Team-BHP - The DSLR Thread

Quote:

Originally Posted by JMaruru (Post 3790653)

Are there any simple tools for inserting watermarks on windows?

If you are looking at standalone tools, where you have a JPG in and JPG+Watermark out; you can try Irfan View. That I think even does batch processing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeroen (Post 3790671)

If you use programs such as Photoshop or Lightroom it's real easy
Jeroen

I am on lightroom 5.5. I found the watermark option on LR. Thank you!

Quote:

Originally Posted by ampere (Post 3790717)

If you are looking at standalone tools, where you have a JPG in and JPG+Watermark out; you can try Irfan View. That I think even does batch processing.

Thank You! Could get it done in LR.

Also, please suggest some good presets for portraits in LR.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JMaruru (Post 3790821)

Thank You! Could get it done in LR.

I use mogrify for water marks in LR5.

Quote:

Also, please suggest some good presets for portraits in LR.

Dont have any specific presets for portraits. Just do the basic edits from my side.

Was playing around with the combo, shooting portraits.

Feedback:

The AF of D750 is better than that of D800. Yes, I had read about it many times, but needed to try for myself.

With the 85mm f/1.4, even with the D750's autofocus, it is a pain to shoot a subject who doesn't care to be shot and keeps running way - is never still for more than a few seconds :). I had to shoot like I would shoot wildlife. Only, the focus is hit and miss with that shallow depth of field (f/1.4 - I wanted to shoot at this aperture instead of stopping down - focus is much easier at a smaller aperture) and with a moving kid who wouldn't pose.

Sometimes the combo would focus on a different high contrast area that was closer. That is expected using the group focus mode of the D750, but I was surprised to experience that even with AF-C Dynamic 9 points or single point. I couldn't shoot at AF-S single point since the subject was moving all the time. Shooting with a fast portrait prime is so different from shooting with a long, wildlife lens,

I am getting attracted to a full frame kit. Been holding out for a while. Not sure for how long.

Quote:

Originally Posted by R2D2 (Post 3790140)

The 300 2.8 is not a "birding" lens per se as it lacks reach. While it's a superb lens when used bare...

I was looking at a few of the photos that I had shot with it. What a lovely lens it is, in terms of sharpness and bokeh!

Sharing a couple of handheld photos, shot wide open with the D7100. I didn't have time to go shoot any mammals. Was testing it at a nearby forest near Cauvery River.

A few wildlife photographers I follow - e.g. David Lloyd - shoot with the 400mm f/2.8, the bigger brother. What fantastic IQ when combined with the D4 or D8xx.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nilanjanray (Post 3793407)

Loved the photos at Lloyd's site. Very talented

Really liked your rooster photo as well...a classic from one of the super teles or rather the exotics as I like to call them.

Of these exotics, my favorites (in descending order) are:
a) 200 2.0
b) 400 2.8
c) 300 2.8
d) 600 4
e) 500 4
f) 800 5.6. This comes last not for IQ, which is superb, but for difficulty in handling a lens with bulk and a very narrow AOV. The price doesn't endear it to many either. lol:

The only problem is once you get used to the IQ from these lenses there are very few others that will please you.

And yes, that was a typo in my previous post where I thought of the 300 2.8 + 2x TC as a poor man's 600, a 5.6 not F4.

If you get a full frame, esp one of the D8xx series, don't skimp on the glass is the only advice I'd give you. Get the best you can.

Quote:

Originally Posted by headbanger (Post 3767710)

While the pros continue to shower their experiences on the thread, I am finding myself a little naive to search relevant information on more than 900 pages of this thread.

I am stuck between Canon 7D Mk II, Canon 70D and Nikon D7200. Sony A6000 is a dark horse in case nothing else clicks for me. Since this will be my first DSLR, I am a little apprehensive if 7D Mk II will be an overkill.

To start with, I will be in portaits first and my immediate buy will be prime lenses in addition to kit lens, should I go for bundled package instead of body alone. I will not be utilizing the camera to capture videos. So this is not a must have feature for me.

Any help is appreciated if someone can point to me to relevant page(s) or post(s).

OT: Since I am in US, any pointer to a good deal is also welcome.

If you are interested in taking a lot of Portraits on prime lenses get the 6D instead. If you think you will do any kind of wildlife stuff pick the 7D2. It's AF is awesome. I sold my 5D3 and got the 7D2 (mainly for more reach) and it serves my purpose very well. I do own a couple primes and they performed better on a full frame than crop. If you are in US wait for Thanksgiving!

