Nikon D750 & D780

Went to Primrose hill yesterday with friends. The weather was dull and it rained, but managed a few with the 70-200. Here's one of Amika, daughter of a friend.


Little Amika by Anirban Acharya, on Flickr
 
chuckles said:
@UaeExile I remember you asking this question before - so I set myself a challenge; one lens, one camera.... Flickr Album

And then some from different occassions

Dining Room by Barry Cant, on Flickr

Untitled-12 by Barry Cant, on Flickr

DSC_6942 by Barry Cant, on Flickr

Last shot - D800 hand-held 1/60 @ f2.0 1600 iso (focus point 7 of the 7th May)
Click to expand...

Cheers Barry yeah you're right I did. Never got round to buying it but I'm still wanting a wider prime and the Siggy looks the best bet.
 
minnnt said:
I've learned my lesson from last years WRC. Always have a change of clothes in the boot.
Click to expand...

Haha yeah, I`m not gonna make that mistake again ;)
 
macvisual said:
Would love to see a few captures Chris with the different lenses you used if you get a chance.....
Click to expand...

Very early days for me with weddings (7 done now, 2 in the past 3 weeks) and loads to learn, but the bookings are rolling in so must be doing something right. Still unsure about 50mm, would never have bought the Art had I not got it for £300. Leaves me needing three lenses instead of two (28/50/135 rather than 35/85), very tempted to ditch them for a light Nikkor AF-S 1.8 combo of the 35 and 85 and something like the 24-120 f4 as an emergency back-up lens.

Nikon 28mm 1.8 AF-S

Bailbrook House Wedding by Chris Harrison, on Flickr

Sigma 50mm 1.4 Art

Random, brief moment in the nasty service area of the hotel when the couple stepped out for a bit of fresh air (it was a hot day) between wedding breakfast courses, not set up in any way, I just about made it work given the background on offer and they love it.

Bailbrook House Wedding by Chris Harrison, on Flickr

Bailbrook House Wedding by Chris Harrison, on Flickr

Nikon 135mm f2 DC

Bailbrook House Wedding by Chris Harrison, on Flickr

I would say for the last two weddings for this combo (this one and one on Saturday) I was 90% 50mm, 5% 28mm and 5% 135mm.
 
Last edited:
Sure I read somewhere lastnight but can't bloody find it now. They say screw on filters makes their lens front or back focus. When take the filter off the images are much better. Is this true
 
That was probably UV filters and is a whole can of worms that's been done to death. Personally, I'd never fit any UV filter onto my lenses and instead use lens hoods but each to their own.
 
Another from Brands ... From a walkabout in the paddock. Processing is probably a bit marmite, but the BG was pants, and had to try to figure out a way around it ;)

55 chevy by Paulie-W, on Flickr
 
rookies said:
Sure I read somewhere lastnight but can't bloody find it now. They say screw on filters makes their lens front or back focus. When take the filter off the images are much better. Is this true
Click to expand...

Pretty much always used a UV filter and can't say any issues. I'm not too bothered about them these days as do use hoods, but if I were doing seascapes etc I would def use it.

I haven't got one on my 50 1.8G or the Tammy 150-600 though.
 
rookies said:
Sure I read somewhere lastnight but can't bloody find it now. They say screw on filters makes their lens front or back focus. When take the filter off the images are much better. Is this true
Click to expand...
I'll test it with my 70-200mm at some point this week for you. Don't use it now as find the hood is a better protection.
 
ukaskew said:
Very early days for me with weddings (7 done now, 2 in the past 3 weeks) and loads to learn, but the bookings are rolling in so must be doing something right. Still unsure about 50mm, would never have bought the Art had I not got it for £300. Leaves me needing three lenses instead of two (28/50/135 rather than 35/85), very tempted to ditch them for a light Nikkor AF-S 1.8 combo of the 35 and 85 and something like the 24-120 f4 as an emergency back-up lens.

Nikon 28mm 1.8 AF-S

Bailbrook House Wedding by Chris Harrison, on Flickr

Sigma 50mm 1.4 Art

Random, brief moment in the nasty service area of the hotel when the couple stepped out for a bit of fresh air (it was a hot day) between wedding breakfast courses, not set up in any way, I just about made it work given the background on offer and they love it.

