|
I really wish there was some sort of Netflix like service that let you check out books and return them at a later date
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2012 21:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 04:47 |
|
|
How weather proof is the D7000 with the 18-200 vr ii and 35mm 1.8G lens? I'm going yo shoot a music festival with a rain forecast. I'm going to buy a shower cap and get a sturdy rubberband to enclose the camera. Are there any other precautions I should take? I've seen videos on YouTube of people soaking their camera with a shower head (D7000) but their lens was weather sealed as well. Any tips for shooting in the rain?
Bioshuffle fucked around with this message at 22:09 on Mar 7, 2012 |
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2012 22:06
|
|
|
dukeku posted:I really wish there was some sort of Netflix like service that let you check out books and return them at a later date Nope. But thanks for reminding me, gonna go along and see what they do have.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2012 00:37
|
|
|
I'm headed that way too and was thinking about a drobo or something.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2012 00:43
|
|
|
I think this was gone over in this (or some) thread previously but I can't find it for the life of me. Assuming the same focal length and aperture, DOF gets smaller when you move from crop to full frame, right? With the reasoning being that you'd have to be closer or zoom more to maintain the same composition?
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2012 15:39
|
|
|
No. Depth of field gets smaller going from crop to FF if the subject is the same size in the image. The image has become bigger, so to make the subject larger within the FF image (to match the crop image), you have to either use a longer focal length or move closer. Longer focal length at same aperture gives a shallower DoF, and moving closer at same focal length and aperture also gives a shallower DoF. I can't recall off the top of my head which effect is greater, but you can figure it out with a DoF calculator pretty quickly edit: think of it this way; the lens doesn't know or care what sensor is behind it, so if the only thing you change is the sensor, the image will remain unchanged (just include extra stuff off to the side of the subject). Captain Postal fucked around with this message at 22:21 on Mar 8, 2012 |
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2012 22:13
|
|
|
Captain Postal posted:
Don't forget the sensor size affects which magnification is required to get to a given output size.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2012 22:30
|
|
|
Clayton Bigsby posted:Don't forget the sensor size affects which magnification is required to get to a given output size. The lens makes an image circle and it gives precisely zero shits as to what you place in that image circle. Physics!  yeti wants to know if changing the sensor only will change the image produced by a lens. It won't.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2012 22:44
|
|
|
geeves posted:It's worth the read, check it out from the library. But it's very very basic. Is there something like the Speedliter's Handbook but for Nikon or any TTL flash? How much of the book actually applies specifically to Canon Speedlites?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2012 04:48
|
|
|
Krelas posted:Is there something like the Speedliter's Handbook but for Nikon or any TTL flash? I think it's pretty much irrelevant what system you use. He goes over the lighting setups and modifiers, not so much about the actual specs of the flash. I think there's a section in there about Canon's flash capabilities, but in my opinion the book is definitely still worth it for Nikon users. The most valuable information in it applies across the board.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2012 04:52
|
|
|
Yeah, I have the same book, but all my flashes are Nikon. The information is still the same, you just have to 'convert' for Nikon flashes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2012 06:10
|
|
|
the yeti posted:I think this was gone over in this (or some) thread previously but I can't find it for the life of me. Judging by your post you meant "field of view" rather than "focal length," right? Since if you zoom you are changing the focal length. In this case, you are pretty much correct, although DOF is a lot more complicated than that in reality. Part of the problem is that people have different definitions for it. Some people refer to the degree of background blur, or bokeh. This effect is definitely stronger for larger sensor formats, given the same aperture and field of view. The other thing you can talk about is the region of critical focus, where the blur is small enough to not be noticeable. "Not being noticeable" depends on the print size, the size of the pixels, the viewing distance, and the quality of the viewer's eyes, so it's pretty subjective. This depends more on the number of pixels your subject fills rather than the size of the sensor. Since in general full-frame cameras have more pixels than crop cameras, at large print sizes this will usually also be shallower for a full-frame camera.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2012 17:20
|
|
|
Is there anyone the provides insurance policies on cameras for accidental damage? Climbing Mt Washington in pretty bad weather later this month; I'd REALLY like to bring my 60D + kit, but I dont want to risk $2k in lenses without insurance. I've got a request for quote into my homeowners insurance; but still looking for options.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2012 18:56
|
|
|
ShadeofBlue posted:Judging by your post you meant "field of view" rather than "focal length," right? Since if you zoom you are changing the focal length. In this case, you are pretty much correct, although DOF is a lot more complicated than that in reality. Part of the problem is that people have different definitions for it. Some people refer to the degree of background blur, or bokeh. This effect is definitely stronger for larger sensor formats, given the same aperture and field of view. What I meant was to maintain your composition either you have to get closer or else you can't have the focal length the same, but in retrospect I didn't lay down my thought process terribly clearly in any case. It sounds like I was thinking in the right direction, in any case.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2012 14:10
|
|
|
I'm going to take pictures in a tropical swimming pool and i have a limited amount of time to work with. I got a limited amount of time to work with and I'm worried about acclimatising my camera so I don't waste to much time walking around with a fogged up lens. The person at the pool told me previous photographers had left their material behind the night before. Not really comfortable leaving my stuff but is this recommended?
