# **Official TPT NIKON Pimp Club** Join us instead, Canon has cooties!



## TickleMyElmo

Nikon Pimp #002 Reserved for SkyGrl! :icon_smil


----------



## SkyGrl

whoop!
im here! Nikons are for the best ppl!

Amy


----------



## jahmic

Gimmie 003.

Was wondering when we would start one up....


----------



## TickleMyElmo

SkyGrl said:


> whoop!
> im here! Nikons are for the best ppl!
> 
> Amy


Of course they are! /NikonSnobbery 



jahmic said:


> Gimmie 003.
> 
> Was wondering when we would start one up....


Sweet! And yes, we have to show those Canonites their place :tongue:


----------



## wendyjo

ROFL @ the title!


----------



## GraphicGr8s

Canikon. For a real camera just get a Pentax. Does as good or better. Just costs less.

A _real_ friend would never let a friend shoot Canikon.


----------



## scream-aim-fire

ill join i have a nikon D60


----------



## SkyGrl

excellent more members!


----------



## Moody636

I just picked up a D3100 last night so I guess I'm in!

Sent from my Inspire 4G using Tapatalk


----------



## Assassynation

I got the D5000 w/ tripod and remote, just waiting to buy a macro lens.


----------



## zenche

ugh...i know this is in good fun...but i've had enough canikon fan/warfare across the rest of the interwebs....seeing it here would not be cool imo ><


----------



## Da Plant Man

Can i join even if I don't have a nikon! I really REALLY want one.


----------



## zainey_04

If I counted correctly I would be a Nikon pimp 007. I have a Nikon D5000

We should also post one or more of our best shots. 

Here are some of mine:




























These are uploaded from my cell so there not at full resolution. I'll upload the originals when I get home from work. 

- Zain


----------



## Centromochlus

D3000!


----------



## Moody636

zainey_04 said:


> If I counted correctly I would be a Nikon pimp 007. I have a Nikon D5000
> 
> We should also post one or more of our best shots.
> 
> Here are some of mine:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> These are uploaded from my cell so there not at full resolution. I'll upload the originals when I get home from work.
> 
> - Zain


Those are some huge chicken strips on that tire. 

Nice shots

Sent from my Inspire 4G using Tapatalk


----------



## TickleMyElmo

wendyjo said:


> ROFL @ the title!


Hehehe :hihi:



zenche said:


> ugh...i know this is in good fun...but i've had enough canikon fan/warfare across the rest of the interwebs....seeing it here would not be cool imo ><


Already happens every time someone posts a what camera should I buy thread on here, maybe this will keep everybody seperated :icon_lol:



Da Plant Man said:


> Can i join even if I don't have a nikon! I really REALLY want one.


Sure! Nikon admirers clearly know their cameras, and will soon have their very own Nikon anyways :thumbsup:



zainey_04 said:


> If I counted correctly I would be a Nikon pimp 007. I have a Nikon D5000
> 
> We should also post one or more of our best shots.
> 
> Here are some of mine:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> These are uploaded from my cell so there not at full resolution. I'll upload the originals when I get home from work.
> 
> - Zain


Nice pics!

Good job everybody! Nikon is where it's at!


----------



## msjinkzd

count me in to this club 

I have a d80, my son has a d5000.

Hope to upgrade to a d90 soon (simply for video capabilities)

Have a friend coming over tomorrow with a D3 to do a photo shoot in the fishroom. Keep your eyes peeled fro some stellar shots!


----------



## TickleMyElmo

msjinkzd said:


> count me in to this club


Sweeeet! Our reputation just got even better with the addition of msjinkzd :icon_smil


----------



## GraphicGr8s

Da Plant Man said:


> Can i join even if I don't have a nikon! I really REALLY want one.


Why would you want a nikon? Why would anyone in their right mind want a nikon? Or a canon for that matter. Their copiers stink too.


----------



## SkyGrl

GraphicGr8s said:


> Why would you want a nikon? Why would anyone in their right mind want a nikon? Or a canon for that matter. Their copiers stink too.


Hater..:flick: you wanna join us! you know it! 

Amy


----------



## zainey_04

SkyGrl said:


> Hater..:flick: you wanna join us! you know it!
> 
> Amy


+1


- Zain


----------



## GraphicGr8s

SkyGrl said:


> Hater..:flick: you wanna join us! you know it!
> 
> Amy


Thank you for the compliment. 

I shot nikon and canon. Hate them both.


----------



## zachary908

GraphicGr8s said:


> Thank you for the compliment.
> 
> I shot nikon and canon. Hate them both.


Now I know it's a matter of opinion... but seriously? I'm a Canon boy, but honestly how can you hate either or the two brands?


----------



## GraphicGr8s

zachary908 said:


> Now I know it's a matter of opinion... but seriously? I'm a Canon boy, but honestly how can you hate either or the two brands?


Because after shooting both they don't feel comfortable in my hand. Personally I think both are highly over rated and overpriced for what you get. There are cameras out there that are as good or better for less money and are easier to setup and use.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

GraphicGr8s said:


> Why would you want a nikon? Why would anyone in their right mind want a nikon? Or a canon for that matter. Their copiers stink too.





GraphicGr8s said:


> Thank you for the compliment.
> 
> I shot nikon and canon. Hate them both.





GraphicGr8s said:


> Because after shooting both they don't feel comfortable in my hand. Personally I think both are highly over rated and overpriced for what you get. There are cameras out there that are as good or better for less money and are easier to setup and use.


Why don't you go hang out in the Canon thread :hihi:


----------



## GraphicGr8s

I dislike nikon more.


----------



## manini

Nikon D80 for 5 yrs now.


----------



## Nubster

GraphicGr8s said:


> I dislike nikon more.


Go away troll. If you don't like Nikon, good on you. Go shoot whatever the eff camera you want and stop running your suck in this Nikon appreciation thread. 

BTW, shooting a D300 here...I'll join up and here's a couple recent shots with my POS camera.


----------



## bsmith

I have had my d3100 for about a year. What a revelation! My wife and I purchased it a few months after our daughter was born (but I was pushing for one for a while for aquarium related duties). I never realized how incapable the p&s's I owned over the years were till I got my Nikon. I thought I was doing something wrong (im not anything to brag about by any means but after reading countless threads/write ups/whatever info I could find and putting that into practice and still producing pictures that simply lacked what I was looking for). Then after the first series of pix I shot with the d3100 and the first upload to the PC, I knew right then and there that it wasn't me, it was the cameras that lacking. Again, I am not even close to being a true photo enthusiast but the d3100 just makes it so easy!

So next on the wish list is a tripod and a nice macro lens. The 18-55 that came with the kit is a very good (in my newbie opinion) all around lens but for proper macro shots it just isn't the best. I'm accepting recommendations!

I have also been wanting to DL some editing software but refuse to pay the $$$ that is required to get PS or any other editing programs. Any direction there would also be helpful.


----------



## Nubster

The Nikkor 60mm Macro is a fine lens. If you want a little more reach, the Tamron 90mm Macro is hard to beat. All three shots above are from the Tamron 90mm Macro. Sigma makes a really nice one that is over 100mm...can't remember exactly what it is...150mm maybe.

And do yourself a favor and grab a 50mm f/1.8 aka the Thrifty Fifty. IMO that is one lens that should be in every Nikon DSLR shooter's bag. You can find them for $100 or less and they are fantastic.

Editing, look at Gimp...it is comparable to PS but it's free. You can also get Photoshop Elements for not much money. Commonly for less than $50. It's just a watered down PS but has all the main things you need to do processing. I personally like Light Room but it's costly. You might be able to grab an old version of Nikon Capture for cheap or even a newer version from someone that doesn't need it. Capture NX2 is an excellent program that is included with some Nikon cameras and much of the time, people that buy them are using PS and sell off the Capture program cheap.


----------



## bsmith

Ohh yeah, forgot about the pics! These are all shot in AUTO mode with no flash or tripod.


----------



## bsmith

Nubster said:


> The Nikkor 60mm Macro is a fine lens. If you want a little more reach, the Tamron 90mm Macro is hard to beat. All three shots above are from the Tamron 90mm Macro. Sigma makes a really nice one that is over 100mm...can't remember exactly what it is...150mm maybe.
> 
> And do yourself a favor and grab a 50mm f/1.8 aka the Thrifty Fifty. IMO that is one lens that should be in every Nikon DSLR shooter's bag. You can find them for $100 or less and they are fantastic.
> 
> Editing, look at Gimp...it is comparable to PS but it's free. You can also get Photoshop Elements for not much money. Commonly for less than $50. It's just a watered down PS but has all the main things you need to do processing. I personally like Light Room but it's costly. You might be able to grab an old version of Nikon Capture for cheap or even a newer version from someone that doesn't need it. Capture NX2 is an excellent program that is included with some Nikon cameras and much of the time, people that buy them are using PS and sell off the Capture program cheap.


I'm just use to the 18-55 lens I have which I think is the mm of it. When you say 60mm or 90mm are those set and you can't zoom or am I completely missing it?

My manager snagged the same camera/lens I got in my kit but his also included a 55-200 (I believe) lens too with his kit (from Costco for only $200 more than what I paid I think). That would be a good macro lens right?

I haven't even dl any of the free software that you recommended in other threads. I guess I'll just check out that gimp tomorrow at work and see what it's like. 

Do you have any input on taking HDR shots or could tell me how to do it? Some of the HDR shots I have seen look unbelievable.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

Good to see you here Nubster!



bsmith said:


> Ohh yeah, forgot about the pics! These are all shot in AUTO mode with no flash or tripod.


Nice pics! And yeah, it can be quite the revelation when people start using DSLRs instead of point and shoots. Sure, the DSLR may be more expensive, but you only have to buy it once, and you'll have great image quality for years to come and the flexibility of new lenses, instead of buying $200 point and shoots year after year searching for good image quality or when they break. Might as well spend the money once and get the real thing instead of going from point and shoot to point and shoot until you've spent enough money to where you could have had a DSLR...

Also, if you're a student or know one, Adobe offers 80% off all their products to all students, no matter their major or full time/part time status. This means you can get Adobe Lightroom 3, the gold standard of efficient image editing, for $90, which isn't bad at all...


----------



## TickleMyElmo

bsmith said:


> I'm just use to the 18-55 lens I have which I think is the mm of it. When you say 60mm or 90mm are those set and you can't zoom or am I completely missing it?
> 
> My manager snagged the same camera/lens I got in my kit but his also included a 55-200 (I believe) lens too with his kit (from Costco for only $200 more than what I paid I think). That would be a good macro lens right?
> 
> I haven't even dl any of the free software that you recommended in other threads. I guess I'll just check out that gimp tomorrow at work and see what it's like.
> 
> Do you have any input on taking HDR shots or could tell me how to do it? Some of the HDR shots I have seen look unbelievable.


The macro lenses are almost all fixed focal lengths, meaning the 60 is only a 60 and the 90 is only a 90mm lens. Reason being primes offer better image quality and with macro its a very high precision instrument to get you to 1:1 magnification, and a zoom can impede that. 

The 55-200mm is a telephoto lens, but it is not a macro lens. A macro lens is not based off how far it zooms in (high mm) but instead is based on its ability to focus closely. The 55-200mm lens zooms out to 200mm, but it can not focus close enough to be a macro lens. Macro lenses come in all different lengths, from 60mm to 105mm to 200mm, but the high mm rating and macro magnification of 1:1(where objects the size of a cm become life size, or fill the frame of the picture) are not related.....its really confusing, but try to wrap your head around that one lol....Nikons word for Macro is Micro by the way, so any Micro lens is a macro lens. Anything without micro in the name, is not a macro lens...


----------



## Nubster

HDR requires HDR software. There are ways you can mimic it in PS but true HDR needs the HDR program. HDR is really cool looking though. I had a program but I lost it when my last computer went down. I never really got the chance to play around with it.

And yeah, like TickleMyElmo said, when the lens is just a 60mm or 90mm or whatever, it is a prime lens which means it's a fixed focal length. Generally they are sharper lenses but they are also more expensive. I really like shooting primes but sometimes I like to have the ability to zoom. Right now I have 30mm, 50mm, and 90mm primes in my kit and one zoom that goes from 70-300mm. If I had the money though, I'd probably replace them with a couple nice zooms and keep the 50mm and 90mm Macro.


----------



## GraphicGr8s

Nubster said:


> HDR requires HDR software. There are ways you can mimic it in PS but true HDR needs the HDR program. HDR is really cool looking though. I had a program but I lost it when my last computer went down. I never really got the chance to play around with it.
> 
> And yeah, like TickleMyElmo said, when the lens is just a 60mm or 90mm or whatever, it is a prime lens which means it's a fixed focal length. Generally they are sharper lenses but they are also more expensive. I really like shooting primes but sometimes I like to have the ability to zoom. Right now I have 30mm, 50mm, and 90mm primes in my kit and one zoom that goes from 70-300mm. If I had the money though, I'd probably replace them with a couple nice zooms and keep the 50mm and 90mm Macro.


Photoshop CS4 had HDR in it but it stunk. CS5 has it and they've really improved the algorithms for HDR. No need any more to go to Photomatix now.


----------



## bsmith

So how do you get a close macro shot with a fixed lens, in an aquarium at least?


----------



## robbowal

bsmith said:


> I'm just use to the 18-55 lens I have which I think is the mm of it. When you say 60mm or 90mm are those set and you can't zoom or am I completely missing it?
> 
> My manager snagged the same camera/lens I got in my kit but his also included a 55-200 (I believe) lens too with his kit (from Costco for only $200 more than what I paid I think). That would be a good macro lens right?
> 
> I haven't even dl any of the free software that you recommended in other threads. I guess I'll just check out that gimp tomorrow at work and see what it's like.
> 
> Do you have any input on taking HDR shots or could tell me how to do it? Some of the HDR shots I have seen look unbelievable.


bsmith
If you are on a budget look into getting a good 50mm prime (f1.2 or f1.4 if the budget wont strech to the 1.2) and some macro extender tubes (that way you will have the best of both worlds without too much of the cost of buying two lenses) 
gimp is very good seeing as its free!
Just some frendly advise from the canon camp :icon_wink


----------



## bsmith

robbowal said:


> bsmith
> If you are on a budget look into getting a good 50mm prime (f1.2 or f1.4 if the budget wont strech to the 1.2) and some macro extender tubes (that way you will have the best of both worlds without too much of the cost of buying two lenses)
> gimp is very good seeing as its free!
> Just some frendly advise from the canon camp :icon_wink


I'm all about friendly advice. I just don't like the brand bashing from fanboys! 

Is prime the brand of the lens? And I'm guessing that the f1.2 is just a higher quality model over the f1.4?


----------



## GraphicGr8s

Prime means it's a fixed lens not a zoom. 

1.2 is a faster lens than 1.4


----------



## robbowal

bsmith said:


> I'm all about friendly advice. I just don't like the brand bashing from fanboys!
> 
> Is prime the brand of the lens? And I'm guessing that the f1.2 is just a higher quality model over the f1.4?


Like Graph said its a fixed focal lenght (they are most often referred to as prime lenses) the F number refers to the apature,the lower the F number the larger the apature and hense the faster the lense(can capture light) F1.2 can be quite expensive in primes and anything lower that F1.2 goes into stratispheric costs (not that the average person would need it). 50mm f1.4 is a good compromise as it can perform very well for most of the situations you will be likely to use it in, you will also get some exercise from it due the "manual" (walk closer or further away) focus element to using one.

no bashing from me as its all about the image produced and not about the equipment that produced it.


----------



## Minja

Nothing but Nikon here also.


----------



## Nubster

If money is an issue, the 50mm f/1.8 is an excellent lens and can be had for about $100. Very sharp, great walk around lens. The other suggestions are good though. If you can swing it, the Tamron 90mm Macro, Nikkor 60mm Micro, and Sigma 150mm Macro are all great lenses but will set you back $300-400.

For macro, I personally suggest a tripod and shutter release. Of course with some practice you can certainly do it free handed.


----------



## bsmith

Great info guys!



GraphicGr8s said:


> Prime means it's a fixed lens not a zoom.
> 
> 1.2 is a faster lens than 1.4


So when your saying faster you mean it is able to capture enough light more quickly in order to produce a decent photo?

After doing a quick google search for 'prime f1.2 or .4 it was apparent to me very quickly that a 1.2 was much more than a 1.4, about 3x as much or ~$1000. 



robbowal said:


> Like Graph said its a fixed focal lenght (they are most often referred to as prime lenses) the F number refers to the apature,the lower the F number the larger the apature and hense the faster the lense(can capture light) F1.2 can be quite expensive in primes and anything lower that F1.2 goes into stratispheric costs (not that the average person would need it). 50mm f1.4 is a good compromise as it can perform very well for most of the situations you will be likely to use it in, you will also get some exercise from it due the "manual" (walk closer or further away) focus element to using one.
> 
> no bashing from me as its all about the image produced and not about the equipment that produced it.



I like setting my camera to manual and doing the tuning (not sure what the proper term is but this seems like it will get my point across). 

So to put it in lay terms. A 50mm prime lens would be like taking pics with the lens my camera came with (18-55), all the way zoomed in or all the way zoomed out? I'm thinking zoomed out. 

I would just have to put the lense right up to the glass to get a good close shot of say a bristle nose plecos face where the nostrils, eyes and bristles were in the shot?



Nubster said:


> If money is an issue, the 50mm f/1.8 is an excellent lens and can be had for about $100. Very sharp, great walk around lens. The other suggestions are good though. If you can swing it, the Tamron 90mm Macro, Nikkor 60mm Micro, and Sigma 150mm Macro are all great lenses but will set you back $300-400.
> 
> For macro, I personally suggest a tripod and shutter release. Of course with some practice you can certainly do it free handed.



Okay so with a 90mm prime lens it would be like taking pics with the lens I have (again, 15-55) roughly at about twice the distance? Pretty sure the nikor lens that I have is f1.8. 

Right now I took a break from taking all the hardscape out of my L183 starlight tank to see how the plecs are doing and to snap some pics. I'm allowing the mulm/pieces of DW to settle so the water clears and I can get better shots. 

But I think after that I'm going to hot up Craigslist and see what's doing on there lens wise...


----------



## Nubster

Faster means that when the lens is set at the largest aperture (smallest number like f/1.2) it allows the most light into the sensor which in turn allows you to use a faster shutter speed. Very useful in low light situations or when you need fast shutter speeds to capture action. Generally, the faster the more expensive, kinda like cars...lol

50mm fixed, or prime means that your lens will be at 50mm all the time. It can not be adjusted. There are markings on your zoom lens. Set it to 50mm and look through it. That is were you will be at with the 50mm prime. There is also a minimum working distance with all lenses. Macro lets you get up very close. That is why they are best for taking very up close shots. A 50mm will not allow you to get up and person but you will be able to crop the photo to get that closeup shot.

Yeah, you will be able to get closer shots further away with the 90mm. That's the only advantage using a 90mm over a 60mm macro lens, it allows more space between you and your subject. That is useful when shooting things like insects that will take off if you get too close. When shooting something like a fish tank, focal length with a macro lens is not that important. Keep in mind though, a macro lens is an excellent prime lens that can be used for a lot more than just macros. Some of my best general shots have been with my 90mm Macro.

For used gear, join up over at www.nikoncafe.com. You have to be a member 30 days and meet a minimum posting requirement, but it's so worth it as there is a VERY active sales section with great gear all the time. Fred Miranda is another good one. Finally check www.keh.com for excellent used equipment. That is all the deal in and they have great customer service and their ratings on the used stuff is very conservative.


----------



## robbowal

bsmith
if you look at you kit zoom lense it will have on it some thing like Fx.x-Fx.x this means that as you adjust the zoom the apature will change also, in a prime lense this will not happen.
This is why i suggested spending on a good 50mm prime and opting to get macro extention tubes (hollow tubes to extend the focal lenght of the lense) to go between it and the camera body thus mimicking a Macro lense at say 60/90/100mm depending which tube you use 
as you put it with your kit lense at 50mm the field of view will be the same as the 50mm prime but the sharpness may not be. 
it would be zoomed in not out (takes a little getting used to) small number = wide shot, big number = tight shot E.G. 24mm lense will give a wide angle shot and a 100mm lense will give a tight shot. to see this stand infront of you tank and look through the viewfinder and go from 15mm to 55mm and you will see what i mean.


----------



## Nubster

Extension tubes work great. I want to get some for my 90mm so that I can get some more reach out of it. You can get really cheap ones or you can buy nicer ones that have contacts that allow your camera to still meter and work the AF though it's usually better to MF when doing macro. You can also reverse mount lenses for macro work but I think the tubes work much better.


----------



## Nubster

TickleMyElmo said:


> All you Nikon representers stand up and claim your Nikon pimp club membership! Doesnt matter if its a DSLR or a Point and Shoot, we want YOU *points finger* to join the Nikon Pimp Club*! *and Coalition against Canon! :hihi:
> 
> Figured this would make for a good Nikon thread in general as well, where we can share tips, info, ask questions, etc that are specific to Nikon cameras and the Nikon brand...
> 
> So go on and claim your membership number! I'm starting it at #001 with myself, and the membership number will go in order based on whoever joins next!
> 
> Oh yeah and don't forget, Nikon rules, Canon drools! :icon_lol: :icon_wink


We need a list of the members. Those Canon fools are more organized...we need to get on the ball.


----------



## zainey_04

The HDR option on CS5 is really good. way better than it was on CS4. here's one example something I did a while back. Its not perfect, but still a good start.










*Then i turned it into this *










If buying a dedicated macro lens is a bit too pricey. you can always buy a reversing ring. Its about $7-10 shipped to your door from amazon. It allows you to attach any lens to your camera backwards turning it into a macro lens. The results are phenomenal. With this method you can zoom in really close to where it feels like your shooting pictures with a microscope. here are some example I've taken with my 18-55mm kit lens on backwards. only downside is you have to keep the aperture open manually. 






































*Here are some microscopic pictures:
*
Pixels in a LCD monitor 









Metal









It's well worth the money :hihi:


----------



## zainey_04

I believe this is the current list




Nikon Pimp Club 001. TickleMyElmo
Nikon Pimp Club 002. SkyGrl
Nikon Pimp Club 003. jahmic
Nikon Pimp Club 004. scream-aim-fire
Nikon Pimp Club 005. Moody636
Nikon Pimp Club 006. Assassynation
Nikon Pimp Club 007. zainey_04
Nikon Pimp Club 008. AzFishKid
Nikon Pimp Club 009. msjinkzd
Nikon Pimp Club 0010. manini
Nikon Pimp Club 0011. Nubster
Nikon Pimp Club 0012. bsmith
Nikon Pimp Club 0013. Minja
Nikon Pimp Club 0014.
Nikon Pimp Club 0015.
Nikon Pimp Club 0016.
Nikon Pimp Club 0017.
Nikon Pimp Club 0018.
Nikon Pimp Club 0019.
Nikon Pimp Club 0020.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

Ugh, I tried to avoid this since it will be a pain to continually update, but hopefully, anybody new who joins will copy and paste this chart and just add themselves in so I don't have to hehe...I'll add it to the original post as well...

And make sure you put it in your sig or user title people! That way we can identify the friendlies in other threads hehe...

#001 - TickleMyElmo
#002 - SkyGrl
#003 - jahmic
#004 - scream-aim-fire
#005 - Moody636
#006 -Assassynation
#007 - Da Plant Man
#008 - zainey_04
#009 - AzFishKid
#010 - msjinkzd
#011 - manini
#012 - Nubster
#013 - bsmith
#014 - Minja
#015 - 
#016 -
#017 - 
#018 - 
#019 - 
#020 - 

*EDIT - I'm counting Da Plant Man in as an honorary member until he buys his dream Nikon. I know how it feels being young and not having money to buy all the cool stuff, so he's in since he likes Nikon so much, whether he has one or not! lol...


----------



## bsmith

http://stlouis.craigslist.org/pho/2798339907.html

http://stlouis.craigslist.org/pho/2815987500.html

Don't think this one will work because its not a V or VR lens, thought I read that somewhere.

http://stlouis.craigslist.org/pho/2811434841.html

Looks like a nice lot and ill bet I could work a heck of a deal for one of them...

http://stlouis.craigslist.org/pho/2811071590.html

Another nice one. 

http://stlouis.craigslist.org/ele/2792264802.html

Why is this one so much more than the others?

http://stlouis.craigslist.org/pho/2741634553.html

Is this the same as the one above for 1/4th the price?

http://stlouis.craigslist.org/pho/2767877362.html

Is this the lens extender that was talked about in previous posts?

http://stlouis.craigslist.org/pho/2765492908.html

Sorry for all the links but I didn't think I would find this much stuff and some of these seem to be similar if not the same but the prices vary pretty significantly and all of them say they are in great shape, like new, not broken.


----------



## Nubster

The first set of links to the Nikkor lenses, those are all older manual focus lenses. They should all work just fine on your camera but they are manual focus, no auto focus. In fact, they are probably very nice lenses that will be very sharp and clear. 

The Sigma lens, you may need to research that one. Some third party lenses are great, some don't do so well. I can't comment on that one.

The next more costly Nikkor lens is because it's a fast (f/1.4) lens that is newer and AF. That's why it costs more. You can get it new for just a little more. Unless they dropped the price some, I wouldn't consider it.

The one for $110 is a good lens. That's the f/1.8 I was talking about. Referred to as the Thrifty Fifty because of it's great value. That is a good price for a brand new version of that lens.

Last one is not the extension tubes. That is a screw one filter that acts basically as a magnifying glass on the end of your lens. Stay away from it.


----------



## robbowal

bsmith
This is the type of extention tube you should look for or something along those lines, they have no optics in them their sole purpose is to extend the focal lenght (putting more distance between the lense and the sensor which then allows you to get closer to the subject) look for the ones that carry the electrical contact through as this will enable the camera body to still meter light through the lense.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Opteka-Focu...4O/ref=sr_1_10?ie=UTF8&qid=1327867122&sr=8-10


----------



## jeepn4x4

#001 - TickleMyElmo
#002 - SkyGrl
#003 - jahmic
#004 - scream-aim-fire
#005 - Moody636
#006 -Assassynation
#007 - Da Plant Man
#008 - zainey_04
#009 - AzFishKid
#010 - msjinkzd
#011 - manini
#012 - Nubster
#013 - bsmith
#014 - Minja
#015 - jeepn4x4
#016 -
#017 - 
#018 - 
#019 - 
#020 -


----------



## TickleMyElmo

jeepn4x4 said:


> #001 - TickleMyElmo
> #002 - SkyGrl
> #003 - jahmic
> #004 - scream-aim-fire
> #005 - Moody636
> #006 -Assassynation
> #007 - Da Plant Man
> #008 - zainey_04
> #009 - AzFishKid
> #010 - msjinkzd
> #011 - manini
> #012 - Nubster
> #013 - bsmith
> #014 - Minja
> #015 - jeepn4x4
> #016 -
> #017 -
> #018 -
> #019 -
> #020 -


Good to have ya aboard!


----------



## driftwoodhunter

I'm waiting to see who will be #18 - my Nikon counterpoint! lol

I got a good laugh out of the thread title, too ; )


----------



## lonnie123

d 7000 here and an old f4 nikon all the way
no other can give such robust color when shot properly:tongue:
add me as well


----------



## TickleMyElmo

driftwoodhunter said:


> I'm waiting to see who will be #18 - my Nikon counterpoint! lol
> 
> I got a good laugh out of the thread title, too ; )


Lol, and yeah I thought the title was pretty funny lol...



lonnie123 said:


> d 7000 here and an old f4 nikon all the way
> no other can give such robust color when shot properly:tongue:
> add me as well


Congrats! You're #016!

#001 - TickleMyElmo
#002 - SkyGrl
#003 - jahmic
#004 - scream-aim-fire
#005 - Moody636
#006 -Assassynation
#007 - Da Plant Man
#008 - zainey_04
#009 - AzFishKid
#010 - msjinkzd
#011 - manini
#012 - Nubster
#013 - bsmith
#014 - Minja
#015 - jeepn4x4
#016 - lonnie123
#017 - 
#018 - 
#019 - 
#020 -


----------



## audioaficionado

I still have my old Nikon F2 from 1976. Too bad the shutter froze up when the lubrication dried out. I'll have to get a new Nikon DSLR now. However I also love my P&S Canon PowerShot A590 IS.

X


----------



## lonnie123

I love my f4 but lenses are so crazy expensive that I have only one lens that will fit on it my pride and joy 70-200 2.8 yes it works on the d7k but some of my other glass wont mostly have dx lenses


----------



## bsmith

Its funny to me that certain older (70's-80's) stereo equipment and now it seems cameras of the same vintage (did not know that) are considered by some to be superior in some ways than the new stuff. Since I'm a very scientific minded person and know that with computers (and most all electronics) its pretty much a universal truth that if you but the newest hottest baddest product that 18 months later there will be something out with twice the performance and half the cost. So its hard for me to believe this but I do also know that beauty is in the eye of the beholder and some products are just classics/timeless/perpetually hot too.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

bsmith said:


> Its funny to me that certain older (70's-80's) stereo equipment and now it seems cameras of the same vintage (did not know that) are considered by some to be superior in some ways than the new stuff. Since I'm a very scientific minded person and know that with computers (and most all electronics) its pretty much a universal truth that if you but the newest hottest baddest product that 18 months later there will be something out with twice the performance and half the cost. So its hard for me to believe this but I do also know that beauty is in the eye of the beholder and some products are just classics/timeless/perpetually hot too.


Eh, the old film cameras are fine for the purists and the old timers stuck in their ways, but digital is the way to go for anything professional and non hobbyist...

Film people just like to remember the good ol' days, a camera from the 70's and 80's is nowhere close to the pro cameras of today, anyone that tells you otherwise is an old fart who thinks all these computers and electro-nics are too futzy and that we should all be using smoke signals to communicate.....like in the good old days! lol...


