PDA

View Full Version : Nikon MUST HAVES



Jack the Ripper
10-01-2008, 06:21 PM
So,

so far i got a pretty modest camera setup.

I have the Nikon D40, the Kit lense AF-S 18-55mm and the non vr AF-S 55-200 nikon lense.

I have a inexpencive Vanguard tripod, 2 spare batteries, a Lowpro camera bag, and a 4 gig SDhc card.

I already want more. I think this is gonna be another expencive Hobby.

And im pretty sure I would like a Macro lens. Some of those macro shots are incredible!

However, does anyone have any reccommendations on absolute MUST HAVES for Nikon digital cameras? Something you got and thought "damn, i cant believe i went without "said product" as long as i did!" ?

Also, there is snakeoil out in every hobby, be it the "shaki rocks" or "tice clock" for audiophiles, the "turbinators" for the gear heads..... are there anything i should just steer clear of? mangnifying lnses? any filters that are a waste? etc?

thanks!


Thanks in advance! :)

mugsisme
10-01-2008, 06:38 PM
IMHO, the first thing you should get an external flash. Either the SB400 or SB600. I love my Sigma 18-50mm macro lens. I keep it on the camera at all times. You may also want to get a polarized filter.

achuang
10-01-2008, 06:46 PM
You're absolutely correct in that it's going to be an expensive hobby. If you're looking for a macro lens that will autofocus on your D40 then the Nikon 60mm AFS or 105 VR are good choices. I have no idea about your budget though. The tamron 90mm macro lens is a good lens that a few forum members either have or have had previously and all say good things about it. It will not AF on your camera body, but if that doesn't bother you then it's a cheaper alternative to the nikons. My suggestions for the must haves would be a fast prime lens and an external flash. Nikon has announced a 50mm f/1.4 which will AF on the D40 and it will be released in december. A SB400 or SB600 flash would go well with the D40. Get the SB400 if you would like something small and light and don't need as many bounce flash capabilities. The SB600 is bigger and heavier but is better for bounce flash and is compatible with nikon's off camera flash system if you ever decide to upgrade. Flash is the big MUST HAVE for me. Flash, more than anything else including lenses, has improved my photos dramatically after I learnt how to use it properly.

Visual Reality
10-01-2008, 07:01 PM
B+W Circular Polarizer, SB-600, and a Nikon lens pen for starters.

Oh and I almost forgot...to ANYONE still using the Nikon camera straps:

http://products.lowepro.com/product/Voyager-C,2075,41.htm

GET ONE! It is the best strap you will find anywhere. Use it over your shoulder diagonally and your gear will suddenly feel like it lost 3/4 its weight and your neck will thank you.

AtlPikMan
10-01-2008, 07:21 PM
I'll toss in my 2cents. My favorite new toy and a must have (IMHO) is the Nikkor 50mm 1.8. Of course others will dissagree or point out the 50mm 1.4 is better, maybe so, but you cant beat the price of the 1.8.

Jack the Ripper
10-01-2008, 07:22 PM
Thanks for all the input!

Yeah i have the lenspen, and i love it. i forgot to ad that in what i do currently have.

The price difference between the SB400 and SB600 is not that much, would it just be better getting the SB 600?

also, what about those flashes that signal off the camera flash, and then flash themselves. Ive seen those for about 20-40 bucks. are those things any good?

i think for a macro lens i would be mostly just doing macro shots. lol. so i think a manual focus should be ok. The 18-55 lens kit seems to focus pretty quick to me, not sure how it compares to others though.

Visual Reality
10-01-2008, 08:06 PM
I'll toss in my 2cents. My favorite new toy and a must have (IMHO) is the Nikkor 50mm 1.8. Of course others will dissagree or point out the 50mm 1.4 is better, maybe so, but you cant beat the price of the 1.8.
You can't beat the price...but to me, 50mm isn't all that useful on a 1.5x crop sensor. 35 and 85 are better IMO, which is why I picked up the 35mm f/2.

