Guitarsoup said:

---

Christmas presents are probably already bought, but if you have any questions, fire away.

---

Not sure if asked, but what are your thoughts on recording/photography with drones?

I'm new to the entire thing and thinking about investing in the new dji mavic pro.

Drake aTm said:

---

Guitarsoup said:

---

Christmas presents are probably already bought, but if you have any questions, fire away.

---

Not sure if asked, but what are your thoughts on recording/photography with drones?

I'm new to the entire thing and thinking about investing in the new dji mavic pro.

---

I haven't gone down that rabbit hole yet, so I wouldn't be a great person to ask.

DJI just bought Hassleblad, so I would bet some nice innovations are on the horizon.

Drake aTm said:

---

Guitarsoup said:

---

Christmas presents are probably already bought, but if you have any questions, fire away.

---

Not sure if asked, but what are your thoughts on recording/photography with drones?

I'm new to the entire thing and thinking about investing in the new dji mavic pro.

---

I've been flying the Mavic for about three months now, it's been around the world and back (Mo'orea, Bora Bora, New Zealand, Australia). Mavic is strong, it depends on what you want to do.

If you're looking for recreational or light pro work (i.e., real estate), it will work for you. If you're wanting to shoot pro level video/photo, you'd really need to go to the Inspire platform for that.

I've flown the Mavic in 25 mph winds and it handled that, so no worries there. Battery life is also good on these, I've pushed 30 minutes on a calm day, down around 20-22 in windy conditions.

The other thing that has thrown some folks is that it has a manual auto-focus on the camera. If you don't refocus, footage can come out blurry. DJI has added auto-focus recently but you still get better results periodically adjusting manually. Meanwhile, the P3 Pro and P4 both have an auto-focus capability in the cameras that I think is superior to that of the Mavic, so keep that in mind.

It also works best if you get some sort of custom gimble cover to cut down on sun reflections on the drone. It's an aftermarket part but does a good job keeping the lens semi-shrouded.

The Mavic is ultra portable, you can carry it discretely in a camera bag or even a backpack (as opposed to having a friggin' box on your back to carry any of the Phantom line). The portability is great and probably the way it heads in the future for the drone market as a whole.

AG 2000' said:

---

Guitar, did I catch that you are running a d810? If so, what lenses do you recommend for landscape and portrait (that aren't $2k+)?

---

Bumping this too for Thomas (or anyone else who is running Nikon and would like to share).

TIA

I have the D800 - essentially the same thing. D800 is the best deal in cameras now if you want to do Landscape/Portrait only.

D810 is essentially the same, but the D810 has better AF and a better buffer.

The Rokinon 14mm 2.8 is a fairly cheap manual focus lens that works pretty well. You will see the difference between that and the 14-24 2.8G if you shoot them side by side. But I have some nice shots with the 14 Rokinon.

I use the 24-120 f4G for strobed portraits and some landscapes. Not the greatest lens, but a pretty good all-around lens.

Here is an article about what I packed to shoot landscapes in Iceland and what I wish I packed:

http://www.thephoblographer.com/2014/08/25/packed-shoot-landscapes-iceland/


For portraits, a good cheap lens is a 85mm 1.8. For Canon shooters, the 135mm 2.0L is a fantastic lens and one of the only Canon lenses I miss from my switch. Canon also makes a fairly cheap 200mm 2.8 prime lens that is great for portraits and gives a little more compression.

I'm a big fan of compression, so I like to shoot with longer focal lengths. That means the 70-200 2.8 and I also have the godfather of portrait lenses, the 200mm f2. That one is probably outside your budget unless you make a lot of money shooting portraits.

I wish Nikon had a good 135mm 2.0 and a good 200mm 2.8, like Canon. What Nikon does have that Canon doesn't is the 105mm 1.4 lens and a very nice prime lineup of 1.8 lenses.


But for portraits, with Canon or Nikon, start with the 85mm 1.8 and go from there.

dubi said:

---

tax refund = powerball win?

---

I thought that was gun/scuba/new truck money.

I guess that means more overtime for me.

Mr. Dubi said:

---

dubi said:

---

tax refund = powerball win?

---

I thought that was gun/scuba/new truck money.

I guess that means more overtime for me.

---

What healthcare organization still allows OT???

Hospital Nursing!
$$$$$$$$$$$

dubi said:

---

Hospital Nursing!
$$$$$$$$$$$

---

Poorly managed....need better admin.

AggieDruggist89 said:

---

dubi said:

---

Hospital Nursing!
$$$$$$$$$$$

---

Poorly managed....need better admin.

---

Derailed.... not possible with the amount of administration, management, bureaucracy and non-clinical staff.

Mr. Dubi said:

---

AggieDruggist89 said:

---

dubi said:

---

Hospital Nursing!
$$$$$$$$$$$

---

Poorly managed....need better admin.

---

Derailed.... not possible with the amount of administration, management, bureaucracy and non-clinical staff.

