's F-Body design was dated way back in '93, it still looks great now. Great "timeless" design even after 15 years.

Jonathan
4th generation was 1993-2002. However, in 1998 they were restyled and given the LS1 that first appeared in the Corvette the year prior (1997).

The last shots I have of it are from 2006...shame, I know...but I plan on having new ones soon.

Actaeon
09-23-2008, 06:35 AM
4th generation was 1993-2002. However, in 1998 they were restyled and given the LS1 that first appeared in the Corvette the year prior (1997).

The last shots I have of it are from 2006...shame, I know...but I plan on having new ones soon.

Ahh, thanks! I forgot it was the 4th Gen, not the 5th (thats the new Camaro).

Please get some shots. I'd love to see it.

Shaft
09-23-2008, 04:36 PM
Hey JTL, when are those Italy shots coming? This thread suddenly turned into car-talk lol

aparmley
09-23-2008, 04:47 PM
Thanks Eric, the 15 minute charger seems to shut off when its done. I had left them in there while doing errands around the house and it just sits there, no fan, just a green LED telling me it was done.

I got the 24-70 2.8 today. I got home from work late and it was Dark when I could play with it, but I did a small bokeh test, and it looks great! See below. I focused on the "50" next to the 50mm, 1:1.4D. The "flowers" were about 1 inch behind the back of the lens and maybe 2.5 inches from the focus point. No editing other than a resize and compression into JPG. It sure looks nice and smooth!

http://www.actaeonlf.com/stuff/DSC_1917.jpg

God-damn you man. . .

Looks amazing. So does the gaurd rail in your RX-8 image. I can't believe how good looking that lens is on the 700 . . . God damn you.

:D

JTL
09-23-2008, 08:48 PM
Hey JTL, when are those Italy shots coming? This thread suddenly turned into car-talk lolThanks. Anything to stop all this motorhead/motormouth madness! :D:p:D

O.K. Shaft...just for you, here's a couple...many more to come...

These were shot in Milan...

http://jtl.smugmug.com/photos/378416206_vdJoU-L.jpg


http://jtl.smugmug.com/photos/379165435_ZMBgf-L.jpg

Esoterra
09-23-2008, 09:39 PM
Ok... I'll bite. Here are a few from a trip to Hawaii a few weeks back. D700 w/Nikkor 24-70, GNDF. no HDR.

Hope you like


http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3174/2868964181_7e6dbdf0ba.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3216/2870596589_7d1483a2a8.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3125/2869786392_ba08b63987.jpg

And a shot from a recent trip to Northeastern Utah

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3004/2810498610_5d7cebbcbe.jpg

Esoterra
09-23-2008, 09:42 PM
Oh... and one more that I thought was kind of interesting.... stitched together in CS3

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3159/2871069287_12b688ed59_b.jpg

toriaj
09-23-2008, 11:22 PM
good to see you back on DCRP, Chris. And I still want to see #1 in color :)

TheWengler
09-24-2008, 12:55 AM
Ok... I'll bite. Here are a few from a trip to Hawaii a few weeks back. D700 w/Nikkor 24-70, GNDF. no HDR.

Wonderful work as usual. Did you use a GND filter on all of them? How do handle when something rises over the horizon (like the trees in the 1st two)?

Gintaras
09-24-2008, 04:43 AM
D700 looks excellent and the release of 5DMarkII should make prices drop i hope.

Wish i could spend money on my camera like Actaeon, sry this is difficult year for the banker and i also want switch places and trade my small Jag for new Lexus, so less cash for photo.

Gintaras
09-24-2008, 04:46 AM
Chris, amazing photos, love your landscape. Actually i found pretty amazing works on deviantart, check my devart "favorites" there http://garfieldfreek.deviantart.com/favourites to see some amazing works of others, wish i had so much dedication and patience as they have.

Rooz
09-24-2008, 05:03 AM
chris, you suck. :p

Rooz
09-24-2008, 05:06 AM
Thanks. Anything to stop all this motorhead/motormouth madness! :D:p:D

O.K. Shaft...just for you, here's a couple...many more to come...