Screenclutter
10-01-2008, 09:24 PM
Depends on your budget really.

My opinion would be a SB600 (or higher) and the upcoming Nikon AF-S 50mm f/1.4 prime.

But I think that you are the stage where you have or are beginning to figure out what type of photography you will be doing more often, and consequently, what type of lenses will help you with your needs.

toriaj
10-01-2008, 09:28 PM
If you're interested in landscapes, look at the remote and a 4-stop graduated neutral density filter.

Rooz
10-01-2008, 10:48 PM
50mm f1.4 afs prime lens. get it and you will never look back.

K1W1
10-02-2008, 02:10 AM
However, does anyone have any reccommendations on absolute MUST HAVES for Nikon digital cameras?

An American Express card preferably Gold or Platinum and somebody to settle the account at the end of each month.

If your SO isn't in a position to sort this out financially then consider divorce or a rich dotting older widow mistress as the first course of action to be followed.

Visual Reality
10-02-2008, 03:49 AM
If you're interested in landscapes, look at the remote and a 4-stop graduated neutral density filter.
Or bracket 3-5 shots at 1 EV apart and merge to HDR if you can.

I know he has a D40 so he can't do this though, so a GND would definetely help.

Actaeon
10-02-2008, 05:37 PM
It really boils down to your budget and needs as to "must haves".

Some people would consider the 14-24, 24-70, 70-200 2.8s as must haves, while others may not think its worth $5000 for the lenses.

If you really want to know the must haves regardless of budget, I'm sure we can chime in on that, but for most people, I'd recommend the below...

Package #1 -

I've heard very positive things about the new 18-55mm VR even though its a kit lens. won't add any additional reach, but heard nice things about it. Combined with the 55-200 VR, it may be a pretty good inexpensive VR Combo... up to 200mm focal length.

You could skip out the 18-55mm VR and save a bit more cash as the 18-55 non-VR with the D40 works fine.

Package #2 -

I thoroughly enjoyed the 18-200mm VR, a bit pricier than the above, but it was a very nice walkaround all-in-one lens. This kind of combines those two lenses above into one nice package that you won't have to swap around.

Then add...

A SB-400 is a great little flash for the money. Very nice and handy.

And the 50mm f1.8 is a fantastic lens for the value. It won't autofocus on your D40, but a great low light lens for the cash if you don't mind learning to manual focus.

This package will cover your bounce flash needs, 18-200mm with VR, and low light with the f/1.8 for less than $1k.



Jonathan

Jack the Ripper
10-02-2008, 06:57 PM
thankyou for all the replies!

Looks like a better flash will be the first on the list. So far im pretty happy with my lenses, that is probably because i dont know how much better they could be, as they say, ignorance is bliss. However i think i AM missing the VR though becasue ive tried several night shots and the stars always look like they vibrated on 30sec 8f 400-1600 iso's... using a cheap vanguard tripod unextended sitting on my hot tub cover. i figure the tripod unextended should reduce vibrations and swaying for the longer exposures.

for now ill probably see how long i can make do with the kit lens and the nikkon 55-200.

so far the only thing i really feel im missing is a macro lense... I have seen those pics of bugs that people take, i find it such an interesting subject cause it is just such a different world than what we live in, and those macro pics really make a grasshopper look the size of a buffalo.

i was taking some shots today out in the yard, got a black widow who was passed out because i think she was molting, and i snapped a few of a jumping spider, and a ugly bugger that lives next to my garage. These are the cropped results, but i just cant seem to get that massive bug pic going, they still look small. The lenses just cant focus that close.

i should be able to use older lenses i understand, even if i have to autofocus, im not afraid to learn how to focus.

anyways, it looks like an upgraded flash and maybe an macro lens.

