Nikon D3 > Canon > Sell All & Switch

[L...@adobeforums.com]

[Donald...@adobeforums.com]

Its only a matter of time till canon one ups nikon,so save your money. Hard to imagine f6 would cover a long table like that, but you now what you saw. natural light is relative as well. it could have been a room with a glass wall to the outside, letting in tons of soft light.I do agree the camera is great and i actually shoot at 800 on a regular basis now, but canon is making great stuff as well.

[L...@adobeforums.com]

Hard to imagine f6 would cover a long table like that, but you now what
you saw.

Because of my propensity to not always get the facts straight, I plan to contact him this week and inquire again. I would love it if he would provide me with a copyrighted JPG, but even so I would probably not be at liberty to share it publicly.

natural light is relative as well. it could have been a room with a glass
wall to the outside, letting in tons of soft light.

Maybe, but if my memory serves me right I think there was a lot of dark wood and shelves.

I do agree the camera is great and i actually shoot at 800 on a regular
basis now, but canon is making great stuff as well.

I hope so, but I have my doubts that Canon will be able to match the D3. If they do have plans to release a body that is comparable, I just hope they don't take too long.

[Lawrenc...@adobeforums.com]

Does Canon have a PC lens?

[Ann_She...@adobeforums.com]

f/6 ? … or might it have been f/16?

I know that the D3 is a huge joy, and the high ISO capabilities are astounding, but part of he success of that shot was probably the result of the photographer's own ability.

Sitting lawyers are reasonably static so, if the camera was tripod-mounted, he could have stopped down and used quite a slow shutter speed.

There is also the possibility that he used image stacking in the way that Fred did in that memorable Forest shot of his.

[L...@adobeforums.com]

Does Canon have a PC lens?

Yes, and they recently came out with two new ones. <http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ProductCatIndexAct&fcategoryid=156>

[L...@adobeforums.com]

There is also the possibility that he used image stacking in the way that
Fred did in that memorable Forest shot of his.

I too wondered if there was any photo manipulation. He seemed to be expressing that it was simply shot as it was.

f/6 ? … or might it have been f/16?

I am pretty sure he said f/6, but will try to find out.

[PSh...@adobeforums.com]

Here we go again ... ;)

Just go ahead and buy the D3 already. It'll satisfy your craving for new equipment and you'll learn a valuable, albeit unexpected, lesson.

Really, I think you should buy it.

How much do you want for your Canon gear?

-phil

[L...@adobeforums.com]

Here we go again...

I wouldn't want to disappoint you. Besides, we need a little excitement around here. ;-)

Really, I think you should buy it.

If I get some time between the job I'm on now and a new job starting in April, I might rent the D3 for a day or a weekend, just to see how it feels and performs in my own hands.

How much do you want for your Canon gear?

If I do this, I'll check to see what the going rate is for used gear like mine, and then try to knock some off. I will want to make enough to at least cover the cost of the new gear though.

I don't plan make this move "too" impulsively. ;-) And I would like to see what Canon does within the next six months.

[Wade_Zi...@adobeforums.com]

The weigh is a factor Linda the D3 is heavy by comparison to the 5D.

Then shooting with the 5D at 800 is not all that fulfilling.

But renting the camera is the way to go. In spite of what others might think the old 24mm Tilt/Shift Canon lens is not a good choice as one colleague who just changed from a 5D to a D3x said the 24mm Tilt Shift Canon lens had too much barrel distortion and was not as sharp as he required.

He is very happy with using a non PC lens on the D3x a 14-24mm zoom, reviewed by many as one f the best lenses Nikon ever made and seems will go down in history as one of their best lenses ever. He does all the perspective correction in Photoshop.

I do not agree that is always a good idea but that is his choice, but then without trying new nikkor pc lenses he judged it by the old experience he had with the Canon Lens so that does not speak well of his logic.

Unlike him I will try the 14-24mm lens this week to see if it fulfills the needs.

My colleague also is very conscious of money and it may simply be economics that drives his decisions.

Some of his clients have complained to me that he always uses the excuse we will fix it in photoshop, every shot and they are getting tired of it.

So there are factors working against him and the next time we talk he will probably tell me i should not use the 14-24mm because you always have to tell the client you'll fix it in Photoshop.

I expect a call asking to borrow the 24mm PC in the near future.

[Wade_Zi...@adobeforums.com]

Linda he may have been using the Nikkor 14-24mm zoom lens I have seen an image taken with it and it appears to be super sharp. It might also explain why he has such a depth of field depending on the focal length and of course a lens that renders the image in such a sharp way tends to give the impression that the depth of field has been in creased since it renders the image more accurately though out the filed.

Not something some of the guys here understand and think is irrelevant.

But you now see what i am talking about if it captures the image in such a way then your falloff is going to be much more subtle.

Generally referred to as a lens with a great depth of field.

Now they are going to jump back and scream bloody murder and that ll lenses render the depth of filed equally but that simply is not the case and do not listen to them.

You know they have said I cannot take a portrait but ask Peter Figen what he thinks of my
realistic approach to taking portraits and you might get a different opinion this time.

BTW Peter I would be interested in taking a portrait of your friend Benny Chan in the same informal way.

Peter was easy to photograph. Andrew I would need a little more time to hang out with first.

It is very important to me to get the person to trust you and to know you a bit before shooting.