These were shot in Milan...

http://jtl.smugmug.com/photos/378416206_vdJoU-L.jpg




wonderful composition.

Shaft
09-24-2008, 05:11 AM
Thanks JTL :D

Great shots Chris. Maybe it's just me or is the horizon not straight in the third one? Anyways beautiful composition and amazing colors.

JTL
09-24-2008, 05:37 AM
Chris...just wow...love your stuff as always...

JTL
09-24-2008, 05:37 AM
wonderful composition.Thanks, Rooz!

JTL
09-24-2008, 06:28 AM
Here's one...not a great shot...but posted for example purposes...

ISO 6400 straight from the camera...no PP whatsoever...a 1/4 sec. exposure...could never have done this with 35mm color film...how far we've come...yet now we take it for granted...

http://jtl.smugmug.com/photos/379393760_88iE7-L.jpg

Rooz
09-24-2008, 06:52 AM
6400. lol
unreal.

Gintaras
09-24-2008, 07:07 AM
JTL, cool, D700 looks like a dream... interesting how 5DMarkII will compare here? Canon was always known for stellar high ISO.

I also am impressed about D90, what a camera, plenty of things and image quality looks great in reviews. If i would not want FF i would have gone D90.

JTL
09-24-2008, 07:17 AM
JTL, cool, D700 looks like a dream... interesting how 5DMarkII will compare here? Canon was always known for stellar high ISO.

I also am impressed about D90, what a camera, plenty of things and image quality looks great in reviews. If i would not want FF i would have gone D90.Even if the 5DMkII has a high ISO edge (which I suspect it will have) to me, for now it will be just hair splitting. And, I'm willing to bet real money that I would prefer the metering and auto-focus systems on my D700 over the 5DMkII. But, even though I love the D700 and have no plans to buy anything else for a while (a micro 4/3rds as a pocket cam, maybe) when the next big leap comes (by big I mean a proven improvement in basic sensor technology), I'll consider moving on. But for now, for me, the D700 is exactly what I want. I sometimes still can't believe that I own a camera that I actually like!

aparmley
09-24-2008, 07:21 AM
chris, you suck. :p

I second this remark.

Amazing work Chris.

aparmley
09-24-2008, 07:23 AM
I agree with you JTL. well put.

Gintaras
09-24-2008, 08:53 AM
JTL, agree with you, this is why I want see how new 5D will fare in metering and auto-focus, high ISO alone is not my priority, but focusing accuracy and dynamic range are high on my list. What I am curious still why Canon does not want optimize body construction as I feel Nikon has better ergonomics. Also no pop-up flash on 5D is a minus, as sometimes it comes handy when you got no time to mount separate flash. If Canon puts movie mode on it then why on earth no pop-up flash? And I need not movie mode at all, movie is not my passion to say the least.

JTL
09-24-2008, 10:29 AM
JTL, agree with you, this is why I want see how new 5D will fare in metering and auto-focus, high ISO alone is not my priority, but focusing accuracy and dynamic range are high on my list. What I am curious still why Canon does not want optimize body construction as I feel Nikon has better ergonomics. Also no pop-up flash on 5D is a minus, as sometimes it comes handy when you got no time to mount separate flash. If Canon puts movie mode on it then why on earth no pop-up flash? And I need not movie mode at all, movie is not my passion to say the least.I'm totally with you on the pop-up flash. It is extremely useful when you just need a bit of quick fill. When I was out hiking 10-12 miles a day, the last thing I wanted to do was to be carrying around an external flash! IMO, the 5D and the 5DMkII are minus an important tool. Leaving it off makes no sense whatsoever especially, as you point out, when movie mode is included. Regardless of the obvious utility of a pop-up flash for the experienced shooter, it is a standard feature expected by most consumers. It seems like they're pretty confused as to who the market really is...

I'd still take 12MP with the pop-up flash over 21MP without any day of the week...because sometimes I need the pop-up flash. I don't "need" 21MP!