----------



## bsmith

Good that makes more sense to me. I have leaarned so much over the past few days because of this thread. I was just looking through the FM classifieds at some lenses that are $3k! I'll never have one but I still wondered if a lens like that would really be worth it?

Also, something that is confusing me. I found a few people on different sites wanting to trade a 50mm f1.4 prime that had for a f1.8 prime. I'm assuming then that just because a lens may be faster it's not always better for all situations. Just ours really (meaning that a f1.4 prime will always be better for macro shots in our tanks)


----------



## Nubster

If you _need_ it, then yeah, a $3k lens is worth it. But the average hobbyist, no. One of the Nikon standards though is the 70-200mm f/2.8. It's a $2400 lens and if you can afford it, it's a great lens to have. You can find them used routinely for about $1500. That's alot but it's a GREAT lens. Someday when I'm out of school I own one. For now though, I'll make do with my $400 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6.


----------



## bsmith

Nubster said:


> If you _need_ it, then yeah, a $3k lens is worth it. But the average hobbyist, no. One of the Nikon standards though is the 70-200mm f/2.8. It's a $2400 lens and if you can afford it, it's a great lens to have. You can find them used routinely for about $1500. That's alot but it's a GREAT lens. Someday when I'm out of school I own one. For now though, I'll make do with my $400 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6.


Thats what I figured.

Can you or anyone else comment on the other question I had above about why someone would trade straight up their 50mm f1.4 prime for (which seems to me by the pricing when new and that it's just a faster lens) a 50mm f1.8 prime?


----------



## nvladik

I'll join. D7000 here with Tamron 18-270 lens.


----------



## Nubster

bsmith said:


> Thats what I figured.
> 
> Can you or anyone else comment on the other question I had above about why someone would trade straight up their 50mm f1.4 prime for (which seems to me by the pricing when new and that it's just a faster lens) a 50mm f1.8 prime?


I can't think of a good reason. The cheapest new 50mm f/1.4 that I have seen is $300 compared to around $110 for the 50mm f/1.8. I'd say though, if you can get an even trade and the f/1.4 is in good shape with sharp, clean optics, I'd make that trade all day long. If nothing else you can resell the f/1.4 for $250ish and buy another f/1.8 and have money left in your pocket.


----------



## bsmith

Nubster said:


> I can't think of a good reason. The cheapest new 50mm f/1.4 that I have seen is $300 compared to around $110 for the 50mm f/1.8. I'd say though, if you can get an even trade and the f/1.4 is in good shape with sharp, clean optics, I'd make that trade all day long. If nothing else you can resell the f/1.4 for $250ish and buy another f/1.8 and have money left in your pocket.


Kinda what I was thinking. Maybe it was just strange circumstances.


----------



## GraphicGr8s

TickleMyElmo said:


> Eh, the old film cameras are fine for the purists and the old timers stuck in their ways, but digital is the way to go for anything professional and non hobbyist...
> 
> Film people just like to remember the good ol' days, a camera from the 70's and 80's is nowhere close to the pro cameras of today, anyone that tells you otherwise is an old fart who thinks all these computers and electro-nics are too futzy and that we should all be using smoke signals to communicate.....like in the good old days! lol...


Guess I am just an old fart then. I do prepress setup and run digital "presses". I use computers all day. I've got 6 at home I use. 3 at work. PC's and 1 Mac. I shoot both film and digital. More digital than film anymore though. I am pretty good with the Adobe Suite. Well at least good enough they got me to pre public beta test CS5 last year. It's not that digital isn't as good. It has a different feel. Digital is either on or off. (Binary) Yes it can be on or off to really small amount but analog can be "a tad" 
As for us film guys: Unless you are truly doing a wet process and it's not scanned it's film quality. If the processing company scans and then prints it is no better than digital. You lose the film qualities as soon as it gets into the digital realm.

Many of the old lenses are better. One thing I've noticed about the generations after mine. They seem to want a lot if things but will accept lesser quality. I often wonder if they realize what quality really is. We are, and have been for a while a throw away society. Just because they tell you it's the latest and the greatest doesn't make it so. The old things were made to last.


----------



## driftwoodhunter

I'd like to say, I miss slide film! I'm relatively new to digital (less than 5 years) and one thing is obvious to me - to nail film photos, you had to know your stuff. Today, anyone can take a mediocre photo, run it through endless post processing, and fix problems the easy way out. Take a thousand photos at a time to get a handful of decent ones? No problem! Do that with film, and you'd force yourself fast enough to learn how to use the equipment...
I belong to a Canon forum, and almost every poster talks more about their post processing more than they take about the experience of taking the photo...


----------



## zainey_04

Hey can anyone recommend a relatively inexpensive wireless flash that can also be attached to the camera if needed. 



- Zain


----------



## Nubster

The Nikon SB-600 is a great flash unit that can be used off camera. There's also the Nissin ND622MKII-N Speedlite which I have read good things about.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

bsmith said:


> Good that makes more sense to me. I have leaarned so much over the past few days because of this thread. I was just looking through the FM classifieds at some lenses that are $3k! I'll never have one but I still wondered if a lens like that would really be worth it?
> 
> Also, something that is confusing me. I found a few people on different sites wanting to trade a 50mm f1.4 prime that had for a f1.8 prime. I'm assuming then that just because a lens may be faster it's not always better for all situations. Just ours really (meaning that a f1.4 prime will always be better for macro shots in our tanks)


They more than likely just didn't need the f/1.4 speed. Some people are perfectly content with f/1.8 being the fastest aperture available, and would rather have the $$ difference in their pockets. If you need f/1.4, then you need f/1.4, no way around it...otherwise most people are fine with f/1.8

And yes, I have several lenses that are that expensive, and I too routinely buy lenses on FM. It most definitely is worth it if you're looking for the best image quality possible, and especially so if you're using it for professional use. 

Also, f/1.4 does not make it good for macro shots. In fact, there's no macro lens that I know of that goes to f/1.4, most only go to f/2.8...



Nubster said:


> If you _need_ it, then yeah, a $3k lens is worth it. But the average hobbyist, no. One of the Nikon standards though is the 70-200mm f/2.8. It's a $2400 lens and if you can afford it, it's a great lens to have. You can find them used routinely for about $1500. That's alot but it's a GREAT lens. Someday when I'm out of school I own one. For now though, I'll make do with my $400 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6.


Actually, the new 70-200 2.8 VRII goes for around $1950 to $2,300 used. Brand news it's a $2400 lens like you said. The older 70 -200 2.8 VRI goes for $1500 used, but its the older first generation model, and it doesn't do so well on FX (extreme vignetting)...



nvladik said:


> I'll join. D7000 here with Tamron 18-270 lens.


Sweet! You're #017...

#001 - TickleMyElmo
#002 - SkyGrl
#003 - jahmic
#004 - scream-aim-fire
#005 - Moody636
#006 -Assassynation
#007 - Da Plant Man
#008 - zainey_04
#009 - AzFishKid
#010 - msjinkzd
#011 - manini
#012 - Nubster
#013 - bsmith
#014 - Minja
#015 - jeepn4x4
#016 - lonnie123
#017 - nvladik
#018 - 
#019 - 
#020 -



zainey_04 said:


> Hey can anyone recommend a relatively inexpensive wireless flash that can also be attached to the camera if needed.
> 
> 
> 
> - Zain


I would also recommend the Nikon SB-600...


----------



## AesopRocks247

I'm #18?? 
D90
60mm micro,24mm prime, 50mm 1.4 prime, 18-105vr, 55-200vr, SB-400 with off camera extension.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

AesopRocks247 said:


> I'm #18??


Sure!

#001 - TickleMyElmo
#002 - SkyGrl
#003 - jahmic
#004 - scream-aim-fire
#005 - Moody636
#006 -Assassynation
#007 - Da Plant Man
#008 - zainey_04
#009 - AzFishKid
#010 - msjinkzd
#011 - manini
#012 - Nubster
#013 - bsmith
#014 - Minja
#015 - jeepn4x4
#016 - lonnie123
#017 - nvladik
#018 - AesopRocks247
#019 - 
#020 -


----------



## zainey_04

Thank for the suggestions guys. I am definitely interested in the SB600, but I wont be able to afford it for a while. I was hoping for other options in the $0- 100 dollar range 


- Zain


----------



## Nubster

IF it helps, I paid $100 for my SB-600 used. Look around, deals can be found.


----------



## bsmith

GraphicGr8s said:


> Guess I am just an old fart then. I do prepress setup and run digital "presses". I use computers all day. I've got 6 at home I use. 3 at work. PC's and 1 Mac. I shoot both film and digital. More digital than film anymore though. I am pretty good with the Adobe Suite. Well at least good enough they got me to pre public beta test CS5 last year. It's not that digital isn't as good. It has a different feel. Digital is either on or off. (Binary) Yes it can be on or off to really small amount but analog can be "a tad"
> As for us film guys: Unless you are truly doing a wet process and it's not scanned it's film quality. If the processing company scans and then prints it is no better than digital. You lose the film qualities as soon as it gets into the digital realm.
> 
> Many of the old lenses are better. One thing I've noticed about the generations after mine. They seem to want a lot if things but will accept lesser quality. I often wonder if they realize what quality really is. We are, and have been for a while a throw away society. Just because they tell you it's the latest and the greatest doesn't make it so. The old things were made to last.


I sure can think of some older things that certanly werent made to last but I do set your point. Perhaps your a bit more nostalgic about it than others though. 

Since I have only had my entry DSL a bit over a year I can't speak to its lasting dependability but this far it has not fiven me even the slightest hint that if kept well, wouldn't be used 20 years from now. 

I would have to think I would fall in the generation after you (29) and will agree some may not be aware if what quality is but I'm not sure that is all our own fault. I personally get a warm felling and am satisfied with myself when I purchase something that I deem to be of high quality and really seek to own only the highest quality objects in there respective genre. I also find myself telling members on these forums to save up for a better quality product (eheim v Chinese knockoff) as it will payoff in the end. One of the most memorable discussions I have had though was with a member from the generation prior to mine though. They actually told me that since the lesser product was so much cheaper that to him the value was found in the fact he could just purchase a whole new cheapo filter (and would happily) if the filter he owned had a component break and that he couldn't just purchase that broken part...

That blew my mind. 



driftwoodhunter said:


> I'd like to say, I miss slide film! I'm relatively new to digital (less than 5 years) and one thing is obvious to me - to nail film photos, you had to know your stuff. Today, anyone can take a mediocre photo, run it through endless post processing, and fix problems the easy way out. Take a thousand photos at a time to get a handful of decent ones? No problem! Do that with film, and you'd force yourself fast enough to learn how to use the equipment...
> I belong to a Canon forum, and almost every poster talks more about their post processing more than they take about the experience of taking the photo...



I'm trying to wrap my head around taking pix with a film camera then having the time it takes to develop those shots to see your mistakes. How on earth could you remember exactly what you were doing or what your settings were to know what you need to change? 



TickleMyElmo said:


> They more than likely just didn't need the f/1.4 speed. Some people are perfectly content with f/1.8 being the fastest aperture available, and would rather have the $$ difference in their pockets. If you need f/1.4, then you need f/1.4, no way around it...otherwise most people are fine with f/1.8
> 
> And yes, I have several lenses that are that expensive, and I too routinely buy lenses on FM. It most definitely is worth it if you're looking for the best image quality possible, and especially so if you're using it for professional use.
> 
> Also, f/1.4 does not make it good for macro shots. In fact, there's no macro lens that I know of that goes to f/1.4, most only go to f/2.8...
> 
> 
> Actually, the new 70-200 2.8 VRII goes for around $1950 to $2,300 used. Brand news it's a $2400 lens like you said. The older 70 -200 2.8 VRI goes for $1500 used, but its the older first generation model, and it doesn't do so well on FX (extreme vignetting)...
> 
> 
> 
> Sweet! You're #017...
> 
> #001 - TickleMyElmo
> #002 - SkyGrl
> #003 - jahmic
> #004 - scream-aim-fire
> #005 - Moody636
> #006 -Assassynation
> #007 - Da Plant Man
> #008 - zainey_04
> #009 - AzFishKid
> #010 - msjinkzd
> #011 - manini
> #012 - Nubster
> #013 - bsmith
> #014 - Minja
> #015 - jeepn4x4
> #016 - lonnie123
> #017 - nvladik
> #018 -
> #019 -
> #020 -
> 
> 
> 
> I would also recommend the Nikon SB-600...


From what I read in this post a 50mm f1.4/.8 prime could be used as an excellent macro lens. Did I miss interpret something?


----------



## TickleMyElmo

bsmith said:


> I sure can think of some older things that certanly werent made to last but I do set your point. Perhaps your a bit more nostalgic about it than others though.
> 
> Since I have only had my entry DSL a bit over a year I can't speak to its lasting dependability but this far it has not fiven me even the slightest hint that if kept well, wouldn't be used 20 years from now.
> 
> I would have to think I would fall in the generation after you (29) and will agree some may not be aware if what quality is but I'm not sure that is all our own fault. I personally get a warm felling and am satisfied with myself when I purchase something that I deem to be of high quality and really seek to own only the highest quality objects in there respective genre. I also find myself telling members on these forums to save up for a better quality product (eheim v Chinese knockoff) as it will payoff in the end. One of the most memorable discussions I have had though was with a member from the generation prior to mine though. They actually told me that since the lesser product was so much cheaper that to him the value was found in the fact he could just purchase a whole new cheapo filter (and would happily) if the filter he owned had a component break and that he couldn't just purchase that broken part...
> 
> That blew my mind.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm trying to wrap my head around taking pix with a film camera then having the time it takes to develop those shots to see your mistakes. How on earth could you remember exactly what you were doing or what your settings were to know what you need to change?
> 
> 
> 
> From what I read in this post a 50mm f1.4/.8 prime could be used as an excellent macro lens. Did I miss interpret something?


Yes, a 50mm f/1.4 lens is not a macro lens, and there has never been a 50mm f/1.4 macro lens. People recommend the 50mm f/1.4 and 50mm f/1.8 lenses because they are relatively cheap, but they are NOT macro lenses. 

The only macro lenses Nikon makes have the word "Micro" in their titles. People tend to mess up and think when they get a semi-close picture of a fish, that it is a macro picture. This is incorrect. Only actual macro lenses allow you to get to 1:1(aka macro) magnification with quality. Yes, there are extension tubes that allow you to get to 1:1(macro) magnification, but they result in poor image quality in comparison to an actual macro lens.

A 50mm f/1.4 and 50mm f/1.8 is simply a cheap, useful lens. The quality is obviously not as good as a $1500 and up lens, but it is better than the kit lens and they are cheap, which is why so many newb photographers recommend them.


----------



## audioaficionado

I like longer macro lenses as the working distance is longer and makes the subjects less nervous when you point the lens at them. I have a Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/4.0 that I've had for almost 40 years and a bellows set to go with it. It sure would be nice if I could use those lenses on the new Nikon camera bodies and have full functionality.


----------



## zainey_04

Nubster said:


> IF it helps, I paid $100 for my SB-600 used. Look around, deals can be found.


I actually just found on for $60. I probably should of searched before posting my previous reply . 
Thanks


- Zain


----------



## jahmic

Also worth remembering is that the 1.4 lens is noticeably heavier than the 1.8. With the slower of the 2 being lighter weight, less expensive, and fast enough for most...it tends to be the more popular option.

As to the question on darkroom developing and waiting to see your mistakes...call me nostalgic; but that's the beauty of film. You need to know your equipment, film, camera settings, even the paper you are going to use...and plan every shot. I used to buy bulk of 35mm film and roll my own cartridges with about 6 or 7 shots per roll. Why? Because I knew as the lighting changed I'd likely have to "push" or "pull" the film in processing to expose the image properly. Chances were that would change after 5 shots if I was outdoors. Once you master that technique, shooting medium and large format is...well...you really have to experience it...it's beyond enjoyable. Slows down the process and makes you think about every detail.

Do you make mistakes? Sure...but you learn to make less as you go. And when you start pulling slides out after exposure, marking them for appropriate developing times, and ending up with print after print of beautifully exposed images that print straight off your slide with no dodging or burning necessary...there really isn't a more satisfying experience for me in photography.

I definitely shoot more digital than film these days, and appreciate what I'm able to accomplish, but shooting in RAW and processing in Adobe almost feels like an autocorrect feature in comparison. Truth be told...I don't know my dslr nearly as well as my old 35mm slrs I have laying around. Sure it's a more complex system, but you really can skip a handful of steps when shooting digital.


----------



## Nubster

zainey_04 said:


> I actually just found on for $60. I probably should of searched before posting my previous reply .
> Thanks
> 
> 
> - Zain


Nice. Jump on it because that's a steal. Most go for $200-250. I got lucky to get mine for $100. You might want to grab a powerball ticket this afternoon :icon_smil


----------



## bsmith

jahmic said:


> Also worth remembering is that the 1.4 lens is noticeably heavier than the 1.8. With the slower of the 2 being lighter weight, less expensive, and fast enough for most...it tends to be the more popular option.
> 
> As to the question on darkroom developing and waiting to see your mistakes...call me nostalgic; but that's the beauty of film. You need to know your equipment, film, camera settings, even the paper you are going to use...and plan every shot. I used to buy bulk of 35mm film and roll my own cartridges with about 6 or 7 shots per roll. Why? Because I knew as the lighting changed I'd likely have to "push" or "pull" the film in processing to expose the image properly. Chances were that would change after 5 shots if I was outdoors. Once you master that technique, shooting medium and large format is...well...you really have to experience it...it's beyond enjoyable. Slows down the process and makes you think about every detail.
> 
> Do you make mistakes? Sure...but you learn to make less as you go. And when you start pulling slides out after exposure, marking them for appropriate developing times, and ending up with print after print of beautifully exposed images that print straight off your slide with no dodging or burning necessary...there really isn't a more satisfying experience for me in photography.
> 
> I definitely shoot more digital than film these days, and appreciate what I'm able to accomplish, but shooting in RAW and processing in Adobe almost feels like an autocorrect feature in comparison. Truth be told...I don't know my dslr nearly as well as my old 35mm slrs I have laying around. Sure it's a more complex system, but you really can skip a handful of steps when shooting digital.


That does sound very enjoyable. I never got the chance to take any kind of classes in high school where I was able to develop any film. But I think learning the process would be really neat.


----------



## zainey_04

Nubster said:


> Nice. Jump on it because that's a steal. Most go for $200-250. I got lucky to get mine for $100. You might want to grab a powerball ticket this afternoon :icon_smil


I think I will, but it seems my D5000 does not support commander mode so I cannot use this flash wirelessly. Would I be able to use a cheapo amazon radio transmitter to fire this flash wirelessly. I know I will lose some functionality. I need this confirmed before I can jump on this. 


- Zain


----------



## Nubster

Heck, if it's in good shape buy it and I'll pay you for it. $60 for a SB-600 is a great deal. I'd love to have a second flash...haha


----------



## zainey_04

Yeah, but I want to keep it for my self since I can still use it on my camera. So do you know if the above method will work for off camera shooting?


- Zain


----------



## IWANNAGOFAST

can i join? I don't even know what number i'd be haha
d3100 here
18-55mm kit lens, nikkor micro 40mm, sigma "macro" 70-300mm

The micro 40mm is a good prime lens but not that great for macro shots since you have to get super close, pretty much you have to have the lens hood on the tank glass to get a decent macro shot. 

I'm on the lookout for the nikkor micro 85mm lens. Any thoughts on it?


----------



## Nubster

zainey_04 said:


> Yeah, but I want to keep it for my self since I can still use it on my camera. So do you know if the above method will work for off camera shooting?
> 
> 
> - Zain


Yeah, you can use the SU-800 command unit (or third party alternative) to fire the SB-600 off camera wirelessly.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

Yes, you can use the cheap ebay radio triggers to fire the flash wirelessly with your D5100...

IWANNAGOFAST, I'll add you to the list when I get home tonight


----------



## TickleMyElmo

IWANNAGOFAST said:


> can i join? I don't even know what number i'd be haha
> d3100 here
> 18-55mm kit lens, nikkor micro 40mm, sigma "macro" 70-300mm
> 
> The micro 40mm is a good prime lens but not that great for macro shots since you have to get super close, pretty much you have to have the lens hood on the tank glass to get a decent macro shot.
> 
> I'm on the lookout for the nikkor micro 85mm lens. Any thoughts on it?


Added :icon_bigg #019

#001 - TickleMyElmo
#002 - SkyGrl
#003 - jahmic
#004 - scream-aim-fire
#005 - Moody636
#006 -Assassynation
#007 - Da Plant Man
#008 - zainey_04
#009 - AzFishKid
#010 - msjinkzd
#011 - manini
#012 - Nubster
#013 - bsmith
#014 - Minja
#015 - jeepn4x4
#016 - lonnie123
#017 - nvladik
#018 - AesopRocks247
#019 - IWANNAGOFAST
#020 -
#021 - 
#022 -
#023 - 
#024 -
#025 -


----------



## bsmith

Nice, Nick I can just use you as my lens guinea pig! If you like them then there's a good chance I would like it too. 

I wouldn't worry about the weight too much, I wouldn't think. It's not like I'm planning any excursions to the dark part of the jungle or anything like that and I have to keep equip weight down. That and I guess it could be harder to take a pic with a heavier (altogether) camera too but what are we talking a few more oz's?

And I could have sworn someone was saying you could take decent macro shots with a 50 or so mm prime. Was that maybe if you reversed it?


----------



## Nubster

You can get decent quality shots that can be cropped but you can't get macro shots.


----------



## Ibn

I'll take #21 once someone picks up 20. I'll list equipment then.


----------



## bsmith

Nubster said:


> You can get decent quality shots that can be cropped but you can't get macro shots.


What is considered a true macro shot then? I have just been using it to describe a pic that is a close up of the topic/medium/focus/subject.


----------



## Nubster

A basic definition of macro photography is getting an image as large or larger than life size on your camera sensor. For example, the flower I am posting, that is macro and how it came off my camera. I did not have to crop or enlarge it to get that close. You couldn't do that with a 50mm lens (unless it was a macro lens or using tubes, reversed, ect.). The working distance for the 50mm is to far to be able to get such an up close shot. A macro lens, you can have the lensmuch closer to the subject and get focus where the 50mm f/1.8 lens has a minimum focus distance of 18". So that means you can't get the lens to focus on anything that is closer than 18" from the lens. Because of that, you can't get the really closeup detailed shots that a macro lens can get.


----------



## bsmith

So these arent macro, just close ups? I took them with my 18-55 kit lens. 


























Obviously nothing like your perfectly focused shot. Im still trying to figure all this out. I would say that for all of these I was in the least zoomed in as I could go (all the way un-zoomed in!) as I find with this lens, I cannot get it to focus for ANYTHING if im zoomed in even the tiniest bit.


----------



## Nubster

Correct, those are just close ups. Even if you can crop or enlarge the shot to be larger than life, it has to be larger than life right off the camera to be considered macro. I mean there can be a point where it's just splitting hairs whether to call it macro or closeup, but generally it's pretty obvious. As far as not being able to focus when zoomed out, that is likely because you are too close and within the lenses minimum working distance.

As far as focusing and general photography, I would suggest practicing on stuff not in your aquarium. Aquarium shots are difficult anyways and to someone that is new to photography or using a new camera, it can be daunting. I have been shooting several years and while far from good, I get lucky now and then but I can't shoot aquarium shots to save my life. It's like they are a whole other beast. I'd get some stuff and set it up in a controlled well lit environment and shoot those. Just get the feel for things and play around. I started that critique thread exactly for stuff like this. Post up pictures and get some critiques. Ask for honest opinions and advise to help shoot better. It's easy to shoot good shots but hard to get great shots but once you start hitting those great shots you will realize how worth it it all is. It's almost like a rush when you get that shot up on your computer and with little to no processing, you have a fantastic photo to share.


----------



## zainey_04

bsmith said:


> And I could have sworn someone was saying you could take decent macro shots with a 50 or so mm prime. Was that maybe if you reversed it?


This is true. If you look at some of the macro shots I posted in a previous reply they were all taken from a reversed 18-55mm kit lens. 



- Zain


----------



## Ibn

What species is that and are you breeding them? Those white margins are stunning!


----------



## bsmith

Nubster said:


> Correct, those are just close ups. Even if you can crop or enlarge the shot to be larger than life, it has to be larger than life right off the camera to be considered macro. I mean there can be a point where it's just splitting hairs whether to call it macro or closeup, but generally it's pretty obvious. As far as not being able to focus when zoomed out, that is likely because you are too close and within the lenses minimum working distance.
> 
> As far as focusing and general photography, I would suggest practicing on stuff not in your aquarium. Aquarium shots are difficult anyways and to someone that is new to photography or using a new camera, it can be daunting. I have been shooting several years and while far from good, I get lucky now and then but I can't shoot aquarium shots to save my life. It's like they are a whole other beast. I'd get some stuff and set it up in a controlled well lit environment and shoot those. Just get the feel for things and play around. I started that critique thread exactly for stuff like this. Post up pictures and get some critiques. Ask for honest opinions and advise to help shoot better. It's easy to shoot good shots but hard to get great shots but once you start hitting those great shots you will realize how worth it it all is. It's almost like a rush when you get that shot up on your computer and with little to no processing, you have a fantastic photo to share.


I can appreciate setting up a play-macro photo shoot but thats not my style (perhaps to my detriment of course) as it seems in most avenues of my life either willingly/knowingly or unwillingly/unknowingly I have happened to get in the hardest or at least difficult portion of whatever it is and have came out victorious in most. 

Like the Plecos, I though they were beautiful animals and I purchased some. Then after a bit (tiny bit) of consideration and research I thought I would give breeding them a try. Well they are one of the harder plecos to breed and aren't your common BN by any stretch of the imagination husbandry wise. But in the end they did bred and have been pretty regularly till this winter. I think they just know what time of year it is and will pick back up in February as they did for the first time last year. 

TMI, im sure but just so you know where im coming from. 




zainey_04 said:


> This is true. If you look at some of the macro shots I posted in a previous reply they were all taken from a reversed 18-55mm kit lens.
> 
> 
> 
> - Zain


So what is the protocol for doing this method sir?



Ibn said:


> What species is that and are you breeding them? Those white margins are stunning!


_They are Ancistrus Dolichopterus_ or commonly known as L183 Starlight Bristle nose Plecostomus. The journal I have kept to chronicle my breeding history is in my sig under L183's I believe. And the white margins are what drew me to them also.


----------



## bsmith

Okay so what benefits/hinderances would something like this little grouping of lenses give me? Pretty cheap...

http://www.amazon.com/Digital-Cameras-Including-Telephoto-following/dp/B005GR614Q

Or would spending 2.5x's as much on this guy be a better decision and why? 

http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-Micro-Nikkor-Filter-Digital-Camera/dp/B005K9OWJ6

Over at FM when I was reading some of the FS adds I notices that some of the cameras for sale talked about being serviced. What does this entail and do I need to have my d3100 serviced as some specific interval?

Also, should I get a UV protection filter or something similar for my camera? I didn't even know about them and from the manufacturers details they sound very import and at keeping your camera innards clean and also giving you better quality images. 


Thanks!


----------



## IWANNAGOFAST

i wouldn't get that lens for macro work. I have it and while it is a "macro" lens, the 40mm working distance is too short. You have to get super super close to an object to get a decent macro shot. So if you're trying to take a picture of say, a shrimp, you're not going to be able to get close enough. 

I was like, 4 inches away from the needle valve to get this shot using the 40mm micro









Here's a 100% crop. 









It does macro shots really well, but if you're trying to take a shot of a VERY small animal from anywhere further than like, 3-4 inches away from the lens, it's going to be hard to get a high level of detail.

I've been scouring ebay for an 85mm nikkor micro lens, but don't have the funds yet 

As for the UV filters and stuff for lens, I have one on all my lenses, but not for any UV filtration or whatever, at least not from what I can tell in shots. It's to protect the lens. It's a lot cheaper to replace a $10 filter than a $300 lens


----------



## TickleMyElmo

bsmith said:


> Okay so what benefits/hinderances would something like this little grouping of lenses give me? Pretty cheap...
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Digital-Cameras-Including-Telephoto-following/dp/B005GR614Q
> 
> Or would spending 2.5x's as much on this guy be a better decision and why?
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-Micro-Nikkor-Filter-Digital-Camera/dp/B005K9OWJ6
> 
> Over at FM when I was reading some of the FS adds I notices that some of the cameras for sale talked about being serviced. What does this entail and do I need to have my d3100 serviced as some specific interval?
> 
> Also, should I get a UV protection filter or something similar for my camera? I didn't even know about them and from the manufacturers details they sound very import and at keeping your camera innards clean and also giving you better quality images.
> 
> 
> Thanks!


You could avoid all problems by not buying anything that is not an actual lens made by Nikon. The first link is not real lenses. The second link is an actual Nikon lens. Yeah, the other stuff like reversing rings, extension tubes, etc are cheap, but they are not good quality, and they do not give high quality images, despite what people claim is "high quality results". 

You're better off taking the money that you would spend on the useless extension tube, reversing ring, etc stuff, and just putting it towards an actual lens. It is "expensive", but photography is expensive, and I assure you the $250-$450 actual Nikon macro lenses you're interested in are nothing in comparison to the more advanced lenses. 

Honestly, the extension tubes and reversing rings vs the actual macro lenses is a bit like the Point and Shoot vs. DSLR thing. The extension tubes and reversing rings get you really crappy quality at a great price (much like a point and shoot camera), while the actual macro lens gets you solid assembly and great image quality. There is no point in owning a DSLR if you're going to cheap out and muck it all up, because at that point, you're probably better off with the cheap point and shoot and its "macro mode"...

