Nikon D750 & D780

This is true.

Just planning how I'm going to shoot this wedding i have penciled in for November...

Thinking that another D7k may be in order with another 85mm... That should compliment the D750 and 24-70 well I'm guessing? Or maybe a D7100? I don't think i could stretch to the D7200 although maybe it will drop in price over the next few months?
 
Livin The Dream said:
Superb again Deci. Love your processing. I'm still unsure about grain, I love the film look it undoubtedly helps provide, I just can't bring myself to add it.

I'm still processing 200 shots of my sisters wedding and really don't envy you guys doing it full time, such a drag I find.
Click to expand...

I only add it to the blog images, and even then, its only really added to the highlights to give them more texture. Its totally a personal preference and i can see why some wouldn't like it. In terms of print images, they're totally clean as the paper gives the highlights some texture.

I wish I only had 200 to edit. I delivered around 700 for that wedding. I enjoy editing, though. Gives me a chance to listen to music/podcasts. I'm pretty quick, too.

minnnt said:
The full set is very impressive. Love the little GIF's. Are these all with the 58?
Click to expand...

Alas, i'm one of those people who lusts after but doesn't own a 58. Everything was shot with either a nikon 24/35/45pce/85 or siggy 50art.

We nearly bought one recently but bizarrely decided to buy a secondhand BMW z4 instead. Still trying to figure out how that happened...
 
minnnt said:
This is true.

Just planning how I'm going to shoot this wedding i have penciled in for November...

Thinking that another D7k may be in order with another 85mm... That should compliment the D750 and 24-70 well I'm guessing? Or maybe a D7100? I don't think i could stretch to the D7200 although maybe it will drop in price over the next few months?
Click to expand...

85mm could save your ass (metaphorically) and your back (literally) when shooting a November wedding. 70-200 is great, but its a beast to use over a long day. If you dont need m/a mode, the 1.4D is a great bargain.
 
lol, don't tell him that, he's not long sold one! (I'd agree - not having any actual knowledge of wedding photography mind)
 
Ahh right. I thought you owned one aswell mate. Thanks for the info.

With regards to the 85, i have been looking at a 1.4. Either the D or the Sigma. Just need to decide if i can warrant the price tag over the excellent 1.8G.

If i could afford the Nikon vr2 then i would get one.
 
minnnt said:
This is true.

Just planning how I'm going to shoot this wedding i have penciled in for November...

Thinking that another D7k may be in order with another 85mm... That should compliment the D750 and 24-70 well I'm guessing? Or maybe a D7100? I don't think i could stretch to the D7200 although maybe it will drop in price over the next few months?
Click to expand...
Rent if its only for a one off?
 
We have a D and a G 851.4. I use a G because I sometimes overide the AF and you can't do that on the D lens - it's either AF or MF. The D though is otherwise as good as the G in almost every way (and better in some). Of all our lenses, it's always the one that needs the least microadjustments with each camera. I think the G shades it a bit on speed of focus but there's not much in it.

I think we'll be selling our 70-200 soon. It has been barely used in the past two years.
 
decigallen said:
I only add it to the blog images, and even then, its only really added to the highlights to give them more texture. Its totally a personal preference and i can see why some wouldn't like it. In terms of print images, they're totally clean as the paper gives the highlights some texture.

I wish I only had 200 to edit. I delivered around 700 for that wedding. I enjoy editing, though. Gives me a chance to listen to music/podcasts. I'm pretty quick, too.
Click to expand...

Trying to get my head round adding to just highlights, quickly that is. Would have to be a PS action which would slow my workflow down. With time and experience you do get quicker, I just don't do it enough. And my processing keeps evolving. I have a few too many pre sets that I keep losing my way with. Still faffing around with the myriad of VSCO that I have but agree with you about good time to catch up with music.
 
decigallen said:
I only add it to the blog images, and even then, its only really added to the highlights to give them more texture. Its totally a personal preference and i can see why some wouldn't like it. In terms of print images, they're totally clean as the paper gives the highlights some texture.

I wish I only had 200 to edit. I delivered around 700 for that wedding. I enjoy editing, though. Gives me a chance to listen to music/podcasts. I'm pretty quick, too.
Click to expand...

Trying to get my head round adding to just highlights, quickly that is. Would have to be a PS action which would slow my workflow down. With time and experience you do get quicker, I just don't do it enough. And my processing keeps evolving. I have a few too many pre sets that I keep losing my way with. Still faffing around with the myriad of VSCO that I have but agree with you about good time to catch up with music.
 
stumeech said:
Rent if its only for a one off?
Click to expand...

Yes Stu, a good shout. I could probably make use of a cropped body though and for the price you can pick them up for now (D7k) i kind of see it as wasted money. Having said that though, if i was renting then i would probably rent another D750.

Apart from 2/3 of a stop of light, what else would a 1.4 offer me? I will probably be using bounced flash for a lot of the reception i think.
 
If I hadn't have bought a novelty lens ( for me, Tamron 150-600) last week, I would have snapped up that 58 1.4G that's in the classifieds....

Next years' investment will be a 70-200 2.8 VR, still handy to have but the weight in the past has influenced the usage which I am mindful of. I think if ever anyone can sort out a decent 135 I would have that at the drop of a hat.