Actaeon
09-24-2008, 10:33 AM
Wish i could spend money on my camera like Actaeon, sry this is difficult year for the banker and i also want switch places and trade my small Jag for new Lexus, so less cash for photo.

Out of all the owners here, I'm not sure why you called me out specifically, but since you did, I'll bite. An easy solution to your problem is to stick with your current vehicle and don't take the hit on another "Luxury" vehicle. Luxury cars are a terrible "investment" and drop in value rapidly.

Use the saved cash and buy what you want. I can guarantee my lens will depreciate less than your Jag or Lexus throughout either of their usable life times.

I figured as a banker, this is something you would know.

erichlund
09-24-2008, 02:04 PM
I'm totally with you on the pop-up flash. It is extremely useful when you just need a bit of quick fill. When I was out hiking 10-12 miles a day, the last thing I wanted to do was to be carrying around an external flash! IMO, the 5D and the 5DMkII are minus an important tool. Leaving it off makes no sense whatsoever especially, as you point out, when movie mode is included. Regardless of the obvious utility of a pop-up flash for the experienced shooter, it is a standard feature expected by most consumers. It seems like they're pretty confused as to who the market really is...

I'd still take 12MP with the pop-up flash over 21MP without any day of the week...because sometimes I need the pop-up flash. I don't "need" 21MP!

I don't get why there's any relationship between a popup flash and movie mode. The popup flash is useless when shooting a movie. OK, they're both items we would associate with consumer cameras, but neither a D700 nor a 5DmkII is actually considered a consumer cam, and most "consumers" are not buying such an expensive tool. They are pro/enthusiast cameras. In that regard, tradition says that higher level cameras don't have a popup flash. We "advanced" users are supposed to disdain such. Of course, we're also supposed to roll over and pass out at the concept of a movie mode on an advanced camera. I personally don't thing Canon is confused about this issue at all.

I will admit I like having the popup on my D200, but I'd give it up for a better viewfinder, and I find the D200's viewfinder adequate. OTOH, the D700 viewfinder is already very nice, so I don't know that I'd want the very small improvement you would get by disdaining the popup.

Of course, if you start buying decent glass for that D700, you will find out very quickly that popup flashes are very limited in utility with big lenses. Consumer popups are for consumer lenses. Pro lenses are big enough to cause shadows under many circumstances.

JTL
09-24-2008, 02:21 PM
I will admit a like having the popup on my D200.
Why do you have to "admit" anything, Eric? A pop-up flash is a feature, a tool, like any other. Some want the tool others do not. I want it. Many want it. You make it sound as if you feel guilty for liking it. That's very strange and I find you're post confusing and don't really understand the point you are trying to make. And you're wrong...plenty of "consumers" are buying D700s. Just because you may not know any doesn't make it so. Nikon has been "getting it", Canon has not. Plain and simple. That’s my point. And your "decent glass" putdown is really, really uncalled for. Not to mention your "advanced user" comment and your "higher level camera" assertion. These things exist only in your mind. I have to say, you sound really, really uncharacteristically snobby and elitist in you post. What brought that on? I Would call the new 50mm and 85mm primes I'll be buying very decent glass and neither will cause a shadow with the pop-up flash....which will be providing me with PLENTY of utilty. So...exactly what was your point again?

Update: Oh...and I forgot...a pop-up flash need not be "usless" in movie mode and there is a definite relationship if you'd think for a second. It's merely a matter of implementation (or in this case, a failure to implement). Just as the modeling light feature in CLS works, so could the flash work as a video light. It wouldn't be practical for heavy use, but it could be there for the times when you really need it. Once again...a tool for a specific purpose in specific situations. So, my advice is don't confuse the failure to implement a feature with the possiblity of the availablity and the potential utilty/usefulness of a feature.