I purchased a D5300 2 months back and has been playing around with the kit lens, 50 mm prime lens, basic LR editing etc.

Now, I want to buy my first zoom lens for using with Nikon D5300 body - the need is to capture architecture closeups, wildlife photography etc.

I have read the threads in tbhp and also many sites on the internet. But so much data left me more and more confused.

The price of AF-S DX NIKKOR 55-200MM F/4-5.6G ED VR II looks tempting. Is 200mm enough or better to go for Nikon 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 G AF-S VR IF-ED?

Also, any alternatives in other brands with better performance or more vfm?

Thanks,
Rajat

Quote:

Originally Posted by rajatmakar (Post 3802551)

The price of AF-S DX NIKKOR 55-200MM F/4-5.6G ED VR II looks tempting. Is 200mm enough or better to go for Nikon 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 G AF-S VR IF-ED?

Both these lenses are quite good and value for money. If you have budget, go for 70-300.

Pros of 70-300

Till 200 mm and a stop below wide-open, picture quality is almost as good as professional lenses
Awesome lens for portraits at 150 - 200mm
Focus distance indicator (Helpful for things like Hyperfocal, where you need everything in focus : from 2 meter to hundreds of meters)
Full-time Manual override, let camera focus and then just twist to fine-tune focus (55-200 requires switching to manual mode for this)

Cons :

3 times the cost
Near 1 KG weight
Cannot focus closer than 1.5m (Sometimes an issue with portraits)

Quote:

Originally Posted by NetfreakBombay (Post 3802631)

Both these lenses are quite good and value for money. If you have budget, go for 70-300.
...
Full-time Manual override, let camera focus and then just twist to fine-tune focus (55-200 requires switching to manual mode for this)
...

Thanks. Full-time manual override is an useful feature. I like it in my 50 mm prime lens.

I may not buy multiple zoom lenses. So, based on your feedback getting inclined towards 70-300 mm. Any comparative feedback with similar models from Sigma, Tamron etc.?

Tamron costs 6K less and reviews read good too ! (http://www.amazon.in/Tamron-70-300mm...amron+70-300mm)

Quote:

Originally Posted by NetfreakBombay (Post 3802631)

Both these lenses are quite good and value for money. If you have budget, go for 70-300.

Till 200 mm and a stop below wide-open, picture quality is almost as good as professional lenses

Near 1 KG weight

It is sharp enough if used properly, even at 300mm. Most people who say that it is not sharp at 300mm, are comparing it to lenses that cost much more.

It is ~700 gms, not 1 kg

Quote:

Originally Posted by rajatmakar (Post 3802704)

I may not buy multiple zoom lenses. So, based on your feedback getting inclined towards 70-300 mm. Any comparative feedback with similar models from Sigma, Tamron etc.?

The Tamron is supposed to be as good as the Nikon.

A few old photos with the Nikon 70-300mm VR. Shot with a (now ancient) D90.

To see the sharpness of a larger version, see https://500px.com/photo/121822547/bi...m=user_library

OT: I am planning to sell my 70-300mm. Will buy the Nikon 200-500mm or Sigma 150-600mm S. Might pair it with the light 300mm f/4 PF + 1.4X TC. Light weight helps a lot in reacting fast and getting a split second shot.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rajatmakar (Post 3802704)

getting inclined towards 70-300 mm. Any comparative feedback with similar models from Sigma, Tamron etc.?

I have Nikon's 70-300, have not used Tamron/Sigma.

Tamron's lens has all the features and reviews indicate good image quality. This lens does look interesting.

Quote:

If you can afford the better option would be a Nikon 1 series cameras that come with 2.7X crop factor and a sigma 120-300 lens. I am definitely planning to get this Combo when i return for its overall cheaper while gives a reach that is second to nothing.

Imagine buying a 810mm F2.8 lens :) or a 1100mm F4 lens with a 1.4X converter.

At the same time you can think of getting the 50-500 bigma with this camera and still be happy with the results. A direct 1350mm f5.6 lens with a flash will take care of most of the scenarios.

Many dont consider this because of the weight balance but i have used this combo and its not bad. Almost like simply holding the lens to shoot.

After owning the Canon 500, i will anyday take a lighter 120-300 and a Nikon 1 series.

Just look at the overall cost including adapters to see if you can buy a combo that gives you easier reach through the sensor crop factor itself.