Think of the revelation you had when you bought your DSLR at the image quality compared to point and shoots. It's much the same revelation you'll have when you realize the great image quality an actual macro lens will give you in comparison to these cheap low quality solutions (extension tubes and reversing rings)

Also, you're camera does not need to be serviced until there's something wrong with it.

And no, do not buy a UV filter. They really just serve to separate suckers from their hard earned money, and they give large profit margins, which is why camera shops push them onto all the gullible suckers that walk in. UV filters have a place on film cameras (and barely there) but serve no purpose on digital cameras, and only degrade image quality. Some people will tell you they "protect" the front element, but in reality the front glass on many lenses is actually quite strong. People love to say a filter saved their lens when it falls and the filter cracks, but in reality, of course a single flimsy piece of glass will shatter when dropped. Luckily, lenses are not single flimsy pieces of glass. In actuality, filters can do more damage than without when lenses are dropped because the resulting glass shards from the filter may permanently scratch the lens glass. 

Here, this is the lens you should get. It will autofocus on your camera, and it's an actual macro lens made by Nikon, in fact, its the cheapest macro lens they offer. You will have to have the lens super close to your subject to get to macro magnification, but it will get close enough even backed up from you're subject.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/810414-USA/Nikon_2200_40_mm_f_2_8G_AF_S.html

Buy it, spend you're money once, don't waste it on the crappy extension tubes, reversing rings, etc....

Yes, there's better macro lenses that allow you to be further back from your subject, but they are much more expensive. That is the cheapest option...


----------



## bsmith

Thanks Nick. Now if ill just be looking for a lens on the 85mm range if it's a macro then. It would allow you to take the same pic of that valve at roughly 8in, is that correct? Or an even closer shot at 4 then too?

This thread is a wonder and a curse at the same time. It's a wonder for me as I can unload all these silly newb questions and get good solid info from (for the most part) people I have atleast slight knowledge about. Bit a curse as you all have to endure them!

It's a great hobby that is linked to the hobby this site cultivates but its also costly and with that component illicets many fears of buying something that may not be of value at all. 

So thanks again!


----------



## Nubster

hmmm...if this is the _crappy_ quality I'll get from reversing rings, I think I can deal with it....



















(Not my shots but they were taken with a 28mm lens on a reversing ring)


----------



## Kai808

Hi, Does anyone know what the minimum focus distance is for a reversing ring? Does it depend on the focal length of lens being used? I've used extension tubes before but don't think that it'll work to good with fauna because of it's minimum focal distance. I can't really test it again since I borrowed and returned the extension tubes. But in order to focus, the lens had to be an inch away from the subject.


----------



## GraphicGr8s

Elmo I agree with you on the filters but it's not just a matter of the lens breaking if it's dropped. If you bang the front element against something you stand a decent chance of scratching it. Now minor scratches generally do not show up in most shots but you've also scratched the coating on the lens and it _could_ start to peel. Either keep a lens shade/hood on the lens or the cap.

Also have to disagree about buying only Nikon lenses. There are good third party lenses out there just as there are some Nikon bombs. Good third party? Sigma comes to mind here.

One other thought here. Sometimes having the "best" of the lenses isn't always a good thing. I've got a couple of cheap (and I mean cheap) lenses I like to use just because of the effect it gives.


----------



## MCHRKiller

Nikon D7000 here


----------



## Ibn

I'd have to disagree with the no reversing ring/flipping lenses bit. It really depends on the sensor of your camera as well as the glass that you're using to flip the lens on. I've probably posted this a million times on, but here are some examples.

50mm (f/1.4D) at the minimum focusing distance. 









Reversing ring w/filter adapter to protect the back of lens.









Picture taken with reversed 50mm lens.









The adapters are small enough where you can just toss it into your pocket or bag. Comes in handy when you're out and you forget to bring your macro along.

Here's a few shots w/the reversed 50mm in cases where the macro was left at home.



























As for extension tubes, they do come in handy as well.

105mm f/2.8 VR at full magnification at 1:1.









Same lens, similar subject, with 105mm at full magnification + extension tubes.









Biggest issue with using extension tubes is light and for reversing, it's light as well as the reduced working distance. You literally have to be on top of your subjects.


----------



## zainey_04

I would have to disagree with that too Elmo. You can get high quality rings that are really cheap. The quality is also astonishing. Paying $20 Instead of $200 plus for something that can get you almost the same results speaks for it self. That being said, there are many advantages to owning a proper Macro lens. 



Ibn said:


> I'd have to disagree with the no reversing ring/flipping lenses bit. It really depends on the sensor of your camera as well as the glass that you're using to flip the lens on. I've probably posted this a million times on, but here are some examples.
> 
> 50mm (f/1.4D) at the minimum focusing distance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Reversing ring w/filter adapter to protect the back of lens.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Picture taken with reversed 50mm lens.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The adapters are small enough where you can just toss it into your pocket or bag. Comes in handy when you're out and you forget to bring your macro along.
> 
> Here's a few shots w/the reversed 50mm in cases where the macro was left at home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As for extension tubes, they do come in handy as well.
> 
> 105mm f/2.8 VR at full magnification at 1:1.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Same lens, similar subject, with 105mm at full magnification + extension tubes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Biggest issue with using extension tubes is light and for reversing, it's light as well as the reduced working distance. You literally have to be on top of your subjects.


Do you use a flash for your macro shots with the reversing ring. 



- Zain


----------



## Ibn

You have to since you're working with a lot less light, plus you have to step down for macros when you're going to a higher magnification.


----------



## Nubster

Speaking of flash, anyone have suggestions for a flash mount for doing macro? One of the ones that gets your speed flash out and in front of the camera? Not a flash ring and I don't mind DIY either.


----------



## Ibn

P.S. I usually use flash as well do to the fact that I do all my macro shots handheld w/out tripods.  

Flash mount for getting the flash in front of the camera? How far ahead are you looking at? Placing it on the hotshoe gets the flash slightly in front of the camera body (but not lens) and the R1C1 kit puts the flashes in front of the lens.


----------



## zainey_04

Ibn said:


> P.S. I usually use flash as well do to the fact that I do all my macro shots handheld w/out tripods.
> 
> Flash mount for getting the flash in front of the camera? How far ahead are you looking at? Placing it on the hotshoe gets the flash slightly in front of the camera body (but not lens) and the R1C1 kit puts the flashes in front of the lens.


Only reason I asked was so then I could follow up to see if you used a mount to get the flash in front of then lens, but you answered that too. I haven't had the need for my outdoor macro shot, but it looks like a good thing to use for faster shutter speeds. 


- Zain


----------



## audioaficionado

#020 please


----------



## AesopRocks247

Nubster said:


> Speaking of flash, anyone have suggestions for a flash mount for doing macro? One of the ones that gets your speed flash out and in front of the camera? Not a flash ring and I don't mind DIY either.


I use the ittl cord so I can hold the flash in my other hand. You can control the lighting to get what you like by holding it in different ways around your subject. I also have a hand grip on my camera so it's easier to hold.


----------



## Da Plant Man

I might be getting a Canon. Can I still be in this group? I <3 nikon! However canon has a better deal for me...


----------



## zachary908

Da Plant Man said:


> I might be getting a Canon. Can I still be in this group? I <3 nikon! However canon has a better deal for me...


Join us... :icon_twis


----------



## SkyGrl

MWA HA HA HA HA HA 

JOIN US K-10

:hihi:
Amy


----------



## TickleMyElmo

audioaficionado said:


> #020 please


Done!

#001 - TickleMyElmo
#002 - SkyGrl
#003 - jahmic
#004 - scream-aim-fire
#005 - Moody636
#006 -Assassynation
#007 - Da Plant Man
#008 - zainey_04
#009 - AzFishKid
#010 - msjinkzd
#011 - manini
#012 - Nubster
#013 - bsmith
#014 - Minja
#015 - jeepn4x4
#016 - lonnie123
#017 - nvladik
#018 - AesopRocks247
#019 - IWANNAGOFAST
#020 - audioaficionado
#021 -
#022 -
#023 -
#024 -
#025 -



Da Plant Man said:


> I might be getting a Canon. Can I still be in this group? I <3 nikon! However canon has a better deal for me...


Canon does have better pricing, but hey, you get what you pay for :hihi: Nikon is for the discerning photographer, who values quality over price :icon_wink

I guesss you can still be in the Nikon club, but I would forewarn you that once you get one system or the other, you tend to be locked in and stick with that brand. I would question the value of saving a few bucks on the initial purchase, only to be dissatisfied down the road when you don't have the system you _really_ wanted, especially considering the cost of the first entry level camera will be peanuts compared to everything else that you gather throughout your Nikon/Canon ownership...


----------



## audioaficionado

Lenses aren't interchangeable. It doesn't take too many lenses to build up to a large investment that would be heartbreaking if you later switched to the other platform. I've got some Nikkor lenses I hope can be used on the new Nikon bodies. I'll be happy if only my Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/4.0 lens and bellows can function.


----------



## bsmith

An observation I made while on FM was that either there are just more people using Canon cameras as there seems to be a bout a 6/4 (my observational guess) mix of Canon/Nikon stiff FS there. OR, maybe just maybe these people are just trying to unload their Canon stuff to join the darksi... errr I mean switch brands. 

Anyone have any real world accurate numbers on brand market share percents?


----------



## audioaficionado

http://www.nicovandijk.net/

It was all about ergonomics for me. The Nikon just fit my hands better and the controls were more intuitive for me.

As long as I like Nikon best, it's a Nikon world GD&R


----------



## Da Plant Man

Here's a question; Can these threads be moved to the new Photography section?


----------



## bsmith

Da Plant Man said:


> Here's a question; Can these threads be moved to the new Photography section?


So are you really going to get a Canon? what model are you thinking about getting?

You know you can get the d3100 with the 18-55 lens for ~$580 pretty easily now. 

Just put it off another month or two and get the camera brand yo have always wanted. You see how much more fun we have over here*, why would you even subject yourself to that?


*Disclaimer: the above member has not even been in the Canon owners thread. Anything said in any above post is purely fictional and artistic licensing grants the above member express/explicit rights to say whatever is necessary to keep people deemed 'worthy' from straying into what will be referred to a 'Canonland' from here on out.


----------



## audioaficionado

Da Plant Man said:


> Here's a question; Can these threads be moved to the new Photography section?


The original poster who started this thread could PM a mod to have the thread moved.


----------



## AesopRocks247

My buddies dad is a rep for cannon and he just gives him all the top quality stuff I'm just like I hate you.


----------



## smg980

Put me down as #21

Nikon D200


----------



## orchidman

#22 right here!

D90 for me!


----------



## scapegoat

i don't understand these unofficial official forum "clubs". i don't feel like they should exist because the idea of them is stupid.


----------



## Nubster

Boohoo...then don't post in them.


----------



## scapegoat

Nubster said:


> Boohoo...then don't post in them.


conflicting opinions are ok


----------



## Nubster

There's a difference in having a different opinion and just going in somewhere and calling something stupid. If you don't like these club threads, good on you. Don't read them. But also don't come in here and start calling them stupid. It's really uncalled for.


----------



## scapegoat

Nubster said:


> There's a difference in having a different opinion and just going in somewhere and calling something stupid. If you don't like these club threads, good on you. Don't read them. But also don't come in here and start calling them stupid. It's really uncalled for.


i'm sorry if stupid was too harsh, dumb maybe? These "official clubs" arent clubs or official. It only serves as a way for people to stroke their own egos that they have something and others do not.

I'd rather see some "official" thread for people to ask questions regarding their specific item... instead of being put on a list w/ other owners. it's just goofy to me...


----------



## GraphicGr8s

I don't own either of the two brands and personally think these threads are pretty damn good and fun in their own right. Just wish there were more Pentax users is all.


----------



## Nubster

It's just a thread for people to come share a common interest, in this case Nikons and photography. I really don't see why that has your panties in a bunch. Like I said, if you don't like them, stay away from them. It's just something "goofy" to participate in and actually there has been a lot of constructive talk going on in this and the Canon thread. 

Again, don't like it, stay out.


----------



## scapegoat

i really don't like the whole "don't like if get out" mentality. It's the furthest thing from constructive dialog... i'm not looking for an argument. I don't see why these "pimp" clubs are fun. perhaps it could be explained to me in a better way than telling me to get lost.


----------



## Nubster

I did explain it once, but I'll do it again. This thread is for people that own or like Nikon photography products or photography in general. Pretty simple. The "club" part is just for fun. The don't like it get out mentality is because you are in here trashing the thread and there isn't a point to that. I see threads I don't like all the time. I just don't go into them and my problem is solved. But I don't pop in and start trashing them just because I don't like it.


----------



## audioaficionado

Ibn said:


> I'll take #21 once someone picks up 20. I'll list equipment then.





smg980 said:


> Put me down as #21
> 
> Nikon D200


Looks like someone else beat you to it.



Nubster said:


> There's a difference in having a different opinion and just going in somewhere and calling something stupid. If you don't like these club threads, good on you. Don't read them. But also don't come in here and start calling them stupid. It's really uncalled for.


+1
It's called 'thread crapping' and is bad netiquette.


----------



## ShortFin

My Tamron 18-50 VC crapped out on me over the weekend. The image stablizer is not working when it is on, otherwise it's working okay when it's off. Anyone know the cost of fixing this from the manufacturer?


----------



## TickleMyElmo

Ibn said:


> I'll take #21 once someone picks up 20. I'll list equipment then.


Done! #021



smg980 said:


> Put me down as #21
> 
> Nikon D200


Done, but as #022!



orchidman said:


> #22 right here!
> 
> D90 for me!


Joined, but as #023! Good to have ya' aboard!

#001 - TickleMyElmo
#002 - SkyGrl
#003 - jahmic
#004 - scream-aim-fire
#005 - Moody636
#006 -Assassynation
#007 - Da Plant Man
#008 - zainey_04
#009 - AzFishKid
#010 - msjinkzd
#011 - manini
#012 - Nubster
#013 - bsmith
#014 - Minja
#015 - jeepn4x4
#016 - lonnie123
#017 - nvladik
#018 - AesopRocks247
#019 - IWANNAGOFAST
#020 - audioaficionado
#021 - Ibn
#022 - smg980
#023 - orchidman
#024 -
#025 -
#026 - 
#027 -
#028 -
#029 - 
#030 -


----------



## scapegoat

audioaficionado said:


> Looks like someone else beat you to it.
> 
> +1
> It's called 'thread crapping' and is bad netiquette.


i forgot that it's not acceptable to use up mere kilobytes of data to voice a disapproving opinion on a subject that could lead to a discussion. perhaps the better place for that was in the lounge, however, where no one would take it personally; as it was definitely not meant to be taken.


----------



## Nubster

ShortFin said:


> My Tamron 18-50 VC crapped out on me over the weekend. The image stablizer is not working when it is on, otherwise it's working okay when it's off. Anyone know the cost of fixing this from the manufacturer?



hmmm...I wouldn't think too much. You may also try to find some authorized repair shops, they may be cheaper. I just had a bunch of work done to my camera body and it was only $200 so I can't imagine a lens costing a lot to repair unless it was a serious issue. That was through an outside shop, not by Nikon.


----------



## smg980

TickleMyElmo said:


> Done! #021
> 
> 
> 
> Done, but as #022!
> 
> 
> 
> Joined, but as #023! Good to have ya' aboard!
> 
> #001 - TickleMyElmo
> #002 - SkyGrl
> #003 - jahmic
> #004 - scream-aim-fire
> #005 - Moody636
> #006 -Assassynation
> #007 - Da Plant Man
> #008 - zainey_04
> #009 - AzFishKid
> #010 - msjinkzd
> #011 - manini
> #012 - Nubster
> #013 - bsmith
> #014 - Minja
> #015 - jeepn4x4
> #016 - lonnie123
> #017 - nvladik
> #018 - AesopRocks247
> #019 - IWANNAGOFAST
> #020 - audioaficionado
> #021 - Ibn
> #022 - smg980
> #023 - orchidman
> #024 -
> #025 -
> #026 -
> #027 -
> #028 -
> #029 -
> #030 -



I still don't see where 21 was taken, but thanks.


----------



## audioaficionado

Ibn post #96

smg980 post #131


----------



## ShortFin

Nubster said:


> hmmm...I wouldn't think too much. You may also try to find some authorized repair shops, they may be cheaper. I just had a bunch of work done to my camera body and it was only $200 so I can't imagine a lens costing a lot to repair unless it was a serious issue. That was through an outside shop, not by Nikon.


That's a good idea. We have Samy's around here. I'm pretty sure they are an authorized shop for Tamron. I actually like that feature for my shaky hands. Also I can use it to stop down.


----------



## williamsonaaron

What pimp number am I? I have a d80...I also have an olympus e500 hope that doesn't disqualify me lol....


----------



## TickleMyElmo

williamsonaaron said:


> What pimp number am I? I have a d80...I also have an olympus e500 hope that doesn't disqualify me lol....


#024, welcome aboard!


#001 - TickleMyElmo
#002 - SkyGrl
#003 - jahmic
#004 - scream-aim-fire
#005 - Moody636
#006 -Assassynation
#007 - Da Plant Man
#008 - zainey_04
#009 - AzFishKid
#010 - msjinkzd
#011 - manini
#012 - Nubster
#013 - bsmith
#014 - Minja
#015 - jeepn4x4
#016 - lonnie123
#017 - nvladik
#018 - AesopRocks247
#019 - IWANNAGOFAST
#020 - audioaficionado
#021 - Ibn
#022 - smg980
#023 - orchidman
#024 - williamsonaaron
#025 -
#026 -
#027 -
#028 -
#029 -
#030 -


----------



## Basil

Count me in. I'm shottin with a Nikon D40 with kit lens plus a 55-200mm telephoto lens. I love this camera!


----------



## TickleMyElmo

Basil said:


> Count me in. I'm shottin with a Nikon D40 with kit lens plus a 55-200mm telephoto lens. I love this camera!


#025!

#001 - TickleMyElmo
#002 - SkyGrl
#003 - jahmic
#004 - scream-aim-fire
#005 - Moody636
#006 -Assassynation
#007 - Da Plant Man
#008 - zainey_04
#009 - AzFishKid
#010 - msjinkzd
#011 - manini
#012 - Nubster
#013 - bsmith
#014 - Minja
#015 - jeepn4x4
#016 - lonnie123
#017 - nvladik
#018 - AesopRocks247
#019 - IWANNAGOFAST
#020 - audioaficionado
#021 - Ibn
#022 - smg980
#023 - orchidman
#024 - williamsonaaron
#025 - Basil
#026 -
#027 -
#028 -
#029 -
#030 -


----------



## Da Plant Man

I found a better camera than the Canon 600D! The *NIKON!* D5100 is cheaper, has a bigger sensor, and has a cool time lasp feature.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

Da Plant Man said:


> I found a better camera than the Canon 600D! The *NIKON!* D5100 is cheaper, has a bigger sensor, and has a cool time lasp feature.


Yes! I'm glad you have seen the light! lol...


----------



## bsmith

scapegoat said:


> i don't understand these unofficial official forum "clubs". i don't feel like they should exist because the idea of them is stupid.


Here's the thing scapegoat, if this was a thread someone posted asking whether they should get a Nikon or a Canon then it would be logical to think that they would appreciate both sides of the coin. The good and the bad. 

But it's not. This is a thread for people who like and own a certain brand of photography equipment. So we post what we have and why we like it and sometimes what we don't. 

This isn't some higher level thinking post where we try to find the subtle discrepancies in a given subject and talk about it and it most definantly is not a thread where your rude, out of place and completely unwanted remarks are wanted. 

There is a whole wide web out there for you to go and tell people just how you feel about what you think. I'm sure you know how to use Google so why don't you go and find a place where you can feel more comfortable in he company of other people that like to come from left field and try to ruin an other wise good thread. 

Please don't post in here after you read this as the moderators really don't like it when you veer too far from the topic of discussion of the thread and as it looks like your not really a big contributor to this site anyway, if they are notified and it's pointed out how disruptive and uncourteous you are they may not look on your behavior too kindly. 

Feel free to shoot me a PM and I'll be happy to explain the rules to you feel so inclined.


----------



## fusiongt

#001 - TickleMyElmo
#002 - SkyGrl
#003 - jahmic
#004 - scream-aim-fire
#005 - Moody636
#006 -Assassynation
#007 - Da Plant Man
#008 - zainey_04
#009 - AzFishKid
#010 - msjinkzd
#011 - manini
#012 - Nubster
#013 - bsmith
#014 - Minja
#015 - jeepn4x4
#016 - lonnie123
#017 - nvladik
#018 - AesopRocks247
#019 - IWANNAGOFAST
#020 - audioaficionado
#021 - Ibn
#022 - smg980
#023 - orchidman
#024 - williamsonaaron
#025 - Basil
#026 - Fusiongt
#027 -
#028 -
#029 -
#030 -


Nikon 4 Life! Nikon D3, D40, N90S (film), and V1 here.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

fusiongt said:


> #001 - TickleMyElmo
> #002 - SkyGrl
> #003 - jahmic
> #004 - scream-aim-fire
> #005 - Moody636
> #006 -Assassynation
> #007 - Da Plant Man
> #008 - zainey_04
> #009 - AzFishKid
> #010 - msjinkzd
> #011 - manini
> #012 - Nubster
> #013 - bsmith
> #014 - Minja
> #015 - jeepn4x4
> #016 - lonnie123
> #017 - nvladik
> #018 - AesopRocks247
> #019 - IWANNAGOFAST
> #020 - audioaficionado
> #021 - Ibn
> #022 - smg980
> #023 - orchidman
> #024 - williamsonaaron
> #025 - Basil
> #026 - Fusiongt
> #027 -
> #028 -
> #029 -
> #030 -
> 
> 
> Nikon 4 Life! Nikon D3, D40, N90S (film), and V1 here.


Cool! Good to have ya here!


----------



## alfalfa

#001 - TickleMyElmo
#002 - SkyGrl
#003 - jahmic
#004 - scream-aim-fire
#005 - Moody636
#006 -Assassynation
#007 - Da Plant Man
#008 - zainey_04
#009 - AzFishKid
#010 - msjinkzd
#011 - manini
#012 - Nubster
#013 - bsmith
#014 - Minja
#015 - jeepn4x4
#016 - lonnie123
#017 - nvladik
#018 - AesopRocks247
#019 - IWANNAGOFAST
#020 - audioaficionado
#021 - Ibn
#022 - smg980
#023 - orchidman
#024 - williamsonaaron
#025 - Basil
#026 - Fusiongt
#027 - *Alfalfa*
#028 -
#029 -
#030 -

#27 for me. 

N90s, D300, a half-dozen lenses, etc.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

alfalfa said:


> #27 for me.
> 
> N90s, D300, a half-dozen lenses, etc.


Awesome! We actually have more members than the Canon club now, I'll have to go post over there about it hehe....


----------



## AesopRocks247

Haha Nikon for the win!


----------



## TickleMyElmo

AesopRocks247 said:


> Haha Nikon for the win!


Hehe, here's what I posted over there...



"Dear Canonites,...

I have assembled my army of Nikonians, and while you may have laughed at the formation of our Nikon club and thought of us as a lesser opponent, we now outnumber your Canon kind....

PREPARE FOR UTTER DESTRUCTION! 



:icon_wink Kidding of course"


----------



## AesopRocks247

I love it


----------



## AesopRocks247

I'd rather have quality over quantity any day. Nikons own


----------



## driftwoodhunter

haha - Nikonians. It sounds like something out of Buck Rogers ; )


----------



## Nubster

AesopRocks247 said:


> I'd rather have quality over quantity any day. Nikons own


Now we have both.


----------



## flwrbed

i hope i can join. i have the 5100 also.

im a noob.....but im learning.


----------



## Ibn

Here's the equipment list as stated earlier:

Bodies:
D200 with battery grip and rrs l-bracket
D2X with rrs l-bracket
D3S with rrs l-bracket
Fuji x100 (my P&S Cam) 

Flashes:
SB-800 (x3) with Quantum Turbo packs (x2)
R1C1 kit with SU-800 commander
SB cords - 17, 28, 29

Lenses:
Nikon 12-24mm f/4 AFS DX
Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8 AFS
Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8 AFS DX
Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8 AFS
Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 AFS VR1
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 HSM
Nikon 55mm f/3.5 micro
Sigma 85mm f/1.4 HSM
Nikon 105mm f/2.8 VR micro
Nikon 300mm f/4 AFS
Nikon TCs: 1.4, 1.7, 2.0
Kenko tubes

Support: RRS BH-55 perched on top of Feisol 3401CF legs

Crapload of other accessories but only so much fits in the TT Retrospective 30 bag.


----------



## Ibn

Also own some Canon gear still. The 2DN/20D with the odd 24-70mm f/2.8L and some other lenses and flash in the Billingham bag but you guys probably won't find interest in those.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

flwrbed said:


> i hope i can join. i have the 5100 also.
> 
> im a noob.....but im learning.


Added!

#001 - TickleMyElmo
#002 - SkyGrl
#003 - jahmic
#004 - scream-aim-fire
#005 - Moody636
#006 -Assassynation
#007 - Da Plant Man
#008 - zainey_04
#009 - AzFishKid
#010 - msjinkzd
#011 - manini
#012 - Nubster
#013 - bsmith
#014 - Minja
#015 - jeepn4x4
#016 - lonnie123
#017 - nvladik
#018 - AesopRocks247
#019 - IWANNAGOFAST
#020 - audioaficionado
#021 - Ibn
#022 - smg980
#023 - orchidman
#024 - williamsonaaron
#025 - Basil
#026 - fusiongt
#027 - alfalfa
#028 - flwrbed
#029 -
#030 -
#031 -
#032 -
#033 -
#034 -
#035 -


----------



## Da Plant Man

Tomorrows the day I am going to buy a factory refurbished D5100 

SO EXCITED!


----------



## Nubster

Da Plant Man said:


> Tomorrows the day I am going to buy a factory refurbished D5100
> 
> SO EXCITED!


Glad you came to your senses...lol...the D5100 is a nice camera from what I read. Should serve you well. Be warned, photography is fun but with a nice camera like that, it can become down right addictive. Not that it's a bad thing, except for your bank account...haha


----------



## Da Plant Man

Nubster said:


> Glad you came to your senses...lol...the D5100 is a nice camera from what I read. Should serve you well. Be warned, photography is fun but with a nice camera like that, it can become down right addictive. Not that it's a bad thing, except for your bank account...haha


Yeah, and according to multiple websites, the canon T3i has worse quality.

Also, why is it that the D90 has less features than the D5100 and yet costs $300 more? 

http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon-D5100-vs-Nikon_D90
http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon-T3i-vs-Nikon-D5100

With kit lens, its only going to be about $590 :bounce:

Already looking at macro and telephoto lens :icon_mrgr


----------



## Nubster

Well, both are great cameras. I think one big reason the D90 is more is because it has the lens focus motor in the body which allows it to focus with non-AFS lenses. It also has wireless commander mode, and more direct controls (less menu diving). It also has a better LCD screen. The D5100 however has better video and a better sensor. Even so, the quality of the photos will likely be indiscernible. I have read that the D90 AF is much better than the D5100 as well which could account for some price difference.

IMO...the lack of external controls is a deal killer for me. Having to go to the menu instead of have fast access is a real PITA. That's just me though.


----------



## orchidman

i have a d90. i love the wireless commander mode for using an OB flash as a slave! especially for doing tank related things, because i can get that flash above the tank


----------



## Ibn

D90 also has the magnesium alloy body as well as better interconnects, seals, and mounts. The autofocusing motor allows legacy lenses to be mounted on it as well and still AF.


----------



## AesopRocks247

Ibn said:


> D90 also has the magnesium alloy body as well as better interconnects, seals, and mounts. The autofocusing motor allows legacy lenses to be mounted on it as well and still AF.


No it doesn't have the magnesium
body.


----------



## Ibn

Must be thinking about the D200 instead of D90.


----------



## ShortFin

Ibn said:


> Must be thinking about the D200 instead of D90.


Or the successor to the D90 --> D7000.


----------



## lonnie123

I love my d7000 it works on old af lenses as well as new lensesroud:


----------



## Da Plant Man

Well, either way. Its a nikon, and I am happy  As of right now, I have no need for all those fancy gadgets  However, the D5100 does have a twisty turny screen. Gotta love that :hihi:


----------



## alfalfa

lonnie123 said:


> I love my d7000 it works on *old af* lenses as well as new lensesroud:


"old af"
:tears oundtable :yellatclouds :feelsold 

I have two packages on the way to me at the moment: one is from Florida with an Eheim 2213, and the other is from New York with a Nikon lens. Talk about old lenses... this is a brand-new manual AI-s lens. Now that's old. :biggrin:


----------



## audioaficionado

I have the old non Ai manual focus Nikkor lenses with the prong to index the meter. Any way to have these fixed so they'll at least work manually with the newer DSLR Nikons without damaging the camera body mount? 

Electronic Coupling Only (no metering tab) D40, D40x, D60, D5000, D5100, D3000, D3100 should couple without damage, but no metering without a conversion. http://www.aiconversions.com/compatibilitytable.htm


----------



## Nubster

Nikon D800 announced. Looks pretty sweet though I think it's going to be more of a specialized piece of equipment. 36MP sensor sounds awesome but I don't think the average shooter will be able to handle it.

Now just waiting for the D400 to be announced. From what I read, it's going to be a really nice upgrade from the D300 line. Hoping the price comes in at <$2000 so that I might be able to afford one in a year or two when the used bodies start hitting the market.


----------



## lonnie123

that is a nice piece:thumbsup:


----------



## audioaficionado

I hope that D800 drops the pricing on all the used Nikons, but I noticed that even old Nikons seem to command higher prices and hold their value well over the years.

The D800 doesn't just have that insane 36.3MP sensor, but it shoots a nice HD video at a decent frame rate too. The $3k price tag is still kinda spendy, but half the D4 price.