It sounds like your photography friend Linda takes the same approach i am certain after a while they were very comfortable with him being around that he had not problem taking a few images and probably most are useable.

Don't listen to the experts rent and find out what lens he was using.

[L...@adobeforums.com]

The weigh is a factor Linda the D3 is heavy by comparison to the 5D.

I've been using the extra battery pack with the 5D without a problem. I wonder how much heavier.

Then shooting with the 5D at 800 is not all that fulfilling.

The 5D does very well at 800 ISO, just not as well as the D3.

But renting the camera is the way to go. In spite of what others might
think the old 24mm Tilt/Shift Canon lens is not a good choice as one colleague
who just changed from a 5D to a D3x said the 24mm Tilt Shift Canon lens
had too much barrel distortion and was not as sharp as he required.

I don't know if I want a Tilt & Shift, but I will be asking my colleague what lens he used for the print he showed me.

He is very happy with using a non PC lens on the D3x a 14-24mm zoom, reviewed
by many as one f the best lenses Nikon ever made and seems will go down
in history as one of their best lenses ever. He does all the perspective
correction in Photoshop.

Sounds nice, though probably a little wide if I only end up with one lens for starters.

Unlike him I will try the 14-24mm lens this week to see if it fulfills
the needs.

I would be interested in seeing how it performs.

[Donald...@adobeforums.com]

I still say you will continually be jumping back and forth between brands if you hope to have the best features all the time. stick with what you have and dont take such a huge hit on selling perfectly good equipment. The nikon 14-24 is truly one of the best optics that nikon makes and is a beauty,but it does not take polarizers,unless you jury rig something, which some have done, but at that wide,polarizers are not always feasible anyway.

Wade, would you prefer the rest of us not offer our input for consideration, as you seem to imply we are all just a bunch of idiots. I am surprised you are not giving linda your textbook speech on always wanting the best equipment. try just offering your suggestions and forego trying to brainwash people into hanging on your every word. just once anyway.

[L...@adobeforums.com]

I still say you will continually be jumping back and forth between brands
if you hope to have the best features all the time. stick with what you
have and dont take such a huge hit on selling perfectly good equipment.

Whichever body I buy will probably be my last camera purchase.

It's funny that I am even into this. Believe it or not, I don't even like photography that much. But I do enjoy the results. And when I am hired to do a job, no matter how small, it is my goal and my pleasure to give to my clients the best work I can provide… within my limited realm.

[Donald...@adobeforums.com]

You must enjoy it to some degree because you always seem to do a good job with things you shoot. I am sure you would be delighted with the camera,but if you do not enjoy it that much, then i think its not your best investment if its just going to collect dust.

[L...@adobeforums.com]

You must enjoy it to some degree because you always seem to do a good
job with things you shoot.

Thank you Donald. I think what I enjoy the most is the awareness that photography has brought to my surroundings. There is hardly a day go by that I do not enjoy looking out the window and seeing how the sun filters through a tree, or reflects on a rain drop, or turns a late afternoon to magic.

[Fred_...@adobeforums.com]

Perhaps a D700 and battery pack would be a closer match to your 5D in handling. The D3 instigates a substantial price penalty over the D700 for extras which may not be relevant if you're not going to be using the camera heavily or "robustly" - the sensor and image processing are the same in both cameras.

The 14-24mm may not be the best choice if much of your work involves people. 24mm is an inconvenient cut-off point, being generally too wide for close-ups without comical distortion of facial features. The 17-35mm is a better spread for all-round use. It may not tickle the lens resolution charts to the same extreme as the 14-24, but is a very sharp lens nontheless, is substantially smaller and lighter, will accept filters, and for most things 17mm is plenty wide enough. The street price of each is about the same.

To my way of thinking a D700 with a 17-35mm, 24-70mm and 70-200mm would be a good starting point, with the inclusion of a 105mm micro and a 35mm PC should your needs take you into those areas.

[Ann_She...@adobeforums.com]

14-24mm zoom, reviewed by many as one of the best lenses Nikon ever made

and seems will go down in history as one of their best lenses ever.

I definitely second that opinion: I am lucky enough to have one and it truly is superb.

I am also glad to have a 28 mm PC lens but it is not one of the new Tilt/Shift ones and I would like to replace it eventually with a couple of the newer ones.

I don't find the wight of the D3 at all onerous and can wear it all day — even with the heavy 24-70 mm mounted. The thing is so well balanced that the weight is not a problem.

The weight of my case when loaded with camera and glass is a different matter — and my set of removable wheels were certainly handy on my last flight to the West Coast.

[L...@adobeforums.com]

To my way of thinking a D700 with a 17-35mm, 24-70mm and 70-200mm would
be a good starting point, with the inclusion of a 105mm micro and a 35mm
PC should your needs take you into those areas.

Hmmm... Might be a good idea, provided the D700 really does perform as well as the D3.

[L...@adobeforums.com]

Linda he may have been using the Nikkor 14-24mm zoom lens I have seen
an image taken with it and it appears to be super sharp. It might also
explain why he has such a depth of field depending on the focal length
and of course a lens that renders the image in such a sharp way tends
to give the impression that the depth of field has been in creased since
it renders the image more accurately though out the filed.

Wade, I just reread your post. Thank you for this info.

[Wade_Zi...@adobeforums.com]

No Donald but sometimes when some guys here on the forum hear sensible solutions they go a bit wild and demand that the sensible advice be overlooked and hey jump in and do not think about it.

