The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Fun Pictures with Nikon

fotografz

Well-known member
Great image and colors. A grad ND filter?

MG
No ND filter ... usually don't have time for stuff like that when shooting weddings.

Used Lightroom 2s new brushes ... specifically the custom grad filter that you can place exactly where you want it, and apply it as much as you want, as many times as you want. Just that one new LR-2 feature has cut hours off of my processing times for weddings ... plus I used a few tricks in PS.

I find the D3X 14 bit files to be amazingly workable.
 

gilgameshist

New member
No ND filter ... usually don't have time for stuff like that when shooting weddings.

Used Lightroom 2s new brushes ... specifically the custom grad filter that you can place exactly where you want it, and apply it as much as you want, as many times as you want. Just that one new LR-2 feature has cut hours off of my processing times for weddings ... plus I used a few tricks in PS.

I find the D3X 14 bit files to be amazingly workable.
That's what I thought ND filters are for slow paced landscape photography.

I see, LR 2 is more flexible and time saver now. I should check LR 2 out.

So, you see big a difference in 14 bit files(D3X) in comparison to 12 bit(A900) ones. That extra bits are there for a reason!

Thanks,

MG
 

fotografz

Well-known member
It is really hard to see what is being achieved here

Woody
What do you mean by "achieved" Woody?

If you mean what was achieved with the wedding pic I posted ... well, printed at 17" X 22" it looks even better than here. Little to no noise @ ISO 500, nice color right out of the camera, very detailed at the plane of focus, and as a number of photographers that have seen the actual print said, it exhibits a strong sense of depth. Doesn't really matter how it got there, or what gear was used ... it works as a pictorial display wedding print ... which is what I make a living from. These are the kinds of images that sell multiple copies to everyone involved and their Grandmother.

My favorite quip about it was when Irakly saw it ... "That's a $5,000. shot!" he didn't ask what camera was used, or what I did to the image afterwards, he just reacted to the picture ... like he always does ... good or bad.

I only mention the gear used because that's how this forum is set up. I make no competitive claims against other cameras ... just that for me and what I do, this one works ... and is better and easier to achieve results from than one would be led to believe from internet chatter.

This was my first use of the D3X on the job. It performed flawlessly and delivered what I needed from a high meg 35mm DSLR. It's a nice compliment to the D3. A dynamic duo for my wedding photography needs, so to speak.

Or, maybe that ISN"T what you meant? :confused:
 

woodyspedden

New member
Marc

What I meant is that on the web it is hard to see the differences one camera to another that is possible when viewing large tiffs or better still large prints.

I have heard much dissing of the D3X (using the A900) as the comparison. But I have now been using mine for about two months, including large file and large print landscapes. I think it is an amazing machine and it can certainly handle the rigors of field work. Built like a tank.

I don't have an A900 so I can't compare. I have seen many files that I like and a fair number which I think have too much shadow noise. But as I say, i don't have one, have taken no images with one, so can't really render an opinion.

You have both so how do you choose which one to work with. Seems to me you would not need both 35mm DSLR systems.

Just trying to learn here...........no other agenda

Woody
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Marc

What I meant is that on the web it is hard to see the differences one camera to another that is possible when viewing large tiffs or better still large prints.

I have heard much dissing of the D3X (using the A900) as the comparison. But I have now been using mine for about two months, including large file and large print landscapes. I think it is an amazing machine and it can certainly handle the rigors of field work. Built like a tank.

I don't have an A900 so I can't compare. I have seen many files that I like and a fair number which I think have too much shadow noise. But as I say, i don't have one, have taken no images with one, so can't really render an opinion.

You have both so how do you choose which one to work with. Seems to me you would not need both 35mm DSLR systems.

Just trying to learn here...........no other agenda

Woody
Well Woody, yes I do have both systems and a good deal of the better lenses for both. Without rehashing all the discourse from the Sony forum it boils down to what I said there in summary ... and meant every word of it ... for which I took a personal lambasting. If I had to choose, I'd sell the entire Sony system before the D3/D3X system. Nothing personal, just business. From what I can tell, most dissing of the D3X comes from those who don't use the D3X and rely on second hand info/opinions/pictures from this relatively new camera. After all, it does take some time to learn about any new camera.

My take on it:

I like the Sony a lot ... but it is a fair weather friend much like the DMR/9 I had (which I sold to fund the Sony and the AF Zeiss lenses). Unfortunately, I have to shoot in less than ideal conditions frequently. There is no D3/D700 equivalent for high ISO work. The Sony doesn't shoot to two CF cards like both the Nikons do ... something I desire for security when shooting a one time, non-repeatable event. And the Nikon flash system is easier to work with IMHO.

Yes, there is noise in the A900 shadow areas ... sometimes even at lower ISOs ... not to hard to deal with ... unless you are dealing with 1,000 images a weekend. Then it's a PITA. This is not an issue with the D3X that I can tell so far. In my limited experience with the D3X so far, ISO 500/640 is excellent even enlarged a lot ... I cannot say the same for the A900. But, when the A900 is on the money, with some of the lenses, it's really can sing ... just like the DMR did.

As usual, YMMV ... but for me it's working out just fine so far.
 

TRSmith

Subscriber Member
Whoa, that's a tough act to follow Marc. Beautifully done.

Something a bit more pedestrian... this from today while waiting for the parade to start. Happy 4th of July!

Tim
 

Leica 77

New member
Red Plumeria on a rainy day. Leica R 50mm Summicron with Leitax mount + Nikon TC-16A + Nikon D2H. Aperture @ f2.8. Thanks for looking. Leica 77 :)
 

Leica 77

New member
Red Plumeria on a rainy day. Leica M (Not R) 90mm Summicron (Canada) with mount adapter + Nikon TC-16A + Nikon D2H. Aperture @ f5.6. Thanks for looking. Leica 77 :)
 

Leica 77

New member
Orchid after the rain. Leica R 50mm Summicron with Leitax mount + Nikon TC-16A + Nikon D2H. Aperture @ f2.8. Thanks for looking. Leica 77 :)
 
Top