Show Off Your Pics (1 Viewer)

[JohnRice]

I was just messing around with the D5500, testing the AF and so on. When I saw this shot, it had this weird thing about it, like I did it on purpose.

Good luck guessing what I was watching.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

My wife and I went to the cider mill this morning, and decided to stop at the Mill Race Village historical park in Northville, Michigan, which is the town just to our north. Here are a few shots. We are still a few weeks away from prime autumn colors -- we may need to get there again for that.

 

[JohnRice]

The Autumn colors are starting to hit in town. This is in my back yard.

Once again, HTF seems to be a little over saturated.

 

[Sam Posten]

What is it?

Is it safe?

 

[JohnRice]

The whole D5500 debacle is over. I finally got my full refunds for the incorrect camera I originally received, but only because Amazon forced the issue. Of course, then the lens that came with the refurb unit I got from B&H was messed up. Just terrible image quality. I think you're supposed to have to deal with Nikon for refurbs, but B&H replaced it, with a brand new lens. Full, new USA warranty, gold Nikon box and everything. That was a nice surprise and a huge improvement over the terrible customer service from the first place.

I've also sold off some stuff I don't use anymore, and decided to get one of the new Nikon AF-P DX 70-300mm VR lenses, since I've been reading such good reviews of it. I have other long lenses, but they are so big, heavy and expensive that I don't carry them around very often for everyday use. Especially that Sigma 150-500, which is enormous. The AF-P lens is impressive, and if you're willing to try a "white box" unit on eBay, you can get it for $200. If you're willing to forego the VR, you can get it for $100. The AF-P lenses are all new optical designs and use a new type of focus motor (which I understand Canon has been using for 5 years, way to trailblaze Nikon) that's basically instantaneous, and silent. The AF-P 70-300 is surprisingly good, and it doesn't weigh anything.

Here's a shot using the 70-300 at or pretty close to 300mm with the D500. I only saved this jpg at 60% to keep the file from being too large, so it's not a sharp as the original.

 

[Dave Moritz]

My photos are no where near as nice as the photos I see here.

 

[Mike Frezon]

Here's a shot using the 70-300 at or pretty close to 300mm with the D500. I only saved this jpg at 60% to keep the file from being too large, so it's not a sharp as the original.

I can't even begin to imagine how much detail is in the original then!

 

[Scott Merryfield]

I'm glad B&H took care of you, John. I am not surprised, though, as I've always received excellent service from them as you did.

I've also sold off some stuff I don't use anymore, and decided to get one of the new Nikon AF-P DX 70-300mm VR lenses, since I've been reading such good reviews of it. I have other long lenses, but they are so big, heavy and expensive that I don't carry them around very often for everyday use. Especially that Sigma 150-500, which is enormous. The AF-P lens is impressive, and if you're willing to try a "white box" unit on eBay, you can get it for $200. If you're willing to forego the VR, you can get it for $100. The AF-P lenses are all new optical designs and use a new type of focus motor (which I understand Canon has been using for 5 years, way to trailblaze Nikon) that's basically instantaneous, and silent. The AF-P 70-300 is surprisingly good, and it doesn't weigh anything.

It must be something similar to Canon's Step Motor (STM) technology. It's supposed to be quiet and smoother than USM lens motors for video, but STM is slower than USM. I only have one Canon STM lens for my large bodies -- the 40mm f/2.8 pancake. For still photography it's really no smoother but seems a little slower than the USM lenses I own, which all focus quick and smooth. I rarely shoot video with my full size dSLRs, so cannot comment on STM for video. Both the lenses for my mirrorless Canon EOS M are STM and I do occasionally shoot video with that body, but the auto focus isn't very good on that body so it's really hard to tell how much STM helps there.

 

[JohnRice]

It must be something similar to Canon's Step Motor (STM) technology. It's supposed to be quiet and smoother than USM lens motors for video, but STM is slower than USM.

