This is bit off topic, but there are some really awesome apps for photo editing on the iPad, some are available on other platforms, but not all. Perhaps google's aquisition of Nik will change the landscape somewhat. Snapspeed is one of my favorites, but I also use filterstorm pro, and camera+. There are many others out there, but these are rated best. I believe the time is almost here where you will no longer need a "real" computer. Certainly in the field this is pretty practical today, albeit with some compromises.

Some more thoughts about iPads;

I have been contemplating buying an iPad for quite some time now, but for what I need the thing for, I had already ruled out the new "mini", as I need the larger display; I spend a lot of time on another forum, and one of the members, (a young fellow in Germany) is by far the sharpest person I have seen yet, relative to "all things Mac"; so I sent him an IM, via the forum, and he (as usual) gave me a VERY good explanation about the differences in models, and actually pointed out a few things that I was unaware of; there are a lot of tablets "out there"; but I'm unaware of any with a display as good as the current iPads; and inasmuch as I need one to work seamlessly with my new IMac, I will be ordering the iPad shortly. Not to mention, how many tablets can you think of that have as many apps written expressly for them, as the iPad has ?

OK, here's what I've learnt so far.

The camranger device is actually just a : http://www.tp-link.com/en/products/details/?model=TL-MR3040 available from various online retailers for £40 ($60), and the spare battery that I paid $20 for, can be had for £10 ($15)! A very crude attempt to hide the equipments true identity externally has been made, by physically 'sanding off' the tp-link name, and placing a cheap looking "camranger" sticker over the top of the damage. Strangely enough though, they have left the manufactures original info in tact, behind the battery compartment? Very strange.
So what's stopping you from spending $60 on the tp-link instead of $299 on the camranger I hear you ask? Well as far as I can see, only a unique registration code that they supply printed on a sticker attached to the back of the router. This needs to be entered in to the camranger iOS app, for the app to work. It's also the code that you enter in to the iPhone or iPad to log on to the devices network signal, so without it you're stuffed. An original tp-link device must also come with such a code, but although I have not gone out and bought one to try it, I would presume only the codes supplied by camranger, will get past the registration process in their app? How do I feel about having spent so much on what is in fact a cheap piece of kit? Well after my initial annoyance, I have calmed down a bit, and understand that the premium price goes to pay for the app development costs. I suppose this is fair enough. I have not connected the device to a camera yet (ran out of time for that), but I'll come back to this thread when I can report on how well the app works, and whether it's worth the extra premium. Watch this space those who are interested.

Well my camranger arrived yesterday, and the good news is.......her majesties government didn't ask me for any money on receipt! :-) That means its worked out nearly £100 less than buying it from the future UK distributior. Result! It's still in its box at the moment as work has suddenly gone mad, but as soon as I get a chance to play...errhum.....I mean use it professionally :-) I'll let you know what I think. Already downloaded the app to my iPhone/iPad, so I'm all set.

Had my 800 since it came out, and no issues until Saturday night
when the first set of shots shots, at a dance event, seemed to have a green tint
I assumed it might have been the reception room which was very pale green

and when I moved to the ballroom the green tint vanished

later in the evening I checked the first set again and found they had lost the tint. when I downloaded them, there was no sign of any tint

Sure seven, will do. 1 battery should be enough for what I plan on using it for, but have bought a backup for $20 just in case. Lets hope 150 feet is pessimistic! I'm intrigued in how it can override the physical positions of some of the controls (focus settings for instance) with software. Will just have to wait and see?

Chris you made an important point: we consume media be it TV news or internet sites. We have to realize some of the "media" deliberately includes a strong entertainment component to boost ratings or traffic so they can charge advertisers more money and make more money for themselves. This is true of news channels and of websites. Sometimes the news channel will deliberately tilt conservative or liberal in order to draw in that group of people to boost ratings. We have to learn to discern these efforts to boost ratings or traffic to a website and learn to disregard them or spend our time elsewhere. We have to be educated and careful, not gullible, consumers.

