fdormoy

Even I am having connection problems with my D5600. It used to work perfectly with snapbridge. But now the camera WiFi is not turning on and I'm getting the message "unable to connect" on the camera. Bluetooth is also not detectable by any mobile device. I think the problem lies within the camera. Did you try to enable the camera WiFi? And is it turning on?

In Auto mode, the camera has full control and overrides the picture control, colour space, ISO and some other settings. Program mode only sets the shutter speed and aperture.

You should never use two shake reduction systems simultanious. They will fight each other.

You are not given that choice as it is the default setting and can not be changed as far as I can see. (Page 47 in the reference manual for firmware 2.0 and later.)

I don't have that specific lens but, when I do macro work,
I only use manual focus except for focus stacking.

What Peter said. If it's a 'D' lens like the one I have you'll only have manual focus with the Z7 and the FTZ adaptor. For whatever it's worth, I never use my lens in AF anyway. It's much easier to focus manually with this lens. At least in my experience. 

 

--Ron

What version is the lens?

The adapter needs lenses with a focus motor in the lens for the AF to work. The two versions from before 2008 depend on the camera having a focus motor.

Interesting question. I think an individual pixel cannot be "in focus" or "out of focus". It only registers the intensity of light (R, G, or .

 

So "being in focus" is a collective property of several neighbouring pixels and Nikon D850 is already showing this information in live view. It is called "focus peaking".

The short answer is no. It would require a tremendous amount of processing power to measure every focus point in the frame, let alone every pixel.

 

The closest I have seen to this is Panasonic's 4k/6k post focus mode, where it literally cycles through every focus point on the camera, creating a filmstrip like capture of multiple exposures. But it takes a while and the camera must remain still. But they are still two dimensional images with no distance information other than lens to focus point.

 

Bottom line is only one two dimensional plane is in focus... everything else is "out of focus". As to which of the other planes are acceptably sharp depends on magnification, size, viewing distance, and the eye of the beholder.

I can use the Focus stacking ... However, for landscape, this is possible only if the subjects are not moving (water, trees and clouds  in a windy situation, animals etc.).

Well, from purely an aesthetic argument, the softening of moving water and clouds can be a pleasing effect... one that conveys natural motion, and is frequently used via long exposures. Animals and windy trees are different beasts however.
 

Or alternatively, I can close the aperture further to be in the range of f16-22.

Apertures in that range will usually soften the image due to diffraction. It's up to you to determine what is acceptable image quality. Shooting a square textured plane like a brick wall or chart at various apertures is a good test to determine just where the softness starts to creep in with any particular lens.

Not CA, but diffraction... It is another thing altogether. Shooting to determine the diffraction limits of your system (lens + sensor) is the only legitimate use for Siemens stars for a photographer as opposed to a tester.

The distance scale shown on lenses, in particular the Nikkor 24-70mm, is very rought, approximate. What I need is an indicator of the distance shown to the place where I made the focus so that I can use an Iphone application which indicates, for a given aperture (f11 for example) and that distance, what is the closest range and farthest range for which the photo is in focus.

As Peter has pointed out, all of it is rough and approximate, including DOF calculations, which like so many "rules" that were originally tempered for film/prints and simple glass, need a rethink given modern hi-rez digital.
 
Bottom line is I think you'll find the physical distance scale adequate for a starting point with DOF calculations, as long as you error on the side of caution (which IMHO is necessary now a days), and are mindful of your lens' diffraction characteristics.
 
But even if you had the exact distance, I wouldn't count on DOF calcs for any critical focus as you simply won't get it under too many circumstances. If there are multiple planes you need in focus, ideally take multiple shots with different focus points and stack. Of course this requires some post, and more often than not a tripod, but anything else is only an approximation which will take experience to master.
 
Of course, if you are doing full sensor output to 8x10 prints hung on a wall, the approximations will probably stand up, but for cropping and/or large prints you'll most likely want more precision. I know I do, and I don't shoot anywhere near 45Mp.

D or later. The G-type lenses transmit the distance information too. As it is meant only for internal calculations for flash exposure, Nikon don't see a use for displaying the value.

The DOF presented in the iPhone apps is a very approximate value, however many decimals the app presents, as the CoC used in the calculations is selected using a very rough model. To get predictable results, you have to shoot more and learn how each lens behaves in different situations. You will get wildly different pictorial results if you use a 14-24, 24-70, 24/1.8 or 24/1.4 even if you set them all to 24 mm, focus them on the same point and use f/2.8. Besides the reproduction scale and the viewing distance, the character of the transition from sharp to unsharp has a huge impact on the perceived DOF.

 

The distance is, by the way a secondary factor... The primary is the magnification scale, not the distance itself. The scale is calculated using the distance and focal length. With an internally focusing or close range corrected lens, the focal length is shorter than the nominal as soon as the lens isn't focused on infinity.

I am not sure whether the D850 alllows to offer benefits for taking infrared captures with these filters, neither what the result will be.

The filter will only let pass light of a limited frequency, so if the filter only lets pass infrared but the filter on the sensor blocks in a second step this extra light the result will be a black picture.

Some years ago a forum member (I think it was @Thumper) has posted some captures of « infrared » pictures taken with filters - if I remember fine he mentioned that using the filters was having some manipulations required as they blocked most of the light (thereby requiring to frame and focus before mounting the infrared filter) - similar to strong ND filters.

When I investigated in infrared capturing, I bought a used D90 with a modified sensor - this allows to give real interesting captures. Here are a few taken with that camera

Peter is right. Newer cameras aren't usually good candidates for shooting IR without modification. And, the mods will void your warranty (if that's important to you).

 

Most of the people who shoot a lot of IR tell me that they've purchased a used body and had that modified by removing the cutoff filter from in front of the imaging sensor and had it replaced with a special filter that passes mostly or only IR light. This allows them to view and focus through the viewfinder as though there were no IR filter mounted at all.

 

On the other hand, you can sometimes simulate the IR look in post (with varying amounts of success). 

 

--Ron