Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
This is why I originally thought he meant D5600. I can't even find the D500 on Target's website.
lol that's the first thing I did too XD
This is why I originally thought he meant D5600. I can't even find the D500 on Target's website.
The most high end Nikon is the 750 on there. I think even Best Buy sells the D500. Edit: finally sorted out the D810 flash sync weirdness. I had it on red eye reduction...I think and most likely far too much exposure comp dialed in.lol that's the first thing I did too XD
Check out brickseek.com and use dpci 056-10-0100 and your zip code to search.
Whenever I'm at target I check for clearance electronics (look for the orange stickers). Looks like this was a one in a million find.
So you think it was mislabeled or something?
Probably cool until the weight of a 2.8 24-70 and 70-200 on there drops your pants and sends them crashing to the floor.
It's better than your A57, just keep it.Not mislabeled, just a unicorn. Target marks down clearance electronics every Monday. It probably sat unsold at $1400 and I happened to be there right after it was marked down to $998. I used the target card for another 5% off.
Looks like the Peak Design Capture Lens but for three lenses. Not sure if that'd be a good thing; outside of a tiny 50 1.8 type of lens I don't want anything on the lens mount that points upward since it's dig into my side. Now you'd have two lenses!
Try the beta. I think by now anyone can join since they are almost done. You can probably Google for a link.I really hope this improves performance. I've used Lightroom and multiple really powerful machines and it always bogs down at some point to the point of frustration. I've tried other programs, but none of them work for me quite as well as Lightroom, so I stick with it.
Cant see myself leaving LR until theres a good alternative to VSCO. Just too useful to me right now.
Film simulation presets.How do you use VSCO that needs LR? Never used VSCO so I'm clueless here, just wondering.
Thoughts on these 2 for the D500?
He'll take $500 for both.
These are both FX lenses. You have no wide to mid range with these at all.Thoughts on these 2 for the D500?
He'll take $500 for both.
Thanks for the replies. I'll keep looking.
What kind of pictures do you want to take? Your usage profile should inform your lens purchases.
And what do you normally use to shoot these?Here's what I typically shoot:
Outdoor family photos (Christmas card shots)
Work events (speakers, galas)
Work portraits
On my A57 I use a Minolta beercan 70-210 and a sony 35mm f/1.8And what do you normally use to shoot these?
On my A57 I use a Minolta beercan 70-210 and a sony 35mm f/1.8
Is there a crop factor with those. Also you doing all of these flash assisted or available light? I'm assuming with flash because I wouldn't be caught dead with either of the Nikon stuff you posted with available light. Nikon's 70-300 is pretty good, but the 24-85 is not really an indoor group shot lens for example.On my A57 I use a Minolta beercan 70-210 and a sony 35mm f/1.8
Is there a crop factor with those. Also you doing all of these flash assisted or available light? I'm assuming with flash because I wouldn't be caught dead with either of the Nikon stuff you posted with available light. Nikon's 70-300 is pretty good, but the 24-85 is not really an indoor group shot lens for example.
Yeah because the background compression would be a lot better on the 70-300. This is why I'm normally using an 85 at the minimum for most portraits. I can do environmental portraits with my 35F2 on the Fuji, but headshots...just don't look as good with it as they do on the 90F2.The 70-300 can take good portraits as long as you have enough light to keep the ISO below 800 and the shutter speed below 200(handheld with VR) or 100 (tripod). Especially at 300mm, the isolation and compression is decent for the price, even if your max aperture there is f5.6. Like, if I had to choose, I'd rather take a portrait with the 70-300 rather than with, say, a 50mm 1.4.
Yeah because the background compression would be a lot better on the 70-300. This is why I'm normally using an 85 at the minimum for most portraits. I can do environmental portraits with my 35F2 on the Fuji, but headshots...just don't look as good with it as they do on the 90F2.
I fucking hate harsh light. Can't even really over power it unless you have HSS if I'm not mistaken.Yup yup, very true. My main point, though, was that you can still use the 70-300 with natural light, as long as you have enough of it, and if you don't, you can always use a tripod, or bump up ISO (but not too much).
The trouble starts, though, when "enough natural light" doesn't have good character for portraits (e.g. bright, but overly harsh sunlight). The easy fix would be to just put the subject in the brightest shade possible, with a cheapo reflector or $2 white cardboard sheet from the store if you you're feeling fancy.
I fucking hate harsh light. Can't even really over power it unless you have HSS if I'm not mistaken.
I have actually dealt with this recently on a rooftop shoot. It's not easy to deal with. I think I had to go to F8 to reduce an obvious hotspot on peoples foreheads and move the flash around. Was annoying.Well, you don't necessarily "need" HSS. You could always stick with 1/250s and adjust your aperture and ISO accordingly. You could also just move to a shaded spot, or use a scrim, or wait till you get some clouds. Then, you could choose to (or not) use the flash instead as fill or accent light.
You couldn't face the person away from the sun?I have actually dealt with this recently on a rooftop shoot. It's not easy to deal with. I think I had to go to F8 to reduce an obvious hotspot on peoples foreheads and move the flash around. Was annoying.
No. I had to take pretty much every picture using the same exact building back drop as mandated by the people that allowed us to do it. It was for a work thing...lots of suits and job titles involved. Not to mention a more shaded spot was being used for something else that I wasn't able to use till they were done with that area.You couldn't face the person away from the sun?
I'll be shocked if that thing isn't good for at least 150K. I have never checked though. My D810 has to be at that range I would think already.
That should be good. I just do not trust Sigma AF anymore. Though somebody on here told me it's definitely a lens by lens case.
Well, you don't necessarily "need" HSS. You could always stick with 1/250s and adjust your aperture and ISO accordingly. You could also just move to a shaded spot, or use a scrim, or wait till you get some clouds. Then, you could choose to (or not) use the flash instead as fill or accent light.
AF that is inaccurate through what I'm using to take my pictures 99% of the time is useless AF.I have a Sigma lens known to suffer from inaccurate AF, the 30mm f1.4, and yes, the AF is usually off when the lens is below f4.0 or so. However, that's only true with viewfinder AF. Liveview AF has no problems.
Take that for what it's worth.
New LR 'Classic' is indeed much faster. Especially in the spots where you'd just be waiting for several seconds and wondering 'what the fuck are you even doing LR?'
New LR 'Classic' is indeed much faster. Especially in the spots where you'd just be waiting for several seconds and wondering 'what the fuck are you even doing LR?'
Is this for the CC plan? How do I get? Just reimaged my PC and need to install LR again.
Is this for the CC plan? How do I get? Just reimaged my PC and need to install LR again.
You want to use LR the way you've used it before, right? Not the new cloud version, right?
http://www.adobe.com/creativecloud/photography.html
The middle one. Or, if you're already a subscriber, just click the download button.
Alternatively, you can install the Adobe CC desktop app, login, and install LR from there.
http://www.adobe.com/creativecloud/desktop-app.html
"Before" no I've only used the cloud version. I've got the $10/month thing.
EDIT: Oooooh I see. I'll go ahead and try out the new one.
I personally prefer the Classic. It's the same old Lightroom, but with new features and improved performance. The new cloud-enabled version is okay, I guess, especially if you have multiple devices, but the features aren't all there yet, and it's only limited to one TB.
With the photography plan, you get access to both, but with only 20GB, so give it a try if you feel like it.