Nikon D750 & D780
- Thread starter Joeturner11
- Start date
- Messages
- 7,901
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- No
It's also a year since I wrecked my camera.
Is that why you swapped it for one with an 'unbreakable' fixed screen?
- Messages
- 8,063
- Name
- Andrew
- Edit My Images
- No
It only gets worse, mine was happening on a daily basis in the end.
It's also a year since I wrecked my camera.
Never forget that day.
- Messages
- 2,937
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Ta. Just be careful
, it's officially closed with gates locked and barriers up as there has been a couple of large rock falls and big trees down and all the safely hand rails are gone.
D
Deleted member 41401
Guest
Yeah, I know. I was up a couple of times in the last 9 months.
- Messages
- 3,323
- Name
- Maria
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Not quite yet, although they're popping up - but only green leaves at the moment. I'm down south, so might have a different season to you, but last year the end of April was when they were showing well.
- Messages
- 23,629
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
Checked my EXIF from last year's pics and they were taken the first week in May, but this was towards the end of the season so I'd guess mid April
- Messages
- 940
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
- Messages
- 1,106
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- No
old-box-camera-black-white-sepia-toned-34809806 by Chris B, on Flickr
this is how i remember it as a youngster think it was my grandads, we had a few different ones
We had one of those in the house when I was growing up. Still have a lot of family photos that were taken with it.
- Messages
- 2,748
- Name
- Julian
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Cheers both - got a few weeks to wait then!
Yeah few weeks yet - I keep meaning to go over to the forest as it's only a few miles away but never seem to manage it
- Messages
- 1,106
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- No
Thanks to Eloise, rob-nikon and snerkler for the help on solving my previous issue. Here's the next one... the last photo I wanted to take at the event yesterday was a group photo. It was of a group of probably 120 students/teachers sitting on the floor of a gym. I wanted to use live view and the flippy screen while standing on a chair so that I could get a (relatively) high shot and include everyone without having to do a bunch of wrangling. The camera was set to AF-C. I did a couple of test shots using these settings on my very messy desk at home and it worked. (I tried another just now and it also worked.) No matter how much I tried at the event, the camera wouldn't focus (and everyone was sitting still) so I did it the old fashioned way. Now, the manual says live view only works with AF-S or AF-A. Why would live view and floppy screen work at home with AF-C but not at the event? (Of course, this is what I get for taking a new camera out for the first time. )
)
- Messages
- 23,629
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
From memory I think if you have AF-C set it automatically changes to AF-F when you swapThanks to Eloise, rob-nikon and snerkler for the help on solving my previous issue. Here's the next one... the last photo I wanted to take at the event yesterday was a group photo. It was of a group of probably 120 students/teachers sitting on the floor of a gym. I wanted to use live view and the flippy screen while standing on a chair so that I could get a (relatively) high shot and include everyone without having to do a bunch of wrangling. The camera was set to AF-C. I did a couple of test shots using these settings on my very messy desk at home and it worked. (I tried another just now and it also worked.) No matter how much I tried at the event, the camera wouldn't focus (and everyone was sitting still) so I did it the old fashioned way. Now, the manual says live view only works with AF-S or AF-A. Why would live view and floppy screen work at home with AF-C but not at the event? (Of course, this is what I get for taking a new camera out for the first time.
It to LV (I don't have the camera at hand to test). Was is relatively dark in gym? Liveview really struggles in less than perfect light. It really really bugs me that Nikon haven't pulled their finger out with LV AF. We've seen how good mirrorless AF is, why Nikon can't get close with LV is beyond me.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 940
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
There's apparently a good carpet up Cooper's Hill, and as it's literally up the road from me, I'll have to check it out.
- Messages
- 2,748
- Name
- Julian
- Edit My Images
- Yes
You Hucclecote way? We used to live there - could see Coopers hill from our old house but never noticed any bluebells - mind you I don't think I was looking for them at the time
Last edited:
- Messages
- 940
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
You Hucclecote way? We used to live there - could see Coopers hill from our old house but never noticed any bluebells - mind you I don't think I was looking for them at the time
Yeah, on "The Edge"
I'm not sure they're on the hill itself, the bit where the mentalists chase after some cheddar, but the woods. Only one way to find out I guess.
- Messages
- 2,748
- Name
- Julian
- Edit My Images
- Yes
That's something else I've never actually watched - the cheese rolling. Looks crazy - I guess the best way is to do it drunkYeah, on "The Edge"
I'm not sure they're on the hill itself, the bit where the mentalists chase after some cheddar, but the woods. Only one way to find out I guess.
- Messages
- 9,590
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I doubt any of us on here will
- Messages
- 8,063
- Name
- Andrew
- Edit My Images
- No
I doubt any of us on here will
Let wipe the ribbon oops snap it goes
- Messages
- 9,590
- Edit My Images
- Yes
- Messages
- 1,106
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- No
No, it was good light in the gym. I normally shoot basketball in there with my D700 at ISO 3200-4000 and 1/500th shutter speed.
