Does Anyone Have This Lens?

[Echosphere]

Nothing wrong with film I'm actually looking at investing in a 2nd hand Mamiya 645 and also a Toyo 8 x 10 field plate camera. And I might mention a Voigtlander bessa film rangefinder too. It's all just lower down on the priority levels than my hi fi gear, astro gear or updating my main photography gear (Canon Mark IIn).

Dave

I've seen your B&W photos, which I like very much. Dang, with a Toyo 8x10, I can only imagine the contrast you'd create with that! :yes:

 

[dpastern]

Dpastern did ask the question we all failed ask, what is mulester shooting?

Night shots? What kind.

That's quite a common thing I see when it comes to gear talk ;-) What you are shooting dictates what your equipment needs will be imho.

I've seen your B&W photos, which I like very much. Dang, with a Toyo 8x10, I can only imagine the contrast you'd create with that! :yes:

Thank you! I quite like landscapes (and actually, portraiture, even though I don't do a lot of it and I have a LOT to learn about both genres). Whilst I primarily shoot digital, film is very nice too. There are advantages to either medium imho. ymmv of course. 2nd hand Toyo's from keh.com are quite reasonably priced and a field view camera has always interested me, both in terms of using it, and of course, the ability to produce an image.

.....thank you, Sir, your opinion continues to mean a lot to me....well said....I'm going to have to learn to photoshop, I guess....I remember your shot of the Moon....that was shot with an 8mp body?.....

thank you! Yes, the moon shot was a 100% crop from an 8mp body. I'd love to see Canon do a FF 8mp camera with the latest sensor and processing technologies. I reckon it'd rock at those higher ISOs (probably clean to 51200).

Dave

 

[mulester7]

Mulester likes to shoot a lotta bull!

.....nooo, night shots! .....

 

[Echosphere]

Hey Echosphere, when you have been teaching photography for as long as I have you have to have some sense of humor to keep things in perspective which is why you will seldom see me getting worked up over some of the posts I read. But on occasion, I do get the hairs on the back of my neck to stand up.

And yes, I do have an 8x10 pinhole I made out of a large hat box but I shoot paper negatives and like to show it off to my students when they do their pinhole camera assignment. I have great respect for pinhole photography. Overall, though, my weapon of choice is my 4x5 Wista SP metal field camera and have been using large format cameras since the mid 80's. Earlier today I was at one of the local camera stores in Phoenix drooling over some of the Arca-Swiss cameras.

Woops! That might have come across as sarcastic. I have a 4x5 Tachihara. I was curious how to make an 8x10 box or pinhole. I'm sorry for sounding negative...

 

[mulester7]

Night shots? What kind.

.....just anything shot off a tripod, EchoSphere....buildings, bridges, rivers, dams, skylines, whatever....I usually at least somewhat bracket the exposure, and try some different color temps as well....I try not to stop-down the lens past one stop short of full, while working toward just shy of 30 seconds in aperture-priority, then I have some bracketing room....after all that, I just see what shows up....lighted buildings at night covered with different colors can be great shots....the Capital building here in Little Rock is a favorite haunt....and, the best part is, I won't have to sell any shots to put food on the table....will just be enjoying a favorite hobby.....

 

[HandyHamlet]

the best part is, I won't have to sell any shots to put food on the table....will just be enjoying a favorite hobby.....

With the gear you are leaning towards the best part is you won't need a tripod anymore. Unless you need a camera holder while you grab a cup-o-joe.

No tripod = less stuff to carry = work quicker = more shots!


:thmbsp:

 

[mulester7]

With the gear you are leaning towards the best part is you won't need a tripod anymore. Unless you need a camera holder while you grab a cup-o-joe.

No tripod = less stuff to carry = work quicker = more shots!


:thmbsp:

.....nooo, I want a tripod, Todd, and it's low iso for me, thanks....with this retirement camera everything is going to be geared toward picture quality.....

 

[chillwolf]

.....just anything shot off a tripod, EchoSphere....buildings, bridges, rivers, dams, skylines, whatever....I usually at least somewhat bracket the exposure, and try some different color temps as well....I try not to stop-down the lens past one stop short of full, while working toward just shy of 30 seconds in aperture-priority, then I have some bracketing room....after all that, I just see what shows up....lighted buildings at night covered with different colors can be great shots....the Capital building here in Little Rock is a favorite haunt....and, the best part is, I won't have to sell any shots to put food on the table....will just be enjoying a favorite hobby.....

Just be careful of what you are shooting at night, or you might be getting some visits from the men in the black suits. Seeing someone taking photos of buildings, bridges and dams can make them a teensie bit nervous. Just saying.

 

[HandyHamlet]

.....nooo, I want a tripod, Todd, and it's low iso for me, thanks....with this retirement camera everything is going to be geared toward picture quality.....

Got it. Starting to understand your style of shooting.

Friendly observation. Buying a D3 and shooting like that is like buying a VMax and never taking it out if 2nd gear. Because it gets better gas mileage.

 

[pioneervato]

Mulester, what ever camera body and lenses you get I am more than confident that you will be more than happy. But if it were me, I think I would rather take the money you would spend on a D3S (12 meg) and use that same money to buy two D700 bodies and then whatever lenses you want. I always feel better when I have a backup body (that came from when I used to shoot weddings) and there is just not enough built into the D3S that, at least for me, warrants spending the money for it. As with just about anything there is the factor of diminishing returns and I think that would apply hear.

However, who am I to tell you or any one else how to spend their money. Bottom line is that you will have the final say in your decision and I can't wait till you report back on whatever it is you finally end up with. Just go with your feeling because you cannot go wrong with either body. I also think that you have been give plenty of sage advice from several experienced members and the time has come for you to make your choices.

