Nikon D750 & D780

minnnt said:
Lmfao. That was a laugh reading all that.

DX mode is a gimmick imo. You get a faint line pop up in the viewfinder which denotes the new frame. Framing on the other hand is a right PITA. Or at least i found it to be. It's very easy to cut off an arm or wing or wheel.
Click to expand...

If we took a image within those faint lines is that the image record at 24mp??
 
I tried it out and didn't think it was too hard to use on birds in flight, granted at the time of testing those birds were gulls so not the greatest challenge.

However if all you're going to do is crop anyway then you might as well save the storage space
 
rookies said:
Was just wondering if taking images on the camera in Dx mode be better than cropping in process.

Ie if take images in Dx mode are the pictures still full
Size other than cropping in process the images gets smaller
Click to expand...
Nope DX images are circa 10mp and there's absolutely no difference in IQ or resolution if you just crop in post (I've tested it ;))

minnnt said:
Lmfao. That was a laugh reading all that.

DX mode is a gimmick imo. You get a faint line pop up in the viewfinder which denotes the new frame. Framing on the other hand is a right PITA. Or at least i found it to be. It's very easy to cut off an arm or wing or wheel.
Click to expand...
This, trying to frame in those lines is awkward. Far from impossible granted, but when you're panning quickly it's easy to clip things.

JohnN said:
I tried it out and didn't think it was too hard to use on birds in flight, granted at the time of testing those birds were gulls so not the greatest challenge.

However if all you're going to do is crop anyway then you might as well save the storage space
Click to expand...

Yep it can be done, but as above, it's more difficult to keep an eye on the borders, especially when panning quickly so why make life hard for yourself? ;) Storage is cheap so I'm not worried about cropping 24mp files :p
 
Last edited:
Does the D750 take the same batteries as the D7200? EN-L15 or what ever it is they're called?

Never mind, Google pulled through. :)
 
Last edited:
Oh, I totally agree, much easier to crop in post but it's still usable, and who knows maybe if you're stuck in the Amazon with shed loads of spare batteries but only a 1GB card it may be really handy ;)
 
Sigma is releasing a 50-100 F1.8 Art for crop bodies. Hoping to see a similar FF equivalent with F2 perhaps.

What sigma also needs to add is OS as these lenses will be heavy.
 
I use the crop mode sometimes for birds on branches, but could see it being a problem with cars and BIF ETC........

Rookies a possibility for your mate who has the 70-300mm L Lens is to get the Sigma 100-300mm f4 lens, make sure its the newer model as some of the older lenses can have communication problems with the body. This one> https://www.mpb.com/en-uk/used-equi...mm-f-4-ex-apo-if-dg-hsm-nikon-fit/sku-604311/

What you need to decide is what your shooting needs are going to be with your shared lens. IF iq is your priority then prime lenses will be better but if its for days out at the zoo the 70-200mm f4 & 1.4tc maybe an option especially if you have young ones in tow and want to keep weight down.
 
Weight aside (personally I mitigate that with a decent strap - I use the back rapid sport) I'd go for the Tamron 150-600 he found for £550.

What Simon says though is the most important - choose what you;re wanting to shoot and get a lens to match - if you're looking for wildlife\long shooting got for the Tamron 150-600, if you're wanting mid the 70-200 range, choose a 2.8, straight up portrait head shots\upper body got with a 85mm 1.8.

Basically choose something :D

I have such a wide range of lenses because I can't choose - others who know what they want have just one or two and are much happier for it.
 
Forgot to add, the Tamron @ HC maybe a earlier version so have good play with it on your D750 if you can, as some of the early ones had some AF issues and they need to be sent back to T for FW updates.

IF I was going halves with my mate and was looking at the new 80-400 lens or considering a 70-200mm f2.8 lens I would see if you could look to stretch your budget and consider the Sigma sport 120-300mm f2.8 lens. MPB have a older one in stock and these lenses take a 1.4 & 2.0 TC very well. Heavy lenses though.

used from mpb > https://www.mpb.com/en-uk/used-equi...00mm-f-2-8-ex-dg-os-hsm-nikon-fit/sku-602555/

newer version > http://www.wexphotographic.com/buy-...match=&plid=&gclid=clfutkw-ksscfqfnwgod4f4ipq
 
Last edited:
anibap said:
Sigma is releasing a 50-100 F1.8 Art for crop bodies. Hoping to see a similar FF equivalent with F2 perhaps.