SkintBrit said:
Just bought one (I think the international shipping cost of $45 was a bit of a liberty). I'll let anyone who is interested know what I think when it arrives.

Hi Skint

Looks goods but for remote working, I would like a range greater than 150 feet and a better battery life

can you you let us know how AF works? something lacking on the Hero, I currently use for remote control

donaldejose said:
Oh, I like KR and check his site often as an easy way to get some factual info about a lens or body. You have to realize that he writes part fact, part deliberate tongue-in-cheek fiction, part entertainment, and part over-the-top opinion. Think of it this way, his opinions are as over-saturated as his colors: some of the most ugly red skin tones I have seen: especially his own skin. Humble or talented, he is not.

Very well summarized.

molnarcs said:
Mostly bad or misleading information. KR has some strong opinions, what people perceive as "telling it as it is" - but what if that information is plain wrong?

I guess the whole problem boils down to that one sentence. To be honest, I think this is not a problem of KR, this is a problem of the people. Maybe that's why there's so much controversy about him, because people simply can't filter something they read and distinguish between opinion and fact-type information. I don't get it.

I wasn't a beginner when I started reading KR, but I was new to the D in DSLR, and looking back, it's really a different kind of shooting, so I could say I was a beginner in digital photography. Not once did I believe anything of all the things you mention in your examples. I've always considered all that exactly what I said before, self-righteous statements, photos without taste.

Apparently, people just need to learn to use their brains again. I don't want to get political, but that's also the ground on which something like Fox News is considered a news channel by so many.

Totally agree with your view about photographylife.com, molnarcs and golf!

That would be great SkintBrit. Look forward to your comments/experiences.

Just bought one (I think the international shipping cost of $45 was a bit of a liberty). I'll let anyone who is interested know what I think when it arrives.

Lol, was just trying to find this thread again, to make you aware of the camranger device (http://www.camranger.com/) vilaro. I'm pleased you spotted it already! :-). Yes I agree it looks superb, and MUCH cheaper than Nikons WT-5! If I can get one posted to the UK, I will buy one also.

molnarcs said:

....photographylife.com - their review photos are stunning. It also shows that they used best practices and at least tried the stuff they review in the field instead....

+1

donaldejose said:
Oh, I like KR and check his site often as an easy way to get some factual info about a lens or body. You have to realize that he writes part fact, part deliberate tongue-in-cheek fiction, part entertainment, and part over-the-top opinion. Think of it this way, his opinions are as over-saturated as his colors: some of the most ugly red skin tones I have seen: especially his own skin. Humble or talented, he is not.

I guess you're right if you look at it that way... Problem is, lots of people don't, and take him far too seriously.

Thanks to everyone for their replies. I should have clarified (sorry to 'theoldnikonian') that i was after a solution that did not require a laptop or computer.

Just to let you all know that i saw the story a couple of days ago here on NR about the CamRanger device. This is exactly the kind of thing i'm looking for. It looks awesome, will probably buy it.

What do others think of it and does anyone have any hands on experience with it to share?

Thanks again.

Oh, I like KR and check his site often as an easy way to get some factual info about a lens or body. You have to realize that he writes part fact, part deliberate tongue-in-cheek fiction, part entertainment, and part over-the-top opinion. Think of it this way, his opinions are as over-saturated as his colors: some of the most ugly red skin tones I have seen: especially his own skin. Humble or talented, he is not.

chris_weinert said:
Just out of interest: What's the damage?

Mostly bad or misleading information. KR has some strong opinions, what people perceive as "telling it as it is" - but what if that information is plain wrong? Like his insistence that "real men shoot jpeg" and how RAW is a lie. Although I'm a raw shooter, I think jpeg is a valid choice with significant advantages (storage needs, processing power, compatibility) over raw. I chose to shoot raw because to me, the advantages outweigh the disadvantages. The problem here is attitude and arrogance to the point of being irrational. RAW is not simply a matter of choice for him, a choice you make after weighing advantages and disadvantages. No, raw is evil, raw is a lie.