Ill try not to bother you all with too many noob questions, i see there are plenty of forum threads to learn from

http://i415.photobucket.com/albums/pp236/christoph281/Bugs%20Life/Garagespider2cropped.jpg

http://i415.photobucket.com/albums/pp236/christoph281/Bugs%20Life/jumpingspidercropped2.jpg

http://i415.photobucket.com/albums/pp236/christoph281/Bugs%20Life/blackwidowzombie2.jpg

fionndruinne
10-02-2008, 10:57 PM
I too recommend the 50mm f/1.8. For the price it's amazing, even though I have to manually focus. No biggie though for $100.

The Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 macro is a really nice replacement for the 18-55mm, with macro capability and much better low-light capability, plus it's sharper and a much more durable lens. The 17-70mm macro is also a nice Sigma option which will AF on the D40.

Esoterra
10-02-2008, 11:22 PM
I would think that the first thing on your must have list... might be some education in Photography, whether self taught or from another... books, classes, internet, ect. Put your money there if necessary before you put your money into more gear and you will find that you save yourself more money in the long run.

achuang
10-03-2008, 01:09 AM
VR is only useful for handholding. Some of the newer lenses with VR will turn it off if it realises it's on a tripod. Lenses like the 55-200VR don't have that advanced VR. But if you leave VR on while your camera is on a tripod it can actually cause shake and vibration. For night shots and just in general a stable tripod is priceless.

Jack the Ripper
10-03-2008, 06:58 PM
I would think that the first thing on your must have list... might be some education in Photography, whether self taught or from another... books, classes, internet, ect. Put your money there if necessary before you put your money into more gear and you will find that you save yourself more money in the long run.

very good advice!

I have a friend who is an amatuer photographer who does do some photography ont he side, weddings, pics of planes, whatever strikes his fancy. He has been giving me some advice here and there and reccommneded the Magic Lantern Guide for the D40, I also got the manual on the D40 from ken Rockwell.com (yes i donated 5 bucks)

As much as i would love to get classes, im probably going to have to go the self taught route due to family obligations and time restraints, getting a regular time to go to class is difficult, got 2 kids to watch :D

But that is actually also the reason i came here!

When i first got into Audio equipment i just went out and bought a bunch of expencive crap. I listened to the sales guy. Then i found Audiogon.com and started in the forums there (slappy if there are any fellow audiogoners on here) and realized most of what i bought was overpriced, mismatched, and not a verty good plan. I was forced to sell off 15 grand of stereo equipment (long story) but the 2nd time i bought up the gear i made better decisions and got a system that outperformed my last rig and cost me about half the price.

That is the price of education right there. Knowledge is power ;)

Then i got into cars. Got a mustang, and found an online forum board and learned just about everything i know about cars on there. At first i diddnt even know how to change the oil, but now im comfortable ldoing a cluth swap. Not a cam swap though. lol.

So that is what led me here. I saw a lot of activity on this board, i dont see people calling the Nikon D40 a walmart disposable that i have seen on other boards, and i figure this place will contain a wealth of knowledge about cameras and im really glad to be here learning.

:)

aparmley
10-03-2008, 08:19 PM
Jack, I wouldn't dare rob you of the experience most all of us have gone through. Give it time, you'll answer your own question.

In the mean time, I'd save my pennies for Nikon's new 50 1.4 AF-S, nothing else at this time, all pennies to the new AF-S prime.

Chris (Esoterra) made a very good point as well. Something I should probably do. . .

Visual Reality
10-03-2008, 10:06 PM
In the mean time, I'd save my pennies for Nikon's new 50 1.4 AF-S, nothing else at this time, all pennies to the new AF-S prime.
Can I ask why?

aparmley
10-04-2008, 11:04 AM
Can I ask why?

Well, this is a "Must Have" thread right? Every SLRer should have a solid prime lens. Heck, you've got my favorite prime, can you imagine not having it in your bag? Considering his body doesn't have built in AF motor, that rules out all other primes. Hence, my advice to save for the 50 1.4 AF-S.

I suppose I could have said, buy a body that has an AF motor so you can pick a prime and use it. But, that just doesn't sound as good. ;)

Gintaras
10-04-2008, 11:47 AM
let me drop my 2 cents on this issue.

