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

Welcome to Nikon Rumors, and thanks for the tip. I can't believe Nikon has the gall to charge $900 USD for a wireless adaptor. I hope you don't mind if I post this on another Nikon site.

Thank You

my hood was damaged-got a new one all is good!

Time has past, since the last comment in this threat, but perhaps someone is still interested in finding a cheap working wifi-connection for the D4, that doens't need an internet connection.

Well, I have an easy-working one I paid about 50$ for. It looks complicate in the beginning, but once you've set it up, it works very stable and easily.

I use an asus WL-330N N150 WLAN AP, REPEATER,GATEWAY,BRIDGE (about 40$, it's tiny and looks professional and has an easy selfexplaining setup-programm) and an external battery (to power up the modem). I configured the WL-330N as an access point.

What you have to do first:

Download the software "Wireless Transmitter Utility" from Nikon https://nikoneurope-en.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/51367

Have the USB-cable for the camera ready.

Connect the camera with an ethernet cable to the pc.

Configure the camera D4:
In the D4 go to network menue, choose hardware, wired lan (go back), enalbe network connection, go to network settings, Create a profile, connection wizzard, choose Camera control if you want to use the software camera control Pro 2, name it, after that select "enter manually" to choose how the IP address ist optained. (you can choose for example 192.168.101.101). The subnet mask you don't have to change.

Now the pairing starts:
Connect the camera to the pc using the USB cable, then start the wireless transmitter utility. The software configures the IP-Address for the camera. You are almost done.

Connect the ethernet-cable from the camera to the asus-WL330N. Give the system a minute.

Go to the pc:
No go to thewireless-network of your computer an choose connect to the asus access point. Now its getting interesting. On windows-pc go to control Panel > Network and internet > Manage network connections. Select internet protocol version 4 (TCP/IPv4) choose properties > choose optain an IP adress manually and set the IP-number according to my example to 192.168.101.102. (it must be a number nearby the one from the camera IP-address).

Now we can start the connection:

Go back to the camera: network, network settings, the camera starts to connect, if it takes to long reconnect the wifi conection pc to asus. Now everything should be fine.

Next time you want to connect the camera to the pc you just have to do the last two steps. Enable Network connection on the camera. Start the wifi-connection pc to asus and don't forget to optain an IP number manually in the internet protocol version 4 (TCP/IPv4)properties. You can control the camera wireless without an internet connection.

Hope this gives you an idea, how to do it.

phototop

Glad you'll accept the 400 f/2.8, if pushed.

I was going away on a trip early November and couldn't wait any longer for the Zeiss 15mm 2.8--plan A was to buy that and add the 24mm 1.4 someday down the track. Bought the Nikkor 14-24 2.8 as Plan B. Great lens, and now I'm not sure I can justify either lens in Plan A.

But if my wife is reading this thread and she wants to buy me a present...

N 200-400 f4
N 600 f4

but if pushed i will accept N 400 f 2.8 + TCs

A D4 with a 24mm f1.4 would nice

and as this fantasy. A first class round the world ticket, with all the trimmings

Squamish has a 200 F2?? no wonder he is such an FX snob ;-) D400 FTW !!!
(BTW, Some of the best Bokeh I have seen Squamish ! )

Its better to give than to receive they say.. so I think it will be an AW100 for my son for his trip to Japan. One year at a Japanese Uni(international studies). He broke his last P&S while playing tennis the last time he was over there.

Well I haven't ever received any expensive lenses for a present, but I have gotten my SB400, tripod, monopod and an extra battery as gifts. I like all of them :)

What would I really want as a gift...well nothing that is out ATM. Whatever new body is released...either the D7100 or D400 :)

Lenses...I am content at the moment...still maybe wouldn't mind the 85 F1.8 and eventually another UWA probably the N10-24.

Asked for: Manfrotto carbon fiber monopod.

If I landed on Fantasy Island: Nikon 24mm PC-E, Nikon 200-400 AF-S f/4.

N600/4, N200-400/f, N200/2, Zeiss 15mm/2.8, N14-24/2.8... but as You wrote, just a fantasy for now :)

msmoto said:
hey, this is a fantasy thread...LOL

Nikon to announce the D400 before Christmas day for under a grand?

You did say fantasy, didn't you?

Now this is an old thread...but it will work for the "What do you want for Christmas?" question or if you do not celebrate Christmas gift giving... what lens would you like for your next birthday?

So, as this thought jumped into my head when Squamish was giving some info on his 200mm f/2...

