Nikon D200 information/and general first dSLR advice
Ken Trout
photography. Two factors are tipping this decision 1) lack of quality
local E6 processing (the lab I previous used switched to no film a while back)
and 2) Finally, someone released a camera that seems nice to me, takes my
lenses, and is inexpensive enough for me to consider.
For anyone who knows:
How does the autofocus compare to the F100? Autofocus isn't important for
most of what I do, but when I need it-- I *need* it. So anyone with
experience with the speed, reliability, tracking, etc abilities of the
D200 AF care to share? The lens I use in these situations is
typical an 80-200 AFD 2.8 (note: Not the AFS lens). I also wish to rent
larger glass like the 300/2.8.
How good is the focusing screen? Is it easy to manually focus? All
lenses I use have large openings (2.8 or better). I will at least
have the advantage of bright images with shallow(er) depth of field
to view while composing/focusing.
I realize this seems like an odd question pair, but I normally focus
manually-- unless I'm doing things that require brilliant autofocus :P
Also, anyone care to share general advice on buying, and getting the
necessary items for a first dSLR? I have photographed seriously for 6 years,
and find most of my pictures are of machines, abstracts of machines, tools
motorsport, etc. And, of course, the people in my life. I do photograph other
things, but I think I have a fascination with metal. :) I have limited
past experience with a D1H, and have used other digital cameras for casual snap
shots. With that little bit of background, hopefully I can get some
advice on things to consider, pitfalls to avoid, anecdotes, and so on.
Thanks for the help.
ken
Bronek Kozicki
> For anyone who knows:
> How does the autofocus compare to the F100? Autofocus isn't important for
> How good is the focusing screen? Is it easy to manually focus? All
I found these reads quite interesting:
http://www.nikonians.org/dcforum/DCForumID202/15152.html
http://www.nikonians.org/dcforum/DCForumID202/15503.html
http://www.nikonians.org/dcforum/DCForumID202/15707.html
seek for F100 and/or autofocus and/or viewfinder on these pages go get
fast answer.
B.
Ken Trout
> http://www.nikonians.org/dcforum/DCForumID202/15152.html
> http://www.nikonians.org/dcforum/DCForumID202/15503.html
> http://www.nikonians.org/dcforum/DCForumID202/15707.html
>
> seek for F100 and/or autofocus and/or viewfinder on these pages go get
> fast answer.
Thanks for the links-- web forums completely slipped my mind as a thing
to search. I'm still stuck thinking only in terms of newsgroups :)
So far it looks like the D200 will fit the bill.
Ken Trout
> they are lightning fast. The ones that aren't focus pretty quickly as well.
That seems to be the general consensus. I saw the theme echoed a few times
in the links provided by another poster. I do wish I could see one before
ordering, but if I don't order soon it seems unlikely I will have it in hand
before spring.
> It's close to the D2x for brightness and size. Again, you won't be
> disappointed.
Hmm, unfortunately I haven't played with D2X-- its size and cost knocked it
out of consideration quickly.
> Right out of the box you really don't need much more than a good lens. If
Cool, I've got those. And the crop factor will actually help me a bit.
It will also allow my 24mm lens to act as my "family gathering" lens.
> This is one of these MUST HAVE GET IT cameras! You won't be disappointed in
> the slightest. I have absolutely no complaints about the D200 other than
> battery life, and that might be solely a result of my shooting style.
I think I see it that way too. Although, I am a bit sad to change my primary
photography tool.
I've seen a few complaints on battery life, so its something I will keep in
mind. 300 shots is roughly 10 rolls of film-- that may be acceptable to me
--in the beginning anyway.
> Do yourself a favor; don't get caught up in this foolish buying frenzy. The
> camera is $1699.95 and the batteries are $39.95, don't pay more than that.
Does the camera come with a memory card? For some reason I thought it
didn't, but I will look again. As far as spending goes, I am looking
towards the body, potentially 2 cards (I want to rotate the cards throughout a
day), and the bare minimum software I need. My lenses are good, I long ago
gave up on camera mounted flash, my tripod is decent... if my local lab
situation was better, I doubt I'd be looking at a D200 :P
Also, one further question... will I need a RAW converter. Without much
experience with digital capture my (possibly naieve) plan is to use RAW capture
for my "photographs" and jpg for "snaps".
ken
Bronek Kozicki
> Also, one further question... will I need a RAW converter. Without
> much experience with digital capture my (possibly naieve) plan is to
> use RAW capture for my "photographs" and jpg for "snaps".