MUST HAVES you check before proceeding:

a) a pair of good, sharp eyes for framing purpose

b) a pair of stable, shake free hands to hold camera and push shutter release button

c) a bit of humor to comprehend a) & b) :p

fionndruinne
10-04-2008, 12:16 PM
I'd justify $400 for a 28mm or 35mm prime, much more all-purpose. But for a fifty on an APS-C, you're kind of excluded from room interiors, landscapes, wider street shots, and more.

The Sigma 30mm f/1.4 is an option, but I'd wait and see if Nikon updates their aforementioned wider primes with AF-S soon.

aparmley
10-06-2008, 04:21 AM
edit: Clearly others mileage does vary - which is normal.

My thinking was he wanted Must Haves given his camera. I didn't see that he was asking for must haves that allow him to shoot room interiors, landscapes, and wide street shots. I'll have to go back and reread the OP.

The 50mm FL is versatile, even on a APS-C, DX, body. Sure, there are time where you are going to wish you had something shorter, just the same as you'll wish you had longer. But, thats a prime lens, its not an all in one solution.

Rooz
10-06-2008, 04:42 AM
great minds andy...

fionndruinne
10-06-2008, 02:20 PM
Yes, 50mm is still versatile, but not for $400. Not when a few more bucks would get you an 18-50mm f/2.8 macro.

That's all up to the OP's budget, though.

Jack the Ripper
10-06-2008, 02:39 PM
let me drop my 2 cents on this issue.

MUST HAVES you check before proceeding:

a) a pair of good, sharp eyes for framing purpose

b) a pair of stable, shake free hands to hold camera and push shutter release button

c) a bit of humor to comprehend a) & b) :p

Do they need to be mine?

or can i just take them from some hooker?

lol

Jack the Ripper
10-06-2008, 02:40 PM
Yes, 50mm is still versatile, but not for $400. Not when a few more bucks would get you an 18-50mm f/2.8 macro.

That's all up to the OP's budget, though.

400-500 for any single item really is my budget at this point, but i can always pick up a paper route if need be. ;)

Rooz
10-06-2008, 03:04 PM
Yes, 50mm is still versatile, but not for $400. Not when a few more bucks would get you an 18-50mm f/2.8 macro.

That's all up to the OP's budget, though.

not in the same ballpark for image quality though. not even even in the same stratosphere.

Desertphoto
10-06-2008, 03:52 PM
400-500 for any single item really is my budget at this point, but i can always pick up a paper route if need be. ;)

Hi, I also recently bought the Nikon D40 and the same two lenses.Not just because of budget, I like the smaller size also.Although retirement plays with your budget just as surely as two little ones.;)

No one has mention UV filters to protect those two lenses.My old Fuji took 44mm so no swapping. But I ordered them at them for the D40 at the same time as the camera. Its very cheap insurance on them.:p

On the learning curve. Try some good books. The library first,free is nice. But if yours doesn't have what you want,try Ebay. I got Miotke's "Digital Photography" for 1/4 the original cost. He's easy to read and I like his workflow. Also got The Field Guide to Nikon D40/D40x because the manuals(and not just Nikons) can be very frustrating.:eek:

BTW, I like your Stang and just have to attach one of my "fish".Our cars and car shows,were a large reason for the move to digital:rolleyes:

http://inlinethumb46.webshots.com/12589/2382802180101654932S500x500Q85.jpg (http://rides.webshots.com/photo/2382802180101654932VOsOjq)

Now I hope the "babysitting" money stacks up quick. I hear that Nikon 60mm macro lens calling me!;)

Desertphoto
10-06-2008, 04:00 PM
edit: Clearly others mileage does vary - which is normal.

My thinking was he wanted Must Haves given his camera. I didn't see that he was asking for must haves that allow him to shoot room interiors, landscapes, and wide street shots. I'll have to go back and reread the OP.