Bailbrook House Wedding by Chris Harrison, on Flickr

Bailbrook House Wedding by Chris Harrison, on Flickr

Nikon 135mm f2 DC

Bailbrook House Wedding by Chris Harrison, on Flickr

I would say for the last two weddings for this combo (this one and one on Saturday) I was 90% 50mm, 5% 28mm and 5% 135mm.
Click to expand...
Nice, I can see why the 50mm art gets so much praise.
 
ukaskew said:
Very early days for me with weddings (7 done now, 2 in the past 3 weeks) and loads to learn, but the bookings are rolling in so must be doing something right. Still unsure about 50mm, would never have bought the Art had I not got it for £300. Leaves me needing three lenses instead of two (28/50/135 rather than 35/85), very tempted to ditch them for a light Nikkor AF-S 1.8 combo of the 35 and 85 and something like the 24-120 f4 as an emergency back-up lens.

Nikon 28mm 1.8 AF-S

Bailbrook House Wedding by Chris Harrison, on Flickr

Sigma 50mm 1.4 Art

Random, brief moment in the nasty service area of the hotel when the couple stepped out for a bit of fresh air (it was a hot day) between wedding breakfast courses, not set up in any way, I just about made it work given the background on offer and they love it.

Bailbrook House Wedding by Chris Harrison, on Flickr

Bailbrook House Wedding by Chris Harrison, on Flickr

Nikon 135mm f2 DC

Bailbrook House Wedding by Chris Harrison, on Flickr

I would say for the last two weddings for this combo (this one and one on Saturday) I was 90% 50mm, 5% 28mm and 5% 135mm.
Click to expand...


Nice work, want to share my latest wedding but they haven't been delivered yet..:(
 
Chris Harrison

That 28mm lens shot at f/2 is as sharp as, a superb capture, I think 28mm focal length is always overlooked, my personal favourite lens length.

Lovely work Sir, respect.
 
Cheers chaps. Enjoy the hell out of it so hopefully something I can continue to develop and do more of in the future. Got bookings for 2017 and 2018 already and seem to be attracting really nice weddings so can't complain.
 
So need to order my tripod head today.

Still pondering between the 496RC2 ball head and 804 Mark II three-way head.
 
ukaskew said:
Very early days for me with weddings (7 done now, 2 in the past 3 weeks) and loads to learn, but the bookings are rolling in so must be doing something right. Still unsure about 50mm, would never have bought the Art had I not got it for £300. Leaves me needing three lenses instead of two (28/50/135 rather than 35/85), very tempted to ditch them for a light Nikkor AF-S 1.8 combo of the 35 and 85 and something like the 24-120 f4 as an emergency back-up lens.

Nikon 28mm 1.8 AF-S

Bailbrook House Wedding by Chris Harrison, on Flickr

Sigma 50mm 1.4 Art

Random, brief moment in the nasty service area of the hotel when the couple stepped out for a bit of fresh air (it was a hot day) between wedding breakfast courses, not set up in any way, I just about made it work given the background on offer and they love it.

Bailbrook House Wedding by Chris Harrison, on Flickr

Bailbrook House Wedding by Chris Harrison, on Flickr

Nikon 135mm f2 DC

Bailbrook House Wedding by Chris Harrison, on Flickr

I would say for the last two weddings for this combo (this one and one on Saturday) I was 90% 50mm, 5% 28mm and 5% 135mm.
Click to expand...

#1 is a beaut mate. Swish.

JJ! said:
So need to order my tripod head today.

Still pondering between the 496RC2 ball head and 804 Mark II three-way head.
Click to expand...

Do you mean 498?
 
So its been a bit hectic with friends and family this weekend so no time to go out and play... but next weekend its time to put the evil twins through their paces!

20160612_135012_zpsqri3lv7q.jpg
 
ukaskew said:
Very early days for me with weddings (7 done now, 2 in the past 3 weeks) and loads to learn, but the bookings are rolling in so must be doing something right. Still unsure about 50mm, would never have bought the Art had I not got it for £300. Leaves me needing three lenses instead of two (28/50/135 rather than 35/85), very tempted to ditch them for a light Nikkor AF-S 1.8 combo of the 35 and 85 and something like the 24-120 f4 as an emergency back-up lens.

Nikon 28mm 1.8 AF-S

Bailbrook House Wedding by Chris Harrison, on Flickr

Sigma 50mm 1.4 Art

Random, brief moment in the nasty service area of the hotel when the couple stepped out for a bit of fresh air (it was a hot day) between wedding breakfast courses, not set up in any way, I just about made it work given the background on offer and they love it.