And, I'll bet you a hundred bucks we see the combo built-in flash/video light feature sometime in the not-too-distant future. ;)

cvicisso
09-25-2008, 07:00 AM
FWIW (not much :)), I didn't read Eric's post as snobby or elitist. I read the quotation marks around "consumer" and "advanced" as "I don't necessarily consider myself 'advanced' - but for lack of a better term..." And I didn't read his comment, "I will admit I like having the popup on my D200..." as anything more than him acknowledging the usefulness of a popup despite his mention of the traditional 'professional' bias against them.

His post started out with his questioning your comment: "IMO, the 5D and the 5DMkII are minus an important tool. Leaving it off makes no sense whatsoever especially, as you point out, when movie mode is included." I kind of scratched my head when I read your comment too. I think I understand now that you meant that popup flashes could be used on future models as a video light (which I agree would be a great idea!), but your post specifically mentions old and current models on which this function does not exist. I think (IMHO) that Eric posted a valid question that you have since answered.

Personally, I love my popup flash. On the beach where I do most of my shooting, I constantly use it to fill shadows. The fact that the D70 will x-sync to 1/500 (sort of :)) is the icing on the cake for me. I simply would not carry an external flash with me for walks on the beach (I look like a big enough dork/tourist with my dslr as it is :)), so the popup allows me to capture more/better images. Nevertheless, obviously I'm not "advanced" or "professional" by any stretch of the imagination...

Anyway, just throwing in my $.02. I think if you re-read Eric's post, you might see that he wasn't trying to be a jerk. Of course I could be totally wrong and Eric is a flaming A-hole!! :):):) Just joking (obvoulsy)!!

JTL
09-25-2008, 07:25 AM
Maybe. But the "decent glass" thing really got my snit on...epsecially since the comment is blantantly wrong...a lens doesn't have to be big to be "decent". And there are plenty of "pro" lenses that are not big lenses. I don't know...maybe it's really a body-part thing...:D:p:D

Like I've said in other posts...if someone doesn't see the utility of PUF (or has to rationalize their use of it), that's fine. Everyone has their own way of shooting (and their own mental processes). But, to imply that those who do find utility in a PUF, and actually speciffically choose a camera with it are somehow ignorant, IMO, crosses over the line of being an a-hole.

erichlund
09-25-2008, 09:10 AM
Why do you have to "admit" anything, Eric? A pop-up flash is a feature, a tool, like any other.

Yes, that takes up space and makes your viewfinder smaller, so it has an impact on your ability to focus the camera manually in poor light. Professionals have never wanted anything that got in the way of focusing the camera, which is why you don't see popups on the pro cameras.

Some want the tool others do not. I want it. Many want it. You make it sound as if you feel guilty for liking it.

No, but sometimes I wish for just a bit brighter viewfinder.

That's very strange and I find you're post confusing and don't really understand the point you are trying to make. And you're wrong...plenty of "consumers" are buying D700s.

You clearly did not understand that the term referred to marketing targets. We were talking about who the camera company aims the camera at, not who actually buys it. The vast majority of people are not buying D700s. That doesn't mean that some non-target people aren't buying it. It just means that they are the exceptions.

Just because you may not know any doesn't make it so. Nikon has been "getting it", Canon has not. Plain and simple. Thatís my point. And your "decent glass" putdown is really, really uncalled for.

You are taking exception to trivia. Would you rather I use the words professional glass and exclude you from buying it? That's silly. But, are you really going to tell me that you bought a $3000 camera and you are not interested in buying the quality of lenses that result in higher quality photos. Yes, the photographer takes the photo, but the lens filters what gets to the sensor. If you put a consumer lens on the camera, you are going to live with the limitations of the lens. You will have a smaller sweet spot and it will be at a higher f number. You will get more artifacts and your color reproduction will not be as accurate. Your bokeh will not be as good because the diaphram will be more cheaply made. When I started shooting with my 17-55, f2.8, it was a revelation. I gave me so much more freedom to not worry about whether I could get the shot and just concentrate on making the shot better.

Not to mention your "advanced user" comment and your "higher level camera" assertion. These things exist only in your mind.