The 50mm FL is versatile, even on a APS-C, DX, body. Sure, there are time where you are going to wish you had something shorter, just the same as you'll wish you had longer. But, thats a prime lens, its not an all in one solution.


MUST HAVE OR NOT

Now I have a question I keep reading about the Nikon NX software, one person says must have,next says not necessary. I have PSE 6, is that enough for the job or is it as limitied as the software included with the camera????:confused:

Visual Reality
10-06-2008, 04:51 PM
Nikon Capture NX is not a must-have. It is good software, but it depends what you have. Someone with Photoshop CS3 wouldn't bother with it, but someone with a basic editor would definitely consider the upgrade.

ssil2000
10-06-2008, 05:12 PM
dont forget adobe lightroom, its a great program, basic raw editing and cataloguing, for my needs i would consider it a "must have" but my needs may not reflect others. :)

Sergio :)

jcon
10-06-2008, 05:44 PM
Nikon Capture NX is not a must-have. It is good software, but it depends what you have. Someone with Photoshop CS3 wouldn't bother with it, but someone with a basic editor would definitely consider the upgrade.

While I can understand and for the most part agree with that, I have both, CS3 and NX, I use NX for opening the NEF/RAWs and doing the basic enhancements inside NX. Then, if needed, I use CS3 for the more advanced enhancements. Ive said this time and time again, Capture NX produces the best images from all the other software I have used. It just seems to "know or read" NEFs better than anyhting else out there.

If I had to suggest an editor to someone, hands down I would suggest Capture NX.

fionndruinne
10-06-2008, 05:44 PM
not in the same ballpark for image quality though. not even even in the same stratosphere.

Yay, I can take some images that are a stratosphere above the rest of the images I can take. A pity they're limited to semi-telephoto 75mm portraits and such.:(

(I am just coming from a similar situation, is why I make this point. I have no desire to go back to the kit lens, but am missing some landscapes and such with a fifty.)

But hey, if you can afford this lens and more in addition, by all means have the best.

TheWengler
10-06-2008, 05:53 PM
These guys all have NAS. Anything that say Nikon on it is a must have to them. :)

Dread Pirate Roberts
10-06-2008, 06:32 PM
The good people here helped me choose the Tamron 90mm F2.8 macro.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/330643-USA/Tamron_AF272N700_SP_90mm_f_2_8_Di.html

The lens is great for portraits, very sharp and opens the world of 1:1 macro photography to you. No more digital cropping and you can fill the screen with a bug (2-4 inches from the lens) that is sharp and massive. A whole new world and every bit as good a bang for buck as the 50mm F1.8 and the SB600.

Oh Tripods are expensive but do make a big difference. They're particularly important for macro.

Visual Reality
10-06-2008, 06:34 PM
While I can understand and for the most part agree with that, I have both, CS3 and NX, I use NX for opening the NEF/RAWs and doing the basic enhancements inside NX. Then, if needed, I use CS3 for the more advanced enhancements. Ive said this time and time again, Capture NX produces the best images from all the other software I have used. It just seems to "know or read" NEFs better than anyhting else out there.

If I had to suggest an editor to someone, hands down I would suggest Capture NX.
But that isn't my experience. Capture NX produced images that were far oversaturated and in general, not as good as CS3...I wish I had saved some of my comparisons.

jcon
10-06-2008, 08:44 PM
I remember your problem... and it was strange to myself and if I remember correctly, it boggled a few others here too. It just goes back to personal preference!

I apologize if I have gotten off topic!