Nikon D800 full features on YouTube

I want to find a used Nikon that takes my converted older lenses, can shoot in RAW and has at least 10 mega pixels. I don't want to spend more than $500 either.


----------



## H82LOS3

D5100 crew checking in


----------



## alfalfa

Hmm. D800E. E? 
(Edit: Just got this in email from the nikongear forum: 
"The birth of one of the most long anticipated Nikon DSLR bodies was announced today, the Nikon D800. But wait, there was more than one baby. It's twins! Not only do we have the D800, but there is a D800E too. Essentially the same as the D800, the D800E offers higher resolving power by removing the AA-filter from the sensor.")

I have mixed feelings about this. I deeply understand placing different features at different price points but there seems to be a huge gap in the DX to FX range. I just want something like an affordable D700 or D300 with an FX sensor. I don't need medium format resolution, I'm not a broadcast-quality cinematographer, etc. I just want to make photographs with my full frame lenses on a full frame sensor at a decently-high resolution. The D700 would be perfect if it weren't twice the price of a comparable DX camera. Maybe that is what the D400 will be but it will probably be DX.

I wonder how many photographers have not become cinematographers. Seems like there's a market for a people who want a high quality, full frame, still image camera without the feature creep. I like my tropical planted tanks. I don't need a reef tank built into it.


----------



## Green Thumb Aquatics

noob style for all you guys with fancy lens out there, but still a nikon, coolpix S4000


----------



## Ibn

alfalfa said:


> Hmm. D800E. E?
> (Edit: Just got this in email from the nikongear forum:
> "The birth of one of the most long anticipated Nikon DSLR bodies was announced today, the Nikon D800. But wait, there was more than one baby. It's twins! Not only do we have the D800, but there is a D800E too. Essentially the same as the D800, the D800E offers higher resolving power by removing the AA-filter from the sensor.")


D700 folks have been waiting for a replacement cam for awhile now and this foots the bill. The "E" should be interesting for those looking at IR work. The major detraction from this cam is the high MP. 



> I have mixed feelings about this. I deeply understand placing different features at different price points but there seems to be a huge gap in the DX to FX range. I just want something like an affordable D700 or D300 with an FX sensor. I don't need medium format resolution, I'm not a broadcast-quality cinematographer, etc. I just want to make photographs with my full frame lenses on a full frame sensor at a decently-high resolution. The D700 would be perfect if it weren't twice the price of a comparable DX camera. Maybe that is what the D400 will be but it will probably be DX.


Comparing D700 with a DX camera is apples to oranges comparison with the different sensors. Pick up a used D700. People have been letting theirs go with the leaked rumors of the D800 and now that it's official, there'll be more hitting the market. I'm seeing them dip below the 2k mark with the battery grip. 



> I wonder how many photographers have not become cinematographers. Seems like there's a market for a people who want a high quality, full frame, still image camera without the feature creep. I like my tropical planted tanks. I don't need a reef tank built into it.


That's what the D4 is for.


----------



## audioaficionado

> The "E" should be interesting for those looking at IR work.


Still blocks IR from what I've read.

http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d800/features01.htm


> Note: The D800E carries an increased possibility that moiré and false color will appear, compared to the D800. IR cut and antireflective coating properties of the optical filter remain the same with both versions.


----------



## Ibn

That's very different and an interesting read.

Thanks for the link.


----------



## alfalfa

Ibn said:


> That's what the D4 is for.


A $6000 camera body doesn't fit into the price point I was talking about. I'd be very happy with a D700. That's all I want, and I almost bought one when the price was comparable to a 5D. I'll probably pick up a used one depending on the D300s's successor. I'm still happy with my D300 for the time being.


----------



## Nubster

D400 should be announced very soon. If I were to get a new camera, I might start with the D400. I am still debating the D7000 but I hate to go from a lowend pro camera to a consumer camera. Maybe just a mental thing. But I'm too cheap and poor so I'll probably wait a year or so until the new cameras start hitting the used market. In reality though, my D300 will probably be all the camera I'll ever need. It just seems like with many hobbies, upgraditis is a difficult illness to beat.


----------



## bsmith

What is the difference between the cameras your talking about to say my camera, a d3100?

Like a p&s to my camera? Or does it just allow you to do so much more?

$6000 for a camera is crazy!


----------



## TickleMyElmo

I have a D700 and as easily as I could upgrade to a D800/D800E and as much as I want to, it really doesn't fit my needs. A D3s or a D4 would really be more useful for me, and it's what I'll probably end up getting...


----------



## TickleMyElmo

H82LOS3 said:


> D5100 crew checking in


Added! #029...



Green Thumb Aquatics said:


> noob style for all you guys with fancy lens out there, but still a nikon, coolpix S4000


Added as well! #030...

#001 - TickleMyElmo
#002 - SkyGrl
#003 - jahmic
#004 - scream-aim-fire
#005 - Moody636
#006 -Assassynation
#007 - Da Plant Man
#008 - zainey_04
#009 - AzFishKid
#010 - msjinkzd
#011 - manini
#012 - Nubster
#013 - bsmith
#014 - Minja
#015 - jeepn4x4
#016 - lonnie123
#017 - nvladik
#018 - AesopRocks247
#019 - IWANNAGOFAST
#020 - audioaficionado
#021 - Ibn
#022 - smg980
#023 - orchidman
#024 - williamsonaaron
#025 - Basil
#026 - fusiongt
#027 - alfalfa
#028 - flwrbed
#029 - H82LOS3
#030 - Green Thumb Aquatics
#031 -
#032 -
#033 -
#034 -
#035 -


----------



## audioaficionado

bsmith said:


> What is the difference between the cameras your talking about to say my camera, a d3100?
> 
> Like a p&s to my camera? Or does it just allow you to do so much more?
> 
> $6000 for a camera is crazy!


If I had $6k to blow right now, I'd spend most of it on a rimless custom Starphire glass tank and the trimmings. Then I'd look at a better camera to take pictures of it with any change left over. :hihi:


----------



## Da Plant Man

Just ordered my D5100. It'll be here monday! Expect a bunch of updated journals that day! Now I need to learn how to work with all those fancy settings. 

Also, I will take all your guys old nikon lens :biggrin:


----------



## audioaficionado

If I want TTL metering with any of my converted pre AI FX size lenses, I'll have to stick with the D3, D700, D300s, D300, D200 or D7000 none of which are inexpensive.

If I don't mind no metering, there are lots of options, some of them less expensive like the older gen 1 cameras. D90, D80, D70, D70s, D50, D100, D5100, D5000, D3100, D3000, D60, D40, D40x.

D40, D40x look good for now so I can use my macro gear at least. Get a D7000 someday...


----------



## Da Plant Man

My goal: Sell a photo for $7,000 to blow on camera gear. I haven't gotten my camera yet and I am already wanting a pro camera!


----------



## crowconor

Im in! I love my nikon!


----------



## Joeangel

I'm in! 
D300s and D90
various glass and sb800 and 900 speed lights.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

Da Plant Man said:


> My goal: Sell a photo for $7,000 to blow on camera gear. I haven't gotten my camera yet and I am already wanting a pro camera!


LOL Dont start, it's a very slippery slope to poorness lol...




crowconor said:


> Im in! I love my nikon!


Added, #031...Nice pics!

#001 - TickleMyElmo
#002 - SkyGrl
#003 - jahmic
#004 - scream-aim-fire
#005 - Moody636
#006 -Assassynation
#007 - Da Plant Man
#008 - zainey_04
#009 - AzFishKid
#010 - msjinkzd
#011 - manini
#012 - Nubster
#013 - bsmith
#014 - Minja
#015 - jeepn4x4
#016 - lonnie123
#017 - nvladik
#018 - AesopRocks247
#019 - IWANNAGOFAST
#020 - audioaficionado
#021 - Ibn
#022 - smg980
#023 - orchidman
#024 - williamsonaaron
#025 - Basil
#026 - fusiongt
#027 - alfalfa
#028 - flwrbed
#029 - H82LOS3
#030 - Green Thumb Aquatics
#031 - crowconor
#032 -
#033 -
#034 -
#035 -


----------



## TickleMyElmo

Joeangel said:


> I'm in!
> D300s and D90
> various glass and sb800 and 900 speed lights.


Added as well! #032!

#001 - TickleMyElmo
#002 - SkyGrl
#003 - jahmic
#004 - scream-aim-fire
#005 - Moody636
#006 -Assassynation
#007 - Da Plant Man
#008 - zainey_04
#009 - AzFishKid
#010 - msjinkzd
#011 - manini
#012 - Nubster
#013 - bsmith
#014 - Minja
#015 - jeepn4x4
#016 - lonnie123
#017 - nvladik
#018 - AesopRocks247
#019 - IWANNAGOFAST
#020 - audioaficionado
#021 - Ibn
#022 - smg980
#023 - orchidman
#024 - williamsonaaron
#025 - Basil
#026 - fusiongt
#027 - alfalfa
#028 - flwrbed
#029 - H82LOS3
#030 - Green Thumb Aquatics
#031 - crowconor
#032 - Joeangel
#033 -
#034 -
#035 -


----------



## vasteq

please give me #033 - photos shooted by Nikon D5100 + Nikkor 18-105mm VR + Raynox DCR-150:


----------



## Chlorophile

So if I have a nikon and a Canon can I just join both?
I decided I'm gonna join every pimp club I'm eligible for and make my signature a mile long.


----------



## Patriot

Count me in Nikon D3100 and D7000


----------



## audioaficionado

Chlorophile said:


> So if I have a nikon and a Canon can I just join both?
> I decided I'm gonna join every pimp club I'm eligible for and make my signature a mile long.


I don't see why not. There is always a percentage of the population that swings both ways :icon_mrgr



Patriot100% said:


> Count me in Nikon D3100 and D7000


You guys are giving me a serious case of Nikon envy. I'm trying to scrape up the scratch to get an old D40 LOL so I can use some of my old lenses. :icon_neut


----------



## bsmith

Vasteq, those are some serious planted macro shots!


----------



## Robert H

WOW, fantastic photos, not crazy about watermarks going down the middle of a fish, but WOW...


----------



## Fornstar

Have a D7000 that I have no clue how to use. Its fairly new and my first DSLR. Wife and I bought it cause we are expecting a baby boy in April. I should probably figure out how to use it by then.

I do like playing with it though.

Guess that would make me #33
Matt


----------



## Dan Knowlton

Well, you can add me - Nikon D90. No decent fish pics yet, though.

Dan K.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

vasteq said:


> please give me #033 - photos shooted by Nikon D5100 + Nikkor 18-105mm VR + Raynox DCR-150:


Done! #033



Chlorophile said:


> So if I have a nikon and a Canon can I just join both?
> I decided I'm gonna join every pimp club I'm eligible for and make my signature a mile long.


Added, #034



Patriot100% said:


> Count me in Nikon D3100 and D7000


Counted, #035



Fornstar said:


> Have a D7000 that I have no clue how to use. Its fairly new and my first DSLR. Wife and I bought it cause we are expecting a baby boy in April. I should probably figure out how to use it by then.
> 
> I do like playing with it though.
> 
> Guess that would make me #33
> Matt


Added as #036



Dan Knowlton said:


> Well, you can add me - Nikon D90. No decent fish pics yet, though.
> 
> Dan K.


Welcome, you're #037!



#001 - TickleMyElmo
#002 - SkyGrl
#003 - jahmic
#004 - scream-aim-fire
#005 - Moody636
#006 -Assassynation
#007 - Da Plant Man
#008 - zainey_04
#009 - AzFishKid
#010 - msjinkzd
#011 - manini
#012 - Nubster
#013 - bsmith
#014 - Minja
#015 - jeepn4x4
#016 - lonnie123
#017 - nvladik
#018 - AesopRocks247
#019 - IWANNAGOFAST
#020 - audioaficionado
#021 - Ibn
#022 - smg980
#023 - orchidman
#024 - williamsonaaron
#025 - Basil
#026 - fusiongt
#027 - alfalfa
#028 - flwrbed
#029 - H82LOS3
#030 - Green Thumb Aquatics
#031 - crowconor
#032 - Joeangel
#033 - vasteq
#034 - Chlorophile
#035 - Patriot100%
#036 - Fornstar
#037 - Dan Knowlton
#038 -
#039 -
#040 -
#041 -
#042 -
#043 -
#044 -
#045 -


Welcome everybody! Our membership list is getting quite large lol...


----------



## bsmith

Fornstar said:


> Have a D7000 that I have no clue how to use. Its fairly new and my first DSLR. Wife and I bought it cause we are expecting a baby boy in April. I should probably figure out how to use it by then.
> 
> I do like playing with it though.
> 
> Guess that would make me #33
> Matt


The best decision I ever made also sparked that other great decision I made as well! Congrats!!!! roud:


----------



## Jaggedfury

I shoot with Nikon for a long time now (Still using Nikon) but I'm not interested in joining a club. However, I was at Best Buy earlier today and they were taking Pre-orders on the Nikon D800 DSLR 36.3-Megapixel Camera and that caught my attention. Any comments from fellow Nikon users on this specific DSLR? Don't mind the price tag.


----------



## Fornstar

bsmith said:


> The best decision I ever made also sparked that other great decision I made as well! Congrats!!!! roud:


Thanks!! Now I got to see if I can figure out how to get some good tank shots with it.

Matt


----------



## Nubster

Jaggedfury said:


> I shoot with Nikon for a long time now (Still using Nikon) but I'm not interested in joining a club. However, I was at Best Buy earlier today and they were taking Pre-orders on the Nikon D800 DSLR 36.3-Megapixel Camera and that caught my attention. Any comments from fellow Nikon users on this specific DSLR? Don't mind the price tag.


Not for everyone. Too many MP for general shooter. I'd say that if you had a specific purpose then it is probably a great camera. But for the masses it's just too much.


----------



## Jaggedfury

I wonder if we here in the USA have companies that will let you rent Lens if you left a credit card deposit for the full price just so we can experience the Lens without purchasing it such as this website in Canada.. http://lenslenders.ca/nikon It would be great if they offer Camera as well so we can fiddle with it without having to fork out a few thousand dollars just to see how the Cameras work. I sell 1-3 Vehicle a month, would like to mess around with some different Lens options to see what comes out.


----------



## Jaggedfury

Nubster said:


> Not for everyone. Too many MP for general shooter. I'd say that if you had a specific purpose then it is probably a great camera. But for the masses it's just too much.


Yepp. May be too much on the MP side. I'll stick to my 12.1 MP. Cool Camera though none the less.


----------



## audioaficionado

I say go for it if you can swing the expense. Who's the say that in a couple of years 36MP won't be the norm in high end DSLR cameras. You can still shoot in DX mode using less of the sensor and end up with 15MP like many of the DX cameras do today. Having 36MP with the full FX sensor is awesome and useful IMO. BTW pros often rent equipment to use and try out. You could also buy, try and return from an online store that will do this if you don't like the camera or lenses after using/testing them and it doesn't feel right in your hands.


----------



## alfalfa

Jaggedfury said:


> I wonder if we here in the USA have companies that will let you rent Lens


Yep, a few shops in your area rent lenses.


----------



## Jacob928

Nikon D40! I did have D300 but sold it  Give me a number


----------



## audioaficionado

I'm planning on getting a Nikon D40 online so I can use some of my 35 year old Nikkor glass. Once I get a D7000 or better, I'll convert that D40 into a full spectrum digital camera so I can shoot both IR and UV.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

Jaggedfury said:


> I wonder if we here in the USA have companies that will let you rent Lens if you left a credit card deposit for the full price just so we can experience the Lens without purchasing it such as this website in Canada.. http://lenslenders.ca/nikon It would be great if they offer Camera as well so we can fiddle with it without having to fork out a few thousand dollars just to see how the Cameras work. I sell 1-3 Vehicle a month, would like to mess around with some different Lens options to see what comes out.


lensrentals.com

borrowlenses.com

They both rent cameras too I believe...

And I would caution against the D800. A lot of megapixels usually means worse high ISO performance. Granted its not out yet so we don't have a ton of sample images to work with, but you'll more than likely need high ISO before you'll really use the high megapixels. The D800 with 36MP will do really well with really really frikin' huge prints, but how often do people really do that?



Jacob928 said:


> Nikon D40! I did have D300 but sold it  Give me a number


Added! #038

#001 - TickleMyElmo
#002 - SkyGrl
#003 - jahmic
#004 - scream-aim-fire
#005 - Moody636
#006 -Assassynation
#007 - Da Plant Man
#008 - zainey_04
#009 - AzFishKid
#010 - msjinkzd
#011 - manini
#012 - Nubster
#013 - bsmith
#014 - Minja
#015 - jeepn4x4
#016 - lonnie123
#017 - nvladik
#018 - AesopRocks247
#019 - IWANNAGOFAST
#020 - audioaficionado
#021 - Ibn
#022 - smg980
#023 - orchidman
#024 - williamsonaaron
#025 - Basil
#026 - fusiongt
#027 - alfalfa
#028 - flwrbed
#029 - H82LOS3
#030 - Green Thumb Aquatics
#031 - crowconor
#032 - Joeangel
#033 - vasteq
#034 - Chlorophile
#035 - Patriot100%
#036 - Fornstar
#037 - Dan Knowlton
#038 - Jacob928
#039 -
#040 -
#041 -
#042 -
#043 -
#044 -
#045 -


----------



## Nubster

Speaking of lenses...what are some affordable options for landscape stuff (DX format)? Looking to go wider than 30mm since I already have a 30mm prime and Nikkor is likely out of the price range. If it's a zoom that covers 30mm, that's fine, I can sell the prime. If I do that, my budget would be around $500.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

Nubster said:


> Speaking of lenses...what are some affordable options for landscape stuff (DX format)? Looking to go wider than 30mm since I already have a 30mm prime and Nikkor is likely out of the price range. If it's a zoom that covers 30mm, that's fine, I can sell the prime. If I do that, my budget would be around $500.


From what I remember the Nikon 16-85 is pretty good at landscapes. It's not a fast lens, but I believe I saw that it was supposed to be rather sharp stopped down a little, from edge to edge of the frame, even the corners. I do believe it was supposed to be best around 30mm too, only thing is it's about $650...


----------



## Jaggedfury

I found a company locally that's close by in town that will rent Canon/Nikon Cameras and their accessories. I may try out that D800 when they get a hold of it. At the moment it's TBA on the rental price. I may shoot some cars that I have for sale. Not pertaining to aquarium photo.

http://photosource.biz/services/rental/


----------



## Nubster

TickleMyElmo said:


> , only thing is it's about $650...


Yeah, that's the problem.


----------



## Da Plant Man

First picture I ever took with my very own D5100.

Meet the frog.

http://i771.photobucket.com/albums/xx356/caton_mccarty/DSC_0001.jpg


----------



## Ibn

Nice little pacman.












Da Plant Man said:


> First picture I ever took with my very own D5100.
> 
> Meet the frog.
> 
> http://i771.photobucket.com/albums/xx356/caton_mccarty/DSC_0001.jpg


----------



## TickleMyElmo

Da Plant Man said:


> First picture I ever took with my very own D5100.
> 
> Meet the frog.
> 
> http://i771.photobucket.com/albums/xx356/caton_mccarty/DSC_0001.jpg


Awesome pic! The difference between a DSLR and a point and shoot is amazing isn't it?


----------



## audioaficionado

Nikon D40 vs D70 for me. Used of course.


----------



## GraphicGr8s

TickleMyElmo said:


> Awesome pic! The difference between a DSLR and a point and shoot is amazing isn't it?


Depends on what you're shooting and who is doing the shooting.


----------



## Nubster

deleted


----------



## Da Plant Man

Can't see it


----------



## Ibn

Most won't be able to see the link since there's now a 300 thread minimum to be able to view the For Sale section of NC.


----------



## audioaficionado

I'm thinkin' you should edit this for sale post before the mods delete it.


----------



## Nubster

It's not mine. Just thought I'd post it up in case anyone was interested. They can delete it if they want. No skin off my teeth.


----------



## Ibn

Edited thread. Figure it's been up long enough for anyone interested.


----------



## Nubster

Yeah, took mine down too.


----------



## Pen3

Anyone going for the D800 or D800E next month?


----------



## Nubster

Nope. Not my cup of tea. I'm personally waiting for the announcement for the D400.


----------



## zainey_04

Nope, but i'm thinking about selling my D5000 for a D7000. The thing I like about the D800 is the mega pixels will allow for some massive prints and the built in HDR function. other than that it's not really a camera for you average user.


----------



## audioaficionado

I went over to Best Buy last night and took a look at the Nikon D5100 and D3100 cameras. Couldn't really get any feel for how ergonomic they are in my hands as that stupid over sized security device prevents you from wrapping both hands around the cameras to see how they feel as you operate them. I'm thinking I'll need to read some good reviews and the manuals before I go back and look at them some more. 

I thought the D90 sucked. Super heavy and the prism viewfinder was dark as moon light. 

I'm leaning more towards the D3100 for now, but I'll end up getting the D40x on the used market to eventually have converted to a full spectrum camera for IR-UV photography. 

Found a place in Eugene, OR that will update my old pre AI lenses with chips so the new cameras will mount and meter plus record the EXIF lens data.


----------



## Nubster

Unless money is a deciding factor, I'd go D5100 over D3100. It beats the D3100 in every way. Some just slightly, some by a decent amount. Really, I don't like either but that's just me. For my money it would be the D5100.

If you don't mind buying used and can swing an extra $150-200 over the cost of the D5100, I'd grab a used D7000. It will spank the D5100 like a redheaded stepchild.


----------



## audioaficionado

Unlike the D90, the D5100 is only slightly larger than the compact D3100. The lighter it is, the easier it is to have hanging around your neck all day. The D5100 may still win me over. It all depends on how the full controls feel in my hands. The less menu diving, the better the picture taking experience IMO. Money is an issue, but an extra couple of hundred won't break the bank.


----------



## Nubster

I was actually considering selling my D300 and trying to buy a D7000 but I think I am going to wait until the D400 is announced. Only thing is, once that happens, the value of my D300 will probably sink like a Canon lens since the market will get flooded with them.


----------



## bsmith

If your looking for an ergonomic camera the d3100 is hard to beat. It does not weigh much (I believe the lightest/smallest slr on the market?) and to me feels very sturdy. 

It seems to me the d5000 has only a few big advantages, the screen, better light sensitivity but everything else is pretty marginal and IMO doesn't matter much.


----------



## Nubster

The D3100 vs D5000 is not significant however the D3100 vs D5100 is.


----------



## audioaficionado

Nubster said:


> I was actually considering selling my D300 and trying to buy a D7000 but I think I am going to wait until the D400 is announced. Only thing is, once that happens, the value of my D300 will probably sink like a Canon lens since the market will get flooded with them.


No it won't. Nikons keep their value better than most other older cameras. Just do a search on E-bay and other used camera sellers. It may drop a little value, but not precipitously after the newer models come out. Try buying a D3 or D300 and you'll see they are still friggin' expensive. Heck a D90 still sells for way more than I'd want to pay considering how much better the newer Nikons are in comparison.


----------



## Patriot

What macro lens do you guys use? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## zainey_04

I use a normal 18-55mm lens reverse mounted.


----------



## bsmith

zainey_04 said:


> I use a normal 18-55mm lens reverse mounted.


Got any pics and what you used to reverse mount the lens?


----------



## zainey_04

I use a Fotodiox reversing ring camera mount adapter. It's $7.99 on amazon.


----------



## Nubster

audioaficionado said:


> No it won't. Nikons keep their value better than most other older cameras. Just do a search on E-bay and other used camera sellers. It may drop a little value, but not precipitously after the newer models come out. Try buying a D3 or D300 and you'll see they are still friggin' expensive. Heck a D90 still sells for way more than I'd want to pay considering how much better the newer Nikons are in comparison.


Well, actually my camera has lost a good bit of value already. It was purchased new for $2000. I bought it for $800. Now you can get it all day long for $650-700 and that's before a replacement (not counting the D300S) has been announced. I have a feeling that once the D400 is announce, the D300 will be easily found for $600-700.

I just hope that the D400 comes in at $2000 or less. That way there might be a chance in hell I can get one before it's replaced in two years.


----------



## Nubster

Patriot100% said:


> What macro lens do you guys use?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Tamron 90mm macro. Great lens that can be had for <$300.


----------



## jeepn4x4

Nubster said:


> Tamron 90mm macro. Great lens that can be had for <$300.


Where are you finding it for less than $300?


----------



## Nubster

Used. I posted a FS thread last week for one that was $275 shipped. Of course it's gone now but I see them routinely for $300 or less.


----------



## ucantimagine

So ummm...I have a Nikon D90 and no clue how to use it. Any bullet points to make taking shrimp pics more successfull without a full-blown photography lesson? Does this camera have a macro mode? Like seriously, I never use it, it weighs a ton. The 8mp camera on my phone is good for most shots, but not intricate stuff like this.









Yup, a pic of the D90 taken with my phone. lol


----------



## bsmith

ucantimagine said:


> So ummm...I have a Nikon D90 and no clue how to use it. Any bullet points to make taking shrimp pics more successfull without a full-blown photography lesson? Does this camera have a macro mode? Like seriously, I never use it, it weighs a ton. The 8mp camera on my phone is good for most shots, but not intricate stuff like this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yup, a pic of the D90 taken with my phone. lol


I cant really help you but I just LOVE the Irony, good job!


----------



## alfalfa

ucantimagine said:


> Does this camera have a macro mode


Macro shots are usually accomplished with an actual macro lens, not through a mode built into the camera body. Besides, you probably don't need true macro abilities — you probably just want to be able to focus close (there is a difference). That's a fairly big topic but I just want to point out that your biggest challenge might be being able to get close enough and still focus. Each lens has a different minimum focus distance. If the distance between the focal plane and the subject is less than the minimum focus distance, you will never be able to focus on it.

(btw, Nikon calls their macro lenses "micro". It is explained at that same link above.)


----------



## ucantimagine

Ohhhh...yea I don't like this camera, sorry (like you made it lol) It's too complicated, makes taking pics a chore plus it flares up up carpal tunnel. lol

I miss my S2IS but the CCD sensor went out on it and yea, no more Canons for me.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

So I'm in Best Buy tonight, picking up a couple odds and ends when a kid that looked about 16 or 17 and his mother walk by having a conversation. 

The mom says "You said to get a Nikon right?"
Kid: "Yeah, Nikon is a way better professional brand, Canon is just cheap..."

I wanted to shake his hand!


----------



## Nubster

ucantimagine said:


> Ohhhh...yea I don't like this camera, sorry (like you made it lol) It's too complicated, makes taking pics a chore plus it flares up up carpal tunnel. lol
> 
> I miss my S2IS but the CCD sensor went out on it and yea, no more Canons for me.


DSLR cameras can be as simple or complicated as you want. Need simple, throw it on auto. Want complicated, go full manual. There's lots of in between too.


----------



## audioaficionado

> the mom says "you said to get a nikon right?"
> kid: "yeah, nikon is a way better professional brand, canon is just cheap..."


QFT & rotflmao


----------



## ucantimagine

Nubster said:


> DSLR cameras can be as simple or complicated as you want. Need simple, throw it on auto. Want complicated, go full manual. There's lots of in between too.


I think the main problem is I don't have the right lens to get close and have sharp focus. It just kinda fuzzes out when I zoom, even with adjusting the focus ring. There's another lens around here somewhere I was told. lol 

If I'm going auto, I may as well use my phone's camera. I also notice with the Nikon, the color balance is often way off--sometimes too blue, sometimes too orange. I'm not faulting the camera, because as I said...I have no clue how to use it. lol

I can live with this...


----------



## AesopRocks247

ucantimagine said:


> I think the main problem is I don't have the right lens to get close and have sharp focus. It just kinda fuzzes out when I zoom, even with adjusting the focus ring. There's another lens around here somewhere I was told. lol
> 
> If I'm going auto, I may as well use my phone's camera. I also notice with the Nikon, the color balance is often way off--sometimes too blue, sometimes too orange. I'm not faulting the camera, because as I said...I have no clue how to use it. lol


You should look into taking a photo class or something, you would benefit greatly.


----------



## ucantimagine

My other half needs to take the class and then I'll sponge off of him. He actually enjoys using the camera but he takes a million pics just to get the right shot. Don't tell him I said that. lol


----------



## Nubster

Color being off is often due to the white balance. Check to see if it's on auto. If not, set it to auto. It isn't perfect but gets pretty close most of the time. You can also set it according to the lights you are shooting under. If you shoot in RAW, the color can easily be corrected using PhotoShop or something similar. You can even find some programs that do simple color correction for free.


----------



## audioaficionado

ucantimagine said:


> My other half needs to take the class and then I'll sponge off of him. He actually enjoys using the camera but he takes a million pics just to get the right shot. Don't tell him I said that. lol


This site can help you learn
*How to Take Better Pictures*


----------



## ucantimagine

Cool. I'll check it out.


----------



## AquaStudent

Ohhh Nikon Club! Woot go Nikon!

I got my D5000 used off ebay a little over a month ago and have been experimenting with it in my aquarium photography and some astrophotography. I absolutely love it and have been enjoying every minute of it.

I still have a lot of learning to do with it and would love some guidance/suggestions. What do I need to do to become initiated into the Club?  I hope nothing like that seen in Animal House or Old School...my body can't handle anything like that.