You're desire to controls all reason at times.

Linda is now doing the right thing and renting to find out what if it is correct.

Also she saw results that have made her think this is the way to go offering her other alternatives without seeing those results that she desires is shooting blind and once again for the purpose of control. She has to find out what she has to do in order to accomplish what she saw,on that basis she can then plan her strategy. Substituting a lens that might or might not fulfill the needs is not a good approach, unless it proves to provide the same results.

That is sharpness and depth of field low noise and a clarity in the images dark areas.

Making assumptions and offering expert advise on something you have no knowledge of is not a friendly thing to do.

Making arguments in advanced based on what you want to be true also stinks Phil let Linda find out, it is her decision to make but it should be one based on the experience she has with equipment in general.

Now I gave my assessment of the noise capabilities of the 5D Linda sees it differently but perhaps when she tries it she might change her mind it all depends on how she shoots and not how I shoot.

This is really about not what we think but about giving Linda good advice on how to evaluate something that she feels she needs not what we need.

That is why I say to not listen to the experts who never seem to get this point, it is not what Peter Figen thinks would suit someone or what Phil would like to have someone do about the lenses Ann has and certainly not about the equipment and manner in which I shoot.

I think Linda is doing the right thing even if in the end she decides to switch or to stay as she is or move in some other direction.

BTW Linda I am not telling you about the what equipment or peoples experiencing for the purpose of proposing you buy a certain item or brand just to show the example of how the decisions vary from one user to another even if they are closely related in the work they do. I don't know anyone that buys something strictly on the basis of one persons advice without really finding a way of trying it out.

Before you rent you might ask this photographer if you can meet up and insert one of your cards in his camera and take three or four images even if it is just a few portraits of him.

That might help you decide if you want to then rent.He might agree? Worth a try.

[Fred_...@adobeforums.com]

There will be no difference in image quality or ISO performance between a D3 and D700. The physical differences are mainly in build, shutter robustness and weather-sealing, and the functional differences are largely concerned with doing things quicker (such as burst rates) and with more programmable finesse.

If you're using a 5D and not a 1Ds, I'd suggest that a D700 would be more than adequate for the same reasons that you didn't go for a 1Ds in the first place. The change will more than buy you a lens such as a 24-70 or 17-35.

[Donald...@adobeforums.com]

Or you could take our word for it that the d700 and d3 are amazing cameras in the low noise area. the majority of competent shooters who frequent here are using them, and our experience with them should be a pretty reliable source of info, since you know us. Renting one might make you feel better about it, but we have been there and done that already. Still canon will come out with something that will make all us nikon shooters want to switch, and so it goes. By the way i hear many canon shooters switched for the 14-24 alone,but then i believe you can get an adapter like peter uses on some gear, so maybe the low noise pushed them over the edge. If you got the cash, you will enjoy them for sure.

[L...@adobeforums.com]

Thanks for all the input everyone. I might try to meet with this photographer at some point. Even better I might go visit his studio when I have some time.

If I don't respond to this thread for a while it's because I have to get back to a client job tomorrow. Once I have some more personal time I look forward to continuing.

[Wade_Zi...@adobeforums.com]

She uses a heavy battery pack as she points out I read somewhere that a comparable device for the D700 offers more weight and bulk so you are back where you were and the cost is about the same.

[Ann_She...@adobeforums.com]

I agree.

You need to handle, and "wear", a camera for a while to really get a feel for whether it is a good "fit" for you physically as well as technically.

Good ergonomics are extremely important in my book.
Does it fit your hands?
What about the viewfinder?
Are the control buttons and switches placed where you can find them instinctively by feel and without looking?

And much more that you can only decide for yourself by actually handling the machine.

[-ma...@adobeforums.com]

Linda,

I suggest you get a good nights sleep before you make a rash decision. Flushing good money down the drain for the sake of owning the latest/greatest doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. That is, unless you happen to have a greenback bearing tree in your back yard.

Camera technology evolves by the second. There are already models in the pipeline that will trounce anything available today. What than? Another switch?

You have excellent equipment. Learn to use it to its potential!

Best!

[L...@adobeforums.com]

Hi Macman... I mentioned that it will be at least six months earlier in the thread, and if I do make the change I will sell what I have first in order to pay for it. :-)

I do plan to try out the D3 or D700 sooner but no plans to buy until I've given Canon a chance to come out with something.

I may not do anything, but I am very impressed with some of the images I've seen.

[-ma...@adobeforums.com]

Linda, my nephew has the same camera you have. I was talking to him a week ago, and, seeing as he’s always touting the latest toys, I causally asked if he’d already upgraded to the 5D II?

His answer: What for? The 5D is already more camera than I need.

I can’t argue his point. I see his pix regularly and they are gorgeous. Absolutely little too complain about.

[PSh...@adobeforums.com]

I may not do anything, but I am very impressed with some of the images
I've seen.

And that's because of the camera, huh? Couldn't possibly have anything to do with the person driving the camera, could it?

I've asked you this before ... what, precisely are looking to improve upon? Where is your current gear letting you down? All of your comments seem to center around sharpness. Can you not get sharp images?

You have excellent equipment. Learn to use it to its potential!

No, no, macman ... you don't understand. Learning is no fun - it's much more exciting to believe new equipment will make you a better photographer so you want to need to buy all the latest toys.