Actually, they exist in many people's minds. Sometimes we think we represent the majority here. But you have to remember, for every member of this site, there are probably at least ONE MILLION photographers who have NEVER been to any photography website, and wouldn't even consider it. Most people wouldn't consider a D700 because of the cost. They may want a dSLR becuase the point and shoots can't quite do what they want, but they will not see the D700 as the solution, they will see the D60 or D90 as the solution. Those cameras are affordable to the average family photographer.

I have to say, you sound really, really uncharacteristically snobby and elitist in you post. What brought that on? I Would call the new 50mm and 85mm primes I'll be buying very decent glass and neither will cause a shadow with the pop-up flash....which will be providing me with PLENTY of utilty. So...exactly what was your point again?

No, the 50 will not. I'm not so sure about the 85 f1.4. It's pretty big. I've gotten shadows focusing close with my 17-55, shooting wide angle. I've also gotten shadows from my 70-300VR and 18-200VR. I've also gotten shadows from my Tokina 12-24 and when I rented a 70-200VR. Anytime you focus close with a large lens, you will risk getting shadows. Anytime you use the popup with a large diameter lens on ANY shot, you risk shadows. You said you were considering the 24-70. I can almost guarantee it with that lens.

Update: Oh...and I forgot...a pop-up flash need not be "usless" in movie mode and there is a definite relationship if you'd think for a second. It's merely a matter of implementation (or in this case, a failure to implement). Just as the modeling light feature in CLS works, so could the flash work as a video light. It wouldn't be practical for heavy use, but it could be there for the times when you really need it. Once again...a tool for a specific purpose in specific situations. So, my advice is don't confuse the failure to implement a feature with the possiblity of the availablity and the potential utilty/usefulness of a feature.

And, I'll bet you a hundred bucks we see the combo built-in flash/video light feature sometime in the not-too-distant future. ;)

Why would I make a bet about technology? Someone will eventually figure out how to do it. With current strobe technology, if you turn it on and leave it on: 1. You will melt the surrounding plastic, and 2. You will be able to watch the battery power visibly drain from the camera. Those lights are designed to go off at extremely high power but for extremely short durations. They are not incandescent bulbs that you can just vary the voltage to get less brighness. They need a threshold power just to light off. Perhaps you should read your manual again to see how using the internal flash effects the number of shots you can take.

cvicisso
09-25-2008, 10:14 AM
I honestly had good intentions, but I feel like I just stepped in something... I am slowly and carefully stepping back out... and will enjoy the show from the sidelines where it's safe! :)

JTL
09-25-2008, 10:29 AM
Why would I make a bet about technology? Someone will eventually figure out how to do it. With current strobe technology, if you turn it on and leave it on: 1. You will melt the surrounding plastic, and 2. You will be able to watch the battery power visibly drain from the camera. Those lights are designed to go off at extremely high power but for extremely short durations. They are not incandescent bulbs that you can just vary the voltage to get less brighness. They need a threshold power just to light off. Perhaps you should read your manual again to see how using the internal flash effects the number of shots you can take.Eric..old thinking. The technology already exists and in the works for implementation...so, I don't have to read any manuals...but maybe you should keep up with current technology...;)

And, I apologize...I think I did over react to your post...

But, I do own and extensively use an SB-800, you know. And I've been shooting film and now digital for decades. So, I do think you're being a little silly by suggesting that I would consider (or advocate) using the PUF with the 24-70. I mean, really...who do you think you're talking about? I never said or even remotely suggested any such thing. All I said is that a PUF provides utility in some circumstances and is a useful feature (and for me and millions of others, a desireable feature), and to deny this is just plain dumb...IMO of course! :D

erichlund
09-25-2008, 01:20 PM
And all I said was that I would give it up for a better viewfinder on the D200. I've handled the D700 (can't afford it, at the moment), and, as I said, I think I would keep the flash, because the full frame viewfinder is already very good.

I didn't mean to say don't use the pop up with the 24-70. It should not always cause a problem. If the distance to your subject is adequate, the pop up should work fine. Of course, then you could get in range issues with the flash.

