D810 Owners thread anything to do with the D810

gremlin16 said:
Sounds good.
Click to expand...

I reckon lots would benefit, myself included as moving from a crop sensor to FF (D700) and then D810 I am finding some scenarios a little confusing, so much to the point I nearly sold my D810, so glad I didn't after trying different settings this morning and getting some cracking results.
 
Went to a car show this morning at 10am and was walking back out 30 minutes later, it was supposed to be full of vintage and classics but the car dealers seemed to have taken over and it was more like a garage forecourt, very disappointing and only a couple of cars worth shooting, this being the nicest thing there, but so hard to grab a shot due to people crawling all over it and the other cars being so close, not to mention it was under trees so light was an issue, anyway the D810 still got me a good shot of this 1965 Mercedes.
I would have taken some interior shots but it was covered in modern gadgets and wires everywhere.

_MGG7093-2_zpsz2zlcuog.jpg
 
gremlin16 said:
:LOL:Ahem, where’s the setting you said we should post :exit:
Click to expand...

OOps ………..D810 (Obviously) Tamron 19-35 f3.5 at f4.5 iso500 1/1000
Converted from raw in CC and a bog standard filter applied from Windows photo viewer and a slight sharpen as the filter softened it a little too much...……...happy now

:D
 
Last edited:
Shot one today of a scooter rider at Thame Skatepark

Jed 1 Hand Skillz by Craig Tull, on Flickr

Camera: D810
Lens: Nikon 16mm Fisheye f/2.8
Shutter Speed: 1/3200th
Aperture: f/5.6
ISO: 200

I also used 2 Godox AD600's to light the rider at full power. Here is another shot comparing no flash to flash. The differences are subtle but balance the exposure just right I find.

No Flash Vs Flash by Craig Tull, on Flickr
 
I love looking into these Craig, into the background at the others looking in awe
 
It does seem to draw quite a bit of attention with the other people wanting to know what is going on and what the rider is going to do. Thanks for the comment Pete :)
 
Found out that a youth track and field event was being held at our local sports stadium Quibell Park today so popped over, only took 14gb of photos lol, got to start shooting in JPEG to save space soon.
Took hundreds of keepers but going to thin the best out later but heres a decent one of the finish of one of the 400m races.

_MGG7259%20-%20Copy_zpshc1hnqmw.jpg
 
Hey guys
Just a heads up that a few little odds n sods are coming up in the sale and freebe sections ;)

Sad to leave Nikon after so many years but just too damn heavy for me to lug around now.
 
Does anyone have a work around for this, I find that 36mp is very unforgiving when using a 4-500mm lens in RAW so have dropped to JPEG fine to see if the slight speed increase helps but don't really think it will make any difference as the pixel count is the same, and I don't want to drop to DX mode as that's just defeating the purpose of having a D810
 
PaulButler said:
That is one heck of a zoom lens!! ;)

Not sure what you require a work around for? lack of sharpness maybe?
Click to expand...

Its a 150-500 but most shots are between 400 and 500, and yes, getting sharp shots is a job and a half, it really is very unforgiving, its fine on a tripod and super sharp, but at airfields and hand held its not so good, I do have a lovely sharp 70-210 that gets shots but need the extra reach of the 150-500 more than anything and OS doesn't save many shots
 
Dangermouse1964 said:
Its a 150-500 but most shots are between 400 and 500, and yes, getting sharp shots is a job and a half, it really is very unforgiving, its fine on a tripod and super sharp, but at airfields and hand held its not so good, I do have a lovely sharp 70-210 that gets shots but need the extra reach of the 150-500 more than anything and OS doesn't save many shots
Click to expand...
I'm not familiar with that lens (assuming the sigma 150-500 OS) ... but typically they tend to be at their worst at the longer end. Stopping down a stop or two usually gains some improvement - problem will be I suspect it is already f6.3 @ the long end so two stops is well over f8 and that could affect shutter speed unless you compensate with higher iso. I guess a lot depends on your hand holding technique, when the D8xx first came out the accepted wisdom was 1.5 times the focal length (1/800 @ 500mm) as a minimum - again that pushes iso in all but great light.

If the lens gives sharp results on a tripod @ 500mm then you have to work on your technique when hand holding - its a bit like shooting a rifle (I used to coach this years back) at least in how to hold it. The breathing used when shooting a rifle may help too. I'm assuming you are nailing focus here (BBF is your friend!!).

Oh and you are right in that shooting raw or full sized jpeg won't show any significant difference in terms of sharpness (jpeg have some sharpness applied to them by the camera which *may* offer a small improvement).
 
