mike j
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I wish they hadn’t ever stopped putting aperture rings on the lenses but I guess that’s a different story.
Embrace the Command Dial.. Embrace it…
I’ve gone back and forth a few times on my opinion of that camera, I’m with you on how nice it is to have a switch for everything, I’ve finally gotten to were I can work quickly with it though and the size is awesome when you’re hauling it around somewhere. I’ll probably get a d300 when they start going for cheap, I’d get a d200 right now but the battery life just seems terrible and I’m bad about keeping stuff charged up.. I’ll probably keep the 40x too though; it’s just so nice for taking on a hike or whatever.
Agreed on the size.. even with a kit lens it’s small and light.. and I was VERY VERY impressed with image quality and functionality… if you were going to pick that or a P & S.. the D40 wins by miles and miles…
My Mother-in-Law has one.. and except for one of us confusing her by mounting an 18-200 VR on it.. she took some of the best shots.. good action shots.. etc.. Nikon for sure has a winner there.. if you want a well priced capture device and want to let the camera do it’s thing.. it works well…
The real threat to Canon (and therefore Nikon as well) will IMHO come from Sony in the second half of this year.
They’re really pushing into DSLR’s in a big way.They have a huge retail base and I think if they get the product and the price right you will be seeing a lot of them around.
I agree, but if they follow the traditional methodology, after a few years the Sony stuff will be… well.. poor..
Example..
Sony made some of the sweetest digital cameras, remember the sony F717?
You’ve got to spend some time with it but the d40/d40x/d60 isn’t that bad. You can change the quality/size, white balance, iso, shooting modes, auto focus modes, metering modes, and flash modes from the rear screen without opening the menus. Not as nice as having dedicated switches or buttons (you do get one custom function button) but if a small camera is what you want it’s more than workable.
In the menus themselves you can strip them down in your own custom views where only the things you need are visible unless you switch back to full view.
I think it’s a good tool. You might find the lack of an auto focus motor to not be as big of a deal as you first think it’ll be, especially if you plan on using mostly newer lenses. Considering I mostly mate mine with either a 12-24 or 24-85 AFS for general use it’s kind of nice to not have to lug the weight of TWO auto focus motors around on the water…
I’m not afraid to use the d40x with older manual focus primes either which can make for a really slick/light set up. You’ve got no metering at all that way but I’d use the histogram more than the actual meter for that kind of photography and with a understanding of the “sunny 16” rule I find it pretty easy to get correct exposures from the start anyway.
Non AFS auto focus lenses meter but do not auto focus.
They aren’t weather sealed but they feel a lot sturdier than the bottom of the line offerings from the competition.
Yeah, I’m probably biased.. if I can’t operate a SLR/DSLR within a couple of minutes I get frustrated.. I guess I expect everything to be approximately where it was on a FF SLR… if I have to change a setting I want to do it someplace on the body (preferably NOT where my face is while I’m composing).. I do not like to take the camera away from my eye… Those darn command dials are the best thing since autofocus…
Regarding metering of F mount lenses on Nikon Bodies… you want to BE SURE that you look up the lens in one of NIKON’s tables before you make any metering assumptions…
I am looking to make the plunge into the DSLR world, and I’m looking for a little advise from some of you guys with a bit of experience. I have looked at the Nikon D40, but I’m not sure that’s a great choice since it does not have the auto-focus motor in the body. I really don’t want to drop the coin on the D80 which seems to be the next logical choice, so I was thinking about trying to pick up a D70 or D70s. Any thoughts? I would really like to keep my initial purchase low and then plan to spend $$ on glass in the future. Tell me what you guys think.
-Mark L.
D70s is a GREAT body… and it has a remote release.. which is the primary reason IMHO to purchase over the D70…
I have a source @ alliance rubber, give me specs, I can likely get what you need, did a little catalog photo work for them.
With Live view already in a lot of the new DSLR’s I doubt it’d be much harder to record the data that’s being fed to the Viewfinder. I’d be willing to bet they’ll hold off on the record feature until they’ve milked all they can out of live view.
That live view is pretty low res I think.. I’d hope it would be the full still frame sensor, but you are probably right, pretty simple to divert the live view data stream over to the memory card..
Yep, memory size and write speed would be crucial.. but I’m like you.. DAMN if I could use my wide’s and my tele’s that would rock.. switching from single frame to multi frame at hi res.. time will tell I guess..
from a prosumer standpoint it sure makes sense.. a grand for a body isn’t bad.. and you expect to spend $500-$1000 on a decent HD video camera.. combine both into a single unit for the right price point.. and I think you’d have a winner…
just google commercial photography in national parks, you should get the NPS website, mostly geared towards film, but they will require still permits if they are having a bad day, the insurance requirement alone naming the us govt on your commercial liability policy can take weeks.
http://home.nps.gov/applications/digest/permits.cfm?urlarea=permits
The NPS does not require a permit for still photographers, commercial or non-commercial, when going [anywhere] or doing anything that members of the visiting public are generally allowed to go or do without a permit.” In other words, as long as you’re doing the same things as other visitors to the area, and don’t break any of the usual rules, you shouldn’t need a permit.
# A permit is required if your photographic activities involve any of the following: Taking photographs that involve product or service advertisement or the use of models, set dressings, props or equipment too large to be hand-carried;
# the potential for damage to park resources or significant disruption of normal visitor use;
# entry into areas not open to the public or before or after normal visitation hours.What are the rules of getting a photographic release form for an image? I have read up a little on the internet, and asked a few people, but the answers seem a little vague. I think Zach may have posted somewhere about this, but I couldn’t seem to find it.
My understanding is that you do not need a release if the image will be used in editorial print (i.e magazine, newspaper, etc accompanying an article)….only if you are using it for commercial gain, as in selling it to a company to use in their advertising. Or using it in free advertising where it could adversley affect the reputation of the model, i.e. some sort of advocay ad which the model does not support or consent too. I also understand that most people shoot folks they are friends with, or their guides, etc, and they are just happy if their image gets into a magazine….so if you are really close and trust someone, you probably don’t need one. But then again, should you always try to get a model release from anyone you don’t know well?
Now the tricky part. My understanding is that if the image is to be posted to the web, i.e. your website where you may be selling prints (commercial gain) you should have a release form, either for the model, and/or the property, if it is easily recognizable to a person or entity.
The use of a property release seems to be a little more vauge… How do you decide when and if you need a property release signed? Obviously, if you took a picture of someone’s storefront, you might be wise to get a property release. My understanding is that you need one if the property can be easily associated or recognized with a certain person or entity. So what constitutes easily recognizable property? As an example,….what about the fly bikini maneqquin picture I posted on a nother thread? It has long been associated with one of our local fly shops. People who have seen it, or visit the shop, may recognize it as the fly shop’s property and associate it with them. Should I get a release in this situation?
I noticed that the generic forms I downloaded, had a notary public area for the property release, but not for the model release. Does a property release need to be notarized, or is a simple signature sufficient as in a model release?
What about the fact that if you submit and image to a magazine for publication with an article, it is free press, but they also pay your for the images, therefore you are making some commercial gain??
I suggest you seek legal counsel.
Dang, you see how big that triple tail was when you see him holding the same net!
Nice report; thanks!
Zach
Yeah, and they don’t call em tripple-tail for nothing (they have like, 3 tails, the rear fin set extend back with the tail)… I could hardly move that fish… as hard as i cranked he just wouldn’t budge.. and when he turned flat side to the tide and started running…nothing but zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz….
