Has anyone compared this Sigma to the Nikon 35mm? Here is a comparison to the Canon 35mm and the Sigma blows it away but the Nikon is a much newer lens.
Either way, the Sigma is way sharper than the Canon:
http://learningcameras.com/reviews/7-lenses/87-sigma-35mm-f14-vs-canon-35mm-f14

The test was outside so it could just be an exposure jump. I don't think they are reversed because depth of field appears to increase continuously.
Seems to be an awesome lens though for almost half the price of the Nikon 35mm f/1.4

Thanks for the link. I wonder one thing though. When he shows F1.4 then F1.8 shot it gets brighter at F1.8, then continues to get darker as he hits F2.8 and F4

Did he reverse them on the video ?

There is a pretty good review of the new Sigma 35mm f/1.4 and it looks like the lens is awesome:

http://learningcameras.com/reviews/7-lenses/86-sigma-35mm-f14-review

Update: Many phone calls and 3 weeks later my replacement computer should be here today. I have a chair and blanket, coffee and sitting on the porch with ipad tracking it. Maybe i should record this too. what a pain in the butt it has been.

New update: I got it.

Saw this on TV the other day and got a good chuckle out of it. Reminded me of when I was laying in the church aisle and got a weird look.

https://www.longliveimagination.com/community/tips-and-techniques/

msmoto said:
@ ben_v3.... Yes, I think for what they did....that is a deal. You may have a better body now than when it was new....

I was thinking that also since someone actually took the time to tune it up versus it coming off the mass production line.

@ ben_v3.... Yes, I think for what they did....that is a deal. You may have a better body now than when it was new....

I got my baby back! Here the list of things they did to her.

Replace Front Body
Replace Mirror Box
Replace Reflex Mirror
Adjust Mirror Angle
Adjust Body Flange Back
Adjust Auto Focus Operation
Checked Meter Accuracy
General Check & Clean

Im still feeling so lucky that only cost me 250 bucks.

I maintain a website for my retail picture framing store. I started out scanning slides from my F4. Then to speed things up I got by 1st digital camera. I bought a Nikon D2h. Even though I have better cameras today, I still use the D2h for images to be used on the website. It was a great sensor, is fast and accurate. It can be bought used in the 300-400 dollar range. It was used to photograph all the framing samples, using an old 28mm f2.8 AIs lens, without distortion.

For reference the site address is <link removed> FYI, I do not take orders off the Internet. My store is retail walk in only. I use the website to allow local clients to get an idea before coming in.

framer

Mike Gunter said:

We should start another topic about what it takes to become a professional photographer right now and the work environment. I think for a single person to universally do well is tough. It's going to take a team.

Hi Hon, Please remember my birthday was in '42....

You have said so much, Mike, but I cannot agree with you more. For an individual to produce a good result as a professional photographer in the commercial arena requires not only a team but a very strong support of the "team" approach. IMO the photographer is one of the team leaders. The art director is another and the client the third member. Once the decision is made as to what the final product should look like, then it is art director, studio manager, photographer. During the shoot the photographer is primary discussing the ongoing results with the art director. After the shoot, the art director and photographer are together again and finally the art director receives the final product. The production team sometimes is as large as ten people all working together. Sometimes larger but usually about five folks are involved plus the model director/make-up folks.

I suppose the point I am attempting to make is that a simple photograph may look very simple in the end, and most of the time this is exactly what one wants, yet the work involved is huge. And, the critical factor is how the team is set up. I think the great photographers are the ones who display profound human compassion yet are not afraid to be very assertive.

Hi all,

@Moby There should have been a subtext in my comments that went something like, 'you're asking us to help you take away a piece of our living - go soak your head!'

Not to be taken too seriously, BTW, but nonetheless...

I believe that the photography market is changing faster than we can understand it (the change). I'm visiting a daughter in Denver and last night got into a long, long discussion with a recent graduate of a college with a degree in photography about a lot of issues. I think she could wrap her head around the fact that my career was older than her parents and I knew a few of the people that she brought up. (Which only proves I'm on Social Security and waitresses call me 'Hon'.)

We discussed paths to doing great work - education or experience and seemed to agree that either will work, but the time for either isn't overnight, or a fortnight, a month, or a year. It takes a few years to really get it right. It's a commitment.

To me one needs to decide what kind of work they want to do and do it well.

You're a great web designer now and apparently, you want to add some photography that will be 'whatever' to that mix. Doesn't really sound like a solid business plan to producing terrific designs for everything.