That has to be it, but however Nikon implemented it, it's so fast that it's essentially instantaneous. Even at 300mm on the AF-P 70-300mm. They all seem to have internal focus. I swear, it focuses before I hit the button. They've only come out with three lenses, they're all cheaper ones, and they're not compatible with cameras from before 2013 and only partially compatible with some since. They cheaped up by taking off the switches. The AF switch really doesn't need to be there anyway, since it's usually just as easy to turn it on and off with the camera, and if you use back-button focus, there's no need for it at all. In fact, I prefer not having one, since it can accidentally get switched off. If you want to turn off VR, you have to dig into the camera menu. They probably should make that easier.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

They cheaped up by taking off the switches. The AF switch really doesn't need to be there anyway, since it's usually just as easy to turn it on and off with the camera, and if you use back-button focus, there's no need for it at all. In fact, I prefer not having one, since it can accidentally get switched off. If you want to turn off VR, you have to dig into the camera menu. They probably should make that easier.

I do not think there is an option for turning auto focus on/off via the camera with Canon bodies. If there is, I've never noticed it in the menus, and all Canon lenses have the AF on/off switch. I have occasionally left the switch off after manually focusing, but it's always easy to know I did that when the camera will not auto focus. What I found more aggravating was being required to turn off image stabilization on some of the older lenses when using them on a tripod. My old Canon 100-400L IS had this requirement, and I would quite often forget to turn IS back on when I was done using a tripod. Then I would wonder why the image in the viewfinder was so unsteady before realizing I had turned IS off the last time I used the lens. Fortunately, all of my current lenses have newer IS systems which detect tripod use, so I just leave those switches on at all times.

 

[JohnRice]

I do not think there is an option for turning auto focus on/off via the camera with Canon bodies.

Seriously? I figured that was a universal feature. Of course, if you set the camera up for back-button focus, then you are essentially doing that. Until the AF-P lenses, Nikon lenses, as well as all the others I have, always had switches for AF and OS. I expect Nikon was trying to cut every cost in the AF-P lenses.

How did the camera "require" you to turn off IS when you used a tripod? I guess they're generally supposed to sense that now, as well as sensing when you are panning.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

How did the camera "require" you to turn off IS when you used a tripod? I guess they're generally supposed to sense that now, as well as sensing when you are panning.

It wasn't the camera which required the IS to be off (Canon doesn't have image stabilization built into any of its camera bodies) -- it was the lens. The first couple generations of IS for Canon lenses could not sense when they were on a tripod. If the IS switch was left on, the lens would still assume there was some camera shake when the camera was mounted on a stable tripod and try to compensate for that non-existent shake. This would cause unpredictable results, as the lens IS mechanism would be moving when it shouldn't be. Later generations of IS were more intelligent and would recognize when mounted on a stable tripod and no longer attempt to compensate for that non-existent shake.

The first version of the Canon 100-400L IS was the only lens I owned with the early generation IS. I have since replaced it with the more modern version II of the same lens. Not only does the IS now recognize a tripod, but it also provides better stabilization (four stops of hand holding versus 1.5-2 on the old lens). The lens is also sharper, faster focusing, and will work with attached filters - the old version produced very poor photos with a CPL filter attached, for some reason.

 

[Sam Posten]

What is it?

Is it safe?

 

[JohnRice]

Is it safe?

I don't understand.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

I don't understand.

Sam was guessing you were watching the film Marathon Man. If you had seen the film, you would understand. If you haven't, you should.

 

[JohnRice]

Haven't seen it in years, so I don't remember. That's not it.

 

[Mike Frezon]

 

[JohnRice]

Nice, Mike.

 

[JohnRice]

My very cluttered HT, wrapping up the series "Dexter" last week. This is with the D5500 and the (outrageously cheap) Nikon AF-P 10-20mm.

 

[JohnRice]

It was one of those endless waits to turn left. So I snapped this with the D5500, which I've made a point of carrying with me.