- Messages
- 23,629
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
What aperture?
Other than struggling to focus due to low light/shooting in the shadows I don't know why else it wouldn't focus tbh (despite the obvious such as accidentally switching to MF which you would've worked out anyway) but then I don't think I've ever used AF-F.
- Messages
- 1,106
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- No
Aperture wa 6.3. ISO was 6400, ended with a shutter speed of 1/100th. It wasn't on manual focus as when I turned of Live View and put the camera up to my eye it focused automatically.
- Messages
- 23,629
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
Sorry, I wasn't suggesting you were in MF.
What aperture were you using when testing at home? I'm wondering if the lens actually stops down before taking the shot when using liveview with exposure preview and therefore at f6.3 indoors there wasn't enough light? That being said I've used it at f8 and higher indoors.
If no-one comes up with an answer by tomorrow I'll have a play about with my D750 and see if I can figure it out. Do you have AF-C/AF-F priority set to focus or release? Was the focus hunting or did it just not do anything? Do you use BBF?
Last edited:
- Messages
- 1,106
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- No
I didn't take it that way. I've just tried again with the same settings - 6400, 6.3, 1/80th - and live view took the photo without any difficulties. And I have to say it's much, much darker here at home than at the school. I didn't do BBF as I prefer to do the half shutter press. I'm much too used to doing it that way. (I've tried BBF but just couldn't see to get on with it.) AF-C is set to focus.
...many hours later...
Well, it's bizarre. I was taking photos of a play tonight in dungeon like lighting and tried the live view flippy screen hold the camera in the air shot and it worked. It's a mystery why it didn't work yesterday.
I've just tried again with the same settings - 6400, 6.3, 1/80th - and live view took the photo without any difficulties. And I have to say it's much, much darker here at home than at the school. I didn't do BBF as I prefer to do the half shutter press. I'm much too used to doing it that way. (I've tried BBF but just couldn't see to get on with it.) AF-C is set to focus....many hours later...
Well, it's bizarre. I was taking photos of a play tonight in dungeon like lighting and tried the live view flippy screen hold the camera in the air shot and it worked. It's a mystery why it didn't work yesterday.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 5,813
- Edit My Images
- No
So I was going to do some sort of blog, but just haven't had the time to set on up yet so will do my review/comparison on here!
So we did some more testing of the 50mm f1.8g and f1.4g. Mainly because my mate was considering trading his in at MPB for the 1.8g.
So here are my thoughts, whether or any use or interest who knows!
Size and build quality
Both these lenses are the same size, the only external differences is that the 1.4 has a smaller white dot to line up the lens and of course the gold lettering says different things!
Internally the 1.4 has a much bigger element.
The focus ring on the 1.4 is tighter, not that the 1.8 is loose. It just moves more freely. Good or bad point - either or I guess!
The 1.4 is noticbly heavier. Not that it's a heavy lens at all - but the 1.8 is a feather weight lens.
Both (IMO) have the same build quality, both slight rattle when shaken lightly and both are made from the same plastic. The 1.4 feels better built but I put this down to the extra weight making it feel a bit more solid, when in fact it's not really.
Performance and IQ
Obviously the 1.4 gives you that extra light so it that sense it performs better.
I really can't say either lens is better IQ wise. Of course if you pixel peep you might see differences in sharpness, but to the eye these look about the same. When using wide open I might be inclined to say the 1.8 is better at 1.8 than the 1.4 at 1.8. According to more in depth reviews the 1.8 is sharper, if sharpness is your thing.
I have read that the 1.4 gives a more 'dreamy' look to the oof areas, but neither of us could see that, and both looked to give similar results. Maybe in certain tests and light the 1.4 might look better, but for me I couldn't see it.
Then we come to AF performance. I will start that saying both these lenses focus accurately and in my experience they do not often hunt even in pretty low light.
When focussing on subjects that a pretty close to each other both lenses are just there and ready. Found them both snappy and up to the standard of any other lenses I own.
The difference comes when switching from subjects close and far away. The 1.8 is quick, not lightning quick, and in no way instant, but in day to day use, quick enough.
Sadly this is where the 1.4 struggles. It's slowness to get focus is it's biggest let down. This is obviously not an issue if taking photos of subjects that are all within a close enough focus distance, or landscapes or portraits really. But if you are say using this for a wedding or any kind of photography that might involve you needed to change focus pretty quickly the 1.4 disappoints.
We had a good look in to this and when looking down in to this lenses you can clearly see how slowly the elements move up and down in the barrell. At first I thought it may be that it has further to travel, but that's not the case. Maybe heavier glass or just that 1.4s are in general slower.
Conclusion
Both lenses are great, and both produce excellent images, with maybe the 1.8 being better wide open when I guess is one of the reasons for buying a prime.
The 1.8 is quicker and easier to work with, I would find the 1.4 quite frustrating day to day.