Got my 85 1.4G second hand off here, love it. One of my pre-requisites when I moved over was that I have the 35/85 1.4 G combo as my core lenses, can't ever see me changing them.

I keep looking at a 50 ART.... ahhhh, the GAS. My little 50 1.8G is okay but it's not great, and feels like a toy.
 
Last edited:
Happy to say that i've joined the ranks of the d750 owners :D

d750 + 24-120 f4 and a sigma 150-600C

need to get out and play at the weekend
 
minnnt said:
How do you just add grain to the highlights btw?

Thanks.
Click to expand...

I'd be interested in a quick way. I would have to use a luminosity mask and add to that selection, but you couldn't really develop an action to apply to a batch unless I'm missing something?
 
Alien Skin Exposure is how I do it. I batch sharpen/resize in photoshop then batch grain in ASE as it allows you to add grain to the H/M/S seperately. If you have the software it's easy.

I previously did it in PShop using an action. That action involved creating a mask of the highlights using the color range selector and then adding a light noise. I prefer the grain I can get in ASE though.
 
decigallen said:
Alien Skin Exposure is how I do it. I batch sharpen/resize in photoshop then batch grain in ASE as it allows you to add grain to the H/M/S seperately. If you have the software it's easy.

I previously did it in PShop using an action. That action involved creating a mask of the highlights using the color range selector and then adding a light noise. I prefer the grain I can get in ASE though.
Click to expand...

I hadn't looked too much into this software, probably wish I had before ploughing into VSCO - looks like it's only the price of one VSCO package. Just had a quick look at a tutorial and looks similar to Nik layout which is quite easy to use. Oh not more software to get lost in....
 
It now has non-destructive RAW editing, which is cool. I still edit with VSCO (because I do a lot of brush work in LR) but I used to use ASE a lot back when I started.
 
Thanks for the insight Deci. It's hard not to lean towards LR for most things these days. The only things that could be improved is the responsiveness of curves and the speed of changing the brush could be better incorporated for a pad.
 
minnnt said:
Ahh right. I thought you owned one aswell mate. Thanks for the info.

With regards to the 85, i have been looking at a 1.4. Either the D or the Sigma. Just need to decide if i can warrant the price tag over the excellent 1.8G.

If i could afford the Nikon vr2 then i would get one.
Click to expand...

I have had the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 and now have the Nikon 85mm f/1.4G there isn't a huge difference between the two. The Sigma is supposed to be sharper than the Nikon D version, with nicer bokeh and quicker a.f but I haven't owned that version.

The Sigma is very good for the money.
 
f/2.8 said:
I have had the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 and now have the Nikon 85mm f/1.4G there isn't a huge difference between the two. The Sigma is supposed to be sharper than the Nikon D version, with nicer bokeh and quicker a.f but I haven't owned that version.

The Sigma is very good for the money.
Click to expand...

This is very interesting as I'm debating upgrading my 85f1.8g

The sigma is 480 ish from amazon.

I'm watching this with interest!!
 
minnnt said:
Ahh right. I thought you owned one aswell mate. Thanks for the info.

With regards to the 85, i have been looking at a 1.4. Either the D or the Sigma. Just need to decide if i can warrant the price tag over the excellent 1.8G.

If i could afford the Nikon vr2 then i would get one.
Click to expand...

MPB have the Sigma 1.4 ;)
 
@Sir SR BTW, its an awesome lens, better than the 85 Gs I had. Sigma primes are stunning, Ive just taken delivery of the 24, 35 and 50 ARTs.:D
 
Last edited:
I had a Sigma 85 a few years ago with my old 5D2 and must say it was the only Sigma that I rated. I don't think there's much difference between it and the 85 1.4G I have now. There's a few shots I cherish that were taken with that lens. I see people say they wish for an ART version but really see no point, they couldn't really improve upon it much IMO. To me, it was the precursor to the ART range and marked a significant step up in quality for Sigma.
 
Last edited:
All this chat - useful info being passed, that will never do!!

Okay, I'll try and merge in a little - this was a shot with the Tamron 70-200 2.8 VC (as the Nikon was being talked about earlier)


On a mission by John Norton, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
JohnN said:
All this chat - useful info being passed, that will never do!!

Okay, I'll try and merge in a little - this was a shot with the Tamron 70-200 2.8 VC (as the Nikon was being talked about earlier)

On a mission by John Norton, on Flickr
Click to expand...


I have the Tamron 70-200 vc. I used to have the Nikon 70-200VR2 and planned on upgrading again eventually but never had a need too the Tamron is very good my copy is excellent but wide open sharpness does drop off between 180mm -200mm in comparison to the VR2.

I don't use the 70-200 enough any more to think of changing it now.
 
That one was 200mm, 2.8 - I'll have to have a go stepping it down!

I must admit its an awkward length, never quite long enough, or short enough - well I suppose it depends, if that shot above it what I'd actually gone out for it would have been fine - as were a few other shots, but nothing planned.
 
Am i right in saying the siggy 85 has no weather sealing? Its something that concerns us about their primes - uk/irish weather is pretty unkind.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top