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2012 12:17
|
|
|
Walked posted:Is there anyone the provides insurance policies on cameras for accidental damage? Your renter/homeowner insurance company should be able to add coverage. That's pretty much the only option I've heard of.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2012 15:19
|
|
|
Grazing Occultation posted:Your renter/homeowner insurance company should be able to add coverage. That's pretty much the only option I've heard of. Yeah; that's what I ended up doing. I'm going to ruin the gently caress out of my gear. But it's insured now, at least.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2012 15:28
|
|
|
Bioshuffle posted:How weather proof is the D7000 with the 18-200 vr ii and 35mm 1.8G lens? I'm going yo shoot a music festival with a rain forecast. I'm going to buy a shower cap and get a sturdy rubberband to enclose the camera. Are there any other precautions I should take? I've seen videos on YouTube of people soaking their camera with a shower head (D7000) but their lens was weather sealed as well. Any tips for shooting in the rain? Dont submerse it. You can go out in light to moderate rain with your D7000 and 18-200/35mm lens. One thing ive seen people use is a Lance Armstrong bracelet around lens where it butts up against the mounting plate on the camera. You can get Optech rain coats for less than 10bux if you really want to not trust Nikon Engineering.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2012 17:02
|
|
|
Musket posted:Dont submerse it. You can go out in light to moderate rain with your D7000 and 18-200/35mm lens. Is the weatherproofing on the D90 significantly worse than the D7000, or does basically the same advice apply?
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2012 17:09
|
|
|
Didn't some goon post pics from inside a water balloon fight? I remember he used a ziplock back with a cheap UV filter to cover the objective.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2012 17:38
|
|
|
Got the idea from Pompus Rhombus: http://www.flickr.com/photos/spf3million/sets/72157626500780879/
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2012 19:56
|
|
|
uwaeve posted:Is the weatherproofing on the D90 significantly worse than the D7000, or does basically the same advice apply? The D90 is missing most of the sealing that the D7000 has. The D7000 is mostly weather sealed but not as much as the next tier of bodies are. D90 good for a small bit of rain, D7000 good for a good downpour, D700 can last in a hurricane. I would 100% buy Optech rain coat for a D90 before i would worry about buying them for a D7000.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2012 22:27
|
|
|
I recently purchased an SB-910 which comes with hard plastic color correction filters. Are these necessary to use all the time or is it something that can be corrected in post with white balance settings?
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2012 01:17
|
|
|
greatapoc posted:I recently purchased an SB-910 which comes with hard plastic color correction filters. Are these necessary to use all the time or is it something that can be corrected in post with white balance settings? If the flash is very different in temperature than the ambient light, you might have some problems.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2012 01:22
|
|
|
I recommending doing a series of test shots under different lighting conditions and with different filter combinations so you can appreciate the difference. I did this with a tripod and did some self portraits, holding up a hand held sign with the various settings written on it for each different shot. It was useful. It's especially important to use the filters if you're exposing for ambient light and using the flash for fill. I once shot someone in a room lit by incandescent lights with a naked flash and the room behind them was lit by "white" compact fluorescents. The results were...interesting.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2012 03:29
|
|
|
uwaeve posted:Is the weatherproofing on the D90 significantly worse than the D7000, or does basically the same advice apply? It's worse, although I have taken my D60 (no sealing at all as far as I know) out in damp weather without any problems. Not a downpour, but it definitely got wet. Of course, with electronics everything works perfectly until one drop of water gets in the wrong crack and it shorts out something important.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2012 05:47
|
|
|
removed.