Here are some of my shots. The Astrophotography photos are were taking on January 31 at Stull Observatory, Alfred, NY (my second home). Alfred is also known as where the sun only comes out once a week. It's actually quite amazing that there are so few clouds in the photo  I'm working on being able to focus my camera while it's attached to our telescopes. It seems that with the adapter we've created my camera is just slightly out of focus. Hopefully I'll have that fixed in the upcoming weeks 



















In both photos you can see the constellation Orion as well as the Orion Nebula and the Red Giant Betelgeuse


----------



## TickleMyElmo

AquaStudent said:


> Ohhh Nikon Club! Woot go Nikon!
> 
> I got my D5000 used off ebay a little over a month ago and have been experimenting with it in my aquarium photography and some astrophotography. I absolutely love it and have been enjoying every minute of it.
> 
> I still have a lot of learning to do with it and would love some guidance/suggestions. What do I need to do to become initiated into the Club?  I hope nothing like that seen in Animal House or Old School...my body can't handle anything like that.
> 
> Here are some of my shots. The Astrophotography photos are were taking on January 31 at Stull Observatory, Alfred, NY (my second home). Alfred is also known as where the sun only comes out once a week. It's actually quite amazing that there are so few clouds in the photo  I'm working on being able to focus my camera while it's attached to our telescopes. It seems that with the adapter we've created my camera is just slightly out of focus. Hopefully I'll have that fixed in the upcoming weeks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In both photos you can see the constellation Orion as well as the Orion Nebula and the Red Giant Betelgeuse


You're in! #039, no crazy initiations here lol...nice pics! Astrophotography is really cool, I've seen some really awesome landscape pictures that combine landscapes and astrophotography...


----------



## Nubster

TickleMyElmo said:


> You're in! #039, no crazy initiations here


Well, there is that one thing...but it'll have to wait because we recently ran out of vasoline and lighter fluid. You'll get a PM once the supplies are re-upped.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

Nubster said:


> Well, there is that one thing...but it'll have to wait because we recently ran out of vasoline and lighter fluid. You'll get a PM once the supplies are re-upped.


LMAO! :hihi:


----------



## AquaStudent

ahhh I'm scared now 

Astrophotography is a lot of fun. I've been drooling over the pictures on the Astronomy Picture of the Day that's put out by NASA daily. I love it!


----------



## Miles03

I've been using Nikons for awhile now and love them I have a few from a point and shoot to a few higher end models can I join? 
Not going to lie all the pics I have posted on this site so far I have just taking with my phone there not good or anything just so much easier.


----------



## xev11

I shoot with a D90. I think spot 40 is open. Do I now have to prove my worthiness?


----------



## TickleMyElmo

Miles03 said:


> I've been using Nikons for awhile now and love them I have a few from a point and shoot to a few higher end models can I join?
> Not going to lie all the pics I have posted on this site so far I have just taking with my phone there not good or anything just so much easier.


Welcome board! #040!



xev11 said:


> I shoot with a D90. I think spot 40 is open. Do I now have to prove my worthiness?


No proving necessary! #041


----------



## TickleMyElmo

AquaStudent said:


> Ohhh Nikon Club! Woot go Nikon!
> 
> I got my D5000 used off ebay a little over a month ago and have been experimenting with it in my aquarium photography and some astrophotography. I absolutely love it and have been enjoying every minute of it.
> 
> I still have a lot of learning to do with it and would love some guidance/suggestions. What do I need to do to become initiated into the Club?  I hope nothing like that seen in Animal House or Old School...my body can't handle anything like that.
> 
> Here are some of my shots. The Astrophotography photos are were taking on January 31 at Stull Observatory, Alfred, NY (my second home). Alfred is also known as where the sun only comes out once a week. It's actually quite amazing that there are so few clouds in the photo  I'm working on being able to focus my camera while it's attached to our telescopes. It seems that with the adapter we've created my camera is just slightly out of focus. Hopefully I'll have that fixed in the upcoming weeks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In both photos you can see the constellation Orion as well as the Orion Nebula and the Red Giant Betelgeuse


Check these out, I have a feeling you'll like them :icon_bigg

http://vimeo.com/36972668

http://vimeo.com/16369165

Just type astrophotography into the search bar at Vimeo, there's plenty of awesome results!


----------



## Patriot

I can't wait to get my hands on the Nikkor 85mm 1.8G this weekend! I also want to pick up a 35mm 1.8G since the store didn't have the 50mm 1.8G


----------



## AquaStudent

Yeah a lot of the videos posted on APOD are linked to Vimeo. Some of my favorites include ones with the aurora boraleis


----------



## pandjpudge

I just noticed this section here! I usually just go to the tank journals and for sale area lol.

My Name is Matt and I have a D90. Here are some recent shots that I love.


A Lucid Dream by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr

RPF1 by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr

Seeing It by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr


----------



## Budget aquarist

My name is Randy and i have a D-70 and sometimes able to borrow a d-700.


----------



## Budget aquarist

oops. wait il fix the picture


----------



## Budget aquarist




----------



## Budget aquarist

wutever.... i give up


----------



## TickleMyElmo

pandjpudge said:


> I just noticed this section here! I usually just go to the tank journals and for sale area lol.
> 
> My Name is Matt and I have a D90. Here are some recent shots that I love.
> 
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/findtheapex/6933835909/
> A Lucid Dream by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/findtheapex/6784545980/
> RPF1 by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/findtheapex/6859962411/
> Seeing It by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr


Very Nice Pics! You can be member #042!



Budget aquarist said:


> My name is Randy and i have a D-70 and sometimes able to borrow a d-700.


I clicked the link you posted, very very nice picture! Is is a panorama stitch or just regular? The D700 is a great camera, you should buy one for yourself 

You can be member #043!


----------



## Budget aquarist

thanks!, just regular. I still haven't found a stitching program that does as good of a job that i would like it to. a d-700 is a large purchase. I would love to have that camera one day, though. :hihi:


----------



## AquaStudent

I'm off to visit Italy for the week  I'm bringing my d5000 and am very excited to take lots of photos

Go Nikon!


----------



## TickleMyElmo

Budget aquarist said:


> thanks!, just regular. I still haven't found a stitching program that does as good of a job that i would like it to. a d-700 is a large purchase. I would love to have that camera one day, though. :hihi:


Oh cool, very very nice! And the D700 is calling your name, they just lowered the price $500 because of the D800 release, it's now $2199 instead of $2799! 



AquaStudent said:


> I'm off to visit Italy for the week  I'm bringing my d5000 and am very excited to take lots of photos
> 
> Go Nikon!


Nice, Italy is a beautiful place!


I'm shooting a wedding tomorrow, should be fun as usual! :icon_bigg


----------



## bsmith

pandjpudge said:


> I just noticed this section here! I usually just go to the tank journals and for sale area lol.
> 
> My Name is Matt and I have a D90. Here are some recent shots that I love.
> 
> 
> A Lucid Dream by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr
> 
> RPF1 by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr
> 
> Seeing It by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr


Seeing is a really awesome pic! What's the story behind it and how did you capture it?


----------



## bsmith

Budget aquarist said:


> thanks!, just regular. I still haven't found a stitching program that does as good of a job that i would like it to. a d-700 is a large purchase. I would love to have that camera one day, though. :hihi:


I could look it up but I'd rather it be explained. 

What is stitching?



AquaStudent said:


> I'm off to visit Italy for the week  I'm bringing my d5000 and am very excited to take lots of photos
> 
> Go Nikon!


I really wish I had made the decision to jump to my d3100 (don't think they were out yet but lets just say a Nikon SLR then) before I went to Japan. I do think my Fuji FinePix did an admirable job but nothing line my camera now.


----------



## Nubster

bsmith said:


> I could look it up but I'd rather it be explained.
> 
> What is stitching?


It's kinda like what it sounds like. Stitching is when you take two or more pictures and combine them to make a panoramic image. So say you have a really huge horizon that you want to shoot but it all won't fit in your view finder. You take how ever many pictures needed to get the image and stitch those images side by side to get the full view of what you wanted to capture. That's a pretty generic explanation anyways.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

TickleMyElmo said:


> I'm shooting a wedding tomorrow, should be fun as usual! :icon_bigg


Forgot to mention! I got my new Think Tank Pro Speed Belt System and Modular components today (Belt with different size pouches to hold your lenses)....so I'll be able to test it out tomorrow! Should work well, I love the way everything is right at my fingertips...


----------



## pandjpudge

bsmith said:


> Seeing is a really awesome pic! What's the story behind it and how did you capture it?


No real story I just wanted to redo a macro of my eye again for project 365. Kind of a lucky shot since I used AF instead of manual.

Lens: Tokina 100mm macro
Strobes: SB-700 and SB-900
Triggered by cybersyncs 
Post editing in photoshop


----------



## alfalfa

TickleMyElmo said:


> Oh cool, very very nice! And the D700 is calling your name, they just lowered the price $500 because of the D800 release, it's now $2199 instead of $2799!


Cool! Rolling back prices to 2008 for the same body.


----------



## BetterWetter

Sign me up! D300 with 45K+ actuations.


----------



## alfalfa

Nice BetterWetter!


----------



## pandjpudge

Added some new additions to the tank. Here are some favorites from today and the rest can be seen either on Flickr or my tank journal (http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/t...gal-jungle-crashed-2-27-a-25.html#post1756256)


Searching by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr

Amano Close Up by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr

Seeing Over His Kingdom by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr

His Turf by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr


----------



## TickleMyElmo

BetterWetter said:


> Sign me up! D300 with 45K+ actuations.


Added! #044...Nice pics!


Nice pics to you too pandj!


----------



## Regenesis

Count me in!

Have a D3000

What # am I?


----------



## TickleMyElmo

regenesis said:


> count me in!
> 
> Have a d3000
> 
> what # am i?


#045!


----------



## Patriot

I happy now that I got my mb-d11 battery pack for my D7000.


----------



## pandjpudge

grips ftw!

Anyone shooting anything interesting this weekend? I'm going to a car event and hopefully the weather plays nice!


----------



## Nubster

Nope...12 hour shifts at the hospital all weekend. Hopefully I'll have new shrimp on Monday to shoot.


----------



## Patriot

I shot some pixs of snow monkeys at the Jigokudani snow monkey hotspring last weekend though is that counts.


----------



## pandjpudge

New shrimp nice, working 12 hour shifts not so nice. 

I can't wait to get my tank back in order. Had a random crash and lost a lot of my stock, then tried to add new stock. The new stuff also died on me, so close to taking a brick to the tank.


----------



## discuscraze

I have a D90. Looking for 50mm f1.8g lens. Love this concept.

Can I get a #?


----------



## pandjpudge

I have the 50mm F1.8 on my D90, great for walking around but not so great for tighter spaces. 

Took a bunch of pictures today and about to start processing them. Got to filter through 6 gigs of raw photos lol


----------



## TickleMyElmo

discuscraze said:


> I have a D90. Looking for 50mm f1.8g lens. Love this concept.
> 
> Can I get a #?


#046, welcome! 



pandjpudge said:


> I have the 50mm F1.8 on my D90, great for walking around but not so great for tighter spaces.
> 
> Took a bunch of pictures today and about to start processing them. Got to filter through 6 gigs of raw photos lol


Nice, processing is always fun lol...


----------



## pandjpudge

Here are some pics from today and got a bunch more to go. Too tired to get into a serious processing session.



Raging Bull Teaser by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr

Raging Bull by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr

Raging Bull by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr

Raging Bull by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr

Raging Bull by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr

Raging Bull by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr


----------



## AquaStudent

awesome shots Pand! That car is SMEXY!

I've got just under 700 photos from my trip to Italy to go through but for some reason my SD card slot on my computer isn't working (it worked 10 days ago just before I left :/)

I'm hopefully going to borrow a USB SD card slot today or tomorrow and be able to go through the photos.


----------



## pandjpudge

More from sunday, still got a bunch to go through. I'm tired so I'm done editing for the night.

Here are a few, the rest is can be found here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/findtheapex/sets/72157629566279797/ . 


240ZX Drifting by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr

240ZX Drifting by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr

350Z Drifting by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr

350Z Drifting by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr

Photographer by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr

Tandem Drift by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr

Vtak by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr

DSC_7648 by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr

Deuces by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr


----------



## AquaStudent

I hope there's not a rule on the number of photos one is allowed to post at one time :/ Here are some shots from my trip around Italy last week (I'm still jet lagged...woke up at 6:30 am this morning. I'm in college that's not supposed to happen)!

All images were taken with my Nikon D5000 camera using the 18-55mm lens. None of the photos have been modified in an image processing program. Also, all photos were taken freehand with the exception of the 3 Coliseum shots at the end (I picked up a mini tripod from an obnoxious street vendor...but hey it works well.)

I feel like the photographs became progressively better throughout the week (if you saw the other 650 images you'd understand). I got a bit used to some of the settings and got to play a bit with some of the modes. It was fun stuff!

From our hotel in Sienna









Flowers for Momma









Tuscana - No Grapes 









It's still leaning









Market in Florence - Yum!









Looking down the street in Florence. Polizia on patrol.









Venice - Down the Canal









Roman Forum Ruins









My future bike (I wish!)









Venus (brighter) and Jupiter (fainter) from the front of Giolitti's (best Gilatto in Italy) I can't believe I was able to freehand this!









Moon and Night Shot in Rome (next to top of Spanish Steps)









Roman Forum at Night









Colosseum!


----------



## Nubster

Nice series. I can only imagine how may shots one could take when visiting Italy. I'd have to take at least a 1TB HD with me to dump pictures to everyday...lol


----------



## AquaStudent

I took just under 700 photos and that's with forgetting my camera in the hotel room for the Vatican Tour and Tour of the Forum/Coliseum.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

Nice series aqua! Italy is a very photogenic place 

I've been busy with weddings lately, and wanted to get back to my roots with some landscape shots, so I explored around a not so photogenic place (New Jersey :icon_lol: lol!... ) It was very peaceful out here, and I find landscape photography to be very relaxing roud:


0EH_4457-Edit-2-2 by Erick Joseph Photography, on Flickr






0EH_4426 by Erick Joseph Photography, on Flickr


----------



## pandjpudge

Nice pictures!

I got one big batch after this and that will end my coverage of IFO. 


Elise by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr

EVOL by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr

Windy by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr

Are you sure this is safe? by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr

MR-2 Spyder by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr

Drift Hard or Go Home by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr

Aftermath by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr

Ready To Ride by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr


----------



## Patriot

Well since everyone is posting pictures now here are my favorite pictures that I taken at the Snow Monkey Park in Nagano Japan. I only put four of my favorite pictures because I don't want to flood this thread with pictures.


----------



## pandjpudge

Patriot100% said:


> Well since everyone is posting pictures now here are my favorite pictures that I taken at the Snow Monkey Park in Nagano Japan. I only put four of my favorite pictures because I don't want to flood this thread with pictures.


Very nice! I love the first one. 

I thought the point of this thread was to show pics off/have gear lust.


----------



## AquaStudent

pandjpudge said:


> Very nice! I love the first one.
> 
> I thought the point of this thread was to show pics off/have gear lust.


Yeah yeah!  That first picture is epic! That baby is very cute! 

I also completely agree with the second comment. I'm new to the 'club' but I want to see lots and lots of photos!

According to the astronomy forecast it should be a very clear night (best conditions I've ever had) so I plan on drinking lots of coffee (already good to go on that part because of a math exam and some homework I still need to finish up) and spending the night exploring campus and the observatory for some astrophotography shots.


----------



## pandjpudge

This ends my coverage of IFO and plenty on my flickr. Thanks for the comments guys!


Supra by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr

Determined by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr

Watching by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr

Hayabusa by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr

Not at IFO but still awesome how I spotted this while eating at Five Guys across the street lol


AMG SLS by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr


----------



## bsmith

Pretty much any pic of any Evo is all right in my book. The SLS is sick too. Have you seen the convert? I think it ruins the car, no gull wing doors...


----------



## pandjpudge

I haven't seen a vert version in person, I had no idea we had a SLS locally. That's pretty flashy compared to the usual stuff around here. I'm just happy I spotted it and got proof since I doubt I'll ever see that car again.

The EVOs were pretty quick on that road course. I wanted to see the EVOs go against the STI but it didn't happen.


----------



## bsmith

Not sure how modified the cars were there but stock to stock Evo's are always quicker. Especially they X's. You can't mess with the control Mitsubishi gave the driver in those cars. That's the only thing I miss about not selling Mitsus anymore (started selling KIA's exclusively about two years ago), whenever I needed a pick me up I just grabbed the keys to a X and hit the back roads. Needless to say there were a few people that purchased Evolutions in the STL area that had properly broken in tires/brakes!


----------



## zainey_04

I wanna share too :biggrin:

so here are some pictures I took at the circus yesterday.


----------



## pandjpudge

really nice photos! especially for a pretty dark place


----------



## WATduh

Room for one more? Just picked up my D90!


----------



## TickleMyElmo

WATduh said:


> Room for one more? Just picked up my D90!


Sure! #047! Nice camera by the way!

Man, we have so many more members than the Canon club, they're only at 32 members :hihi:


----------



## WATduh

TickleMyElmo said:


> Sure! #047! Nice camera by the way!
> 
> Man, we have so many more members than the Canon club, they're only at 32 members :hihi:


Sweet! And we don't have cooties! :biggrin:


----------



## TickleMyElmo

WATduh said:


> Sweet! And we don't have cooties! :biggrin:


Exactly! :biggrin:

In other news, here's some images I shot today, froze my butt off waiting for the sun to set! Figured I would keep the thread fresh lol...


----------



## driftwoodhunter

Beautiful! The second one is my favorite - very painterly.


----------



## indigo

ooh can i join in? i have a nikon d60.
this year I'm doing a 365 project here todays photo was of a glass catfish


----------



## AquaStudent

gorgeous shots Elmo!


----------



## TickleMyElmo

driftwoodhunter said:


> Beautiful! The second one is my favorite - very painterly.


Thanks!



indigo said:


> ooh can i join in? i have a nikon d60.
> this year I'm doing a 365 project here todays photo was of a glass catfish


Sure, you're #048! Nice pic!



AquaStudent said:


> gorgeous shots Elmo!


Thanks! Appreciate the comments guys! :icon_smil


----------



## teah

Oh... I want #48 hehe. Can I join with Nikon F80?

Our night~ by Tea.H, on Flickr


----------



## indigo

yay thanks 

also wondering.. i was trying to do a fts yesterday and i couldn't get one without glare on the glass. anyone got some tips on how to do it?


----------



## AquaStudent

Try turning off the lights in the room. Also, if you are using flash make sure your camera glass is not parallel and head on with the tank glass because the flash will bounce back directly and you'll image your flash.

I'm no expert but following these ideas you should be able to figure out what works for you.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

teah said:


> Oh... I want #48 hehe. Can I join with Nikon F80?
> 
> Our night~ by Tea.H, on Flickr


indigo is #048, but you can be #049!



indigo said:


> yay thanks
> 
> also wondering.. i was trying to do a fts yesterday and i couldn't get one without glare on the glass. anyone got some tips on how to do it?





AquaStudent said:


> Try turning off the lights in the room. Also, if you are using flash make sure your camera glass is not parallel and head on with the tank glass because the flash will bounce back directly and you'll image your flash.
> 
> I'm no expert but following these ideas you should be able to figure out what works for you.


What AquaStudent said is good advice...


----------



## indigo

AquaStudent said:


> Try turning off the lights in the room. Also, if you are using flash make sure your camera glass is not parallel and head on with the tank glass because the flash will bounce back directly and you'll image your flash.
> 
> I'm no expert but following these ideas you should be able to figure out what works for you.


That what confused me, I had only the tank light on and no flash. But maybe its because the light is a metal halide one that basically lights up the room anyway.

heres the photo of the tank anyway..


----------



## TickleMyElmo

indigo said:


> That what confused me, I had only the tank light on and no flash. But maybe its because the light is a metal halide one that basically lights up the room anyway.
> 
> heres the photo of the tank anyway..


Yeah it's probably from the metal halide light, if it acts like a small room light then you'll still get the reflection :icon_neut


----------



## TickleMyElmo

I posted this in the Canon thread, but figured I better post it here too in the interest of full disclosure,....luckily, I didn't buy it, so I can deny any connection to myself!

-----------------------------------------------

Ugh, I think I'm going to be sick.

My dad leaves for a business vacation to California on Thursday, and wanted a point and shoot to record the trip and scenery. We went to Best Buy and I had a Nikon picked out for him, but it wasn't in stock, so I......I recommended a Canon :confused1: I didn't want to do it, but I sure as hell wasn't going to let him get something like a _samsung _or a _fuji _or god forbid a _pentax_ *shudder*

Thank god I didnt pay for it, so I can scrub my hands clean of this one and pretend it didn't happen...it's a Canon Powershot SX260 HS.

To make myself feel better, I figured I would use it to take a picture of a real camera, and put it in it's place :icon_mrgr Got to establish the pecking order with it before it gets any ideas :hihi:......


IMG_0025 by Erick Joseph Photography, on Flickr


Nah, its actually a pretty neat little camera. I'll probably use it for tank videos and such after he gets back and doesn't need it anymore...


0EH_5041 by Erick Joseph Photography, on Flickr



Wide Angle:

0EH_5053 by Erick Joseph Photography, on Flickr



20x Optical Zoom:

0EH_5054 by Erick Joseph Photography, on Flickr




0EH_5056 by Erick Joseph Photography, on Flickr




PS: Speedie if you add me to this club, I swear to god I will travel to Cali with my father and throw your 60D into the Pacific! Besides, you can't, its not actually mine :icon_smil


------------------------------------------------------------


----------



## audioaficionado

My main shooter is a Canon PowerShot A590 (until I get a proper DSLR to replace my F2). It will be a Nikon of course.


----------



## Ibn

LOL, Elmo. 

My point and shoot is the X100. Had both the LX-5 and the Oly ZX-1 before picking it up.









Both of the other cameras were decent shooters, but the Fuji had what I was looking for.


----------



## audioaficionado

Elmo had a Fuji X100.

Very nice, if not the best P&S on the planet.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/fuji/x100.htm


----------



## AquaStudent

Elmo do you use any sort of filters when photographing a sunset?

EDIT: I took a few photos today and thought I'd share them.

Cropped Version (New Profile Pic?)









Original of Above (should have cleaned my side glass)









FTS of 5g: Betta Surfing in Filter Current









Butt Shot









Strange Shadow


----------



## mcqueenesq

Nikon D70s
Nikon Zoom-Nikkor 24 mm-85 mm F/2.8-4.0 D IF AF Lens

Hoping to join the Leica Club one day.


----------



## pandjpudge

I've been a fan of nikon's P&s. I used a canon and now use a panasonic ts-3 for all my rugged needs.

I would love to get my hands on the fuji x100 and the new x-pro 1


----------



## TickleMyElmo

Ibn said:


> LOL, Elmo.
> 
> My point and shoot is the X100. Had both the LX-5 and the Oly ZX-1 before picking it up.
> 
> 
> Both of the other cameras were decent shooters, but the Fuji had what I was looking for.





audioaficionado said:


> Elmo had a Fuji X100.
> 
> Very nice, if not the best P&S on the planet.
> 
> http://www.kenrockwell.com/fuji/x100.htm


Audio is right, I did have the X100 for a while. I did thoroughly enjoy it, and those fuji greens are awesome, but I found the lackluster autofocus to be the major buzzkill. Nothing I couldn't put up with, but I dont mind lugging my DSLR around, so I always tended to use it more. I certainly wouldn't mind picking up another one some day though.

I'm not a huge fan of the X-Pro1...I think it's butt ugly, the lenses are butt ugly, and the interchangeable lenses is more of a negative than a benefit for me, in the sense that I'd rather not worry about changing lenses and spending $$ on them for a limited use system, when I have $$$$ in Nikon lenses laying around. I would prefer to be "stuck" with the 35mm focal length compact pancake lens of the X100. If I would be using the X100 or X-Pro1, it would be because I wanted a break from my DSLR, and the X-Pro1 wouldn't seem like much of a vacation with all the lenses, etc...



AquaStudent said:


> Elmo do you use any sort of filters when photographing a sunset?


Nice Pics! And no, I don't use any filters. Heck, I don't even have a tripod, although I should really pick one up soon.



mcqueenesq said:


> Nikon D70s
> Nikon Zoom-Nikkor 24 mm-85 mm F/2.8-4.0 D IF AF Lens
> 
> Hoping to join the Leica Club one day.


Cool! You can be #050!


----------



## TickleMyElmo

I've gone back and forth deciding whether or not to post this, just stopped here real quick in the last few minutes of daylight the other day, so nothing really great. This particular area, Sandy Hook, is a 6 mile long Peninsula. In the distance straight ahead is the skyline of New York City, although its hard to see. 

It was taken as a storm was rolling in from the east (right side)...


Road to Sandy Hook by Erick Joseph Photography, on Flickr


----------



## GraphicGr8s

Well I am glad you did post it. Looks good from where I am sitting. This is one of those shots where everything needs to be centered, or close to it. Color might be punched up just a tad too much though.


----------



## teah

TickleMyElmo said:


> I've gone back and forth deciding whether or not to post this, just stopped here real quick in the last few minutes of daylight the other day, so nothing really great. This particular area, Sandy Hook, is a 6 mile long Peninsula. In the distance straight ahead is the skyline of New York City, although its hard to see.
> 
> It was taken as a storm was rolling in from the east (right side)...


Beautiful photo, I really like it. What time was it taken? The light is very great, which add the 3D effect onto the photo.

D7000 and AF 50 1.8D

Portrait with friends and more friends by Tea.H, on Flickr


----------



## TickleMyElmo

teah said:


> Beautiful photo, I really like it. What time was it taken? The light is very great, which add the 3D effect onto the photo.
> 
> D7000 and AF 50 1.8D
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/tea_h/6930674462/
> Portrait with friends and more friends by Tea.H, on Flickr


Thanks! It was taken at 7:25PM, cant beat that golden light! 

Awesome picture to you too! You have some really cute friends haha, if you weren't in Vietnam I'd tell ya to hook me up with one of them, lol!  I had a D7000 for a while and loved it, fantastic value for the money...


----------



## teah

TickleMyElmo said:


> Thanks! It was taken at 7:25PM, cant beat that golden light!
> 
> Awesome picture to you too! You have some really cute friends haha, if you weren't in Vietnam I'd tell ya to hook me up with one of them, lol!  I had a D7000 for a while and loved it, fantastic value for the money...


Hey, I am going FX end of this month too. But very considering between D700 and 5DmII. Any thought or advise you could give me? ATM, I am 65% D700 and 35% 5DmII cos of it great skin tone and 24Mp.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

teah said:


> Hey, I am going FX end of this month too. But very considering between D700 and 5DmII. Any thought or advise you could give me? ATM, I am 65% D700 and 35% 5DmII cos of it great skin tone and 24Mp.


I would honestly recommend the D700 for its autofocus alone. The 5DmkII is well know for its focus issues with anything other than the center focus point. I think it's absolutely crazy to pay $2k for a camera that cant focus to save its life! I do love the Canon colors, especially the greens, but the D700 just feels like its higher quality in my hand, plus it seems to be better weather sealed. 

I don't think megapixels are really such a big deal, my camera is 12MP, but all my fish photos are awesomely sharp and I doubt if anyone would look at them and say "Only 12MP ?!? OMG crappy pics bro!" haha...besides, if you really want high megapixels, you should be going after the D800....

How's the price of camera gear over there? It seems like everywhere outside of the USA or Japan camera gear is crazy expensive, like the UK for example. They get freakin' robbed over there! Cameras and lenses are way more expensive because of VAT, duties, etc...


----------



## D3monic

teah said:


> Beautiful photo, I really like it. What time was it taken? The light is very great, which add the 3D effect onto the photo.
> 
> D7000 and AF 50 1.8D
> 
> Portrait with friends and more friends by Tea.H, on Flickr


You need to hook me up with your friend :hihi:


----------



## Patriot

d3monic said:


> you need to hook me up with your friend :hihi:


 lol


----------



## smithron

*Nikon 300S*

I'm in


----------



## TickleMyElmo

smithron said:


> I'm in


Awesome, #051! Welcome!


----------



## TickleMyElmo

I photographed an engagement session today, had tons of fun and got some really awesome pictures 

Reminds me why I love being a professional photographer roud:


----------



## youjettisonme

I'm in. What number do I get?

D5100 here.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

youjettisonme said:


> I'm in. What number do I get?
> 
> D5100 here.


Nice pics! I particularly like the second one...

And welcome! You are #052


----------



## AquaStudent

Those are great shots! I like the second one too  it looks so peaceful


----------



## Nubster

D300 with Tokina 12-24 f/4

5 shot HDR...still playing around with that...free handed.


----------



## audioaficionado

Which Nikons do HDR?


----------



## TickleMyElmo

audioaficionado said:


> Which Nikons do HDR?


All of them,...so long as you do it yourself outside of the camera :hihi:

The only Nikons that I know of that have the HDR function built in are the new D800, D4, and D5100. By that I mean it processes the HDR for you, in-camera. 

Most of the other upper level Nikon models have bracketing, but that only gives you the individual images, it doesn't merge them for you.


----------



## audioaficionado

Good as I've been eying the D5100. The extra $150 over the D3100 seems worth it and it is hardly any larger or heavier either.


----------



## Nubster

TickleMyElmo said:


> All of them,...so long as you do it yourself outside of the camera :hihi:
> 
> The only Nikons that I know of that have the HDR function built in are the new D800, D4, and D5100. By that I mean it processes the HDR for you, in-camera.
> 
> Most of the other upper level Nikon models have bracketing, but that only gives you the individual images, it doesn't merge them for you.


How do the in camera images compare to taking separate shots and merging them using software?


----------



## audioaficionado

I can't imagine the in camera processing is going to be as good, but sometimes quick and dirty is plenty good enough and saves valuable time better spent taking more pictures rather than hours in front of the computer tweakin' images.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

Nubster said:


> How do the in camera images compare to taking separate shots and merging them using software?





audioaficionado said:


> I can't imagine the in camera processing is going to be as good, but sometimes quick and dirty is plenty good enough and saves valuable time better spent taking more pictures rather than hours in front of the computer tweakin' images.


Yeah, I have no idea, I've never used it either. I do know that doing HDR on the computer is a pain in the you know what and requires software that I simply don't want to buy/spend my money on. If the camera does it, thats perfect and probably good enough for me or I could always slightly tweak it later....