K1W1
10-06-2008, 09:14 PM
dont forget adobe lightroom, its a great program, basic raw editing and cataloguing, for my needs i would consider it a "must have" but my needs may not reflect others. :)

Sergio :)

I agree and disagree.
Lightroom is the best and easiest program to edit, save, tag, sort, upload to the web, make slideshows and numerous other things if you have a Nikon camera and shoot jpeg.
If you shoot RAW then sorry but NX2 simply produces a better result.
Editing a RAW image in NX2 saving it to Tif the doing a final edit in Lightroom and uploading to the web as a jpeg produces a markedly better result than simply opening a RAW file in Lightroom alone and going from there but it's time consuming, fiddly and takes up a lot of hard drive space for one image.
For my use Lightroom is everything I need 99% of the time because I mainly shoot in jpeg anyway but if I ever got pedantic or starting miraculously shooting wonderful artistic images I would buy NX2 without hesitation and use it in conjunction with Lightroom.

fionndruinne
10-06-2008, 10:50 PM
The Tamron 90mm macro is a good recommendation. If I recall aright they are coming out with a version that will AF on the D40.

swgod98
10-06-2008, 11:16 PM
**deleted**

TheWengler
10-06-2008, 11:20 PM
I check this thread every so often and there are some really awesome photos in here! I am just amazed at how sometimes seemingly insignificant things in life can look so amazing. You guys all do a really good job.

Me, I've been busy with modelling shoots. Here is a photo of Sarah from a shoot last Wed.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3219/2913369133_da2d1c7b2e_b.jpg

Taken with my D300, Sigma 18-50mm, and a few monolights.

I'm thinking this landed in the wrong thread. :confused: Nice cupcakes though. :rolleyes:

swgod98
10-06-2008, 11:43 PM
I'm thinking this landed in the wrong thread. :confused: Nice cupcakes though. :rolleyes:

Ah $h!t. Yep. Sorry *innocent*

britkev
10-07-2008, 12:50 AM
Nice cupcakes though. :rolleyes:

Cupcakes? Where? ;)

theMadHatter
10-07-2008, 05:20 PM
BTW, I like your Stang and just have to attach one of my "fish".Our cars and car shows,were a large reason for the move to digital:rolleyes:

http://inlinethumb46.webshots.com/12589/2382802180101654932S500x500Q85.jpg (http://rides.webshots.com/photo/2382802180101654932VOsOjq)

Nice Barracuda... I had a '67 Fastback back in the day. :)

aparmley
10-07-2008, 06:32 PM
If you shoot RAW then sorry but NX2 simply produces a better result.
Editing a RAW image in NX2 saving it to Tif the doing a final edit in Lightroom and uploading to the web as a jpeg produces a markedly better result than simply opening a RAW file in Lightroom alone and going from there

got any comparison images online to share to back this up? I apologize, I'm a skeptic by nature. But, in all seriousness I'd like to see what your talking about, having never used Nikon image editing software.

jcon
10-07-2008, 10:01 PM
got any comparison images online to share to back this up? I apologize, I'm a skeptic by nature. But, in all seriousness I'd like to see what your talking about, having never used Nikon image editing software.


Give the free trial and look. As noted earlier.. I agree with K1W1 about NX. I think youll be pleasantly surprised once you play around with NX!

e_dawg
10-07-2008, 11:01 PM
Yep, for me, an SB-600 or 800 flash is essential, and offers more per dollar improvement than any other purchase IMO. Combine that with a Gary Fong Lightsphere or Stofen Omni-Bounce type bounce diffuser and you have instant pro-quality(ish) lighting at your disposal. Lighting is everything in photography (after composition and artistic expression). Knowing how to use available light or provide your own quality light source(s) when needed is more important than any lens.

The 2nd most important must-have IMO is a grad ND filter. I use a 2-stop grad ND filter all the time when I'm shooting pics outdoors with a bright sky. It's almost glued to my camera when I'm traveling. It makes all the difference in the world, as (IMHO) multiple exposures and HDR is just a tedious workaround for trying to fix something after the fact that should have been taken care of at the time of exposure (that is, if it was actually practical to do so). It deepens and saturates blue skies like a polarizer does, but without the dependency on relative positioning to the sun and the weird polarization effects that you can get shooting at WA with a C-POL. It just works and does so more effectively, with more consistency, and less fuss than a polarizer.