---

Oh Mr. Dubi, I'm not opposed to you getting OT but and effective admin should realize properly staffed health organization is a safe and effective organization that benefits both communities it serves and the patients and families.

To make it thread related, I picked up a brand new condition 7D with 7,000 shutter actuation because I felt I need a 1.6x crop body.

Back for more Nikon talk. Eyeing the D750, D800E, or D810. Leaning towards 750 over the 810 actually.

Will be used for family photography, but also a lot of low light (storm chasing, astro, and possibly underwater). That said, will also be used for lots of landscape stuff.

Thoughts one way or another?

Thomas,

Talk to me about filters in Iceland. Can you get by without? Read your article (thank you for that), just curious whether they are a deal breaker or not if you don't have.

A variable ND is key if you want to do some really slow shutter speed stuff like getting motion for waterfalls, waves, etc.

A graduated ND is what I didn't have and I really regret. It lets you match the exposure for the sky/ground much easier and you just can't do it the same without it. You can still take really great pics (I am happy with my pics) but in a lot of situations, I was limited by what I created because I didn't have the graduated ND.

750 is probably better for your normal family stuff. I like the 810 or 800e for landscapes.

Guitarsoup said:

---

A variable ND is key if you want to do some really slow shutter speed stuff like getting motion for waterfalls, waves, etc.

A graduated ND is what I didn't have and I really regret. It lets you match the exposure for the sky/ground much easier and you just can't do it the same without it. You can still take really great pics (I am happy with my pics) but in a lot of situations, I was limited by what I created because I didn't have the graduated ND.

750 is probably better for your normal family stuff. I like the 810 or 800e for landscapes.

---

I've read that you can't really use the GNDs or VNDs on wide angle due to issues with sky color consistency, etc. Admittedly, that was a few years ago.

Still true? Thinking about whether I should spring for a filter holder for the ultra wide I'll be taking (14mm full frame).

Why would you prefer a variable ND over a plain ND filter? I have a 10 stop and a 6 stop I use for long daytime exposures but I have always heard that variable ND filters are typically bad optically - especially at the same price piont.

Less to carry/keep up with.

If I knew I was always going to need the same amount of light or I was a professional landscape photographer, I would probably spring for a better filter set.

http://amzn.to/2n7myT1

This is the variable ND I have and it worked great, but I rarely ever use it and I didn't know if I wanted a 2 stop or 4 or 6 or 8 so this gives me all of that. Don't have a lot of pics with it, but here is one.




The GNDs and VNDs are much better now than they used to be. I'd have no problem using the set they make for the 14-24. But when you are using something like that, you are using the big plate GNDs, which are much better anyway. But you are looking at a LOT of money to get a nice Lee filter set for a wide angle lens.

Soup, still selling the 45ts?

bthotugigem05 said:

---

Soup, still selling the 45ts?

---

#YESSIR!

Ok, sending PM

AG 2000' said:

---

Got my d750 and a couple of lenses. Man, what a beast of a camera system. Off to Iceland, wish me luck.

---

I think it goes without saying, but post lots of pictures!

Going on a 3 week trip to Europe in June. Just taking Lumix GX-7 with 12-35mm 2.8.

I currently have a nikon 5300d with a nikon 35mm f1.8 and the sigma 17-50 f/2.8. I'm pretty sure it's a novice user not the lens but I feel like I prefer the 35mm more but anyways... If I can invest in one more lens, is the Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 be a good choice? this is just for your basic "dad-tography"

70-200 would be an excellent choice.

Guitarsoup said:

---

70-200 would be an excellent choice.

---

I borrowed Guitarsoup's 70-200 2.8 last week and have been very pleased.

Very good lens for the price. I bought it when I switched to Nikon to replace the 24-105 I sold to the Dubis.

Any opinion on the Tamron or Sigma 70-200? The price difference vs the Nikon is hard to ignore

jaggiemaggie said:

---

Any opinion on the Tamron or Sigma 70-200? The price difference vs the Nikon is hard to ignore

---

I've always been disappointed by off-brands with very few exceptions.

I would look at the Nikon 80-200 2.8. I know that KEH.com often has them. 14 day no questions asked return policy.

Does the new Sony A9 pretty much end any development for their A-mount cameras? Glad I only rented a A99m2 and did not buy one.

I think they will still make DSLRs, but the focus is definitely on mirrorless. Sony does better at video than Canon or Nikon and mirrorless is made for video. Plus Nikon and Canon are hands down better for DSLRs, so Sony goes with the thing that Nikon and Canon can't compete.

Guitarsoup said:

---

I think they will still make DSLRs, but the focus is definitely on mirrorless. Sony does better at video than Canon or Nikon and mirrorless is made for video. Plus Nikon and Canon are hands down better for DSLRs, so Sony goes with the thing that Nikon and Canon can't compete.

---

Like 20fps and almost 1000 focus points????

And the lack of 40 year old casio watch LCD screen Canon still uses?