Yes, you will probably want RAW converter, even though camera might come
with trial version of Nikon Capture. There are few that handle RAW
format of D200 (notably Adobe PS CS2 ie. Camera RAW currently does not
support it, but it will change within few months). Of these that do
support D200 I would suggest Capture One (www.phaseone.com) - LE version
is rather cheap, has all basic functionality and you may try it for
free. This will allow you to use RAW and decide if you need something
better. To learn more why you want to use RAW see:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/u-raw-files.shtml
Other thing that you will need is calibrated monitor. You may buy
calibrator and DIY , or seek for someone in your area that will do it
for you. Or just use your eye and try-and-miss. The important thing is
that you need your monitor to faifhfully reproduce colors, and no
monitor does it off the shelf (unless you have very expensive monitor
built for the very purpose of digital imagining).
Yet another thing you will need is ability to archive your photos -
single RAW takes 16MB, so if you use CD-R it will suffice for ~37, just
like single roll of film. Personally I find it insufficient (CD-R takes
rather more space than roll of film) so I suggest buying decent DVD+R
writter (Plextor are best ones) and supply of blank DVD-R (or DVD+R) .
See also http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-05-09-04.shtml
The last thing that I found useful (but you might decide otherwise) is
grey card - it allows to you find exact colour of light reaching your
sensor, thus making it easier to remove any colour casts. I find it
especially useful when shooting in unusual conditions when coulor
temperature is beyond auto-balance ability of my camera (eg. in
twilight, when colour temperature of clear sky reaches 13000K or in
interiors where colour temperature of bulbs might be as low as 2800K).
The important thing is that if you shoot RAW, you may always adjust
colour temperature in postprocessing, and single shot of grey card will
deliver credible data to make this operation quick and easy.
The whole process of developing visible image from RAW is called digital
workflow, you may read more about it here
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/digital-workflow.shtml .
You might also find this site http://www.outbackphoto.com/ useful
B.
Ken Trout
> Yes, you will probably want RAW converter, even though camera might come
> support D200 I would suggest Capture One (www.phaseone.com) - LE version
Thank you for the software suggestions. I know nothing of RAW converters,
apart from limited experience with Nikon Capture.
> monitor does it off the shelf (unless you have very expensive monitor
> built for the very purpose of digital imagining).
My monitor and printer agree on colors right now, which is a good step
in the right direction. But the monitor isn't calibrated for perfect
color rendition. I'm not sure I need it though, at least at first-- I will
have a local lab that specializes in digital build important prints from
my RAW files. My home work will simply be play, and viewing at first.
> writter (Plextor are best ones) and supply of blank DVD-R (or DVD+R) .
I have storage worked out. I have a large live filesystem that I back
up. But I agree... keeping discs of just 37 images sounds painful!
> The last thing that I found useful (but you might decide otherwise) is
> grey card - it allows to you find exact colour of light reaching your
Thats a good idea. Now to find my grey card. I put it away a long time
ago when I figured out how to choose what I wanted to be neutral toned in
shots. But color temp is a whole new ballgame.
Thanks very much your help.
I feel a bit better the whole "digital" thing now :)
ken
Bronek Kozicki
> On 2006-01-05, Bronek Kozicki <br...@rubikon.pl> wrote:
>> Yes, you will probably want RAW converter, even though camera might
>> come [snip] support D200 I would suggest Capture One
>> (www.phaseone.com) - LE version
>
> Thank you for the software suggestions. I know nothing of RAW
> converters, apart from limited experience with Nikon Capture.
if you feel well with it, you may obviously keep using it. But anyway,
I'd suggest to give C1 a try once you have D200 in your hands :)
(personally I use Photoshop CS2, but C1 was strong contender - and CS2
currently does not support D200)
>> monitor does it off the shelf (unless you have very expensive monitor
>> built for the very purpose of digital imagining).
>
> My monitor and printer agree on colors right now, which is a good step
> in the right direction.
Indeed it is.
> Thats a good idea. Now to find my grey card. I put it away a long
Be aware that some grey cards used for exposure metering might have
slight colour cast, which make them rather problematic as a tool to
determine white balance.
B.
John L Rice
news:slrndrqd9e....@thunder.xecu.net...
> On 2006-01-05, Bronek Kozicki <br...@rubikon.pl> wrote:
>> Yes, you will probably want RAW converter, even though camera might come
> [snip]
>> support D200 I would suggest Capture One (www.phaseone.com) - LE version
>
> Thank you for the software suggestions. I know nothing of RAW converters,
> apart from limited experience with Nikon Capture.
I'm very new to dealing with RAW images myself (I just got my D70s a few
weeks ago) but I did find this recently released free RAW converter plugin
for Windows XP SP2 and it seems to work fine as far as I can tell :
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=d48e808e-b10d-4ce4-a141-5866fd4a3286&DisplayLang=en
I wouldn't mind reading some reviews of this by people experienced in using
the more common choices like PhotoShop and SilkyPix etc.
And I just noticed this main page for Windows XP digital photographers :
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/digitalphotography/prophoto/default.mspx
John L Rice