D500

T_J_G said:
@rookies VRII? I bet that works lovely with the D500!
Click to expand...

Yes it the VRII and I am got to say I am IMPRESS really am IMPRESS.. This combo is lovely it has put my faith back in to this D500
 
rookies said:
Yes it the VRII and I am got to say I am IMPRESS really am IMPRESS.. This combo is lovely it has put my faith back in to this D500
Click to expand...
Best lens I've used to date (y) You just need a flash you can bounce now to get the ISO down for those indoor pics :p
 
Good now go take some pictures, I think for the dog shot you could have been slightly lower to bring him/her higher in the frame.
 
T_J_G said:
Good now go take some pictures, I think for the dog shot you could have been slightly lower to bring him/her higher in the frame.
Click to expand...

Yes you right but like I said it was my first shoot to test it and BANG impress.

For some strange reason I am loving this lens more than the Sigma 18-35 1.8 Art I think this lens is letting me down..
 
Here another I took it only testing the performance I know I could get the image better but I was just testing focus on the eye to see what eye lash like and at iso 2500 I find it pretty good.. I would never get that image with my sigma 18-35 1.8 art at 1/20 sec shutter this is what confusing me and this made me think the sigma is letting me down that why I been disappointed ??


DSC_1152.jpg by Andrew Rookes, on Flickr
 
rookies said:
Here another I took it only testing the performance I know I could get the image better but I was just testing focus on the eye to see what eye lash like and at iso 2500 I find it pretty good.. I would never get that image with my sigma 18-35 1.8 art at 1/20 sec shutter this is what confusing me and this made me think the sigma is letting me down that why I been disappointed ??


DSC_1152.jpg by Andrew Rookes, on Flickr
Click to expand...

You'll be closer with the Sigma which means the DOF will be shallower so more chance of missing.
 
Mr Perceptive said:
The Sigma doesn't have any stabilisation, and if shooting relatively wide open, unless you are a statue (rock solid), the slightest movement will not get a sharp image at 1/20 sec. You are not comparing apples with apples.
Click to expand...

This is making me thinking of getting rid of that sigma and replace it with a lens with VR for me i know you all dont agree I feel i need it..
 
rookies said:
This is making me thinking of getting rid of that sigma and replace it with a lens with VR for me i know you all dont agree I feel i need it..
Click to expand...

That's ok for static subjects, its whatever suits you best, but if your subject moves at 1/20th you will still potentially get blur, even a blink by your daughter could cause this (and that applies to the 70-200 as well)
 
rookies said:
Yes you right but like I said it was my first shoot to test it and BANG impress.

For some strange reason I am loving this lens more than the Sigma 18-35 1.8 Art I think this lens is letting me down..
Click to expand...
There's nothing wrong with the 18-35mm :facepalm: Andy, I say this for your own benefit mate, stop blaming the gear ;)
 
Mr Perceptive said:
That's ok for static subjects, its whatever suits you best, but if your subject moves at 1/20th you will still potentially get blur, even a blink by your daughter could cause this (and that applies to the 70-200 as well)
Click to expand...
Of course if she blink I am aware of that.. I was just stating I just very please with how this lens perform I seem to get what i want out of it..
 
rookies said:
Here another I took it only testing the performance I know I could get the image better but I was just testing focus on the eye to see what eye lash like and at iso 2500 I find it pretty good.. I would never get that image with my sigma 18-35 1.8 art at 1/20 sec shutter this is what confusing me and this made me think the sigma is letting me down that why I been disappointed ??