This ties in with my earlier platitude that lighting is everything in photography... you have to manage contrast and work within the limitations of the dynamic range of a digital imaging sensor, which has much, much less DR than what our eyes can capture.

K1W1
10-08-2008, 01:03 AM
got any comparison images online to share to back this up? I apologize, I'm a skeptic by nature.

Same here (sceptic) but I agree with Jason, download the free trail of NX2 and use it on your own images.
I noticed big differences in two main areas one was reds which I have never been totally happy with and the other is the D-Lighting, it's wonderful.
Having said that I have now paid for Lightroom 2 and my NX2 trial has expired and I have not purchased it simply because I get far more use from the features of Lightroom 2 for me than I do overall from NX and I don't want to become a software slave and start processing every image in several sorts of software.

Visual Reality
10-08-2008, 03:57 AM
Yep, for me, an SB-600 or 800 flash is essential, and offers more per dollar improvement than any other purchase IMO. Combine that with a Gary Fong Lightsphere or Stofen Omni-Bounce type bounce diffuser and you have instant pro-quality(ish) lighting at your disposal. Lighting is everything in photography (after composition and artistic expression). Knowing how to use available light or provide your own quality light source(s) when needed is more important than any lens.

The 2nd most important must-have IMO is a grad ND filter. I use a 2-stop grad ND filter all the time when I'm shooting pics outdoors with a bright sky. It's almost glued to my camera when I'm traveling. It makes all the difference in the world, as (IMHO) multiple exposures and HDR is just a tedious workaround for trying to fix something after the fact that should have been taken care of at the time of exposure (that is, if it was actually practical to do so). It deepens and saturates blue skies like a polarizer does, but without the dependency on relative positioning to the sun and the weird polarization effects that you can get shooting at WA with a C-POL. It just works and does so more effectively, with more consistency, and less fuss than a polarizer.

This ties in with my earlier platitude that lighting is everything in photography... you have to manage contrast and work within the limitations of the dynamic range of a digital imaging sensor, which has much, much less DR than what our eyes can capture.
Still though, an ND Grad, Polarizer, and HDR have different uses. ND Grad gets you great results with the least work, while HDR is the ultimate solution. It is definetely not a "workaround". A Polarizer obviously has its uses and has a different purpose than either and can be used with either at the same time.

e_dawg
10-08-2008, 07:06 AM
Same here (sceptic) but I agree with Jason, download the free trail of NX2 and use it on your own images.
I noticed big differences in two main areas one was reds which I have never been totally happy with and the other is the D-Lighting, it's wonderful.
Having said that I have now paid for Lightroom 2 and my NX2 trial has expired and I have not purchased it simply because I get far more use from the features of Lightroom 2 for me than I do overall from NX and I don't want to become a software slave and start processing every image in several sorts of software.

I would agree and did the same thing. As was said above, the colour response of LR is not as good as with CNX, but the good news is that the latest version of LR2 and Adobe's camera profiles is that it includes different profiles for your camera. If you don't like how ACR 4.4 processes your Nikon RAW files, you can use the new Adobe Standard Beta profile for your camera, or the new camera-specific Natural, Portrait, or Vivid profiles as well, based on the Nikon picture modes. So there is hope in getting Lightroom images to look like what you can achieve in CNX.

Incidentally, i have to say that I hated the speed of LR2 especially with extensive local adjustments. They do have version 2.1 out now (at least the beta version on Adobe Labs) and it is a noticeable improvement in most (but not all) aspects. So if you get LR2, don't forget to download the latest version from Adobe Labs as LR 2.0 out of the box can be slow.

Desertphoto
10-08-2008, 05:17 PM
Thanks everybody that posted in. I had not realized their was a trial version. How dub not to check. I will try it and the photoshop and see. Seems like a plan to me.

Thanks Mad Hatter, Mopar rules here. we have a 64 Dart conv and a 65 barracuda with a 426 wedge also.

aparmley
10-08-2008, 05:31 PM
Ok. I'll bite. I'll DL the trial.