He's a highly controversial figure, probably because he writes as if he spoke the Truth of God, and for some reason people fall for it. Some forums (like photo.net) banned links to his site because people posted with the same zeal and attitude resulting in flame wars.

And when it comes to his settings - he oversaturates his photos so much that he routinely blows out channels (mostly red) so with flowers, for example, you lose texture details. Then there are his reviews, especially lenses, which are highly suspect (ie I'm convinced that at times he didn't actually use the tools he reviews). Worse still, he promotes his settings for download... complete with copyright KR exif info that will be attached to YOUR images. Of course, it's not his fault if someone doesn't change this, but given the target audience (probably only beginners would download his file as is and apply it without understanding the reasons for those settings) there will be a lot of people unaware of this...

He has some OK articles, but then you look at his photos and wonder... When it comes to individuals who identify themselves as photographers writing about gear, I always take the quality of their photos into account. My personal favourite is the mansurovs at photographylife.com - their review photos are stunning. It also shows that they used best practices and at least tried the stuff they review in the field instead of just shooting plants in your backyard. KR's photos (if he has any) in his reviews... well, see them for yourself. For reivew sites like dpreview I don't mind bad photos though...

Overall, my main problems are
1) unreliability - lots of misleading information on his site, regarding both gear and techniques
2) his arrogant attitude that seem to be contagious among his fans, who than pop-up on various sites spreading his dumb and oversimplified views, such as "the only lens you'll ever need is the 18-200" and other nonsense.

Everything he says should be taken with a huge grain of salt. And there are far better alternatives on the net if you need good information on your gear or photography in general.

Yeah I understand.

Just out of interest: What's that damage?

Hi there. just joined the forum and noticed your iPad question. There is an app on the Apple app store called DSLR remote HD which will allow you to connect your D800 to your iPad. The app cost me around £18.00 in the UK developed by ononesoftware. First you download the app from iTunes and load it onto your iPad. You then load the ononesoftware server onto your laptop. Click on your wi-fi icon on your laptop and click on create network. Call it something simple i.e. ad-hoc and add a password. Connect your camera to your laptop and open the app on your iPad. The iPad will find your new network and will open the software. It will allow you to control your camera fully including f stop, iso, shutter speed, and show live view plus more Iincluding tap to focus. It will also allow you to start and stop video recording. All images or video clips will be saved to both laptop and memory card with an option to save to the iPad. There are a few video demos on youtube so see what you think. Because you are using a computer to computer network that you created you can use this anywhere and no need for the usual wi-fi signal. Hope this helps.

chris_weinert said:
Haha, yes you guys are right.

On the other hand, it's as with the big media: I never understand how someone would want to get in an argument over the newspaper or magazine I'm reading. It's not a religion, and if you know what you're reading, you can filter accordingly (I live in Germany, the newspaper landscape here is still a bit less bad than in some other places). In KR's case, it means to just ignore the self-righteousness and anything that has to do with taste, the "the best XYZ, period" statements, and you're ok. It's just a source of "information", that's all.

Well, I really don't care what others read, it's just KR's misinformation came back to haunt me several times (like in the shop). I don't know what kind of SEO he does, but he's extremely popular among beginners, and I have to spend time undoing the damage in our workshops. Now I started to cringe when I hear his name :-/

TaoTeJared said:
First issues is listening to kr on anything.

molnarcs said:
I wish KR stopped writing anything about cameras.

Haha, yes you guys are right.

On the other hand, it's as with the big media: I never understand how someone would want to get in an argument over the newspaper or magazine I'm reading. It's not a religion, and if you know what you're reading, you can filter accordingly (I live in Germany, the newspaper landscape here is still a bit less bad than in some other places). In KR's case, it means to just ignore the self-righteousness and anything that has to do with taste, the "the best XYZ, period" statements, and you're ok. It's just a source of "information", that's all.