Bailbrook House Wedding by Chris Harrison, on Flickr

Bailbrook House Wedding by Chris Harrison, on Flickr

Nikon 135mm f2 DC

Bailbrook House Wedding by Chris Harrison, on Flickr

I would say for the last two weddings for this combo (this one and one on Saturday) I was 90% 50mm, 5% 28mm and 5% 135mm.
Click to expand...

Very nice matey! #1 is my favourite.
 
ukaskew said:
Very early days for me with weddings (7 done now, 2 in the past 3 weeks) and loads to learn, but the bookings are rolling in so must be doing something right. Still unsure about 50mm, would never have bought the Art had I not got it for £300. Leaves me needing three lenses instead of two (28/50/135 rather than 35/85), very tempted to ditch them for a light Nikkor AF-S 1.8 combo of the 35 and 85 and something like the 24-120 f4 as an emergency back-up lens.

I would say for the last two weddings for this combo (this one and one on Saturday) I was 90% 50mm, 5% 28mm and 5% 135mm.
Click to expand...

Why not swap the 50mm art for the 35mm art then get the 85mm 1.8G?
 
macvisual said:
Chris Harrison

That 28mm lens shot at f/2 is as sharp as, a superb capture, I think 28mm focal length is always overlooked, my personal favourite lens length.

Lovely work Sir, respect.
Click to expand...

The favourite lens of arguably one of the most well known wedding togs in the world... Ryan Brenizer.
 
minnnt said:
Buy that one then. ;) I had a pan and tilt head before and i hated it. Ball heads for me at least are far better.
Click to expand...

Will go balls lol. Different QR plate is the only difference (and price).
 
JJ! said:
I think its been discontinued.

Replaced with this one:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Manfrotto-...465739119&sr=8-1&keywords=manfrotto+ball+head

or arca version:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Manfrotto-...465739119&sr=8-6&keywords=manfrotto+ball+head
Click to expand...

I bought a new tripod and head late last year and for the head I went with the Sunwayfoto DB44 which is highly recommended on here. I have found it excellent in my use so far and Arca Swiss compatible. I have bought cheaper longer plates from Amazon for less than a tenner for my longer lenses. They supplied with a 50mm plate and the offer was £120 accepted.

linky > http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/DEMO-SUNW...468314?hash=item3ab3bad21a:g:5UQAAOxyzi9SjGdD
 
minnnt said:
Buy that one then. ;) I had a pan and tilt head before and i hated it. Ball heads for me at least are far better.
Click to expand...
Have to agree with@minnnt, I much prefer ball heads but the cheaper ones do drift a bit. I'll be interested to hear what this one's like if you do get it.
 
My Friends D750 seems to be under exposing and neither of us can figure out why. Matrix metering, no exposure compensation.
Using a light meter it indicated F1.4 1/160 ISO100, he was using a 50mm 1.4.
On reviewing of the images on the back LCD and a computer they would appear to be under exposed, both on look and histogram.
Shooting both RAW+Basic.

Any ideas how to cure this?
 
wilt said:
My Friends D750 seems to be under exposing and neither of us can figure out why. Matrix metering, no exposure compensation.
Using a light meter it indicated F1.4 1/160 ISO100, he was using a 50mm 1.4.
On reviewing of the images on the back LCD and a computer they would appear to be under exposed, both on look and histogram.
Shooting both RAW+Basic.

Any ideas how to cure this?
Click to expand...

Does it do the same with any other lenses?
Also, it will be worth checking that there is no exposure compensation set in the menus either.
Menu is in the custom settings section "Fine tune Optimal Exposure".
Might be worth a look there?
 
wilt said:
My Friends D750 seems to be under exposing and neither of us can figure out why. Matrix metering, no exposure compensation.
Using a light meter it indicated F1.4 1/160 ISO100, he was using a 50mm 1.4.
On reviewing of the images on the back LCD and a computer they would appear to be under exposed, both on look and histogram.
Shooting both RAW+Basic.

Any ideas how to cure this?
Click to expand...
Have you tried a full menu reset back to default settings? I think there is a way to do that. There may be a setting somewhere in the menu that's causing the under exposure. The other test is using another lens to see if the same occurs on that too. The aperture lever on camera and lens would be another bit to check. If it's an aperture lever problem I would expect it would be very under exposured as it would be at minimum aperture (would that be f22 on that lens) yet the camera expecting the lens it to be wide open. Is bracketing on?

How many stops under exposures are we talking?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top