You can become a terrific photographer - shoot a lot, take a lot of classes, get a mentor who will generously devote his/her time to you, and it really won't matter what gear you have - you'll do good work.

But the point is, your web design will suffer for it.

We should start another topic about what it takes to become a professional photographer right now and the work environment. I think for a single person to universally do well is tough. It's going to take a team.

More on that,

My best,

Mike

msmoto said:
......I tend to download the photos to an external hard drive connected to the computer after a shoot, and reformat the camera entirely immediately after this. In the computer I have all the files in NEF and from that file I choose the downloads to Lightroom. ....

I do pretty much the same but using LR I also make a second copy

with important jobs ( weddings) I edit the RAW files and burn a set of jpeg to a couple of CDs (one of which is taken off site) before formatting the card(s)

I am not certain as to why I do what I do, but in the D4 is an XQD and CF card each 16 GB. And, I tend to download the photos to an external hard drive connected to the computer after a shoot, and reformat the camera entirely immediately after this. In the computer I have all the files in NEF and from that file I choose the downloads to Lightroom.

If, I am shooting an important job, I will look at the files in the hard drive to make certain I have those recorded and then reformat the memory in camera. Only after many years of photography have I determined my images are not priceless....and if they somehow are lost, well, I have lost tens of thousands due to Ektachrome dyes being unstable, so that is just the way it is. Hopefully, on Flickr, the images will stay for a while.

Ironically, when I ordered my D4, no one knew the cameras were delivered with the cards and reader. So, I have now two XQD readers and two 16 GB cards, but rarely use the second card as I perform the above and do not go out on long treks.

Very interesting topic this. I like DutchNikon also went to leave a comment on one of the conversations on the main page, but declined after being made to open a disqus account. I don't feel I'm paranoid about Internet security, and certainly have nothing to hide, but am concerned about who has access to my personal information, and will not give it away unnecessarily. (Posting on NR counts as unnecessary). After reading Admins comments about why he has changed the way the site works, I can now see a lot of sense for it. I also always thought it a shame that many of the contributors to NR seemed only interested in being antagonistic and disrespectful to other contributors. Interestingly though, without any different account status, we seem to avoid such time wasters in NRF. Why is that? I know the mods here are constantly removing spam threads, but the actual contributors to the discussions are I would suggest, nearly always genuine. Long may it continue! DutchNikon got further than I with the disqus account application, when the registration box came up, I just thought "what on earth is all this", and just decided not to post because it looked like too much hassle, I never got as far as reading the privacy policy!!

Admin, I can now see the reason for the change, and although I'm still not sure I want to open an account, if you have started using the services of disqus for the reasons you state, I would also recommend turning off the "guest user" option, otherwise as others have stated, there would seem to be little point in it. You'll just have to accept that there is always some collateral damage in such decisions.
Thank you for a great site, I really enjoy being a part of it.

Huge SD cards (256, 128 and 64 GB) aren't needed for photography but come in handy inserted into a laptop as an extra "hard drive" or "removable media backup." I use from 4 to 32 GB and never fill them up. When a camera body has two card slots I will put one card in the first slot and a card containing twice as much GB into the second slot and set that second slot as backup. Then I shoot, edit and reformat the first card time and time again while just letting the second card fill up until it is nearly full before I reformat it. This way I have a backup of every shot from the last few shoots just in case I want to go beck and look for something I have already deleted when I edited. Cheap insurance. I use 4 GB in a D90, a 4 and 8GB pair in a D7000; 8 and 16 GB pair in a D600; and a 16 and 32 GB pair in a D800. I never come close to having a space problem but the most I usually shoot at a time is less than 300 images.

I have successfully moved over completely to the more expensive Sandisk cards and find that 2 16 GB SD Extreme cards at 90mb/s and 2 32GB CF cards at the same speed get the job done for me no matter what. I am still tempted by the insanely high speed Lexar cards though, but damn they sure are expensive...

SkintBrit said:
Seems like a good time to resurrect this thread, as Lexar introduces its $1000 256GB SDXC 400x card. One question........why would you want one?

There was a guy who scattered nikons or gopro's or something all over the arctic to take timelapse unattended for a few months. maybe he would need them ? Me, I'm like Msmoto, smaller cards are safer. I've picked up 4 x 16gb cards but no fast ones (90mbps+) yet :-)

R8R said:
Tif, psd, pdf, etc for printing. Jpg maybe for very small prints of snapshots.