What sigma also needs to add is OS as these lenses will be heavy.
Click to expand...

Can you imagine the size, bazooka!
 
Anyone using the 35 F1.8 G? Specifically I am thinking on a light prime kit for weddings. I have a 24-70 and an 85. Thinking of changing to 20/35/50/85 prime set up.
 
I have one, it does the job well and is pretty good value. Do still lust after a Sigma Art though ;)
 
Something a bit different/minimalist from me. Can't decide whether I like it, or whether it's utter garbage :lol:

DSC_7939 by TDG-77, on Flickr
 
anibap said:
You can even get it cheaper used. Chris was selleing one for £175 just a month or two old. You can also takes shots like this with it.


DSC_8949 by Anirban Acharya, on Flickr
Click to expand...


That's nice Anirban, really like the comp', and the B&W conversion works well with this subject giving it a nice contrasty gritty type of feel to the image.(y)

George.
 
AndrewSt said:
Anyone using the 35 F1.8 G? Specifically I am thinking on a light prime kit for weddings. I have a 24-70 and an 85. Thinking of changing to 20/35/50/85 prime set up.
Click to expand...
Isn't that a Dx lens
 
AndrewSt said:
Anyone using the 35 F1.8 G? Specifically I am thinking on a light prime kit for weddings. I have a 24-70 and an 85. Thinking of changing to 20/35/50/85 prime set up.
Click to expand...
I had one and it was a stunning lens, I was a little disappointed how 'plasticy' the actual lens was but in terms of performance it was just excellent. I sold it and purchased the 35mm ART and it is just so damn heavy, I still wonder if I made the right decision.

When I went to Copenhagen I used it a lot with my D700, here is a link to the album on Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/118970253@N05/albums/72157652215385426
 
Last edited:
daygo30 said:
I had one and it was a stunning lens, I was a little disappointed how 'plasticy' the actual lens was but in terms of performance it was just excellent. I sold it and purchased the 35mm ART and it is just so damn heavy, I still wonder if I made the right decision.

When I went to Copenhagen I used it a lot with my D700, here is a link to the album on Flicr https://www.flickr.com/photos/118970253@N05/albums/72157652215385426
Click to expand...

I love mine as well, so small and light.

If money was no option I'd love either the Sigma Art version or the Nikon 1.4 though.
 
Chuckoir said:
Garbage. ;)

Just kidding, I like it. SOOC or have you done anything to the sky? - love the colours.
Click to expand...
Thanks. Just dropping the blacks and upping the contrast to silhouette the foreground made it look like that tbh. There's a slight colour cast from the ND grad too.
 
AndrewSt said:
Anyone using the 35 F1.8 G? Specifically I am thinking on a light prime kit for weddings. I have a 24-70 and an 85. Thinking of changing to 20/35/50/85 prime set up.
Click to expand...

Go art or go home.

I had to make the same choice and opted for the art knowing that I'd only have to try one anyway.

It's sharp as a sharp thing and resolves so much detail, zoomed in 3:1 I can make out the markings in the paint on my 50mm 1.8.

Not best image but this is a photo of my screen showing a 3:1 zoom, the photo is on my Flickr if you want to take a look.

image.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Well till I see a used Nikon 70-200 2.8 VR mark II am considering getting a tamron 70-300 to cover me for now as hoping find one cheap ie £170 odd
 
G.K.Jnr. said:
That's nice Anirban, really like the comp', and the B&W conversion works well with this subject giving it a nice contrasty gritty type of feel to the image.(y)

George.
Click to expand...
Thanks George.
 
It's arrived!
2016-02-25_06-39-07 by Chuckoir, on Flickr

excited-baby.gif
 
You boding much better than me with the PS i can get my girl to look real.. Which Brush your using as you seem to keep the hairs in the shots mine doesn't
 
rookies said:
You boding much better than me with the PS i can get my girl to look real.. Which Brush your using as you seem to keep the hairs in the shots mine doesn't
Click to expand...

Didn't use a brush, just selected her and converted to a mask
 
What there there a different want of putting a person onto a background I though we use the brush
 
How you select her like that I don't know lol with all the fine hair details
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top