(On a sidenote, it's also the same for what gear one's using. Anytime someone is trying to get me into a conversation on "Why Nikon and not Canon", I try to escape quickly in order not to die of being bored. I shot Canon before, because at the time it was the best choice for me, now it's the D800, so what. Both brands suck here and are excellent there, so what's the fuzz about. Same goes for my computer brand which I just happen to hate less than Windows, or for my car, which I considered the least "look-I'm-driving-a-premium-brand-car" out of the so-called premium brands.)

I've had 2 d800s in my hands. The first had the green tint issue and the left-AF issue (or rather, in my case, both sides were off because the focusing module was physically misaligned with the sensor). When the Nikon Service centre fixed the focusing issue, it came back front focusing by about +30. Finally, after much arguing the shop I bought the camera at replaced it. The new d800 focuses perfectly, but it still has the green LCD issue.

Neither of the 2 cameras had any problems with the actual files. That is, the green tint was (and still is) apparent only on the camera LCD. And when I complained about this, somebody at the shop gave me that KR reply to "fix" the problem. I wish KR stopped writing anything about cameras. Again, there is no trace of a green tint in the final images, so changing the white balance to "fix" it will actually yield images with white-balance slightly off.

How bad is this issue? Well, on my d800, the difference is not slight. The LCD has a very recognizable shift towards green, compared both to my d7000 screen and my monitor. However, in practice, after shooting it for about a week, I got used to it. I'd still prefer to see more natural colours, and if a free option to calibrate it existed, I would take it. Unfortunately, service quality where I live is awful. I don't trust the local Nikon Service centre, especially not after their last "repair" - after which they simply refused to acknowledge that it's a problem. I have two lenses that need no adjustment on my d7000. They only work if I adjust both camera (+10) and lens (+20) after Nikon's fix! Shame! But to get back to the LCD issue - it's not a big deal.

As others have pointed out, never use the LCD for checking colour accuracy. I use it to check focus and to check for blinkies. Oh, and auto-white balance is pretty damn accurate, even in terrible lighting conditions. I shot an event in a great hall with mixed lighting plus huge strobes occasionally flooding the whole scene with green, purple, blue, etc. lights. I kept worrying about WB all the time, using grey cards in quickly changing lighting conditions was out of the question. This was my first major engagement with the d800, and it performed admirable.

Basically, only a handful of photos (out of 400 hundred shipped photos) needed WB adjustments, and although I shoot raw and post-process a lot in LR (using my custom presets + manual adjustments) the majority of photos didn't need any processing. Just cropped them here and there and exported them to my standard shipping resolutions (1.8 and 9.5 megapixel JPEGs). I must say I'm extremely impressed with this camera's performance (autofocus, metering and auto-wb, not to mention high-ISO performance).

Along this same line...what is required to tether a D4 to a Macbook Pro via Ethernet cable? Is there software to allow the control of the camera functions?

@ chris_weinert Yes, the rear display was what I was talking about.....old folks get confused...ha, ha, ha... as the rear display is a bit like looking at a ground glass image in the old days except today we get to see it right side up! And, I agree, the image viewer in the rear...for me only as a focus aid or a general idea of what I have in the camera......not good for much else...

donaldejose said:
This reviewer (scroll down for Mariea Rummel's review) says the D800 green tint exists, is not just on the rear LCD and she shows an example to prove it.

"[…]I must note also that the Auto white balance is superb in the D800. When you don't have time to calibrate your white balance I would definitely use the Auto mode."

Ah, just read this now. This must be the reason why I the m+1 adjustment produces worse results with my camera. Whenever I use manual WB/Kelvin, I usually shoot RAW anyway, because those would be studio shots. When I shoot JPGs (and hence color casts would be more of a problem to correct), I usually would use Auto WB.