----------



## Da Plant Man

I did 5hr time lapse of a tulip opening today. I timed it wrong, and the flower didn't open. Picture 1 and Picture 568 look exactly the same. I was like....really?


----------



## Nubster

TickleMyElmo said:


> Yeah, I have no idea, I've never used it either. I do know that doing HDR on the computer is a pain in the you know what and requires software that I simply don't want to buy/spend my money on. If the camera does it, thats perfect and probably good enough for me or I could always slightly tweak it later....


You can download CombineZM for free. It's not the best, but it works ok.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

Da Plant Man said:


> I did 5hr time lapse of a tulip opening today. I timed it wrong, and the flower didn't open. Picture 1 and Picture 568 look exactly the same. I was like....really?


Haha, that sucks! :icon_lol: Oh well, sometimes things don't go as planned 



Nubster said:


> You can download CombineZM for free. It's not the best, but it works ok.


Thanks, I'll have to check it out...



In other news, here's some pics from a recent engagement photoshoot, hope you guys like them as much as the clients did, they were such great people!  Feedback is welcome, we all have room to grow and get better! 

1.



5.




7.




11.


----------



## Patriot

Does anyone know how long it takes Nikon to look at something you send in. It arrived there about a week ago still with no word from Nikon on the estimated cost 

Sent from my Galaxy Note using Tapatalk


----------



## Nubster

I was told it can take several weeks. That's why I recently used Authorized Photo Service. I shipped my camera to them, had an estimate the day after they received it, and it was back in my hands in less than 10 days. I'd say closer to 7 days total. Couldn't be happier. I know too late now, but for future reference, I'd skip sending anything to Nikon unless it HAS to go to them.


----------



## Patriot

I guess i learned my lesson now huh. I don't see why it would take so long, whats so hard about looking at it and giving a price. 

Sent from my Galaxy Note using Tapatalk


----------



## Nubster

My guess is because so many people send their stuff to Nikon rather than an authorized repair place.


----------



## alfalfa

TickleMyElmo said:


> Most of the other upper level Nikon models have bracketing, but that only gives you the individual images, it doesn't merge them for you.


(Disclaimer: these statements are not absolutes and YMMV.)
That is still how I prefer it. Tripod, bracketed, merged with some software especially for HDR, etc. The only in camera "HDR" I've tried has been on my iPhone and it isn't very good, almost like "Contrast Reducer" would be a better name. I imagine in-camera HDR is much better elsewhere, and will only continue to get a lot better. The D800 would probably change my opinion.


----------



## Ibn

Time it spends over at Nikon depends on the extent of the repairs. It's usually pretty quick once they do look at it (should be back in a week's time). 

For NPS members it's usually quicker (couple of days and back in a week's time with a loaner in the meantime).


----------



## AquaStudent

I had some fun at the Baltimore Aquarium last weekend (My favorite place on the planet!). I was down in Baltimore for a conference and convinced my programs director to take a side trip to the aquarium. It was well worth it!

The more photos can be found here:
Baltimore Aquarium Trip Photos - April 2012

EDIT: I had these shots of the Inner Harbor




























This is the best image of the sharks I could get. There's so little light and the sharks are moving (so no long exposure lol) so it's a bit tricky.































































I haven't touched any of these photos with an image editing software (except for the first one for a label experiment). Some of the images could use some cropping work...like the last turtle pic 

I highly recommend visiting the aquarium if you get a chance.

This final photo isn't very artistic nor the best framed or quality but it's probably one of my favorites. It's such a happy photo!


----------



## Patriot

Well I finally got my estimate for my camera and it's $94.08 just the clean the body. and $59.00 to repair the broken lens mount on the lens. That a lot of money, so next time I'll send it to a Authorized Photo Service to get a cheaper price maybe.


----------



## audioaficionado

$150 for fixing a Nikon ain't that bad. It could have been a lot worse.


----------



## audioaficionado

*Nikon launches D3200 entry-level dSLR* :bounce:


----------



## TickleMyElmo

audioaficionado said:


> *Nikon launches D3200 entry-level dSLR* :bounce:
> 
> [/QUOTE
> 
> 
> Well, looks like I have to throw my outdated D700 away...
> 
> I mean come on,...THEY HAVE IT IN RED!#1!
> 
> /Sarcasm lol....
> 
> Does seem like a nice entry level camera though! The new transmitter looks cool I guess, but too bad its only for the D3200 and Android Operating systems


----------



## audioaficionado

I like it better than the D3100 and it might even top the D5100 I was considering. Anyway most can't swing the full pro camera prices, not even close for the recent decade's antiques. It comes in black too and it's better than a Canon :icon_mrgr

iOS support will be coming this fall.


----------



## Nubster

Patriot100% said:


> Well I finally got my estimate for my camera and it's $94.08 just the clean the body. and $59.00 to repair the broken lens mount on the lens. That a lot of money, so next time I'll send it to a Authorized Photo Service to get a cheaper price maybe.


Yeah, my camera repair was $180 for a cleaning, replaced the display window, replaced the bayonet mount, sensor cleaning, check and adjust shutter speeds, and focus adjustment. That was through APS and I had the camera back in less than a week.


----------



## Nubster

Maybe it's just me, but the color option totally killed any legitimacy the 3200 had. 

I just wish they'd announce the D400. If I can swing it, I want one for a graduation present to myself this summer.


----------



## Patriot

Nubster said:


> Yeah, my camera repair was $180 for a cleaning, replaced the display window, replaced the bayonet mount, sensor cleaning, check and adjust shutter speeds, and focus adjustment. That was through APS and I had the camera back in less than a week.


Man all of that for $180, that's was a good deal. It's been three weeks and they just sent me an estimate this morning. They won't start working on it until the next day. So if will probably be another two weeks before I get it back too. 

Sent from my Galaxy Note using Tapatalk


----------



## Nubster

Crazy. I sent my camera out on a Saturday, they received it on Wednesday, I had the estimate the same day, I ok'd the estimate, they did the work the following day, I had the camera back in my hands early the following week. That sux you are so long without your camera. Hopefully since they have your camera on the bench the repair will only take a day and back out to you.


----------



## GraphicGr8s

audioaficionado said:


> I like it better than the D3100 and it might even top the D5100 I was considering. Anyway most can't swing the full pro camera prices, not even close for the recent decade's antiques. It comes in black too and it's *better than a Canon* :icon_mrgr
> 
> iOS support will be coming this fall.


Anything is better than a canon.


----------



## audioaficionado

Nubster said:


> Maybe it's just me, but the color option totally killed any legitimacy the 3200 had.
> 
> I just wish they'd announce the D400. If I can swing it, I want one for a graduation present to myself this summer.


If they can get several thousand prosumer sales because of red, so what. I'd get the black one anyway. If they only had the red option, then I'd go a different direction unless they had red lenses too :icon_mrgr

http://kenrockwell.com/nikon/d3200.htm#top


----------



## audioaficionado

I dunno... The D5100 has dropped in price to match the D3200. Does that mean the D5100 is up for an update soon or in danger of being obsoleted / discontinued? Anyway comparing the feature sets I don't see much of an advantage of either one and I'm now leaning towards the D5100.


----------



## Nubster

Depends on what you are looking for. The D3200 has more mega pixels, 24 vs 16 but the D5100 has better ISO performance. D5100 has continuous video focusing but the D3200 has a better external mic. The D3200 is smaller and lighter. The D5100 has built in HDR. The D5100 should be a bit cheaper too. For me, the only thing that would make me unsure is the mega pixel or ISO decision. All the other stuff I could care less about.


----------



## Patriot

We wont know until it comes out.

Sent from my Galaxy Note using Tapatalk


----------



## audioaficionado

Unless you're printing up billboards, anything past 10 mp is academic. You have to go from 6 to 24mp to double the lines/mm or dpi. That swiveling LCD makes it a lot easier to get odd perspectives and shot angles. I'm too old to twist like a pretzel trying to get those shots with a fixed LCD (not to mention macro shots). I do like the newer next generation processor in the D3200, but I'm not sure how much better the image will be compared to the D5100 because of it.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

I'd go for the d5100...

In other news, new rumors today of a Nikon D600! Supposedly its going to be an entry level full frame camera, and probably nicely priced....that should get a few of you salivating and saving your pennies lol...

Unfortunately you'll still have to buy FX glass, so you better be saving a lot of pennies lol!


----------



## audioaficionado

TickleMyElmo said:


> I'd go for the d5100...
> 
> In other news, new rumors today of a Nikon D600! Supposedly its going to be an entry level full frame camera, and probably nicely priced....that should get a few of you salivating and saving your pennies lol...
> 
> Unfortunately you'll still have to buy FX glass, so you better be saving a lot of pennies lol!


All I have is FX glass LOL. It may be old, but I can have it chipped and it should be good to go for another 35 years.


----------



## Nubster

I'm looking forward to the D400, if it ends up being DX. I don't feel like nor can I afford to replace all my glass anytime soon.


----------



## stewardwildcat

Ill take spot #053. Nikon D7000


----------



## teah

TickleMyElmo said:


> Haha, that sucks! :icon_lol: Oh well, sometimes things don't go as planned
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks, I'll have to check it out...
> 
> 
> 
> In other news, here's some pics from a recent engagement photoshoot, hope you guys like them as much as the clients did, they were such great people!  Feedback is welcome, we all have room to grow and get better!
> 
> 
> 
> 5.


This photo is amazing sir. The couple is totally stand out of the background. Is that 80-200 2.8 III? What other lens you use for D700?

I just got a D700 2 days ago, amazing camera!!! I could never done this bokeh on D7000 before, on a 50 1.8D


----------



## TickleMyElmo

stewardwildcat said:


> Ill take spot #053. Nikon D7000


Welcome #053! Nice camera 



teah said:


> This photo is amazing sir. The couple is totally stand out of the background. Is that 80-200 2.8 III? What other lens you use for D700?
> 
> I just got a D700 2 days ago, amazing camera!!! I could never done this bokeh on D7000 before, on a 50 1.8D


Thanks! It was taken with the 70-200 2.8 VRII. The 70-200 VRII is my absolute favorite portrait lens, it just gives such amazing results when you use it right, and the VRII is a lifesaver in general and especially in dimly lit churches. I also use the Nikon 24-70 2.8, Nikon 50mm 1.4G, and Nikon 35mm 1.4G ...I want to get a 24mm 1.4G again next, and then a 14-24, but I want to get a new 27" iMac when they release the new models sometime in May or June, and then I can think about more lenses 

And nice shot! You'll come to love that D700 and you'll become inseparable. And I agree, one of the biggest advantages of full frame cameras is the amazing (lack of) depth of field that you get


----------



## Patriot

My 55-200mm 4-5.6G works on my D3100 perfectly as it should, but my older 28-80mm 3.3-5.6G doesn't AF on it. I don't have my D7000 to test it on to see if it auto focus. Why would one G lens work while the other G lens doesn't?


----------



## audioaficionado

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/nikortek.htm#g

They should all work, but yours apparently doesn't.


----------



## alfalfa

Patriot100% said:


> My 55-200mm 4-5.6G works on my D3100 perfectly as it should, but my older 28-80mm 3.3-5.6G doesn't AF on it. I don't have my D7000 to test it on to see if it auto focus. Why would one G lens work while the other G lens doesn't?


G doesn't make a difference. The only thing G means is the lens doesn't have an aperture ring. The aperture has to be set electronically by the camera. The issue is your 55-200mm 4-5.6G is *AF-S* while your 28-80mm 3.3-5.6G is *AF*.

From Nikon USA's D3100 tech specs:
"Lens Compatibility at a Glance*** AF-S Lens Required for Autofocus"


Nikon cameras used to always (?) come with focus motors built into the bodies. If the lens is AF, it has to be driven by the built-in motor. (You can actually see the slotted worm gear screw head on an AF lens that the body's focus motor screwdriver turns.) Nikon can make bodies smaller, cheaper, and lighter by eliminating the motor in the camera body while making the lenses quieter and focus faster by putting the motor to be in the lens. That is what AF-S means. Therefore, a camera body without a focus motor (like the D3100) is capable of telling an AF-S lens how to focus, but the body can't physically focus any lens.


----------



## trit0n2003

Just got a few year old Digital Nikon D70 with the Nikkor 18-70mm F3.5-4.5 lens as a gift from my sister (she had a newer one and didn't use it anymore) woo! 

I want to get into macro shots 

So does this mean ill be #54? lol


----------



## alfalfa

trit0n2003 said:


> Just got a few year old Digital Nikon D70 with the Nikkor 18-70mm F3.5-4.5 lens as a gift from my sister (she had a newer one and didn't use it anymore) woo!


I still have mine. I haven't used it for years, keeping it available for my wife, hoping my wife would get bitten by the bug. She likes photography but wants something like a P&S to have available, not a big camera body to haul around on a mission.

The D70 is excellent for IR. That's why I'm keeping mine. I still think about having it modified permanently, but the value of the body and lens is probably less than the modification cost.


----------



## audioaficionado

Reading up on IR conversions, The Nikon D70 has a good custom white balance to deal with the predominantly red colors of the IR filters if you go with the near IR to get more false color in your shots. Not all Nikons are equal to the IR task.

I'd go for the UVIR+Visible conversion so you can use what ever external filter you want and not be limited to what they replaced the mirror hot filter with.

http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/photography/164056-infrared-ultraviolet-photography-anyone.html


----------



## TickleMyElmo

trit0n2003 said:


> Just got a few year old Digital Nikon D70 with the Nikkor 18-70mm F3.5-4.5 lens as a gift from my sister (she had a newer one and didn't use it anymore) woo!
> 
> I want to get into macro shots
> 
> So does this mean ill be #54? lol


Sure does! Welcome #054! lol...


...and because this thread can never have too many pics, I bring you a photograph from the edge of the world (dont fall off!)...




-


----------



## pandjpudge

A water drop type day


Butterfly Effect by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr

Strange Tides by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr

Rolling Downhill by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr

Drip by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr

Tango by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr

Basket Carrier by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr

Float Away by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr


----------



## trit0n2003

TickleMyElmo said:


> Sure does! Welcome #054! lol...
> 
> 
> ...and because this thread can never have too many pics, I bring you a photograph from the edge of the world (dont fall off!)...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -


Wow, I always want to carry my camera on me these days cause I have always seen things that Id love to capture.


----------



## audioaficionado

Awesome PC wallpaper roud:


----------



## Nubster

What did you use for the colors? I tried some water drops not long ago, it's a little harder than I thought it would be...here's a few I came up with...not as nice as yours but I was ok with them for my first try....


----------



## AquaStudent

My best friend has been working on some fluid dynamics research over at Va Tech. His project involved 'clapping hands' where he examined how fluids of different viscosities acted. He used a high speed camera to capture the droplets and then modeled their motions. It's cool stuff 

I wish I could find the link to his paper :/


----------



## Mr. Appleton

Guess I'll be #55? 

I started with a D40 a few years ago and have slowly worked my way up to a D700 which is positively beastly. 

My usual travel kit is a 20mm f/4, 58mm f1/2. and 75-150mm f/3.5. All manual and super compact. 

When working, I use the 24-70mm f2.8 and the 70-200mm f2.8VR. 

In addition to fish and shrimp, I guess I'm a bit of a lens addict


----------



## alfalfa

Mr. Appleton said:


> 58mm f1/2


The 58mm f1.2 NOCT???
roud:


----------



## Mr. Appleton

alfalfa said:


> The 58mm f1.2 NOCT???
> roud:


Haha good catch  Yes, yes it is. What's even better is the fact that I got it for basically free... 

http://www.flickr.com/groups/[email protected]/discuss/72157613301659751/?search=noct

Seriously one of the most beautiful lenses I've ever had the pleasure of using. It's rendering is pretty much unmatched.


----------



## alfalfa

Mr. Appleton said:


> Haha good catch  Yes, yes it is. What's even better is the fact that I got it for basically free...
> 
> http://www.flickr.com/groups/[email protected]/discuss/72157613301659751/?search=noct
> 
> Seriously one of the most beautiful lenses I've ever had the pleasure of using. It's rendering is pretty much unmatched.


That's YOU!??!??! I remember reading that a long time ago! LOL! Small world. (Edit: As that link to flickr was loading, I was thinking about how you said you "got it for basically free" and I thought, "Probably not as good of a find as that one guy who...")


----------



## Mr. Appleton

alfalfa said:


> That's YOU!??!??! I remember reading that a long time ago! LOL! Small world. (Edit: As that link to flickr was loading, I was thinking about how you said you "got it for basically free" and I thought, "Probably not as good of a find as that one guy who...")


My 20mm f4 is also from that same deal... when all was said and done I ended up with cash in hand as well as those lenses  Gotta say that was probably the best deal I pulled off, ever. :hihi:


----------



## audioaficionado

I've got a pre AI 20mm. Won't give that nice ultra wide angle unless I have an FX camera so I don't think I'll go to the extra expense of having it converted and chipped.


----------



## pandjpudge

Nubster said:


> What did you use for the colors? I tried some water drops not long ago, it's a little harder than I thought it would be...here's a few I came up with...not as nice as yours but I was ok with them for my first try....


The colors were reflected off the background I made. Basically take some paper and paint, while channeling your inner child. Bump the color up in post to your liking.

I just use regular water, dyed water takes too much effort lol


----------



## teah

Testing out the 35 1.8G DX on a FX. Vignette but very natural. I love the lens!

ID cafe by Tea.H, on Flickr


ID cafe by Tea.H, on Flickr


----------



## Nubster

Definitely looks like it works...nice low light shots!


----------



## Patriot

teah said:


> Testing out the 35 1.8G DX on a FX. Vignette but very natural. I love the lens!
> 
> ID cafe by Tea.H, on Flickr
> 
> 
> ID cafe by Tea.H, on Flickr


Goes to show you that using a DX on a FX body work when used right.


----------



## xev11

I'm looking for some advice. I've got a D90 and 18-200 II. It's extremely handy since it doesn't require me switching. Im thinking of getting something else for a trip to Spain. Considering the magic 35 for $200. Dont really have a big budget; just a few hundred. I'm definitely still in the beginner class, even though i've had the camera for a few years.


----------



## Patriot

The 35mm is a great lens to have. you can see the quality by the pictures of the chairs above.


----------



## wahhshoang

#001 - TickleMyElmo
#002 - SkyGrl
#003 - jahmic
#004 - scream-aim-fire
#005 - Moody636
#006 -Assassynation
#007 - Da Plant Man
#008 - zainey_04
#009 - AzFishKid
#010 - msjinkzd
#011 - manini
#012 - Nubster
#013 - bsmith
#014 - Minja
#015 - jeepn4x4
#016 - lonnie123
#017 - nvladik
#018 - AesopRocks247
#019 - IWANNAGOFAST
#020 - audioaficionado
#021 - Ibn
#022 - smg980
#023 - orchidman
#024 - williamsonaaron
#025 - Basil
#026 - fusiongt
#027 - alfalfa
#028 - flwrbed
#029 - H82LOS3
#030 - Green Thumb Aquatics
#031 - crowconor
#032 - Joeangel
#033 - vasteq
#034 - Chlorophile
#035 - Patriot100%
#036 - Fornstar
#037 - Dan Knowlton
#038 - Jacob928
#039 - AquaStudent
#040 - Miles03
#041 - xev11
#042 - pandjpudge
#043 - Budget Aquarist
#044 - BetterWetter
#045 - Regenesis
#046 - discuscraze
#047 - WATduh
#048 - indigo
#049 - teah
#050 - mcqueenesq
#051 - smithron
#052 - youjettisonme
#053 - stewardwildcat
#054 - trit0n2003
*#055 - wahhshoang*
#056 -
#057 -
#058 -
#059 - 
#060 -


I think i would be 55??

I got a D7000 ;] currently with 35mm f/1.8 and SB-600.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

wahhshoang said:


> I think i would be 55??
> 
> I got a D7000 ;] currently with 35mm f/1.8 and SB-600.


Sure would! You've been officially added! Welcome, nice setup!


----------



## teah

D700 and vivitar series 1 28mm f1.9

Vivitar 28mm f1.9 by Tea.H, on Flickr


----------



## Patriot

Japanese Spider Crab eating off the walls at the Coex Aquarium Seoul South Korea. I found it hard to photography in the low light without the proper lens but I made it work. This is one of my favorite pictures.


----------



## teah

pump for Nikon. 

The only lens I have AFS 35 f1.8G

Hey mister, I'm bored by Tea.H, on Flickr


----------



## TickleMyElmo

Nice bokeh teah!

Some recents shots to bump the thread...

-Must be Spring.




-Is that teh Humanz?!....Hideee!....Ehhh, whats up doc'?


----------



## teah

I'm not a fan of self portrait 

But the last 4 photos definitely awesome. Love the 2nd one most. Beautiful photos!


----------



## acitydweller

I'll join. Nikon d50 here...

Non functional flash though


----------



## cradleoffilthfan

Me too! Nikon D90 here. Saving up for my 50mm f/1.4!


----------



## acitydweller

I have a AF-S NIKKOR 18-55 lense. Hoping someone can recommend a better cost effective lense for macro photography. Just looking to really photograph the beautiful shrimp and fish in my tank. Thanks.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

acitydweller said:


> I'll join. Nikon d50 here...
> 
> Non functional flash though


Cool, you'll be #056!



teah said:


> I'm not a fan of self portrait
> 
> But the last 4 photos definitely awesome. Love the 2nd one most. Beautiful photos!


Thanks! I like the plant picture too 



cradleoffilthfan said:


> Me too! Nikon D90 here. Saving up for my 50mm f/1.4!


Sure! You're #057


----------



## OrangeSoda

I'll take #58. I've got a D60 with a 18-55 stock lens. I also have a 55-200 lens that I picked up.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

OrangeSoda said:


> I'll take #58. I've got a D60 with a 18-55 stock lens. I also have a 55-200 lens that I picked up.


Cool, you've been added!


----------



## TickleMyElmo

So I had a wedding and an engagement session over the weekend, and I can't express just how awesome both were, and how awesome the shots I got are  I'll have to post some when I'm done editing


----------



## teah

D700 and 35f1.8 again. Raining flea market in Saigon 

Sai Gon Flea Market by Tea.H, on Flickr


----------



## .shawnD.

Can I get in on this 

Nikon D7000 and D3000 
35mm 1.8
10-20 Wide
Sigma 70-200 2.8

www.shawndallas.com


----------



## TickleMyElmo

.shawnD. said:


> Can I get in on this
> 
> Nikon D7000 and D3000
> 35mm 1.8
> 10-20 Wide
> Sigma 70-200 2.8
> 
> www.shawndallas.com


Sorry, I was on vacation! You're #059, congrats and welcome! Nice gear setup you got there roud:


----------



## kubalik

ok I just sold my canon T1i + all glass and got myself used d700 with 50 1.8G , so time to join Nikon club , still have the canon s100 as packet camera tho .
Thx


----------



## TickleMyElmo

kubalik said:


> ok I just sold my canon T1i + all glass and got myself used d700 with 50 1.8G , so time to join Nikon club , still have the canon s100 as packet camera tho .
> Thx


Smart man  Welcome! The grass is greener on the Nikon side, lol! You'll be #060!


----------



## AquaStudent

This isn't Nikon relate per-say but I would appreciate all of your input on my new project

http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/photography/179688-diy-underwater-camera-housing.html


----------



## kezg

Im nikon too:

just a D5100 with a few lens' and bits n pieces


----------



## CryptKeeper54

Can I get a number? I have a D5100.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

Whoops, forgot to add you guys!



kezg said:


> Im nikon too:
> 
> just a D5100 with a few lens' and bits n pieces


Sweet, you can be #061!



CryptKeeper54 said:


> Can I get a number? I have a D5100.


Sure can! You're #062!


----------



## KenRC51

Can I be #063? I got a D7000, 24-70 2.8, 70-200VR1 2.8, 50 1.4g, sb-900.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

KenRC51 said:


> Can I be #063? I got a D7000, 24-70 2.8, 70-200VR1 2.8, 50 1.4g, sb-900.


Sure, welcome to the club! #063!


----------



## Lagarb

I'll jump in here! I've got a D90 and a gimpy 18-55 5-5.6 nonVR works well though!


----------



## LipzyDaizy

My boyfriend got me a D5000 about 3 years ago that I still haven't really learned to use but I'm trying to learn. I even got the Nikon D5000 for Dummies book! lol. Can I still join?


----------



## TickleMyElmo

Lagarb said:


> I'll jump in here! I've got a D90 and a gimpy 18-55 5-5.6 nonVR works well though!


Cool, you're #064!



LipzyDaizy said:


> My boyfriend got me a D5000 about 3 years ago that I still haven't really learned to use but I'm trying to learn. I even got the Nikon D5000 for Dummies book! lol. Can I still join?


Of course you can! You're #065!


----------



## antiquefloorman

Hey guys,
I am trying to buy a camera. I can get a nice d5100 refurbished from Nikon. What do the camera gurus say??


----------



## audioaficionado

The Nikon D5100 is an excellent camera.


----------



## reefdive

Hello I never joined a club before but have always had a Nikon around or for a while a fuji pro but I won't speak of that . So can I join in the fun ? Is there a club house and secret hand shake ?  Always wanted that but closest I got was a treehouse in the backyard . I have a D90 got it used with 2300 clicks not to bad and I have a ton of accesories from my other incarnations of Nikons I have had . Just got the 105 the old one with the sharper optics but weird sound's and I kept a 28 to 300 aspherical . Both work well for pictures I am pulling together my studio lighting hopefully I can take a good picture someday .


----------



## reefdive

Oh poop Can we skip 66 I like #67 much better . I already have people calling me name's 66 might be fuel for the fire . It is funny but I am serious , about not wanting #66 I mean . Yeah I know i am being a pill I will take it if I have to


----------



## TickleMyElmo

reefdive said:


> Oh poop Can we skip 66 I like #67 much better . I already have people calling me name's 66 might be fuel for the fire . It is funny but I am serious , about not wanting #66 I mean . Yeah I know i am being a pill I will take it if I have to


LOL sure, you can be #067! Welcome!


----------



## reefdive

Thanks Elmo


----------



## honda237

Just bought a D5100, what are some good starting points? Sorry if its been asked, I can't search very well on my phone.


----------



## audioaficionado

This guy knows his way around cameras and photography.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d5100.htm


----------



## TickleMyElmo

audioaficionado said:


> This guy knows his way around cameras *and photography.*
> http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d5100.htm


That is very, VERY debatable :hihi:

All technical knowledge and fluff, the guy can't take a good picture to save his life...


----------



## audioaficionado

Another opinion :shrug:

I guess it's all in the eye of the beholder.

dpreviews is also a great place to look up info on cameras and lenses.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond5100/


----------



## zdnet

TickleMyElmo said:


> That is very, VERY debatable
> 
> All technical knowledge and fluff, the guy can't take a good picture to save his life...





audioaficionado said:


> Another opinion :shrug:
> 
> I guess it's all in the eye of the beholder.


Here are three reviews on the very same lens - "Nikon AF-S DX Micro-Nikkor 85mm f/3.5G ED VR":

Ken Rockwell

Photo Zone

Photography Blog


----------



## amygirl11

Can I be #66? I have a D5000 with the 85mm micro. I just brought my camera back out and started "playing" with it again.Took this one yesterday.


----------



## Jubs

I have an old D40x lol


----------



## amygirl11

I have a friend that had the D40x until she broke it. Ended up upgrading to the D90. She wanted her D40x back....LOL She got amazing macros with it with just a 55-200 lens. The D40x is a great camera.


----------



## ryc120

Can I join? 
Sorry no fish or shrimp pics with my Nikon D60 just yet... 

Ruby Throat Hummingbird









American Goldfinch









Taken with a Nikon D60 55-300mm Zoom lens


----------



## AquaStudent

Amy that shrimp picture is awesome!
Ryc I love the hummingbird! the blurr in the wings is epic!


----------



## agimlin

i wanna join lol, my wife and i have a nikon d40. i will post some pics my wife took of my bolivian ram some day


----------



## TickleMyElmo

honda237 said:


> Just bought a D5100, what are some good starting points? Sorry if its been asked, I can't search very well on my phone.


Great! You can be #068!



amygirl11 said:


> Can I be #66? I have a D5000 with the 85mm micro. I just brought my camera back out and started "playing" with it again.Took this one yesterday.


Sure, welcome aboard #066!




Jubs said:


> I have an old D40x lol


Sweet! You can be #069!




ryc120 said:


> Can I join?
> Sorry no fish or shrimp pics with my Nikon D60 just yet...
> 
> Ruby Throat Hummingbird
> 
> 
> American Goldfinch
> ]
> 
> Taken with a Nikon D60 55-300mm Zoom lens


Surely! You can be #070!



agimlin said:


> i wanna join lol, my wife and i have a nikon d40. i will post some pics my wife took of my bolivian ram some day


Sweet, the d40 is a classic! You can be #071!


Man, we have so many more members than that piddly Canon club :biggrin: And they say Canon has the largest market share...apparently not so true on TPT! lol...


----------



## honda237

Awesome will add that to my signature when I get on my laptop. 
What's a good macro lens for the d5100? I want to shoot close pictures of my shrimp, and only want to spend $300-$400 if possible. 
Thanks


----------



## TickleMyElmo

honda237 said:


> Awesome will add that to my signature when I get on my laptop.
> What's a good macro lens for the d5100? I want to shoot close pictures of my shrimp, and only want to spend $300-$400 if possible.
> Thanks


No such thing in that price range. There is the 60mm macro, and the 85mm macro, but with the 60mm the subject needs to be within an inch or two of the front element, and the 85mm has sloppy optics (not the best quality) and the subject has to be 5.5 inches from the front element for macro magnification. The only acceptable choice for any decent sized aquarium would be the 105mm 2.8 Macro which gives you about 12.5 inches of space from the front element to the subject, but thats $900.