Dangermouse1964 said:
Its a 150-500 but most shots are between 400 and 500, and yes, getting sharp shots is a job and a half, it really is very unforgiving, its fine on a tripod and super sharp, but at airfields and hand held its not so good, I do have a lovely sharp 70-210 that gets shots but need the extra reach of the 150-500 more than anything and OS doesn't save many shots
Click to expand...
I’m with @PaulButler on this. If you are getting good results using a tripod and the issue is occurring when you handhold the 150-500 it’s likely to be a technique/weight issue for that specific lens. I find my 300 f2.8 can be too heavy for me to handhold properly. Doubling of the shutter speed I use on a tripod helps, but I mainly use a tripod because of the difficulty hand holding at lower shutter speeds. The 1/focal length is only a guide and may need adjusting depending on the lens/camera or subject or photographer.

What kind of shutter speeds are you using and what subjects (Static or moving?) are we talking about?
 
Aircraft of I should say prop aircraft, I try to keep shutter to 1/125 to get blur, when the jets go over the shutter is around 1/500
 
Dangermouse1964 said:
Aircraft of I should say prop aircraft, I try to keep shutter to 1/125 to get blur, when the jets go over the shutter is around 1/500
Click to expand...
Could you use monopod to take the weight of the lens to help you hand hold a lens that weighs around 2kg? Trialing a faster shutter speed for jets may be worth it to see if that helps?
 
I am getting giddy now I am getting the hang of this, reset the fine tune to 0 on all lenses and then turned it off as I reckon that was the reason I couldn't get a sharp image, too much messing about with lens settings, back on RAW and got some decent shots, since I and the missus both had today off work we decided to visit Doncaster airport, then changed our minds and took the road to fighter town, quite pleased we did, we know it was a long way to go for not a lot of action on Fridays, but the lads did go out to play for an hour or two, light was very harsh as the sun was directly overhead but everything I took was just abought right, I did slightly under expose because of the conditions and I also said to the missus either I get some decent shots or I get a D500...……….happy to say the D500 isn't being ordered

D810
Sigma 150-500@500
1/640
f9
ISO 100 B

Typhoon_zpsfpnisykn.jpg
 
Funny...………..I don't remember putting a star filter on the lens...………:D

_MGG7481_zps82qfwvts.jpg
 
Trying to fine tune a lens like that is like trying to tune a piano with a hammer. you either tune it to the shortest or longest mm lens setting, or take a guess at half way. Which ever you try it won't work .I tried with my 80-400 and gave up. Fine tuning is really for prime lenses I have come to the conclusion but having said that the 24-70 seems to be ok. maybe because the range is not so big
 
realspeed said:
Trying to fine tune a lens like that is like trying to tune a piano with a hammer. you either tune it to the shortest or longest mm lens setting, or take a guess at half way. Which ever you try it won't work .I tried with my 80-400 and gave up. Fine tuning is really for prime lenses I have come to the conclusion but having said that the 24-70 seems to be ok. maybe because the range is not so big
Click to expand...

I have gathered that, that's why I removed all the settings I put in and just went and shot, its not perfect but with some tweaks the shots are passable at full zoom, probably would have been better using the 70-210 and cropping but we live n learn.....lol
 
realspeed said:
Trying to fine tune a lens like that is like trying to tune a piano with a hammer. you either tune it to the shortest or longest mm lens setting, or take a guess at half way. Which ever you try it won't work .I tried with my 80-400 and gave up. Fine tuning is really for prime lenses I have come to the conclusion but having said that the 24-70 seems to be ok. maybe because the range is not so big
Click to expand...
I completely agree but it doesn’t have to be if you choose a Dock/Console compatible Sigma or Tamron lens. Perfect whatever the focal length or focal distance. Nikkor and Canon has a serious amount of catching up to do.
 
I shot some of the lad playing football today. They lost 5-1 so it wasn't the best game for them but they gave it their all.

_CT26004 by Craig Tull, on Flickr

_CT25998 by Craig Tull, on Flickr

_CT25963 by Craig Tull, on Flickr

_CT25930 by Craig Tull, on Flickr

_CT25925 by Craig Tull, on Flickr

_CT25892 by Craig Tull, on Flickr

_CT25886 by Craig Tull, on Flickr

_CT25874 by Craig Tull, on Flickr

Shot with Nikon 300 f2.8 at 1/3200 shutter speed, f5.6-7.1 and iso between 160 and I think about 1000.
 
Last edited:
tHVnKIF.jpg


Ok agree it doesn't look much but blown up I just like the simplicity of it and the way the sunlight catches to back of the bird
 
The clouds kind of look like a claw Baz. Would be awesome if the bird was just inbetween the pincers haha ;)
 
A couple from last week. It's amazing how a bit of cloud can change the entire look of an image.

42102431405_67c3f855e7_o.jpg


42102311205_705846da22_o.jpg
 
Beautiful shots John. May I ask what lens was used?
 
The second one is just exquisite John, simply stunning shot, we were at Coningsby on Friday morning when MK356 took off but were at CG3 so it was behind the Bunkers when it got airborne so didn't manage a shot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top