A jpg file is a compressed version of the image. Depending on the level of compression, there are mild to severe compromises made in image quality.

PDF is just a container format, which will then contain i.e. a TIFF or JPEG image. That's similar to .mov for video, the container format doesn't specify what codec is used for the file itself.

As for the JPEGs: As I said, just check it out yourself, it's not expensive to do. Just be sure you select an image that has critical stuff in it, i.e. shadow detail, highlight detail, all that. For around 5 bucks, you can do a pretty nice series of one, two three images that give you a good comparison.

When in doubt, why worry about it anyway and just send TIFF. For larger-format "artsy" prints, I always send TIFF. I doubt it makes a difference, but if it did, then I'd be ok. For this kind of print work, I never send batches of photos anyway, but one or two, and who cares if it takes 20 seconds or ten minutes to upload. Just don't worry and send the large file, done.

Skinty: The Post Office have just changed their system - if you contact them you can stipulate it is OK to leave parcels with a neighbour (give house number) or if no signature req'd that it is OK to leave it in a safe place (if you have one). Works for me, I got sick of just missing the postie and having to drive 5 miles to somewhere that you have to pay to park just to collect a cheap parcel....

TaoTeJared said:
I have always used Auto ISO all the time.

That does not mean that I don't control it. I change it for each situation, lens, topic/subject, lighting, and end goal of the image. Sometimes that even means turning it off.........it has saved my bacon when I thought It went too high. Better to have something, than nothing at all.

Me too!

I thought this only happened with the UK post office. Sorry to hear that's not the case, as I know how frustrating it can be, as its happened to me on several occasions. Over here the post men (who are often on bikes or foot) just put a "sorry you were out" card through the door rather than carrying the weight of all the parcels on their delivery round. You then have to take the card to your local office (often miles away) to collect. I think they must put the card through and run! At least with no signature I presume you're covered? Did you pay by card?

I'm a fan of auto ISO in most cases.... mostly because I'm generally too darned forgetful when manually setting ISO and prefer to only worry about setting one variable at a time by myself (usually aperture). I do tend to adjust the max of the Auto ISO though. Now that I'm shooting full frame I don't mind letting it max out at 6400 but I tend to limit it to lower values such as 800 when I'm shooting outdoors.

I generally only set the ISO manually when I'm working with off camera flash because generally I have a model that's not going anywhere for a bit in those cases.

Safire- Thanks. I am not at home right and on the iPad. The shipper I think was u-trac. Not sure who they are but have been in contact with them a few times today. We will see what happens. I'm without a computer still. Bummer. Well if it stops raining I'll go out and fill up some memory cards out at the coast.

Wow - I'm really surprised at how many people "never" use Auto ISO. As someone that just switched from Canon the Auto ISO capabilities of Nikon cameras are one of the reasons I switched.

On my D600 I almost always use Auto ISO... with only two situations where I don't:

1. Landscape photography. I have this mapped to U1 where ISO is pegged at 100 among lots of other Landscape specific options.
2. Flash photography. In this case I choose ISO depending on how much background light I want (higher ISO for brighter backgrounds).

Other than those... I use Auto ISO. I have it set to keep the shutter speed at double the focal length (so 50mm shoots at 1/100s). This is something that is not possible on most Canon bodies and I love it. Combined with the awesome high-ISO capabilities of the D600 I let the ISO range up to 6400 without issue.

When walking around I'm almost always shooting in Av mode to choose my DoF... and it's awesome to know that the camera is just taking care of balancing ISO and the shutter speed to keep things sharp.

If I'm trying to shoot anything moving then I don't switch to Tv mode. Instead, I still use Av (to select the DoF I want still) BUT I set a minimum shutter speed in the Auto ISO menu that is fast enough to freeze the motion (if that's what I'm after). Usually something like 1/800th to 1/1250th of a second. This is AWESOME! It means that if my subject moves into the sunlight my shutter speed can automatically go above my minimum to get the right exposure... and if my subject moves into the shadows my shutter will hit the minimum but the ISO will go up to get the correct exposure. This is EXACTLY PERFECT... and something not possible on even really high end Canon bodies (like the 5DIII).

When I'm in Manual mode (which isn't often... only usually for flash photography) I don't generally use Auto ISO. That said, I don't understand getting upset over Auto ISO in Manual... it's an option just like in any other mode... just turn it off (on my D600 it's one button hold plus one click on the front wheel... it takes about 1/1000th of a second)