(despite the sarcasm, most photographers ARE gearheads. I've certainly been guilty of talking myself into purchases because of a want and not of a "need". Goes with the territory...)

But the most important thing to understand is that the only "expert" to believe in here is that WZ guy. You know, the guy who succinctly explained that Nikon lenses magically circumvent the laws of physics. Lol ...

-phil

[L...@adobeforums.com]

I guess I'd better explain. I just hope you will actually read with as much thought as I put into expressing what comes from my heart.

Photography is not a hobby for me. It is part of my business. And whereas is not my primary source of income, it does provide income and could provide more if I took all the jobs that came my way.

I would not upgrade at all if I didn't want the ability to produce larger prints in the future. In our area people spend a lot of money to buy large prints, primarily on canvas. Being able to sell big makes a huge difference in the cost of a print.

I know that some of you have little respect for me as a photographer. And I don't tout myself as being that great. But for some reason others do like my work. Why? Because I do strive for excellence in the finished product.

No matter how big or how small a job, I try to produce the best work I can, within my limitations of course.

The 5D is a wonderful camera, and has served me well. If Canon comes out with a replacement that offers the same capabilities regarding low light shooting and the same quality as the D3, this will make me very happy.

But, instead of trying to compete with the D3, Canon chose to add video to the most recent upgrade. Those of you who followed my other thread know how much I wanted to see an image that came close to the D3 output. It never happened.

Phil, I doubt you will ever believe in me as a photographer, and I don't blame you. You and I are worlds apart. But if you knew me on a professional level, not as a photographer so much, but as a creative who works very had, I do think you would gain at least a little respect. Then again, maybe not.

Now, hopefully I will stay away from this thread long enough to focus on my work today. ;-)

[L...@adobeforums.com]

No, no, macman ... you don't understand. Learning is no fun - it's much
more exciting to believe new equipment will make you a better photographer

so you want, er ... need to buy all the latest toys.

Phil, This statement proves without a doubt, that you don't know me at all. Do you know that you can come across as mean and shortsighted at times?

[Ramon...@adobeforums.com]

The D3 is the BOMB!! ... sell everything! :)

... and if it weren't for LRK and her expertise, my step daughter would not have had a photo of her and her dad coming down the aisle in her wedding. I've been a professional photographer for over 25 years ... but digital was a whole new ball-game for me.

[L...@adobeforums.com]

... and if it weren't for LRK and her expertise, my step daughter would
not have had a photo of her and her dad coming down the aisle in her wedding.
I've been a professional photographer for over 25 years ... but digital
was a whole new ball-game for me.

Ramona, Bless you for posting this. I had to stop and think for a moment because I had forgotten about it.

[Allen...@adobeforums.com]

I am seriously considering selling every piece of my Canon equipment in
order to pay for a D3 with one good lens.

IMO you are a D700 person and Canon will probably have a camera competitive with the D700 before long. As to "good lens" that is what some of us have been advising since your Rebel...

[Allen...@adobeforums.com]

Also note that when establishing a limited new top quality lens selection, lenses like superwide PC or the 14-24mm or even the 17-35mm are probably initially less appropriate than the 24-70mm for what I perceive as your needs.

In that wide-normal-mild tele range zoom is particularly useful, but when choosing lenses do not fail to consider the value of fast prime lenses for superwide and for tele.

[Wade_Zi...@adobeforums.com]

I think Linda has learnt some things about buying and selling equipment and she will do alright with the exchange and I think she will probably also want to hook up with someone that has a Canon 5D Mark II just to compare with a comparable lens.

Before renting network and ask to try it out and I think it is a good idea to see this photographers studio. Here it is just talk but once you see that is a much better picture.

You'll make the right decision.

I think you will have fun visiting your different contacts' studios and the networking opportunities are good as well.

No matter what you do you will learn something first hand which works best for you.

[Wade_Zi...@adobeforums.com]

I see that the wording in the last post needs some punctuation. You have to put those in yourself.

I meant to say; that if you visit you r colleagues studios then you will have an opportunity to also network. That way you benefit from the experience of seeing the studio set up, get to know your colleague and benefit from having them know you.

[L...@adobeforums.com]

I agree about colleagues. For the past three years I've been a member of our local pro Guild it has been a pleasure and beneficial getting to know other photographers in the area.

[L...@adobeforums.com]

Allen,

Appreciate your thoughts on lenses. I do hope Canon comes through with something impressive, especially when I think of having to replace my lenses.

Not sure I told you all, but a few months back I finally broke down and bought the 100mm Macro f/2.8. It was one of the cheaper lenses I bought, but has become a favorite for portraits. I'm quite sure it is the sharpest lens I own.

[Ann_She...@adobeforums.com]

You probably did well to get it when you did, Linda.

Some Nikon prices went up steeply over the last few weeks and perhaps the Canon ones did too?

Nikon offers a 105mm f/2.8 macro which i have been eyeing but I really do need to try and exercise a bit of "purchasing-restraint" at the moment — IF I can …

8/

[L...@adobeforums.com]

Some Nikon prices went up steeply over the last few weeks and perhaps
the Canon ones did too?

You're right Ann. It has gone up since I bought it. It was $455 at B&H. Now it is $490.

[Ann_She...@adobeforums.com]

Evil, wicked, temptress … !

;)

[Fred_...@adobeforums.com]

Get the 105, Ann, I don't think you'll regret it.

