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!
Osman.....These Are So Rich In Color & IQ!
Appropriately so. Thanks Steve (and for your comment above!)(Transferred These Over From Other Nikon Post Thats Filled To The Rim!)
Didn't Want These Wonderfull Images From Osman To Get Lost!
WOW! you've made a "normal" high school baseball game appear like a momentous game in history!!My Nephews High School BB Game..
Yes, I owned one of the first copies of the 200/2 to come out, and frankly, I loved it. But... I found that I simply didn't use it as much as the 70-200 (that was the original version), and I needed some $$ for something else. Now, with the new 70-200 VRII, well, I just don't think I'd get another 200/2, as the differences, while they exist, are even smaller. I worked with a friend shooting the Boston Marathon, and he had his 200/2 with him, but it came out of the bag exactly once the entire week. He's one of the top event shooters in the world, and told me that with the new 70-200 VRII, he thinks for him, the 200/2 is essentially a duplication, with less utility.Lloyd, your niece is beautiful, and you did a fantastic job with creating these portraits for her!
Do you happen to have any personal experience with the 200 f/2 VR? I'm considering selling the 200 f/2 VR and replace it with the 70-200VR2 so I can free up some money. I've read a lot about the 70-200VR2 performance, but the one detail I'm interested in is how the bokeh compares between the two lenses. The 200 f/2 VR bokeh is almost a modern legend, but I'm not sure how the 70-200VR2 is in comparison? I really like the bokeh in the shots you showed above though!
Lloyd: +1. The master of portraiture strikes again. Color, composition, poses, all beautiful. I guess they don't use those little booths anymore? Cheers, Matt.Gorgeous In Every Way Uncle!!!:thumbs:
Thanks Matt. Yeah, they still take those cattle call shots at the schools, but the kids don't want those. She had me take these to send out with her graduation announcements... and for her Facebook.Lloyd: +1. The master of portraiture strikes again. Color, composition, poses, all beautiful. I guess they don't use those little booths anymore? Cheers, Matt.
http://mdriscoll.zenfolio.com
(Transferred These Over From Other Nikon Post Thats Filled To The Rim!)Osman.....These Are So Rich In Color & IQ!
Panda81: I'd second what Lloyd said. I had a 200 f/2 and also sold it. I miss it, occasionally; but, I wasn't using it as much as the 70-200mm VRI. The new 70-200 VRII is almost the 200 F/2's equal and is lighter , less expensive, and more versatile.Yes, I owned one of the first copies of the 200/2 to come out, and frankly, I loved it. But... I found that I simply didn't use it as much as the 70-200 (that was the original version), and I needed some $$ for something else. Now, with the new 70-200 VRII, well, I just don't think I'd get another 200/2, as the differences, while they exist, are even smaller. I worked with a friend shooting the Boston Marathon, and he had his 200/2 with him, but it came out of the bag exactly once the entire week. He's one of the top event shooters in the world, and told me that with the new 70-200 VRII, he thinks for him, the 200/2 is essentially a duplication, with less utility.
That said, if you've seen, for example some of Steve's or Osman's images here, and since you own one, you know that the bokeh with that lens is something special. As for the bokeh in my shots, that's just what the lens gave me, and I'm very happy with it. Don't know if that helps, but there you go.
Cool!Thanks Matt. Yeah, they still take those cattle call shots at the schools, but the kids don't want those. She had me take these to send out with her graduation announcements... and for her Facebook.
Greatly Appreciated Jerry!WOW! you've made a "normal" high school baseball game appear like a momentous game in history!!
There's something about that Red Dress Matt...!Here's a couple from last night (same two posted earlier except in B&W or color). That hot spot in the lighting was killing me (squinting woman on left). I just checked and I didn't have Active-D Lighting on at all. That probably would have helped? Thanks for looking. Cheers, Matt
1. D3s; 24-70mm f/2.8; 38mm; 1/50s @ f/3.5; ISO 9000
2. D3s; 24-70mm f/2.8; 70mm; 1/50s @ f/3.5; ISO 5000
http://mdriscoll.zenfolio.com
[/I]
Not so ADL as probably using center-weighted metering. Matrix metering gets a little out of whack onstage due to the tremendous uneveness of the lighting (unless the lighting director is very, very good).Here's a couple from last night (same two posted earlier except in B&W or color). That hot spot in the lighting was killing me (squinting woman on left). I just checked and I didn't have Active-D Lighting on at all. That probably would have helped? Thanks for looking. Cheers, Matt
http://mdriscoll.zenfolio.com
PS: Just read a little more. ADL appears to be moot because I shoot raw and import through Lightroom 2 and not Capture NX2.
You're cracking me up here Steve!:ROTFL: Yes, Matt, those are a nice pair!!There's something about that Red Dress Matt...!
Nice Pair!
:salute::bugeyes::wtf::ROTFL::thumbs:You're cracking me up here Steve!:ROTFL: Yes, Matt, those are a nice pair!!
This part (and Matt's a couple of posts below) is a little bit of a surprise for me. As good as some results from the 70-200 VRII are, from what i can see here and there along with the few RAW files i could handle myself, in my eyes the 200/2 has still an edge AFA pure IQ is concerned. Of course for action (race shots you've mentionned) use it clearly doesn't have the same versatility and it's understable that it'd stay in the bag.Yes, I owned one of the first copies of the 200/2 to come out, and frankly, I loved it. But... I found that I simply didn't use it as much as the 70-200 (that was the original version), and I needed some $$ for something else. Now, with the new 70-200 VRII, well, I just don't think I'd get another 200/2, as the differences, while they exist, are even smaller. I worked with a friend shooting the Boston Marathon, and he had his 200/2 with him, but it came out of the bag exactly once the entire week. He's one of the top event shooters in the world, and told me that with the new 70-200 VRII, he thinks for him, the 200/2 is essentially a duplication, with less utility.
That said, if you've seen, for example some of Steve's or Osman's images here, and since you own one, you know that the bokeh with that lens is something special. As for the bokeh in my shots, that's just what the lens gave me, and I'm very happy with it. Don't know if that helps, but there you go.