Plus, frankly, even with the lens, you'd still need a speedlite/flash mounted off camera to get even semi-decent results, which would be another $80-350 minimum for the flash, plus you'd need a remote trigger for the flash...

Simply put, you need a much larger budget to really get into macro photography. One does not simply walk into Mordor with $400 and expect to get great macro shots lol...

Of course, thats for actually semi-decent macro shots. I know one of you is going to post a picture taken with their macro lens and you're going to be all "NO Elmo not true see I took this awesomE!!1! macro shot with my macro lens see" and its going to be some picture that I would consider absolutely horrible. But hey, some people think a fuzzy underexposed picture of a blurry shrimp is awesome because they wouldn't know enough to know the difference between their shot and an actual good one, so it really depends on your standards...


----------



## honda237

TickleMyElmo said:


> No such thing in that price range. There is the 60mm macro, and the 85mm macro, but with the 60mm the subject needs to be within an inch or two of the front element, and the 85mm has sloppy optics (not the best quality) and the subject has to be 5.5 inches from the front element for macro magnification. The only acceptable choice for any decent sized aquarium would be the 105mm 2.8 Macro which gives you about 12.5 inches of space from the front element to the subject, but thats $900.
> 
> Plus, frankly, even with the lens, you'd still need a speedlite/flash mounted off camera to get even semi-decent results, which would be another $80-350 minimum for the flash, plus you'd need a remote trigger for the flash...
> 
> Simply put, you need a much larger budget to really get into macro photography. One does not simply walk into Mordor with $400 and expect to get great macro shots lol...
> 
> Of course, thats for actually semi-decent macro shots. I know one of you is going to post a picture taken with their macro lens and you're going to be all "NO Elmo not true see I took this awesomE!!1! macro shot with my macro lens see" and its going to be some picture that I would consider absolutely horrible. But hey, some people think a fuzzy underexposed picture of a blurry shrimp is awesome because they wouldn't know enough to know the difference between their shot and an actual good one, so it really depends on your standards...


Awesome, that's actually the type of response I was looking for. I would really love to be able to take excellent macro, so I guess I will have to save up. 
On another note, what's a good lens for farther distance for action shots? I'm not talking super far, but possibly double to triple the zoom capability of the stock lens. Nothing professional grade, just an active hobbyist grade shot, I would really love to get in to photography, I might take a class this fall.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

honda237 said:


> Awesome, that's actually the type of response I was looking for. I would really love to be able to take excellent macro, so I guess I will have to save up.
> On another note, what's a good lens for farther distance for action shots? I'm not talking super far, but possibly double to triple the zoom capability of the stock lens. Nothing professional grade, just an active hobbyist grade shot, I would really love to get in to photography, I might take a class this fall.


You could look into the Nikon 55-300, although its relatively new and I can't vouch for image quality. I've heard nothing but good things about the Nikon 70-300, its an FX lens but that just means it'll be even better on your DX camera since you'll only be using the center "prime spot" of the lens...

Feel free to take a class, but you can learn just as much just from reading and watching videos on the internet. Some people learn better in a classroom environment though, so by all means take a class if that's your learning style. But be forewarned, a lot of classes are really just crappy and you don't end up learning much that you couldn't read on the internet. Personally I never got a formal education in photography, and I'm doing just fine lol...


----------



## ryc120

The pictures of the two birds in my post above were taken with a 55-300mm Nikon. I absolutely love the lens for the price. I got it refurbished on Amazon.


----------



## amygirl11

I'm sorry. I didn"t know you wanted shots of what a 85mm can do. Sorry I have to direct you to my expired flickr account but my darling children left my external drive at school with my photo's on it.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/5981847163/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/5946290470/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/5915520770/

Here's one with my 70-300.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/5869594575/

Now I really don't expect anybody to tell me my photography is awesome!!! I am a middle of the road photographer, with middle of the road equipment, and middle of the road skills. As far as macro lens goes, I personally don't think the 85 is all that bad if thats all you can afford. I totally agree that the 60mm you would have to be to close to your subject. Just remember that Nikon lenses don't deppreciate all that much. One can always sell it and use those funds to upgrade when the better glass is more affordale to you. I may never be able to afford the 105 and I really don't care. I have fun with my 85 and that is all that matters to me. My photography is for my enjoyment. I would like to thank you for informing me that my camera and equipment will never take a decent shrimp shot. I'll quit trying.


----------



## amygirl11

BTW, I forgot to add that all of the above shots were hand held. I hate tripods!!!


----------



## TickleMyElmo

First of all, lets address your PM to me...



amygirl11 said:


> Thank you for publicly embarrissing me It was greatly appreciated.


I don't know where you got the idea I was trying to or did "publicly embarrass" you...at no point did I make mention of any shots you posted or name you in my post. In fact, my post specifically said "one of you is going to post a picture" as in the future tense, as in someone _will_ post an image. That would rule you out since you had already posted that shot a while ago, so I really don't understand where you could infer I was speaking about you. You're certainly not the only person to have posted a macro shrimp shot you know...



amygirl11 said:


> I'm sorry. I didn"t know you wanted shots of what a 85mm can do. Sorry I have to direct you to my expired flickr account but my darling children left my external drive at school with my photo's on it.
> 
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/5981847163/
> 
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/5946290470/
> 
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/5915520770/
> 
> Here's one with my 70-300.
> 
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/5869594575/
> 
> Now I really don't expect anybody to tell me my photography is awesome!!! I am a middle of the road photographer, with middle of the road equipment, and middle of the road skills. As far as macro lens goes, I personally don't think the 85 is all that bad if thats all you can afford. I totally agree that the 60mm you would have to be to close to your subject. Just remember that Nikon lenses don't deppreciate all that much. One can always sell it and use those funds to upgrade when the better glass is more affordale to you. I may never be able to afford the 105 and I really don't care. I have fun with my 85 and that is all that matters to me. My photography is for my enjoyment. I would like to thank you for informing me that my camera and equipment will never take a decent shrimp shot. I'll quit trying.


First of all, again, I was not personally talking about you or _your_ 85mm macro. It's a well known fact and documented in various reviews that the optics of the Nikon Micro 85mm are lackluster compared to the other micro Nikon lenses. I was simply stating a fact observed in many reviews. Can you still take great pictures with a Nikon 85mm Micro,...absolutely! Would I recommend one knowing what I've read in multiple credible reviews, no, I would not, so I didn't recommend one to him. Those are all nice shots you linked to in Flickr, but they're also all shots in daylight or close to it, which is vastly different to that of aquariums. Without a speedlite mounted off camera, its impossible to get the quality of light and the depth of field required to get pictures like Speedie or myself get, simply due to the fact that aquariums are dark and hard to light in the eyes of a camera sensor. 

The problem here is that often times someone new to photography will post asking for recommendations for a macro lens so they can get all the cool shots like Speedie gets, and everyone jumps to recommend a random macro lens like the 60mm or 85mm but never follow up with the fact that Speedie and myself use speedlights to get the results we do. The danger with that is the new photographer then goes and blows $300-600 on a unsuited macro lens, only to be disappointed with the results and now they're stuck with something they can't use to the full potential or at all with even decent results depending on the lighting and size of their aquarium. 

If the poster wants really excellent macro shots, then he'll need the equipment I mentioned. Once he has that, then it has nothing to do with equipment, and everything to do with himself. He asked, so it was my job to tell him exactly what he needed without any sugar coating if he wanted truly awesome macro shots. 

If the person asking me wants excellence and amazing shots, I'll gladly tell them exactly what they need to buy, and how much it will cost. I refuse to sit here and beat around the bush or coddle someone, saying "Oh yes, all you need is $300, don't worry, you'll be taking amazing macro shots in no time with the best of them" when I know it simply isn't true. DSLR photography and especially macro photography is expensive, there's no way around it. $300 isn't realistic for what most people here want to achieve, but because of the flood of people only recommending "get a macro lens!", they are led down a false road of hope, only to be disappointed later when they don't look like Speedie's pictures. I'm not here to set people up for mediocrity, if they ask me, I will tell them whats required for _excellence._


----------



## viwwo

I want to be in! 
I got a D5000 and the 55-300mm Zoom lens and I love it!
















































Sorry I just had to spam you all.

I need to find a good macro.


----------



## teonguyen

I want to join the club too.lol im so jealous with all the great pics you guys have taken. I m thinking about getting D3100 18-55 and 55-200mm..What do you guys think ? Please advise this noob..I want to share my aquarium's pics......


----------



## amygirl11

MY APOLOGIES ELMO!!!! I reread the post and seen that he wanted a macro lens for shrimp. I do sincerly apologize. I was cross referencing another post with someone that wanted to learn macro. A whole different story. I also did think your statement, "fuzzy underexposed picture of a blurry shrimp" was directed at me because THAT is my picture....LOL, and yes I do know it. Now if I may ask your expert advice. Knowing full well that I will not get the high quality shots that you and Speedie get, is there any way to improve my shrimp shots with the gear I have? I do have a SB600 with a softbox attachment and a really cheapo umbrella set. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Here's one that I took this morning. Sorry to hurt your eyes...LOL


----------



## amygirl11

BTW, all my flickr shots were taken outdoors. I am in the process now of working on the lighting aspect of photography.


----------



## honda237

TickleMyElmo said:


> You could look into the Nikon 55-300, although its relatively new and I can't vouch for image quality. I've heard nothing but good things about the Nikon 70-300, its an FX lens but that just means it'll be even better on your DX camera since you'll only be using the center "prime spot" of the lens...
> 
> Feel free to take a class, but you can learn just as much just from reading and watching videos on the internet. Some people learn better in a classroom environment though, so by all means take a class if that's your learning style. But be forewarned, a lot of classes are really just crappy and you don't end up learning much that you couldn't read on the internet. Personally I never got a formal education in photography, and I'm doing just fine lol...


I was looking up some reviews, and it appears that the 70-300 is still better than the 55-300, and the 70-300 has a better build quality, so i will probably get one of those also. 
Well I guess i will just research online, thats a lot cheaper than a class.
Thanks for your help.


----------



## audioaficionado

You might also consider how heavy of a lens you want hanging around your neck all day for that extra bit of telephoto reach you most likely won't use often.


----------



## atomicjade

Count me in! I have a D3100, woohoo!

I just have the base lens but it works just fine for me, not to say I'm not wanting a macro and telephoto sometime...


----------



## TickleMyElmo

Sorry everybody, I've been busy working on a photoshoot over the weekend and I'm just having time now to catch up on this thread :icon_lol: Check out my website if you want to see a awesometacular preview picture of my latest photoshoot! Anyways...




viwwo said:


> I want to be in!
> I got a D5000 and the 55-300mm Zoom lens and I love it!
> 
> 
> Sorry I just had to spam you all.
> 
> I need to find a good macro.


Welcome aboard #072!



teonguyen said:


> I want to join the club too.lol im so jealous with all the great pics you guys have taken. I m thinking about getting D3100 18-55 and 55-200mm..What do you guys think ? Please advise this noob..I want to share my aquarium's pics......


Sure, you can be #073, welcome fellow Nikon appreciater! A D3100 is a perfectly fine camera!



amygirl11 said:


> MY APOLOGIES ELMO!!!! I reread the post and seen that he wanted a macro lens for shrimp. I do sincerly apologize. I was cross referencing another post with someone that wanted to learn macro. A whole different story. I also did think your statement, "fuzzy underexposed picture of a blurry shrimp" was directed at me because THAT is my picture....LOL, and yes I do know it. Now if I may ask your expert advice. Knowing full well that I will not get the high quality shots that you and Speedie get, is there any way to improve my shrimp shots with the gear I have? I do have a SB600 with a softbox attachment and a really cheapo umbrella set. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Here's one that I took this morning. Sorry to hurt your eyes...LOL


No worries! roud: You're pictures isn't underexposed or blurry, the lighting is just a little off thats all! 

The good news is, you pretty much already have everything you need to get pictures like Speedie and I do. Take that SB600 and put it on top of the tank pointing down into the water, preferably pointing at the subject/shrimp you're taking a picture of. I used to just duct tape the flash to the light, but that requires caution or you could end up losing your flash if it falls into the aquarium. I now use egg crate lighting diffuser that can be found at any home improvement store to put over the tank/light, to act as a safety net of sorts. 

You're using a D5000 which doesn't have a commander mode built in, so you'll need a set of radio triggers to fire the flash when its off the camera. Luckily, the cowboy studio triggers are both dirt cheap and very reliable...

http://www.amazon.com/CowboyStudio-NPT-04-Channel-Wireless-Receiver/dp/B002W3IXZW

Just mount the flash above the tank pointing down like mentioned before. Your shutter speed should be anywhere from 1/200 to 1/320, the faster the better and 1/250 is usually the best and your aperture should be set to f/8 or above. Then set ISO to the base level (usually ISO 200 or 100, the one right before it goes to LO1) Then all you have to do is dial the flash up or down in power levels until it looks right. The radio triggers I posted only allow manual flash power settings, but thats better anyways because its more consistent. The flashy powers on the SB600 range from 1/1 (full power) to 1/64 (the lowest power available on the SB600). The amount of power you'll need will vary by your aquarium size and f/stop, so just go up and down until it looks good. Thats it! No umbrellas or soft boxes needed. 



honda237 said:


> I was looking up some reviews, and it appears that the 70-300 is still better than the 55-300, and the 70-300 has a better build quality, so i will probably get one of those also.
> Well I guess i will just research online, thats a lot cheaper than a class.
> Thanks for your help.


Yeah I've always heard the 70-300 is a great bang for the buck lens.



atomicjade said:


> Count me in! I have a D3100, woohoo!
> 
> I just have the base lens but it works just fine for me, not to say I'm not wanting a macro and telephoto sometime...


Awesome, you can be #074!


----------



## amygirl11

Thanks Elmo! It's at the top of my Christmas list. It will give me something to do when cabin fever sets in. I highly doubt I will achieve photo's as good as yours and Speedie's, but it will be fun trying. Thanks for your vote of confidence.


----------



## AquaStudent

I have a question for you all. I'm trying to get into more astrophotography and night shots. Last night I tried my hand at light painting (too bad it was cloudy) just to see how that worked. Right now I don't have a shutter control switch so I can't really utialize the bulb setting. What product would you guys suggest for a D5000?

I was searching around Amazon and most of them worry me. The product reviews I've seen haven't mentioned D5000s and some claim that it works for the D3100 (for example) then others claim it doesn't work for a D3100 (on the same product). So I don't know what to believe.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

AquaStudent said:


> I have a question for you all. I'm trying to get into more astrophotography and night shots. Last night I tried my hand at light painting (too bad it was cloudy) just to see how that worked. Right now I don't have a shutter control switch so I can't really utialize the bulb setting. What product would you guys suggest for a D5000?
> 
> I was searching around Amazon and most of them worry me. The product reviews I've seen haven't mentioned D5000s and some claim that it works for the D3100 (for example) then others claim it doesn't work for a D3100 (on the same product). So I don't know what to believe.


Doesn't the standard little Nikon remote work with the D5000? It official and its cheap enough...

http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-ML-L3-Wireless-Remote-Control/dp/B00007EDZG

You can get cheap knockoff copies of the same remote on a certain bay site for a few bucks too if you'd rather go that route...


----------



## AquaStudent

I don't see NikonD5000 on the list of compatible cameras.

What is "MC-DC2" vs. "ML-L3". Could those be different internal image sensing structures? Because if that's true then the wireless remote you posted I don't think would work...but then again I have yet to find the location where there would be a hardwire connection for a shutter release into my D5000 :/

The observatory I'm running has a couple Pentax cameras that have the wired shutter control accessories. I was hoping for something like that but not sure if that's a possible accessory for the D5000


----------



## amygirl11

The ML-L3 will work. The problem that I encountered with it is that the only sensor for it is at the front of the camera. It wasn't what I wanted for the type of photography I was trying to do. One of the problems with an entry level DSLR is that it limits you on certain funtions. As Elmo pointed out, it doesn't have a commander mode, nor does it have a hardwire connection. At least from what I can remember when I researched it. It's a real pain getting old...LOL That's why pro's use pro's camera's. Sometimes it's the little things in life that matters.


----------



## Kunsthure

Kunsthure claims Pimp #075. D5000 shooting mainly with a Tamron 90mm f/2.8 macro lens. 

-Lisa


----------



## AquaStudent

At least one of the reviews claim it works for the D5000 camera. The image sensor in the front of the camera is going to be a bit undesirable for me but there's no way around it.

It is the little things that make a huge difference.

I'm presuiming the camera using an IR sensor to detect it. I think I saw in the menu where to set it to look for that. Thanks Elmo and Amy for the help.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

AquaStudent said:


> At least one of the reviews claim it works for the D5000 camera. The image sensor in the front of the camera is going to be a bit undesirable for me but there's no way around it.
> 
> It is the little things that make a huge difference.
> 
> I'm presuiming the camera using an IR sensor to detect it. I think I saw in the menu where to set it to look for that. Thanks Elmo and Amy for the help.


Yep its on the front, and its listed as compatible with the D5000 on the official Nikon site, so I'd say you're good.


----------



## Crispino L Ramos

zainey_04 said:


> If I counted correctly I would be a Nikon pimp 007. I have a Nikon D5000 We should also post one or more of our best shots. These are uploaded from my cell so there not at full resolution. I'll upload the originals when I get home from work. - Zain


Those are awesome photos, thanks for posting.


----------



## Pen3

Just got myself an almost new Tokina 100mm AT-X Pro f/2.8 for $370 shipped with box and all accessories including warranty paper and receipt.


----------



## haoly123

*Me and the D5100 with a 35mm would love a spot *


----------



## zdnet

TickleMyElmo said:


> No such thing in that price range. There is the 60mm macro, and the 85mm macro, but with the 60mm the subject needs to be within an inch or two of the front element, and the 85mm has sloppy optics (not the best quality) and the subject has to be 5.5 inches from the front element for macro magnification. The only acceptable choice for any decent sized aquarium would be the 105mm 2.8 Macro which gives you about 12.5 inches of space from the front element to the subject, but thats $900.


ISTM there is a mix up here. The 12.5 inches mentioned for the 105mm is the lens' minimum focus distance which measures from the camera's focal plane mark to the object. Therefore, *you do not get 12.5 inches between the lens' front element and the object.*

In fact, the minimum focus distance (and the distance between the front element and object) for the 85mm and the 105mm differ by only one inch. Here are the minimum focus distance numbers from Nikon:

* For AF-S Micro Nikkor 60mm f/2.8G ED, it is 7.3 in.

* For AF-S DX Micro Nikkor 85mm f/3.5G ED VR, it is 11.3 in.

* For AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED, it is 12.4 in.

BTW, the previous generation of the Nikon 105mm micro is only half the price of the current generation.

Also, the previous generation has much lower chromatic aberrations (CA):

* Previous generation: Micro-Nikkor AF 105mm f/2.8 D









* Current generation: AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED










And if you go for the 85mm, its CA is even much lower:

* AF-S DX Micro Nikkor 85mm f/3.5G ED VR









Yes, the 85mm lens does not provide the best optical quality for all around shooting. The lens is not as bright (which makes focusing a bit tough) and its SWM (Silent Wave Motor) mechanism is a bit slow.

But for getting sharp macro with decent depth of field (which requires stopping down the lens), the 85mm is the best of all three Nikon micros (60mm, 85mm, 105mm). It blows the current generation of 105mm out of the water. 

Of course, you have to get closer to the object by one inch. In return, you get a much sharper macro with plenty of depth of field (assuming you have a capable flash like the Nikon SB-900).


----------



## TickleMyElmo

zdnet said:


> Test charts and such


Yeah, that's great, but thats because the 85 is a DX lens, so the crop factor is built into the MFD. I'm using a full frame camera, so the 85 is rather useless to me. I can't speak for crop cameras, and they're not the 35mm standard, so I don't include them in my postings.

And yes, you can save a bunch of money on the older 105mm macro, but you need a camera with the screw drive autofocus motor built in, which frankly, not a lot of people have. Lots of D3100s and D5100s on here.


----------



## zdnet

TickleMyElmo said:


> Yeah, that's great, but thats because the 85 is a DX lens, so the crop factor is built into the MFD. I'm using a full frame camera, so the 85 is rather useless to me. I can't speak for crop cameras, and they're not the 35mm standard, so I don't include them in my postings.
> 
> And yes, you can save a bunch of money on the older 105mm macro, but you need a camera with the screw drive autofocus motor built in, which frankly, not a lot of people have. Lots of D3100s and D5100s on here.


Your postings actually recommended against the 85mm. Since most of the DSLR users are using crop cameras including the D3100 and D5100, the 85mm is a bargain for them.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

zdnet said:


> Your postings actually recommended against the 85mm. Since most of the DSLR users are using crop cameras including the D3100 and D5100, the 85mm is a bargain for them.


Yeah, but don't forget, the 105 is an FX lens, so when you use it on a DX body you get the crop factor, so it creates even more working distance than when used on an FX body, so the 105 is still the better lens.


----------



## zdnet

TickleMyElmo said:


> Yeah, but don't forget, the 105 is an FX lens, so when you use it on a DX body you get the crop factor, so it creates even more working distance than when used on an FX body, so the 105 is still the better lens.


Ha, ha... I wish you were right. But the working distance to achieve a 1:1 macro magnification is the same even though you are using an FX lens on a DX body. 

If you were right, applying an FX macro lens on a DX body would have given more than 1:1 magnification. But did you see Nikon making that claim? Or do you think Nikon's marketing department is asleep. :wink:


----------



## TickleMyElmo

Oh really? I didn't think it would affect the magnification ratio, just the working distance. Guess I'm wrong, oh well!


----------



## zdnet

TickleMyElmo said:


> Oh really? I didn't think it would affect the magnification ratio, just the working distance.


The lenses mentioned here were not designed to behave in that way.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

Kunsthure said:


> Kunsthure claims Pimp #075. D5000 shooting mainly with a Tamron 90mm f/2.8 macro lens.
> 
> -Lisa


Added, as #075. Welcome!



haoly123 said:


> pic


Sure, you can be #076! Welcome, and nice pic!


----------



## Fuze

Nikon Pimp 077 here.

D70. Never got Canons really...Nikon all the way!


----------



## discusonly

Count me in. I've had mine D90 for a few years now but ever use it much except for kids activities with the stock 18-105 lens. I am just slowly getting my feet into macro photography so I just picked up a used Sigma 105mm 2.8 to start playing


----------



## msjinkzd

I have been shooting my macro with a Tokina macro 100mm f 2.8- so far I really like it (especially for the price tag).


----------



## herns

What is the cheapest Nikon DSLR to buy that has good reviews?


----------



## audioaficionado

D5100

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d5100.htm

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond5100/


----------



## AquaStudent

I was practicing with my D5000 (and stock 18-55mm lens) earlier and caught these photos. Suggestions on how to improve would be greatly appreciated.

I used manual mode with manual focus. Aperture of 5 (I believe) and exposure between 1/25 and 1/40 of a second. I touched up the images in GIMP by playing with the brightness/contrast slightly and a very little bit with Red/Cyan and Yellow/Blue color balance.

My Dad's oscar was looking pretty photogenic. The oscar is about 8 inches small and has been with us for about 6 months.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

I was feeling particular fine-art-y today, so I went out and tried for an abstract style landscape at a particular location I had in mind. 

I know it's not actually abstract art, but I just had to satisfy the random urge I had to make some interpretive art. I feel like it does my creative side good to do this type of expression every once in a while. Sorry, I can't help it! lol...For the record, every element of this photo was included or placed on purpose, including shadows and light.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

Fuze said:


> Nikon Pimp 077 here.
> 
> D70. Never got Canons really...Nikon all the way!


Woot woot! Added as #077!



discusonly said:


> Count me in. I've had mine D90 for a few years now but ever use it much except for kids activities with the stock 18-105 lens. I am just slowly getting my feet into macro photography so I just picked up a used Sigma 105mm 2.8 to start playing


Cool, you can be #078! Enjoy the lens!



AquaStudent said:


> I was practicing with my D5000 (and stock 18-55mm lens) earlier and caught these photos. Suggestions on how to improve would be greatly appreciated.
> 
> I used manual mode with manual focus. Aperture of 5 (I believe) and exposure between 1/25 and 1/40 of a second. I touched up the images in GIMP by playing with the brightness/contrast slightly and a very little bit with Red/Cyan and Yellow/Blue color balance.
> 
> My Dad's oscar was looking pretty photogenic. The oscar is about 8 inches small and has been with us for about 6 months.


Not bad at all, especially considering the (lack of) available light! I really like the bubbles shot.


----------



## Patriot

I finally got the SB-910 speedlight. I can't wait to use it to it's fullest.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

Patriot100% said:


> I finally got the SB-910 speedlight. I can't wait to use it to it's fullest.


You have unlocked something that gives you more possibilities than you can imagine


----------



## zdnet

TickleMyElmo said:


> You have unlocked something that gives you more possibilities than you can imagine


Exposure is about lighting. Therefore, having a powerful speedlight makes taking good picture much easier, especially through Nikon's CLS.


----------



## AquaStudent

I accidently posted this in Elmo's epic journal thread instead of here a couple of weeks back. Sorry about that Elmo :/

Begin old post:
I spent all last night at the observatory taking photos of the Andromeda Galaxy for the mosaic I'm working on. I also had the opportunity to try out some light painting and general star shots.

In the photos you can see the band of the Milky Way. In a few there are some guest satellites and the Andromeda Galaxy.

All of these are 30 second exposures (I'm working on getting a remote shutter control so I can utilize the bulb setting).



















Images were taken on the morning of July 25, 2012 at the Stull Observatory, Alfred University, Alfred, NY


----------



## Pen3

I just ordered a used D700 for $1300 and can't wait to get some photos. Current FX lens i have is a 50mm 1.4, 70-300mm, and Tokina 100mm. I plan on buying the 24-120 f4 and if i have the money a 70-200 2.8. I will have to sell my D90 and all the FX lens soon.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

Pen3 said:


> I just ordered a used D700 for $1300 and can't wait to get some photos. Current FX lens i have is a 50mm 1.4, 70-300mm, and Tokina 100mm. I plan on buying the 24-120 f4 and if i have the money a 70-200 2.8. I will have to sell my D90 and all the FX lens soon.


Great camera, great price! Now all you have to limit yourself is....yourself! (and maybe a few lenses )

P.S. Does this mean you want to join? :red_mouth


----------



## IWANNAGOFAST

I'm thinking of upgrading my d3100 to a nicer model. i was thinking d7000 or d5100. Does anyone have the d7000? What are your thoughts?


----------



## audioaficionado

D7000 is APS-C/DX like the D3100/3200 or D5100. It's its more pro like and has dropped in price recently. All these cameras will produce equal IQ. It's a matter of how you plan on using it.


----------



## zdnet

IWANNAGOFAST said:


> I'm thinking of upgrading my d3100 to a nicer model. i was thinking d7000 or d5100. Does anyone have the d7000? What are your thoughts?


You may want to take a look at the following comparisons:


D7000 vs D5100
D3100 vs D5100
D3100 vs D7000


----------



## Patriot

Does anyone here have a 70-200mm 2.8 vrII lens? I'm saving for one but can't decide sigma or Nikon. I hear that if some has the extra money then Nikon is better. I have a D7K and plan on using it for sports and such. I also hear that the sigma is great but not as fast as the Nikon. What are your thoughts on the lens?


----------



## TickleMyElmo

Patriot said:


> Does anyone here have a 70-200mm 2.8 vrII lens? I'm saving for one but can't decide sigma or Nikon. I hear that if some has the extra money then Nikon is better. I have a D7K and plan on using it for sports and such. I also hear that the sigma is great but not as fast as the Nikon. What are your thoughts on the lens?


I have one, and I would NEVER sell it. I'm really more of a prime guy, but the 70-200 VRII is a lens I will always have. As a pro, its a staple lens and always creates the real "wow" shots, especially with portraits around the longer end of the zoom (180-200mm) with a shallow depth of field. The sigma is okay I guess, but it is and always will be a compromise compared to the Nikon.


----------



## AquaStudent

I just got a Tamron 90mm lens and have been testing it out over the past few days. Macro photography is definitely a challenge, especially when trying to photograph quick, young African Cichlids!

Here are some of the results.

Jacob's Peacock





















Dragonblood Peacock











And then my favorite of my shots so far


----------



## Patriot

AquaStudent said:


> I just got a Tamron 90mm lens and have been testing it out over the past few days. Macro photography is definitely a challenge, especially when trying to photograph quick, young African Cichlids!
> 
> Here are some of the results.
> 
> Jacob's Peacock
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dragonblood Peacock
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And then my favorite of my shots so far


 Your going to need flash to freeze the motion of the fish. Get a speed light and aim it down from above the tank with a softbox if needed.


----------



## Pen3

TickleMyElmo said:


> Great camera, great price! Now all you have to limit yourself is....yourself! (and maybe a few lenses )
> 
> P.S. Does this mean you want to join? :red_mouth


After using the D700 for a few days i decided to let it go and concentrate on lens first and bought a 70-200mm VR1. I ended up selling the D90 anyways, but replaced it with a D7000. I am looking for a better tripod now since my Manfrotto is a pain to move around. I am looking at a Benro Carbon that supports 17+ and weights under 2.6. I still like my mount and since it is Mg i will keep it.

I took this with my old phone









I really liked the D700, but i can wait it out and possibly get a D600 or what ever Nikon brings out in 2014. I actually did handle a D800, but still liked the D700 more.


----------



## Pen3

Is it safe to use a short quick release shoe like the RC2 i have there? Or should i change up for their bigger size.
ANd put me down for #80 XD


----------



## seachaz

What are folks using for micro/macro lenses on their Nikon setups? I'm pretty new with the aquarium thing and haven't been much into macro photography but I'm finding my current equipment isn't the best getting close to my fauna which is 1.5" or smaller. Anyone using extension tubes?