With AF-S, IF, VR and Crystal Nano-coating it is an up-to-the-minute gold-ring design in the Nikkor stable. Even though it has been around for a while now, there will not be any updates in the foreseeable future as evidenced by the recent upgrade of the venerable 60mm Micro to similar design specs, so delaying purchase (for whatever reason) is only leaving you with days ahead that you don't have it and photographs that you'll not take with it.

It is a perfect compliment to the D3 as well. I was never really overly excited with its performance on the D2x, but it really came to life when used with the D3.

[L...@adobeforums.com]

Evil, wicked, temptress … !

Actually, the USA version is currently out of stock at B&H.

But why was I even looking … ?!

LOL!

It is obvious that the world has taken to the D3 like nobody's business. Nikon has the upper hand and apart from the economy, could probably raise prices again… and still get away with it.

My hat is off to Nikon for the excellence they've put into this product. I do hope both Nikon and Canon stay in business and keep separate because they are good for each other.

[Ann_She...@adobeforums.com]

You are compounding Linda's bad influence, Fred!

9Actually, the 105mm has had outstanding reviews.)

Another consideration is how much weight can my camera-bag (and my shoulder) take — apart from the amount that my credit card can withstand.

[L...@adobeforums.com]

Ann, Surely you made enough off that recent (very impressive) product shoot… to justify a little extra expenditure?

[Ramón_G_Castañeda@adobeforums.com]

Nikon 105mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor Lens in stock at amazon for 895. <http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-105mm-2-8G-ED-IF-Micro-Nikkor/dp/B000EOSHGQ/ref=pd_bbs_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1237851099&sr=8-1>

[Ann_She...@adobeforums.com]

You are ALL such bad influences!

<Running (with hands over eyes and ears) to pay horrendous property taxes!> … </running>

Amazon you say?

[Fred_...@adobeforums.com]

I would consider this being a good influence.

Take brilliant shots with 105, sell them for much money, pay taxes, pay off lens and take holiday with the change all sounds much better than just plain paying taxes..... XD

[Wade_Zi...@adobeforums.com]

The 60 Micro I have but have actually not used it i test it and it does have an advantage over other Micro lenses which is 1:1! At 6 inches.

So that is very good I believe I posted detail shots and everyone was impressed.

As far as i can recall the 105 Focal length seems to be one that Nikon has always had great success with. I think Ann was impressed with a portrait i took with 105mm with a displaced depth of field feature work well with digital but I think originally designed for film.

I think you probably should try it first a lens like that might cost $25-35 to rent for the weekend.

Now for people in LA if you rent in New York and you take the lens out friday mid day and return it Monday morning that is a one day rental. Do the same at Samy's and that is a two day rental because they are opened on the weekend.

[pfigen]

But pick it up after 2 pm and it's a one day rental....

[Fred_...@adobeforums.com]

The 105mm also does 1:1, and doesn't get so close to the subject that it blocks light like the 60mm. At 1:1 it is about a foot from the subject.

It's a better optic as well (flatter field), plus it has VR for easy hand-held use in low light. As a general short tele it is also very good. As I said before, with the D3 it is a perfect match; 3200 ISO, 1/40 sec @ f:2.8, hand held:

<http://www.pixentral.com/show.php?picture=190gUz7T1V2BVPcV9BzND2ewoqvSCV>

[Wade_Zi...@adobeforums.com]

Hmm again you are making rules and about unknowns? I do not get the need to do such a thing.

I purchase 60MM for a purpose I do not see it blocking the light! why come up with things like this stuff. 12 inches in the micro world is a long distance it does not offer a vantage point that might be desired by some users.

For instance if I want to shoot an architectural model and I have to do so from the human scale close up then I have to be very close. Even though you get close sort of speak with the 105mm longer focal length because the angle of view is different the make up of the images is different as well.

So instead of a vantage point of being say at he corner of West 121 Street and Broadway with 60MM, that's like two blocks from the Hudson River, I am now in New Jersey with the 105mm.

Though it is often acceptable as it is an abstract expression of what will be there are times when it is not acceptable. Nor desired.

the idea that they make a 60MM Micro is for a reason the reason they make a 105 MM micro also is for a reason. zit is not so much a question of one being better then the other as much as one being appropriate for your uses.

I do not know how the 60MM would perform in low light I doubt I will ever have to find out but I do not get this strange need to think that what ever you use is the best. Ann does the same thing?

It is very odd.

I assumed you used the 60mm and did not like it. It does get good reviews.

Although it is also a general lens I do not think that is its power as would be the case with the 105.

[Fred_...@adobeforums.com]

What on earth are you on about, Wade?

My main point was to correct your inference that the only Micro lens that does 1:1 is the 60mm. It isn't - the 105mm manages that perfectly well without accessory tubes. See:

<http://www.pixentral.com/show.php?picture=1NUKpENdbWWizajiEJITR2DYXuw5Uy0>

(pardon the lack of quality - this was done in haste using a Lumix P&S).

The mention of the VR on the 105 is also pertinent, for although Nikon recommend against using it in the macro field, it works just fine and has made hand-held shots that were unpredictable or impossible before with the 60mm quite feasible (1:1, strong wind blowing, position too cramped to set up a tripod, hand held @ 1/80 sec). Any closer and probably the insect would probably have flown off (a 60mm at this magnification would probably have touched its wingtips while moving in and out to catch focus):

<http://www.pixentral.com/show.php?picture=1RJb6rfcAW4blbasc0Cc7wcftkXlx4>

It also helps out in general photography, as my example was posted to illustrate.