My list....and this is about lenses unless someone want so add anything else...

Zeiss 35mm f/1.4, Nikon 105mm f/2.8VR, Nikon 300mm f/2.8...or the 200-400mm f/4. That should do for awhile.....hey, this is a fantasy thread...LOL

oops, that was a typo on my part. I meant to say "connected to this competition" My point was that its possible that their license goes beyond just printing things about the competition. But as others have said, its par for the course.

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

What "... connected to this publication" ?

I dont think its underhanded, however, this legal terminology gives them more right than people have been saying:

" ... in any of their publications, their websites and/or in any promotional material connected to this competition." can easily be read as: ANY of their publications, and of their websites not connected to this competition and ANY promotional material connected to this competition. In other words, it would certainly be forseeable for them to use the material in a publication that has nothing to do with the competition as long as its THEIR publication, and not a third party publication.

My point is the "... connected to this publication" does not have to tie to all three of the parts of that clause, just the last part about the promotional material.

all that being said, I still dont feel there is anything underhanded or dishonest about this. You know that you are granting a non-exclusive license, retaining copyright, in the hopes of being published (or maybe just winning money).

And i completely aggree with heartyfisher about the types of material in a contest. sure its a marketting reason, but there is nothing wrong with contests being about marketting, and there is no reason costest have to be "arty". (your point about homelessness and christmas)

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

@ Tom Gresham Right click and copy "Video URL" Then paste in you post....

I bought my 135mm f/2 DC used. Love it, love it, love it. Honestly, I don't use the DC feature at all. Just love shooting this lens wide open for portraits and (mostly) for the "talking heads" portion of our videos.

In this video, the part where the various women are on camera, fairly tight cropping on their heads, and talking to someone off-camera, you can see why I like to isolate them from the background with this lens. This was with the D7000.

(I don't know how to embed the video here.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWwhvKW9-nM&feature=player_detailpage

lol! You have done it now ! in 10 years when you are the president it will come back to bite you ! ;-)

seriously though I dont understand what you see as being "dishonest". you seem to say that there is some misrepresentation happening but its not clear to me what it is. I don't understand the relevance of the "homeless" statement (and related paragraph) to the competition.

Its not unlimited license, its only licensed for reproduction related to the promotion of the competition, and you still retain copyright.

yes, i understand that the pictures should be used in connection with the comp, its just they get an unlimited license for any picture sent that bothers me, i feel that it should be our decision as to whether we grant permission for use or not in any situation.

and i just dont like the underhanded nature of it .... i mean seriously, its 100% about grabbing pictures imo, and 0% about art. the comp just seems like a ruse to me.

it struck me how there was nothing about christmas time, nothing about the homeless problem around london, things id normally expect, and the 3 categories are just the stuff they use in their marketing. ya know, its OK if they want to do that, but they shouldnt fake it as a competition, i feel like they are being very deceptive, and i cant stand deception, it annoys me.

so, anyways, even though ive had second thoughts, as far as i know the story is gonna run in the newspaper this week, hahaha, im nervous tbh, i have a feeling like im gonna get in trouble over this. have to wait and see. ill let you know what happens ....

What the original poster's quoted language establishes is that an entrant can't come back later and say "Hey, I don't want you using my photo anymore" and force the University to destroy, for example, printed flyers or whatever. It's perfectly reasonable to expect that if you enter a contest your images might be used to promote the contest.

There are actually many "competitions" that take your pictures.. so you are right to be careful. but this one seems ok.
1) you retain copy right
2) they can only you your picture only for stuff related to the competitions.
3) They cannot sell/on sell the pictures.

eg: of a bad one
"
Ownership of proposals and reproduction rights

The designers transfer all copyright and other intellectual or industrial property rights relating to his or her proposal. These rights will then become the exclusive property of the Organizers which will be able to use, publish or dispose of them as it sees fit, without geographical limitation or any other restriction, via all forms of printed (publications, posters, promotional material, etc.), digital (websites, multimedia presentations, etc.) and/or audiovisual media.
"

I do not see a problem here, the sentence ends in "connected to this competition" .

If SOAS would not be allowed to use the images in their publications, they would not even be able to plublish the winning pics...

And if your pic would win and bget published : even better...
It also says that copyright remains with you, so not only you can stil sell the images, without their permission, but also they will have to add your name to them when publishing....always .

This , to me, sounds one of the better regulations on a competition, many others would stipulate that you would loose the copyright to the work..