PS - Can I still join the pimp club? 

D300S, D200 (dead), D70
70-200 f/2.8 VRI
16-85 f/3.5-5.6 VR
12-24 f/4 (tokina)
50 f/1.8
SB-800


----------



## seachaz

Pen3 said:


> Is it safe to use a short quick release shoe like the RC2 i have there? Or should i change up for their bigger size.
> ANd put me down for #80 XD


Depending where you are in equipment purchasing I'd say switch to Arca-swiss compatible releases and plates if you can swing it - definitely safer and many more brands. I've got one plate that lives on my camera which is much lower profile then the Manfrotto style quick release plates and works with my 3 heads all by different manufacturers.


----------



## Pen3

seachaz said:


> Depending where you are in equipment purchasing I'd say switch to Arca-swiss compatible releases and plates if you can swing it - definitely safer and many more brands. I've got one plate that lives on my camera which is much lower profile then the Manfrotto style quick release plates and works with my 3 heads all by different manufacturers.


Is this what i am looking for? http://www.adorama.com/KIRQRC3.html The shoe on nikon is 2.8" long so i want at least a 2.5" long plate.


----------



## seachaz

Pen3 said:


> Is this what i am looking for? http://www.adorama.com/KIRQRC3.html The shoe on nikon is 2.8" long so i want at least a 2.5" long plate.


Yes that would work, you can use short or long plates in the same clamp. Really Right Stuff used to have a foot that replaced the nikon one on the 70-200 but looks like they only have it for the VR2 now, they do have a plate for the VR1: http://reallyrightstuff.com/Items.aspx?code=LenNik70-200VR&key=cat

I use a generic plate on my 70-200 VRI that's a bit shorter then the foot but works fine.


----------



## OrangeAugust

I have a D3100 (digital). 
and an N65 (film)


----------



## Adri.

Ohh hello, why did I not check out this thread sooner?

My mom bought a Nikon D50 a while back and stopped using it after a while. I realized it was great for taking pictures of my foster dogs...Well, now I'm hooked  This photography thing is addicting.

Educate me...why is it that cannon sucks? 
Bear with me here, I'm just a beginner! Still learning how to use this thing...I've only recently started figuring out how to properly use the exposure triangle! But now that I've got it, I love shooting in manual mode


----------



## Patriot

Adri. said:


> Ohh hello, why did I not check out this thread sooner?
> 
> My mom bought a Nikon D50 a while back and stopped using it after a while. I realized it was great for taking pictures of my foster dogs...Well, now I'm hooked  This photography thing is addicting.
> 
> Educate me...why is it that cannon sucks?
> Bear with me here, I'm just a beginner! Still learning how to use this thing...I've only recently started figuring out how to properly use the exposure triangle! But now that I've got it, I love shooting in manual mode


I wouldn't say canon sucks, but instead Nikon seems to be more "new" user friendly. A friend and myself both got camera the same day, he got a Canon while I went the Nikon route. A few months later he sold it because he said it wasn't as easy to use as the Nikon beginner camera.


----------



## Pen3

I wouldn't say canon sucks since they make very good cameras and lens and I wouldn't mind a 5dm3 or 1dx. The only thing I can think of is their pro lens don't hold as much value as Nikon's pro lens. I'll take Nikon's 70-200 vr2 over Canon's anyday.


----------



## Pen3

seachaz said:


> Yes that would work, you can use short or long plates in the same clamp. Really Right Stuff used to have a foot that replaced the nikon one on the 70-200 but looks like they only have it for the VR2 now, they do have a plate for the VR1: http://reallyrightstuff.com/Items.aspx?code=LenNik70-200VR&key=cat
> 
> I use a generic plate on my 70-200 VRI that's a bit shorter then the foot but works fine.


I ended up ordering a Kirk 2.5" clamp with a D7000 L Bracket and 70-200 Feet replacement.


----------



## audioaficionado

*Nikon D600* roud:


----------



## Pen3

What about it? I still prefer the size, feel, layout and controls of the old D700 over the D600.


----------



## audioaficionado

So you've tried a D600?

Nice price on your D700 BTW.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

seachaz said:


> What are folks using for micro/macro lenses on their Nikon setups? I'm pretty new with the aquarium thing and haven't been much into macro photography but I'm finding my current equipment isn't the best getting close to my fauna which is 1.5" or smaller. Anyone using extension tubes?
> 
> PS - Can I still join the pimp club?
> 
> D300S, D200 (dead), D70
> 70-200 f/2.8 VRI
> 16-85 f/3.5-5.6 VR
> 12-24 f/4 (tokina)
> 50 f/1.8
> SB-800


Sure! You can be #079!



Adri. said:


> Ohh hello, why did I not check out this thread sooner?
> 
> My mom bought a Nikon D50 a while back and stopped using it after a while. I realized it was great for taking pictures of my foster dogs...Well, now I'm hooked  This photography thing is addicting.
> 
> Educate me...why is it that cannon sucks?
> Bear with me here, I'm just a beginner! Still learning how to use this thing...I've only recently started figuring out how to properly use the exposure triangle! But now that I've got it, I love shooting in manual mode


Welcome, you can be #080!


----------



## Darth Toro

D5100 pimp


----------



## TickleMyElmo

Darth Toro said:


> D5100 pimp


Added, #081!


----------



## concepts88

Can I be a pimp? #82?

D7000 shooter, with a lot of FX glass.


----------



## MABJ

I've got a cheapo camera, but I'd join . 

I've got the best cool pix camera they had a few years ago. I'll update with the number. 


MABJ's iDevice used for this message


----------



## TickleMyElmo

concepts88 said:


> Can I be a pimp? #82?
> 
> D7000 shooter, with a lot of FX glass.


Sure thing, #082!



MABJ said:


> I've got a cheapo camera, but I'd join .
> 
> I've got the best cool pix camera they had a few years ago. I'll update with the number.
> 
> 
> MABJ's iDevice used for this message


Welcome, you can be #083!


----------



## concepts88

TickleMyElmo said:


> Sure thing, #082!


thanks!


----------



## concepts88

Adri. said:


> Ohh hello, why did I not check out this thread sooner?
> 
> My mom bought a Nikon D50 a while back and stopped using it after a while. I realized it was great for taking pictures of my foster dogs...Well, now I'm hooked  This photography thing is addicting.
> 
> Educate me...why is it that cannon sucks?
> Bear with me here, I'm just a beginner! Still learning how to use this thing...I've only recently started figuring out how to properly use the exposure triangle! But now that I've got it, I love shooting in manual mode


Nice shots. Do you post process? What was it shot with?


----------



## MABJ

TickleMyElmo said:


> Sure thing, #082!
> 
> 
> 
> Welcome, you can be #083!


Hehe thank you! It is a L110. 


MABJ's iDevice used for this message


----------



## jester56

Just found this thread after wondering what the "Pimp" tag was. I have a D50 that I love. I usually take action sports photos. But with my tanks, it makes it even more of a challenge. I'd love to be added to the list.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

jester56 said:


> Just found this thread after wondering what the "Pimp" tag was. I have a D50 that I love. I usually take action sports photos. But with my tanks, it makes it even more of a challenge. I'd love to be added to the list.


Awesome, you can be #084! Welcome!


----------



## SMB

Just found this. I have been shooting Nikon for 30+ years. Would take to long to post all the equipement that has come and gone. Never really been tempted to the dark side, even in the early digital years.
No my # would not be my age...


----------



## howze01

I love my Nikon! It's not a DSLR but it takes some great pics! Here is one of my favorite shots I have ever taken. It's my pair of Harlequin Shrimp from when I had my reef tank.


----------



## SMB

*Where is elmo....I want my #* :angryfire


----------



## TickleMyElmo

howze01 said:


> I love my Nikon! It's not a DSLR but it takes some great pics! Here is one of my favorite shots I have ever taken. It's my pair of Harlequin Shrimp from when I had my reef tank.


Awesome pic, you can be #086!



SMB said:


> *Where is elmo....I want my #* :angryfire


 You can be #085!


----------



## JerSaint

*I'm in! Nikon D5000*

I'm in! I Love my Nikon. My daughter is an amazing photographer and I bought her a Nikon D3000 a year ago for Christmas. The minute it got here, I ordered my D5000!
I believe i am #087.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

JerSaint said:


> I'm in! I Love my Nikon. My daughter is an amazing photographer and I bought her a Nikon D3000 a year ago for Christmas. The minute it got here, I ordered my D5000!
> I believe i am #087.


Yes you are! Welcome!


----------



## SMB

Thank you elmo !


----------



## JerSaint

I think I have my Signature straight now!
One of my favorite shot from last night.
Whatta you lookin at?








Thanks Elmo!


----------



## pandjpudge

I've been sort of inactive lately but here is something recent that I took.

Set:http://www.flickr.com/photos/findtheapex/sets/72157632258359196/


FR-S by Hurricane Warning, on Flickr


----------



## sam86

D7000 + Nikkor 24-70 2.8


----------



## Elppan

Heeeey! You are all the awesome people to ask, I'm looking at getting a Nikon dslr on the lower end of the price range. Going to use my tax check for it so I figured I'd start research now. I own a Kodak advanced point and shoot now (the step between dslr and p&s) I have never owned a dslr :-(

I DID however learn how to shoot a film slr, and develop my own film. I MISS film cameras, and i really miss having the power of a slr in my hands. I'm really big on nature photography
To not totally muck up your thread just pm me some things I should look out for.

I'm broke as a joke lol so LOWER priced cameras (under 700$ and as close to $500 as possible lol) I don't really know what's out there so a point in the right direction would be great, so after taxes i can join your club! Lol


----------



## Patriot

Elppan said:


> Heeeey! You are all the awesome people to ask, I'm looking at getting a Nikon dslr on the lower end of the price range. Going to use my tax check for it so I figured I'd start research now. I own a Kodak advanced point and shoot now (the step between dslr and p&s) I have never owned a dslr :-(
> 
> I DID however learn how to shoot a film slr, and develop my own film. I MISS film cameras, and i really miss having the power of a slr in my hands. I'm really big on nature photography
> To not totally muck up your thread just pm me some things I should look out for.
> 
> I'm broke as a joke lol so LOWER priced cameras (under 700$ and as close to $500 as possible lol) I don't really know what's out there so a point in the right direction would be great, so after taxes i can join your club! Lol


In that price range you can get a used d5100, D300, D3100, D2x, and more. There are lots of choices to be made. However if you have any m42, m39, etc lens mounts that you might want to use on the Nikon body beware. Nikon is the most incompatible body for those type of older lens. The Nikon flange focal distance is too great of all DSLRs out there. A Sony body or Canon would be better in that regards. If not then a Nikon would work.


----------



## DBlauj

Just got my D5100, can't wait to take pics!!


----------



## Bananariot

Just bought my D5100, loving it so far!


----------



## ayy lmao

count me in baby


----------



## shift

Haha sweet. I have a d7000


----------



## Nubster

Guess I'm out of the club now. Unless having Nikon lenses is enough for me to maintain membership.


----------



## ayy lmao

get a tattoo in our memory


----------



## Nubster

Will do.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

sam86 said:


> D7000 + Nikkor 24-70 2.8


Not sure if you wanted to join, but don't want you to be left out, so here's a number anyway!  #088!


DBlauj said:


> Just got my D5100, can't wait to take pics!!


Awesome! You can be #089 



Bananariot said:


> Just bought my D5100, loving it so far!


Sweet, you can be #090!



Judge Judy said:


> count me in baby


Great! You can be #091!



shift said:


> Haha sweet. I have a d7000


Sweet! You can be #092!



Nubster said:


> Guess I'm out of the club now. Unless having Nikon lenses is enough for me to maintain membership.


You can still be in the club  I don't have any Nikon cameras or lenses anymore, and I'm still in! :hihi:


----------



## El Funko

I be pimpin' with my 5100 and D50.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

El Funko said:


> I be pimpin' with my 5100 and D50.


Great, you can be #093!


----------



## daphilster08

Looking into getting the D5100. Anyone know the best place to buy this? Is there any package deals with a good lense out there? Let me know


----------



## Nubster

B&H has them with $200 instant saving and a free memory card right now. Not sure if that's the best deal or not but the most recent one I've looked at.


----------



## bigd603

My girlfriend has a D5100, and we live together so I use it all the time, does that count?

Sent from outer space.


----------



## Bananariot

daphilster08 said:


> Looking into getting the D5100. Anyone know the best place to buy this? Is there any package deals with a good lense out there? Let me know


Got mine refurb off newegg with warranty for $520.


----------



## d2creative

Hi, new here with my D800. Canon can suck it. :biggrin:


----------



## scbrooks87

May I take Nikon Pimp #94?

I have a D90, 18-105 stock lens, but my dad has a handful of nice Nikon lenses I borrow. 50mm 1.4 and 105mm 2.8 are my favorites.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

scbrooks87 said:


> May I take Nikon Pimp #94?
> 
> I have a D90, 18-105 stock lens, but my dad has a handful of nice Nikon lenses I borrow. 50mm 1.4 and 105mm 2.8 are my favorites.


Sure! You've been added as #094!


I was out and about tonight. Unfortunately it was too cloudy to get really good shots, so this'll have to do  Fly me to the moon!


----------



## scbrooks87

Wow! That pic is awesome!


----------



## Darth Toro

Are most of the macro pics of fish/shrimps using remote flash? If so what's a good one for a noob. Got a Nikon D5100 with a 18x55 mm lens. Been wanting to improve my macro shots. I know I should get a lens too


----------



## Nubster

Darth Toro said:


> Are most of the macro pics of fish/shrimps using remote flash? If so what's a good one for a noob. Got a Nikon D5100 with a 18x55 mm lens. Been wanting to improve my macro shots. I know I should get a lens too


Check out the Tamron 90mm macro (this is what I have), the Tokina 100mm macro, the Nikkor 60mm micro, or the Nikkor 105mm micro for some decently priced lenses.

For flash, you can't go wrong with the SB600 for a beginner flash. Really, it's good enough that it will work for you even as you advance into photography. It's just a good workhorse flash unit. There's some third party stuff out there too that seems to work well, I'm just not familiar.


----------



## Darth Toro

Wow! I didn't realize how much they were. I wasn't looking to spend that much. Just wanted to improve my macro photos and tank shots

What's the easiest way to upload pics to the site? I was using photobucket and will continue to do so unless someone advises me another way. Thank you


----------



## Darth Toro

FTS









One of my new Peacock gudgeons. To bad the glass is scratched up. Guess that will be even more of a problem once I get a macro lens.


----------



## d2creative

I never use flash in tank shots.
Kills the natural lighting and white balance that you see with your eyes.
The tamron 90mm mentioned above is the best value in a macro lens. All the image quality of the nikkor 105, minus the VR and $400 cheaper.


----------



## Nubster

Photobucket is as good as anything out there.

For macro, you might look into extension tubes. They work really well. As far as the cost of a macro lens, they really aren't that expensive as far as lenses go. You can get a used Tamron or Tokina for <$300.


----------



## hisxlency

can I be #95? I have an love my old D50 DSLR


----------



## Darth Toro

Thank you. I'll keep an eye out for one. What about the speed light? Are they all very expensive too? I guess you get what you pay for. I still can't believe how much various camera equipment costs. I thought my RC hobby from a few years back was expensive. Lol


----------



## msjinkzd

Though it is not a SLR, i just picked up a aw100 waterproof camera to try out for in tank shots and video

Hoping to upgrade my slr camera body to a d7000 soon


----------



## houseofcards

d2mini said:


> I never use flash in tank shots.
> Kills the natural lighting and white balance that you see with your eyes.
> The tamron 90mm mentioned above is the best value in a macro lens. All the image quality of the nikkor 105, minus the VR and $400 cheaper.


That's a great shot. What kind of lighting?


----------



## Nubster

Darth Toro said:


> Thank you. I'll keep an eye out for one. What about the speed light? Are they all very expensive too? I guess you get what you pay for. I still can't believe how much various camera equipment costs. I thought my RC hobby from a few years back was expensive. Lol


You can get a Nikon SB-600 for fairly cheap used ($150-200) and it's a great light. There's some third party alternatives out there that work well too, I'm just not familiar.

Yeah, photography can be insanely expensive. I used to mess with RC's as well, another costly hobby. I ride mountain and rode bikes...talk about a lot of money too. I have WAY more in my bikes than I do camera stuff and my bikes aren't even highend.


----------



## tommypham

just picked up a D3100 so I guess I'm in!


----------



## Darth Toro

Thank you for the info. It's a big help by pointing me in the right direction. I will be keeping a look out now. Bikes and riding is also crazy money. I'll be looking for a bike seat so that once the weather improves here I can't wait to take my little man out.


----------



## d2creative

houseofcards said:


> That's a great shot. What kind of lighting?


Thanks 
Just the Ecotech Radions over the tank.


----------



## Synyster1337

I've got a spot in here, hopefully. D90 crew checking in.


----------



## Nubster

Looks like I might be back in...I think I'm going to pick up an almost new (<500 clicks) D7000 to replace my D300 that I recently sold.


----------



## AquaStudent

Last night was a cold night and snow crunched under my feet but before my toes fell off from frostbite I was able to take this shot.

Orion is in the background and one of the observatory's telescope domes is lit up by moonlight in the foreground. I had a small gap before the overcast skies took over.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

msjinkzd said:


> Though it is not a SLR, i just picked up a aw100 waterproof camera to try out for in tank shots and video
> 
> Hoping to upgrade my slr camera body to a d7000 soon


An AW100 is certainly good enough to join, you want in? :red_mouth



tommypham said:


> just picked up a D3100 so I guess I'm in!


Great, you can be #095!



Synyster1337 said:


> I've got a spot in here, hopefully. D90 crew checking in.


Sweet, you can be #096!



Nubster said:


> Looks like I might be back in...I think I'm going to pick up an almost new (<500 clicks) D7000 to replace my D300 that I recently sold.


But you were never out!  Whats the reasoning behind possibly picking up a D7000? Just have some lenses left and figure you might as well get a DSLR to have around when you need the capability that mirrorless sometimes doesn't provide?



AquaStudent said:


> Last night was a cold night and snow crunched under my feet but before my toes fell off from frostbite I was able to take this shot.
> 
> Orion is in the background and one of the observatory's telescope domes is lit up by moonlight in the foreground. I had a small gap before the overcast skies took over.


Sweet! I did some astrophotography for the first time a few days ago (pic on page 39), froze my butt off but I really enjoyed it, definitely plan on getting back out there soon  Clouds are my biggest problem so far,....it's always freakin' cloudy when I want to go out and take some pics! :icon_lol:


----------



## Nubster

TickleMyElmo said:


> But you were never out!  Whats the reasoning behind possibly picking up a D7000? Just have some lenses left and figure you might as well get a DSLR to have around when you need the capability that mirrorless sometimes doesn't provide?


Pretty much. I am really enjoying the mirrorless and MF is a blast, but I also miss fast accurate AF at times and the NEX cameras are not known for that. None of the mirrorless systems really are. Not yet at least. I went with the D7000 this time around rather than getting another D300 because of the D300's lack of low light ability. I figured the D7000 was a step or two up and has pretty much everything else I want over the D300. I was able to grab a body for pretty cheap with less than 500 clicks on the shutter. I figured, why not.


----------



## Icegoalie32

CoolPix L810. I'm in.


----------



## AquaStudent

Elmo was that a shot of the ISS passing over or another satellite? There wasn't a periodic brightening so I don't think it was a jet and it was fairly consistent with it's brightness through the flight so I don't think it was an iridium flare (reflective satellite)
Cool shot.

Clouds do make things tricky. I was just outside and saw that it was clear. I may try and go get the 32" telescope up and running...although it's been buggy lately.


----------



## Synyster1337

Thanks for the add, I'll post up some shots of my tank when I get a break from school and work >:O Decent little 55 that's heavily planted. The right half of it is awesome, but the left half is very spacious. I'll at least try to get the picture from my phone even though it's not the quality of my D90.

Here's the picture from my phone.








This is about two weeks into the tank. Since then it has exhibited massive growth in full eco complete substrate at about 3.5-4" deep across the tank. I've got a 2x54W T5HO fixture as well. Filtration is a Rena XP2, and that thing does work. I haven't gotten around to pressurized CO2 quite yet, but it's definitely going to be an elaborate setup. I also want a 12 long rimless but I'm gonna have to wait on that. The good DSLR pics will come when I get home.


----------



## TickleMyElmo

Icegoalie32 said:


> CoolPix L810. I'm in.


Sweet, you can be #097!



AquaStudent said:


> Elmo was that a shot of the ISS passing over or another satellite? There wasn't a periodic brightening so I don't think it was a jet and it was fairly consistent with it's brightness through the flight so I don't think it was an iridium flare (reflective satellite)
> Cool shot.
> 
> Clouds do make things tricky. I was just outside and saw that it was clear. I may try and go get the 32" telescope up and running...although it's been buggy lately.


Just a plane, I think :confused1:...it was taken at 17mm so I'm pretty sure it's just a plane lol...



Synyster1337 said:


> Thanks for the add, I'll post up some shots of my tank when I get a break from school and work >:O Decent little 55 that's heavily planted. The right half of it is awesome, but the left half is very spacious. I'll at least try to get the picture from my phone even though it's not the quality of my D90.
> 
> Here's the picture from my phone.
> This is about two weeks into the tank. Since then it has exhibited massive growth in full eco complete substrate at about 3.5-4" deep across the tank. I've got a 2x54W T5HO fixture as well. Filtration is a Rena XP2, and that thing does work. I haven't gotten around to pressurized CO2 quite yet, but it's definitely going to be an elaborate setup. I also want a 12 long rimless but I'm gonna have to wait on that. The good DSLR pics will come when I get home.


No problem, sweet tank!


----------



## Nubster

Jeez...can't believe no one is even going to mention it....

http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d7100/index.htm

http://nikonrumors.com/2013/02/20/n...Rumors+(NikonRumors.com)&utm_content=FaceBook

http://www.nikonusa.com/en/About-Ni...ed-Enthusiast-With-Intuitive-Engineering.html


----------



## tippeecanoe

Nikon D70, I'm in!


----------



## michael09

Nikon D3200!


----------



## herns

What is Nikkon budget or entry level DSLR?


----------



## Nubster

The D3100 is the lowest level for a new Nikon DSLR. There's a number of much better cameras great prices though on the used market.


----------



## MABJ

Nubster said:


> The D3100 is the lowest level for a new Nikon DSLR. There's a number of much better cameras at the same or better prices though on the used market.


Like what? I'm interested in a DSLR, but I'd love bang for my buck.


----------



## Nubster

The D300 is $450-500ish and it's a borderline pro camera...far, far from an entry level. The D7000 prices will be dropping with the announcement of the D7100. You can get them for $650-700 right now. The D7000 is a highend consumer grade camera. It's arguably as good or better in some regard than the D300. There's also the older D80 ($250ish), D90 ($500), and D200 ($300). All great cameras. Prices are approximate but general price ranges.


----------



## michael09

I HAS A nikon D3200 can I join Club


----------



## MABJ

Interesting. Thanks for the insight. What is a safe place to drop money on a used a camera?


----------



## Nubster

www.keh.com is a good one. 14 day satisfaction guarantee and 60 day warranty through their store.

And honestly, CL isn't bad. Fred Miranda always has loads of stuff for sale and I've always had a good experience buying there. In fact, that's where my D7000 came from. Nikon Cafe is another one but they have a tough limit on who can use the FS section...you have to be a member 30 days and have 300 posts I think before you can even have access...good thing though, helps keep people from joining just to sell stuff.


----------



## MABJ

Thanks again. I'll start researching and comparing. 

And hey, I love that rule lol. 



Nubster said:


> they have a tough limit on who can use the FS section...you have to be a member 30 days and have 300 posts I think before you can even have access...good thing though, helps keep people from joining just to sell stuff.


----------



## Elppan

GUYS! I'm so excited! I got my first dslr today (I was using an advanced point and shoot and an slr from the 70s)

Picked up a Nikon 5100 

Sent from my phone, in the land of magical unicorns and rainbows!


----------



## SMB

It was tough to get this in my tank and she eats a lot.
(Taken with my Nikon.)


----------



## Geniusdudekiran

How many fellow Nikon supremecists are ready for the fast approaching avian photography opportunities that spring will bring? 










Taken yesterday with my Nikon D7000, 55-300mm Nikkor VRII


----------



## Nubster

I don't mind looking at bird shots, but I don't really shoot them myself, unless it's just a shot of opportunity.


----------



## papwalker

D70s
d5100


----------



## TickleMyElmo

tippeecanoe said:


> Nikon D70, I'm in!


Awesome, you can be #098!



michael09 said:


> Nikon D3200!


Cool, you can be #099!



Elppan said:


> GUYS! I'm so excited! I got my first dslr today (I was using an advanced point and shoot and an slr from the 70s)
> 
> Picked up a Nikon 5100
> 
> Sent from my phone, in the land of magical unicorns and rainbows!


Nice! You can be #100!



papwalker said:


> D70s
> d5100


Sweet, you can be #101!



...and with that, we officially have over 100 members now! roud:  Thanks for making this such a huge success everybody!


----------



## IWANNAGOFAST

Is anyone here thinking of getting the d7100 when it comes out? I'm looking to upgrade from my d3100.


----------



## Nubster

Looks like a nice camera but I'm still holding out for the D400, if I even get another DSLR body. I find myself using my mirrorless 99.9% of the time these days.


----------



## papwalker

IWANNAGOFAST said:


> Is anyone here thinking of getting the d7100 when it comes out? I'm looking to upgrade from my d3100.


I'm thinking of the D7000 now that the prices are tanking.

(actually, a nikon A1R MP+ would be nice too)


----------



## tippeecanoe

Yippee! Now I can update my signature!

TippeeCanoe :fish:
Nikon Pimp [STRIKE]#TBD[/STRIKE] #98


----------



## msjinkzd

Picked up the d7000 this week. here was my very first shot with it


----------



## naldopr

new to the forum I don't own any camera but planning in getting a Nikon d7000 or d7100


----------



## KenRC51

naldopr said:


> new to the forum I don't own any camera but planning in getting a Nikon d7000 or d7100


I would spend the couple hundred more for the D7100 instead of the D7000. Reason is because the D7100 has a 51AF point and should be much better than the 39AF in D7000. MP wise I actually prefer the 16MP.


----------



## Nubster

But D7000's are more than half the price and very capable cameras. My D300 had 51 AF points and honestly, I didn't find it leaps and bounds better than the D200 it replaced and now that I've replaced the D300 with a D7000, I don't find myself hindered by fewer AF points.


----------



## nofearengineer

New to the forum, but I am a D300 user. :red_mouth

I try to make the most of my 18-200VR, nifty fifty, and an SB-600.


----------



## papwalker

nofearengineer said:


> New to the forum, but I am a D300 user. :red_mouth
> 
> I try to make the most of my 18-200VR, nifty fifty, and an SB-600.


I had an SB-800 and loved it, until some junky stole the lot.

At least they are cheaper now I suppose.
:icon_neut


----------



## nofearengineer

papwalker said:


> I had an SB-800 and loved it, until some junky stole the lot.
> 
> At least they are cheaper now I suppose.
> :icon_neut


People have NO IDEA what they are missing out on if they are just using their built-in flash. The speedlight with diffuser is light years better.


----------



## sarazorz

Officially requesting Nikon pimp club membership! My new D3200 is on the way - I'm "stimulating the economy" with my tax return, heh! Well, sort of. 

This is what I'll be using for now:
Nikon D3200
18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 AF-S DX VR NIKKOR Zoom Lens
Nikon 35mm f/1.8G AF-S DX Prime Lens 
Possibly the ol' AF ?-120mm Zoom if I feel like doing some landscapes and manually focusing. But I'll probably get an AF-S later on.

Ex Camera:
an Ancient Fujifilm S1 Pro, bought new back in like 2001 or something. Pretty much obsolete now. Haven't done photography in a few years, getting back into it now. 

Yay! \o/ 

*
*


----------



## TickleMyElmo

nofearengineer said:


> New to the forum, but I am a D300 user. :red_mouth
> 
> I try to make the most of my 18-200VR, nifty fifty, and an SB-600.


Sweet, you can be #103!



sarazorz said:


> Officially requesting Nikon pimp club membership! My new D3200 is on the way - I'm "stimulating the economy" with my tax return, heh! Well, sort of.
> 
> This is what I'll be using for now:
> Nikon D3200
> 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 AF-S DX VR NIKKOR Zoom Lens
> Nikon 35mm f/1.8G AF-S DX Prime Lens
> Possibly the ol' AF ?-120mm Zoom if I feel like doing some landscapes and manually focusing. But I'll probably get an AF-S later on.
> 
> Ex Camera:
> an Ancient Fujifilm S1 Pro, bought new back in like 2001 or something. Pretty much obsolete now. Haven't done photography in a few years, getting back into it now.
> 
> Yay! \o/
> 
> *
> *


Congrats, you'll love it, especially with that 35mm 1.8G! You can be #102 as mentioned in PM!


----------



## meowschwitz

My first DSLR: a Nikon D3100.
Lenses:
18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR AF-S DX Nikkor
55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED IF AF-S DX VR Nikkor
40mm f/2.8G AF-S DX Nikkor

Using the 40mm:


----------



## Nubster

Cool shots. Grab a few flower shots today with the D7000...


----------



## shift

Can someone recommend a good external microphone that wont break the bank?


----------



## JoeandCarrie

well, might as well join if its still going on. Wife's the photographer, but she hits the site fairly frequently.
Currently she has a D300, D80, for nikon, and enough lenses to break the bank twice. Everything else is old school film.
I use a simple nikon P&S.
Not sure how you add that little tag thingy at the signature line though.

Thanks,


----------



## sam86

d7k - 24-70 2.8


----------