DSC_1152.jpg by Andrew Rookes, on Flickr
Click to expand...
Andy I know it's much faster shutter speed, but there's absolutely nothing wrong with this image with the 18-35mm which is at a similar ISO. If anything I'd say it's a smidge sharper.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/129847036@N08/31442691233/in/dateposted/


Before you toss the 18-35mm to the curb I'd practice with it and try and get your shutter speed down as it's a really nice lens. Any lens that can go toe to toe with the 70-200mm VRII in terms of IQ would be a keeper for me as there's not a lot that matches it.
 
snerkler said:
Andy I know it's much faster shutter speed, but there's absolutely nothing wrong with this image with the 18-35mm which is at a similar ISO. If anything I'd say it's a smidge sharper.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/129847036@N08/31442691233/in/dateposted/


Before you toss the 18-35mm to the curb I'd practice with it and try and get your shutter speed down as it's a really nice lens. Any lens that can go toe to toe with the 70-200mm VRII in terms of IQ would be a keeper for me as there's not a lot that matches it.
Click to expand...
To add to this, nothing wrong with this that you took at 35mm (52.5mm eq) at 1/60, looks sharp to me.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/129847036@N08/30946806804/in/photostream/
 
@rookies you need to go out shooting stuff and not all these tests shots around your house. It's really not helping you.

You have decided to keep the D500... Great... So now go out and use it and get posting.
 
But don't you think that Nikon handle the details better at higher ISO?
 
I'm upto about page 30 on this thread and I think this is an ideal upgrade for my D300.
 
rookies said:
But don't you think that Nikon handle the details better at higher ISO?
Click to expand...
Nope, if two lenses have the same detail as each other at ISO 100 they'll have the same detail as each other at 6400 or 12800 ISO. The only thing that can affect the detail from pushing up the ISO is the sensor.
 
snerkler said:
Nope, if two lenses have the same detail as each other at ISO 100 they'll have the same detail as each other at 6400 or 12800 ISO. The only thing that can affect the detail from pushing up the ISO is the sensor.
Click to expand...

lol and this where the d750 comes in [emoji6]
 
Do I ;) I dont think I do that much tbh...
 
rookies said:
lol and this where the d750 comes in [emoji6]
Click to expand...

I think we have proven on countless threads that there is in all honestly not a great deal of difference in the noise of the 2 bodies so move along from that..........

JUST GET OUT AND TAKE SOME BLOODY PICTURES :D:D:snaphappy::snaphappy::snaphappy::snaphappy:
 
rookies said:
Do I ;) I dont think I do that much tbh...
Click to expand...
Who're you trying to kid :p

Personally I don't 'frown upon' pixel peeping, as long as it's done for the right reasons and you don't lose sight of the big picture. When you start obsessing over the tiniest of differences that's when it becomes a problem imo.
 
kingo15 said:
I think we have proven on countless threads that there is in all honestly not a great deal of difference in the noise of the 2 bodies so move along from that..........

JUST GET OUT AND TAKE SOME BLOODY PICTURES :D:D:snaphappy::snaphappy::snaphappy::snaphappy:
Click to expand...

Dont think it noise Toby talking about.. Think it details that the sensor gives??
 
rookies said:
Dont think it noise Toby talking about.. Think it details that the sensor gives??
Click to expand...
I was talking about noise affecting the detail of the image tbh. As far as outright detail there's lots of 'arguments' that a larger sensor will give sharper/more detailed images, BUT the difference between APS and FF is really small these days, and as the D500 doesn't have an aa filter I would argue that the D500 gives as sharp images SOOC from the sample shots I've seen.
 
Last edited:
snerkler said:
Who're you trying to kid :p

Personally I don't 'frown upon' pixel peeping, as long as it's done for the right reasons and you don't lose sight of the big picture. When you start obsessing over the tiniest of differences that's when it becomes a problem imo.
Click to expand...

Like smudging on a tree or rock :D
 
Well all I can say this new lens seem to put a smile on my face and I just can't wait to get to YWP but it wont be this bloody weekend :( as got to go to the in laws.. argh
 
T_J_G said:
Painterly then :)
Click to expand...
Don't have to pixel peep to see that ;)

In all honesty the only time I zoom into an image is for precise sharpening, precise brushing or that I see an issue with an image. OK this is a crop but would anyone honestly be happy with rendering like this :eek:

Screen%20Shot%202017-01-07%20at%2011.58.09_zpsmrh5tz4k.png
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top