Saying that if you want or need 1.4 then that's something the 1.8 can't do, and you will not be disappointed with the photos you get.
My recommendation has to go to the 1.8g. It has so much going for it. Lighter
So we did some more testing of the 50mm f1.8g and f1.4g. Mainly because my mate was considering trading his in at MPB for the 1.8g.
So here are my thoughts, whether or any use or interest who knows!
Size and build quality
Both these lenses are the same size, the only external differences is that the 1.4 has a smaller white dot to line up the lens and of course the gold lettering says different things!
Internally the 1.4 has a much bigger element.
The focus ring on the 1.4 is tighter, not that the 1.8 is loose. It just moves more freely. Good or bad point - either or I guess!
The 1.4 is noticbly heavier. Not that it's a heavy lens at all - but the 1.8 is a feather weight lens.
Both (IMO) have the same build quality, both slight rattle when shaken lightly and both are made from the same plastic. The 1.4 feels better built but I put this down to the extra weight making it feel a bit more solid, when in fact it's not really.
Performance and IQ
Obviously the 1.4 gives you that extra light so it that sense it performs better.
I really can't say either lens is better IQ wise. Of course if you pixel peep you might see differences in sharpness, but to the eye these look about the same. When using wide open I might be inclined to say the 1.8 is better at 1.8 than the 1.4 at 1.8. According to more in depth reviews the 1.8 is sharper, if sharpness is your thing.
I have read that the 1.4 gives a more 'dreamy' look to the oof areas, but neither of us could see that, and both looked to give similar results. Maybe in certain tests and light the 1.4 might look better, but for me I couldn't see it.
Then we come to AF performance. I will start that saying both these lenses focus accurately and in my experience they do not often hunt even in pretty low light.
When focussing on subjects that a pretty close to each other both lenses are just there and ready. Found them both snappy and up to the standard of any other lenses I own.
The difference comes when switching from subjects close and far away. The 1.8 is quick, not lightning quick, and in no way instant, but in day to day use, quick enough.
Sadly this is where the 1.4 struggles. It's slowness to get focus is it's biggest let down. This is obviously not an issue if taking photos of subjects that are all within a close enough focus distance, or landscapes or portraits really. But if you are say using this for a wedding or any kind of photography that might involve you needed to change focus pretty quickly the 1.4 disappoints.
We had a good look in to this and when looking down in to this lenses you can clearly see how slowly the elements move up and down in the barrell. At first I thought it may be that it has further to travel, but that's not the case. Maybe heavier glass or just that 1.4s are in general slower.
Conclusion
Both lenses are great, and both produce excellent images, with maybe the 1.8 being better wide open when I guess is one of the reasons for buying a prime.
The 1.8 is quicker and easier to work with, I would find the 1.4 quite frustrating day to day.
Saying that if you want or need 1.4 then that's something the 1.8 can't do, and you will not be disappointed with the photos you get.
My recommendation has to go to the 1.8g. It has so much going for it. Lighter
- Messages
- 23,629
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
Baffling indeed, I"m sadly out of ideas. Did it hunt or just not do anything? Maybe we'll just have to put it down to a Nikon 'quirk'I didn't take it that way.
...many hours later...
Well, it's bizarre. I was taking photos of a play tonight in dungeon like lighting and tried the live view flippy screen hold the camera in the air shot and it worked. It's a mystery why it didn't work yesterday.
- Messages
- 5,813
- Edit My Images
- No
Nice review, thanks. Disappointing to hear that the 1.4 is softer at 1.8 than the 1.8 as I don't rate that wide open
I rate mine quite well wide open TBH. Maybe its just a nice copy!
- Messages
- 4,605
- Name
- Kris
- Edit My Images
- No
Must say my 50 1.8G is nowhere near as sharp wide open as my premium 1.4 lenses, but then I don't expect it to be for the money. I almost always stop it down to 2.2-2.8 where it improves significantly. It's built like a toy but handy to have in the bag.
- Messages
- 18,233
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- Yes
At 10% of the cost I'm not surprised.
Coincidentally, I've received a 50mm this morning. Yet to put the lab coat on though but it seems ok to me! Just editing some snaps of Charlie from yesterday that i took with the 24-85 and it is ridiculously good for the money. The sharpness wide open at, ahem, f4.5
is spot on. Hope you're not missing it @Chuckoir
- Messages
- 940
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Nah, you're alright. Although I do feel a bit of a tool selling it, then all of a sudden getting an itch to take landscape photos!At 10% of the cost I'm not surprised.
Coincidentally, I've received a 50mm this morning. Yet to put the lab coat on though but it seems ok to me! Just editing some snaps of Charlie from yesterday that i took with the 24-85 and it is ridiculously good for the money. The sharpness wide open at, ahem, f4.5
I'm happy enough with my dinky 28-80 for now, if I see a cheap 24-85 come up - I'll grab it.