Revolucion fucked around with this message at 21:43 on Nov 29, 2020 |
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2012 10:49
|
|
|
Yes sirree. That's a cool find.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2012 13:19
|
|
|
ShadeofBlue posted:It's worse, although I have taken my D60 (no sealing at all as far as I know) out in damp weather without any problems. Not a downpour, but it definitely got wet. Of course, with electronics everything works perfectly until one drop of water gets in the wrong crack and it shorts out something important. I've had the same experience with my D5000. I've taken out in light rain, shooting from a kayak, traipsing around in creeks, etc. etc., and even though it's been splashed a bit and gotten rained on, there've been no problems.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2012 18:34
|
|
|
removed.
Revolucion fucked around with this message at 21:43 on Nov 29, 2020 |
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2012 06:58
|
|
|
How long can I keep a shutter open before anything happens to the camera? I've heard the CMOS can apparently overheat. An idea I had was to put a ND filter on the camera and use a small aperture, to get a long exposure of a sunset.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2012 16:02
|
|
|
You will get hot pixels if you go pretty long, but you can edit those out pretty easy. Ive taken 5min exposures before without worry of the sensor heat, i just had to do a bit of cleaning in post.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2012 16:10
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:How long can I keep a shutter open before anything happens to the camera? I've heard the CMOS can apparently overheat. An idea I had was to put a ND filter on the camera and use a small aperture, to get a long exposure of a sunset. If the sun is pretty close to setting then you probably wouldn't have to worry about it. Long exposures in the middle of the day can, however, damage the poo poo out of your sensor. A rule of thumb that I am making up right this second is "If it's comfortable to stare at the sun then you're ok with taking a long exposure shot of it. If it hurts to look at the sun, then don't slow your shutter speed tooooo much."
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2012 17:22
|
|
|
Musket posted:You will get hot pixels if you go pretty long, but you can edit those out pretty easy. Ive taken 5min exposures before without worry of the sensor heat, i just had to do a bit of cleaning in post. Most modern digital SLRS have a custom function called "long exposure noise reduction" what is does is lake an equal length exposure with the shutter closed and then removes all the matching hot pixels from the actual image. Pretty loving clever.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2012 19:03
|
|
|
AceClown posted:Most modern digital SLRS have a custom function called "long exposure noise reduction" what is does is lake an equal length exposure with the shutter closed and then removes all the matching hot pixels from the actual image.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2012 19:15
|
|
|
What is it about a good rainstorm that makes colors look so wonderful afterwards? 
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2012 00:37
|
|
|
Clean air.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2012 00:52
|
|
|
AceClown posted:Most modern digital SLRS have a custom function called "long exposure noise reduction" what is does is lake an equal length exposure with the shutter closed and then removes all the matching hot pixels from the actual image. My P&S does this, which is nice unless it's really cold and you have to wait double the amount of time for each shot. We must suffer for our art
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2012 16:37
|
|
|
Funny coincidence with that earlier Nikon FM post. I have a Nikon FE that has been in the closet for years, and I finally pulled it out today. It seems to be in very good shape, got a couple batteries from Target and it seems to work fine. The only thing I see that needs to be repaired are the light seals and mirror foam. It seems fairly straightforward to replace them with a kit from ebay, is that right? Anything else I should clean up?
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2012 01:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 04:47 |
|
|
quantegy posted:Funny coincidence with that earlier Nikon FM post. I have a Nikon FE that has been in the closet for years, and I finally pulled it out today. It seems to be in very good shape, got a couple batteries from Target and it seems to work fine. The only thing I see that needs to be repaired are the light seals and mirror foam. It seems fairly straightforward to replace them with a kit from ebay, is that right? Anything else I should clean up? Ebay foam kits are great, one guy sent me an extra because it was missing one of the tools. They sometimes include several different lengths of foam to fit several cameras, make sure you use the right length. Then it's a matter of following the instructions, and just get rid of all the previous foam and residue with the alcohol swabs. Also use a swab and/or brush to dust off the mirror and pentaprism as best you can.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2012 02:05
|
|