I fail to see how you get that I was canning the 60mm or making "rules" (geez, talk about the pot calling the kettle black!), all I did was point out a couple of quite valid reasons why the 105mm is a very useful lens, moreso than the 60mm in my experience with using both of them in a far wider general application than just taking architectural models. Obviously both have their advantages, but I carry the 105mm in the field and leave the 60mm on the copy stand because the 105mm is a more versatile lens in general use.

I treat my replies as being read by anyone, so seek to be as general as possible. Not all of us photograph little else but steel, concrete and glass, after all.

[Wade_Zi...@adobeforums.com]

I treat my replies as being read by anyone, so seek to be as general as
possible. Not all of us photograph little else but steel, concrete and
glass, after all.

You know some people think I have a way with portraits as well.

[Fred_...@adobeforums.com]

You know some people think I have a way with portraits as well.

For which the 105mm would be the choice of the two lenses to use, one would think....?

[L...@adobeforums.com]

Fred, I love the older man with a guitar you posted. It's one of those shots that you connect with. It's rich.

[PSh...@adobeforums.com]

Do you know that you can come across as mean and shortsighted at times?

That's because I tell the truth. Obviously, you're only interested in feel-good comments and advice on where to spend your money so I'll bow out for good.

-phil

[L...@adobeforums.com]

That's because I tell the truth.

As you see it. This door swings both ways. Is it possible that you are not always right about your assessment of others?

Back to the topic at hand. Trust me. I don't want to have to switch. I just want Canon to quit focusing on video and work on quality that matches the D3 at high ISO. I'm willing to pay for it, but I don't see it.

[Fred_...@adobeforums.com]

It's rich.

As was his music, Linda.

Cold night, on the front porch of an old 1819 farm mansion, lighting was mainly by one desklamp on the floor in front of him, and there were about 40 very appreciative people in the impromptu audience. One of those situations where taking a bad photo would be very difficult indeed.

[Ann_She...@adobeforums.com]

Fred:

I should be suing you for damages!
You post images like those ones and expect me have self-restraint and not to go and buy a 105mm instead of paying my taxes?!

On the other hand I could always send my Tax Bills to you instead?

Anyone who has the 24-70mm, investigate its use as a close-up lens.

A zoom for macro? Yes — incredibly.

At 70mm you can get in to almost 1:2 and still get amazingly good results.

[L...@adobeforums.com]

Cold night, on the front porch of an old 1819 farm mansion, lighting was
mainly by one desklamp on the floor in front of him, and there were about
40 very appreciative people in the impromptu audience. One of those situations
where taking a bad photo would be very difficult indeed.

Fred, I can so appreciate this experience. It had to be a magical moment. We had the privilege of gathering with a small group and listening a Russian musician in our home and a friend's home, followed by a performance in Palm Beach a couple of years ago. His gift is such that it brings tears to my eyes.

[Fred_...@adobeforums.com]

I don't expect restraint at all :-)

Even with escalating prices, the 105 is a bargain for what you get for the money. Its features are a virtual dictionary of Nikkor acronyms: SWM VR ED IF N Micro.

[Wade_Zi...@adobeforums.com]

Linda

Phil thinks this is a hobby me as well and that I am a silly women as well!

I don't know if he still teaches but he once said his students could out perform me, that might be but then they would be out performing him easily as well. However I gave him the challenge of having his students visit my portfolio and offer their criticism and comments but we never heard even a peep.

I think it would have been a great class project.

So from one silly women to another do what you think is right.

As for Fred I tend to use the 24 mm pc lens for portraits. It gives a natural look to the subject at least they way I shoot with it. 60mm would be my idea of a mild telephoto.

[L...@adobeforums.com]

Phil thinks this is a hobby me as well and that I am a silly women as
well!

So from one silly women to another do what you think is right.

:-)

I really don't want to have to switch, and I can appreciate how it does seem silly that I would entertain the idea. I realize Canon makes a great product. I am just so impressed with the huge strides Nikon has made since the D3. Being able to shoot at such high ISO's in low lighting and get the kind of results I've seen samples of, is a breakthrough to a whole new level, both in achieving quality of product, and of flexibility.

I don't do much for fun. Those that know me well realize I am somewhat of a workaholic, and often have to pull me away from my work, for which I usually am grateful. I just enjoy excellence and quality in different areas of life. And though I fall short, it's something I continue to strive for.

[Wade_Zi...@adobeforums.com]

Linda many of the users here even the professionals started early in life taking photography seriously and they think the concept that people pick up a camera and explore the use of the camera solely for use as a business is a bit foreign. They do not quite relate all the tie t the concept that one sees this in a different way.

I point this out all the time that not everyone sees things the same and they mostly view photography as a very personal thing and a profession secondly and a business in the third place. So when someone comes along who sees it as a business in the first place and there is no second or third place, well that sort of throws them off. that is why they often response with excitement about your queries about equipment and they go a bit wild and you can get this one and that one and this one and that one.

I have often tried to explain the Linda is in business graphic arts is her business photography is not a hobby, she has to see a return on her investment, right or wrong feels she has to offer her clients the latest up to date services, that is all there is to it.

And also she is hard to educate so the education part is a much harder sell and probably not as important as long as she can provide her clients with the services.