Another problem with using the strobe as a modelling light is that the light color will change with using it at reduced voltage. If you change the lamp to be more effective as a modelling lamp, do you now reduce its quality as a strobe? This would be an unnacceptable compromise to me. I suspect the general population for buyers of enthusiast / advanced amateur / pro cameras would tend to agree that anything that gets in the way of single frame performance should be avoided. Video is an add on and should not get in the way of using the camera for its primary purpose.

Another issue is lack of power. The popup is not very strong to begin with, and I can envision a lot of video with people squinting at the light, but it not being strong enough to properly illuminate the scene (including the looking like you shot with a flashlight, tunnel view). I personally would much rather have my secondary lighting off camera where my subject doesn't have to stare into it to look at the camera, and it gives much better general lighting.

As for battery consumption, the D300 manual is not very forthcoming, but in the D200 manual it's noteworthy that one of the main hogs in the two scenarios mentioned is the flash, and they quote 1800 shots without flash and 340 with. There are other factors between the scenarios, and the 1800 number has always been a joke, but the flash is a super power hog.

Esoterra
09-25-2008, 11:37 PM
good to see you back on DCRP, Chris. And I still want to see #1 in color :)

Thanks Tori. I'll try to get around to it sooner than later....heh

Esoterra
09-25-2008, 11:38 PM
Wonderful work as usual. Did you use a GND filter on all of them? How do handle when something rises over the horizon (like the trees in the 1st two)?

Yeah I used a GNDF on all of them. If trees get in the way, it depends on if I'm feeling lazy or not as to whether I dodge them or not.

Esoterra
09-25-2008, 11:39 PM
chris, you suck. :p

haha... neener neener neener!

Esoterra
09-25-2008, 11:41 PM
Thanks JTL :D

Great shots Chris. Maybe it's just me or is the horizon not straight in the third one? Anyways beautiful composition and amazing colors.

Ya... its a little off... but I read somewhere that straightening horizon lines in PP takes away from the overall quality of the pic... so I didn't bother. The 24-70 has a little distortion at 24 mm on FX, so it hard to lock it in sometimes, not to mention that it was pretty dark when I took the picture.

Esoterra
09-25-2008, 11:42 PM
Chris...just wow...love your stuff as always...

Thanks m8!

Esoterra
09-25-2008, 11:43 PM
I second this remark.

Amazing work Chris.

No really... the pleasure is all mine MUAHAHAHAHA! :D

herc182
09-26-2008, 01:29 AM
Ok... I'll bite. Here are a few from a trip to Hawaii a few weeks back. D700 w/Nikkor 24-70, GNDF. no HDR.

Hope you like


http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3174/2868964181_7e6dbdf0ba.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3216/2870596589_7d1483a2a8.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3125/2869786392_ba08b63987.jpg

And a shot from a recent trip to Northeastern Utah

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3004/2810498610_5d7cebbcbe.jpg

Unbelievable shots :eek:

Really top class. You flickr pages are just quality shots after quality shots.

However, I agree with Rooz. You suck. So send me your gear and I will make sure it gets a nice new home :D:D:D

Superb

Visual Reality
09-26-2008, 04:01 AM
It isn't just about the gear though...most of the stuff on his site was done with the D200 and the 17-55 from what I understand. The D700 + 24-70 is a dream combo for many...will be interesting what he can do with it.

Chris, do you use NX or PS?

Esoterra
09-28-2008, 08:55 AM
It isn't just about the gear though...most of the stuff on his site was done with the D200 and the 17-55 from what I understand. The D700 + 24-70 is a dream combo for many...will be interesting what he can do with it.

Chris, do you use NX or PS?

VR- yeah a lot of my pics have been taken w/ D200 + 17-55 which are great tools as well. I use view/NX2 to make basic adjustments and convert to tiff, then I finalize my pp in CS3.

Lens > camera
Tripod > camera
Skill & knowledge > camera