So git 'r done, amigo!

 

[Echosphere]

Mulester, what ever camera body and lenses you get I am more than confident that you will be more than happy. But if it were me, I think I would rather take the money you would spend on a D3S (12 meg) and use that same money to buy two D700 bodies and then whatever lenses you want. I always feel better when I have a backup body (that came from when I used to shoot weddings) and there is just not enough built into the D3S that, at least for me, warrants spending the money for it. As with just about anything there is the factor of diminishing returns and I think that would apply hear.

However, who am I to tell you or any one else how to spend their money. Bottom line is that you will have the final say in your decision and I can't wait till you report back on whatever it is you finally end up with. Just go with your feeling because you cannot go wrong with either body. I also think that you have been give plenty of sage advice from several experienced members and the time has come for you to make your choices.

So git 'r done, amigo!

+2 :thmbsp:

Mulester, while the built in flash is a bit weak, I LOVE them! There are so many times when you just need that quick little bit of light for some cool portraits or timed exposures... D700 has it, D3 doesn't.

Plus you can get the vertical grip and actually be "bigger" than a D3...
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D700/D700A.HTM

 

[mikeybc]

Personally I don't think the D3x is worth the extra 2,300 or so bucks over the D3s which is better in low light and faster at 9 frames per second. Add HD video capability too just in case you feel the need. If your going to print 20X30 posters and be looking at them with a magnifying glass then get the D3x, If speed and crazy high iso's don't concern you then save yourself roughly 4700 bucks and get the D700 with a usable built in flash.

 

[dpastern]

Yes, but it comes down to what mulester will do with the images - if he's printing out large format prints, then the D3x will be better (in terms of PPI).

I personally think the D3s is a better allround camera if you can make do with "only" 12mp. I personally can. Others might not be able to - each to their own. I can understand mulester preferring the 24mp D3x - a lot of landscape shooters do go for the highest mp bodies possible. And if he's shooting at low ISO using a tripod and cable release, noise isn't an issue. The D3x is as good as the D3 up to ISO 800 imho. The D3s is probably a 1/3 stop better @ ISO 800 from what I've seen, but it's such a small difference as to be barely noticeable, even when pixel peeping.

Again, it all comes down to what you want to shoot, and how you shoot it.

Dave

 

[mulester7]

Mulester, what ever camera body and lenses you get I am more than confident that you will be more than happy. But if it were me, I think I would rather take the money you would spend on a D3S (12 meg) and use that same money to buy two D700 bodies and then whatever lenses you want. I always feel better when I have a backup body (that came from when I used to shoot weddings) and there is just not enough built into the D3S that, at least for me, warrants spending the money for it. As with just about anything there is the factor of diminishing returns and I think that would apply here.

So git 'r done, amigo!

.....Jess, you and four or five others here, have forgotten more about digital slr's than I will every know, that's for sure....I'm making this decision based off a lot of years in film, and about 18 months in digital....these digital slr's are wild....6 speeds gained at 6400 iso with little discernible loss of grain....that's mind boggling compared to film....but, I'm after the shot that's got the tightest grain, period, the largest sensor Nikon's got, with overkill on mega-pixels....that's what I'm hoping will bring a brilliance to some shots, especially fill-in flash attempts....am pretty sure of what I'm going to order.....

 

[Echosphere]

This all makes me want to buy a Leica R4 or R5 with a Summicron lens.

 

[mulester7]

I can understand mulester preferring the 24mp D3x - a lot of landscape shooters do go for the highest mp bodies possible. And if he's shooting at low ISO using a tripod and cable release, noise isn't an issue. The D3x is as good as the D3 up to ISO 800 imho. The D3s is probably a 1/3 stop better @ ISO 800 from what I've seen, but it's such a small difference as to be barely noticeable, even when pixel peeping.

Dave

.....Dave, you have been a shining beacon to me in this thread, and I thank you for that....I've been in the Swamp of Decision with my multi-phased ignorance at every turn....I feel settled on my choice, but have wanted a D3x the whole time this thread's been going....if it's not better, I'll still have the best Nikon offers for my shooting requirements....but, I've already seen a difference in an 800x600 download....I'm pretty sure it's going to be there.....

 

[Echosphere]

The D3X is the very best made camera. You should get it.

 

[Echosphere]

No its not!!! Boy, I want to beat you and help you at the same time...

We know you want your gold watch... BUY THE D700 for GODS SAKES!!!!

PLEASE!!!!

 

[mulester7]

No its not!!! Boy, I want to beat you and help you at the same time...

We know you want your gold watch... BUY THE D700 for GODS SAKES!!!!

PLEASE!!!!

.....but it ain't got overkill on the mega-pixels....EchoSphere, them two posts was within 5 minutes of each other.....

 

[pioneervato]

.....but it ain't got overkill on the mega-pixels....EchoSphere, them two posts was within 5 minutes of each other.....

The D700 with 12 megapixels should provide you with great looking 16"x20" prints. If you have any thoughts of making larger prints the D3X should be able to give you great looking 22"x34" prints. If you don't ever plan on printing larger than 16x20 what then would be the point? Of course if you want the baddest camera that Nikon currently makes when it comes to megapixels then go for the D3X.

Large prints do not require the high resolution that smaller prints generally require since larger prints are best viewed from a distance. I talked about this in a post on this forum a long time ago and several threads ago. Just like large billboard signs are designed to be viewed from afar and therefore don't require to be printed with a dpi that a much smaller print would require. Get up close to a billboard and they don't look so good because now you can see the all of the colored "dots" that make up the image.