I am just being honest, not insulting you.

have often pointed out that I know many well regarded pros and fine artist that use the photography media that know no more about the traditions and techniques then you do and by now probably know less then you do, but that does not make them any less well regarded their audience is happy.

I personally think they can be more efficient if they had more of a background and understanding of the process but i still regard them as artist and professionals in most cases.

Your in business and do well that is all that matters and you do what ever you think is correct but like with the photo guild the information here is not about you as much s it is about the poster in amy cases.

I personally think you spent money on things you do not need but that is what we all do and no matter how much we are warned we always do it.

I am killing time as I have to do a shot at dusk.

You know you client base serve them not us. And get the check and make certain they sign it.

[L...@adobeforums.com]

Wade, Thank you for your thoughts. I would say you did a good job of being perceptive. Learning is something I am constantly working at, but it does not come easy for me as it does for others. My retention is not so hot either. I do best by reading, re-reading, and highlighting my library of books, while getting help from others, such as yourself, Ann, Ashley, Phil, and several others... to help fill in the blanks and answer specifics... for which I am most grateful.

[Allen...@adobeforums.com]

I tend to use the 24 mm pc lens for portraits. It gives a natural look
to the subject at least they way I shoot with it. 60mm would be my idea
of a mild telephoto.

I consider 60mm pretty much a normal lens. Obviously a good photog can make an interesting pic with various tools, but in general IMO 24mm is much too wide angle for what most viewers consider "pleasing" for general portraiture.

[Wade_Zi...@adobeforums.com]

And perhaps for most photographers as well but I think I do very well with the 24mm. When working with a Lieca my normal lens was a 35mm elmarit and I was very successful with it.

But I like the idea of having the vantage point of being as I would normally se a person when addressing them and prefer a casual look to a portrait. I can't be concerned about what most viewers see or think i have to be concerned about what I think and see if they don't see it that is not my problem, I do what I feel is right for me.

At about five feet I think the 60 mm leaves the impression you are at five feet from your subject however that is not why I have the 60mm lens but it dies illustrate my purpose when photographing an architectural model. If I acquire the 45mm PC and that serves the purpose as well I will probably sell the 60mm.

Maybe I will find out soon as I intend to photograph a neighbors nine year old son is becoming an outstanding pianist and then maybe a video as well.

I like the intimacy of being closer to the subject both with people and objects.

[Ann_She...@adobeforums.com]

Hmm … about that 105mm lens?

Pity that I can't pay my taxes so my tax bills are being forwarded to Florida and Tasmania.

8/

[L...@adobeforums.com]

Pity that I can't pay my taxes so my tax bills are being forwarded to
Florida and Tasmania.

Nobody here by that name. Hiding. 8)

[Wade_Zi...@adobeforums.com]

Yes! You did not take your own advice and you have yourself to blame however that is the price you pay for having ll this fun with new toys.

And after all like Leona Helmsley always use to like to say: Only the small people pay taxes!

And did you forget to deduct your new toys from your taxes?

BTW when is the deadline for taxes…something like July 30th or there abouts? Something like that…right?

And isn't there a tax amnesty that we do not have to pay taxes until 2012 because of the economic down turn…or am I dreaming?

[Ann_She...@adobeforums.com]

These are the Local Taxes — and they are already over-due — and there ain't no deductions for Toys (nor for house-eating squirrels either)!

:(

But, hey, that 105 has already shipped — and is due to arrive here tomorrow!!!

:)

[L...@adobeforums.com]

It's just like me to cause someone else to spend money, while I have now got it out of my system, and have decided to keep what I've got. :-)

[-sh...@adobeforums.com]

And isn't there a tax amnesty that we do not have to pay taxes...

Only if you're a cabinet appointee, Wade.
;)

[L...@adobeforums.com]

Only if you're a cabinet appointee, Wade.

Good one Shep! ;-)

[Wade_Zi...@adobeforums.com]

So how do you apply for this Cabinet appointee thing? Can anyone be a cabinet appointee where do you get the form.

[Ann_She...@adobeforums.com]

There are only a few people who can send you that form.

The fee is a mere $2,000 … and needs to be sent to me via Western Union.

[Wade_Zi...@adobeforums.com]

Ok I am running to get the form and the deposit in the mail…look for it!

[Fred_...@adobeforums.com]

As much as 105 seems to be one of the focal lengths that Nikon does exceeding
well in all versions in their history it seems. What would be the point?

Besides being a prime lens that is at least one and a half stops faster, has a flatter field with no distortion and 1:1 macro focusing ability, I guess there is no point, Wade.

Ann won't be disappointed, that much I can confidently predict. (The Kenko extension tube set is a worthwhile accessory as well, Ann - it's cheap and extends the 105 into a virtual microscope.)

I might point out here that CS4's 11.0.1 update has improved layer stacking and combining into the best program for focus stacking. It is exceptionally good - far better than Helicon Focus or CZM.

[Ann_She...@adobeforums.com]

(The Kenko extension tube set is a worthwhile accessory as well, Ann -
it's cheap and extends the 105 into a virtual microscope.)

O.K. Fred!
In for a penny; in for a pound … I guess!

Actually, I have just looked at reviews of the Kenko tubes and they are somewhat damning because of the plastic construction.

The Pro Optic metal ones may be a better product?
<http://www.adorama.com/MCAETNKAF.html>

However neither brand seems to be auto focus compatible with Nikon AF-s (Silent Wave) lenses and manual focusing is required with these lenses.

Has anyone here had experience with these two brands?

[Wade_Zi...@adobeforums.com]

Besides being a prime lens that is at least one and a half stops faster,
has a flatter field with no distortion and 1:1 macro focusing ability,
I guess there is no point, Wade.

That is exactly what I mean there is probably a hundred lenses out there that have as attractive specs as this lens, but without a clear purpose it seems strange one would purchase it just to have, I understand your enthusiasm. But it is a strange that Ann would do this very thing for this very purpose!

S what is the point was not even being directed at you it was being directed at Ann.

Just six months ago she told me she thought you guys were sort of strange to buy equipment worth thousands upon thousands of dollars and there seemed to her no clear purpose to it.

I told her it is important to you guys to have equipment and new equipment and some of you have never sold any of your equipment even after you no longer use it.

Kind of strange yes! And difficult to understand what the point of it is, very strange.

Now Fred I know that you still think the point is that it has the specs you are talking about, but that is not what i am talking about at all.

I am glad Linda is using her head and she made the right decision for her I still think that she should go over to this photographers studio and see his set up and if she wants try the camera for the fun of it and take this new friends portrait and network.

If she does a good job of the portrait that might lead to things as well.

I think that would be better use of one's resources then spending money unduly.

And personally I think waiting for the next round is much better as what they are now doing is tweaking what has already been advanced and the next go around would probably see some serious advancement in the technology.

Like the adaption of a larger chip. etc. maybe even a Tilt Shift with a large displacement range.

No noise at 3200 ISO.

32 bit support.

[Allen...@adobeforums.com]

neither brand seems to be auto focus compatible with Nikon AF-s (Silent
Wave) lenses and manual focusing is required with these lenses.

When I use the (older version) 105mm Nikkor for macro I often focus manually anyway. My expectation is that for the kind of macro you get with extension tubes you would generally probably want to focus manually.

All that said I do not own extension tubes and any advice is appreciated.

[Ann_She...@adobeforums.com]

So what is the point was not even being directed at you it was being directed at Ann.

The first point is that it is a fast first-class long focal-length Prime with Macro capabilities and just rounds at my "Stable" nicely.

And the other point is that at the price that I was able to snag this little beauty for, was one helluva bargain (so much so that I am unlikely to ever have such an opportunity again!)

:)

This purchase probably completes my shopping for a while as fortunately I don't have the strength to handle that 600 mm — even if I wanted to!

[Ann_She...@adobeforums.com]

Allen,

I decided to go with the Pro Optics — they are metal (and not plastic) and were half the price of the Kenko tubes.

I will let you know how I find them but they are useful things to have in the bag.

Focusing at that range is usually done by positioning the camera rather than with the focusing ring anyway.

[pfigen]

That's why I use Really Right Stuff's Macro Focusing Rail. Exquisite machining and functionality. Beautifully finished. Usable for much more than just macro.

[Ann_She...@adobeforums.com]

You can actually SEE the precision and the quality of the machining in the photograph — it looks like a superb piece of equipment.

[Fred_...@adobeforums.com]

The Kenko set I have here has metal lens mounts front and back, and works just fine with AF-S. If the body is of plastic it was not evident and I hadn't realized it until you noted it, Ann. It is very robust plastic indeed.

I don't know where some of these "reviewers" get their information. Maybe they are referring to the loss of light bringing the effective f: stop below the f:5.6 that AF-S is supposed to prefer as a minimum. Whatever (and I usually use manual focusing in the macro realm), when using AF-S with tubes attached the D3 has coped perfectly, even with all three tubes attached.

I also had not heard of the Pro Optics product - possibly that's not available in this country.

[Fred_...@adobeforums.com]

Ann, curiosity getting the better of me, Googling Pro Optics tubes returned several responses similar to this:

I just received my pro optic tubes yesterday, they provide full communication
between lens and body, aperture and focus. Build is good, the body side
mount is plastic with the lens side being metal.

Sounds to me that these are plastic as well, and I'd be very cautious about hanging a new 105 off the D3 with a plastic lens mount doing the job....

[Wade_Zi...@adobeforums.com]

Maybe you don't need this Ann, seems like a lot of trouble and what will you gain from it?

if you need to really get close once or twice in your life then you can rent something rally good and charge the client for the rental and extra for using a specialized technique that requires special equipment which has to be rented.

Or am I ruining your fun.

[Ann_She...@adobeforums.com]

We are talking about a mere $90 Wade!

I always have a set of tubes squirreled away in my Olympus bag; the Mamiya has built-in bellows; and I have extended bellows for the Monorail.

Extension tubes are just useful things to have with you for that time when you suddenly need to get in really close — even if you seldom use them.

[Wade_Zi...@adobeforums.com]

I won't was the space in my case for it. for $90 if I really needed it I would know in advance.

I use to own them the use them twice and never really need to use them in the first place.

I understand the bellows extensions are much better and everyone use to own them as well but never needed to use them.

But you are right it is your $90 although St.Jude Hospital could probably put that $90 to better use.

[Ann_She...@adobeforums.com]

I promised to report back when I received my Pro Optics extension tubes.

They were made in Japan and seem to very well constructed with metal connecting plates at both ends. It seems as if they are constructed entirely from metal and are well-finished and fit smoothly and snugly.

They cost only a little more than half that of the Kenko set and I can see no problems with them.

I got mine from Adorama.