dcbear78

Actually took this a little while ago but my PC finally gave up on life and it has taken me a bit to have the spare money to build a new one. So only just got around to processing them. 

 

D810 with Tamron 24-70mm @ 48mm, f4.5, 1/100s ISO 200.

 

Annika by Crew One Photography, on Flickr 

 

and...

 

Same gear..... 70mm, f4, 1/160s, ISO 200

 

Annika by Crew One Photography, on Flickr

 

Can see the rest of the album here if you are interested.

I had the same problems (same camera too). My solution was the Sony RX100. I have the version 3 that I bought new that was far more than your budget. But that was a couple years ago now and you could possibly pick up the RX100iii for about that price.

It's a phenomenal little camera.

And.... I just realised just how old this thread is.

On a positive note the video features of the Z6 far outweigh the competition. Full frame, 4k, log and 10 bit recording is only possible on $30k+ cameras (although admittedly they also offer raw). With the addition of a cage and external recorder you have a serious bit of video tech at your hands for about $3k.

The secondary card does not have to be the same type. The D850 and D500 use an SD card as a secondary slot.

Other issues are:

330 shot battery life
No eye AF
Supposedly real bad buffer clearance (although unsure about validity of this)

And now to top it off it appears you can't focus in anything less than ideal light...

I had an order, to use this on my Sony's. But looking at the feedback (in the Facebook group) from those who have their hands on it, I quickly cancelled it before it was too late.

Was all looking really promising until I saw they only have a single memory card.   Seriously? That is a massive failure! That has pretty much eliminated many working professionals, especially wedding shooters, that require the safety net of dual cards.

I was wondering if I was going to cancel my orders for a couple A7iii's, but this alone solved that problem.

Don't forget the Tamron 85mm. I kinda gets forgotten about but is an exceptional lens. Probably somewhere in between the Nikon and Sigma in quality.

Cheers for the grammar pick up. Will get onto that.

 

The font size in the tables is something I am working with the theme developers on. Overnight they have sent me through some CSS code to add in to see if that fixes the problem. It works fine on my 4k screen. Works fine and downsizes the font on mobile devices. But looks bad on the most common monitor resolution out there, 1080p.

 

The blog posts are mostly used to gain SEO mojo with Google. The more of this content you post, the more Google sees you as an authority on the subject and the higher they rank you. I am completely aware next to nobody will read them, especially early on. I will use these to share my shoots going forward. I also plan on using them for some tutorials.

Testing out my daughter's new camera (and will serve as a third/backup camera to me on wedding days) a Sony A6500 with Sony 85mm f1.4 G Master lens.

 

R7 Beach Shoot by Crew One Photography, on Flickr

 

edit... Here's another one.

 

R7 Beach Shoot by Crew One Photography, on Flickr

Additionally you may need to put the flash into TTL mode. I know a few transceivers work this way to adjust power on Nikon flashes. I am not sure on the V5's. I had V6's for Pentax many moons ago.

Worth noting extremely capable flash triggers are really not that much more expensive than cheap ones. And not only eliminated these problems, but adds more features.

Only people who haven't kept up with the rapidly developing flash industry still use overpriced and underfeatured triggers like Pocket Wizards. I believe PW are in the process of Kodaking themselves.

https://www.amazon.c...&ref=mp_s_a_1_4

From my recent testing of my lenses with Reikan Focal I have yet to find one that has a sweet spot higher than f5.6. Although I have yet to actually test all of my lenses. So I am wondering if the old thought that lenses were best at f8 is still valid? 

 

Here are two of the graphs I have available. The first is the Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 VC lens. I can't remember what focal length I used for this testing now. It's on the report.... Was tested at 70mm.

 

This one is the Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 G2 at 200mm.

 

All lenses will of course be slightly different. But it is interesting to see the actual sharpness of a lens and the point where diffraction kicks in. Not sure if it changes anything, but these were tested on a D810.

 

 

All of these things have an impact on getting the background to blur.

 

• Faster aperture - The smaller the f(number) ie f2.8 etc the more out of focus the background. Some lenses go lower than others and are obvious more ideal for this purpose and are always more expensive.
• The longer the focal length used the more blur - In your case it will work better at 105mm than 18mm. 200mm or 300mm will be better again, but you will have to stand further away. These are the compromises you have to decide on.
• Increase the separation between the subject and the background - As it says, the greater the distance between your subject and what is behind them the more blur.
• Get closer to your subject

All of these things have an affect. And a combination of them is needed. If you combine all of these and have a fast lens (f2.8 or lower) that is also a long focal length like 85+mm and a lot of room to work in, this is when the background is completely blurred out. Sometime you don't have the space to work with to create the distance. Sometimes you don't have an ideal lens. But if you compensate for the aspects you can't control with the others you should be able to get something desirable.

 

BUT...... Sometimes you just don't have an ideal lens or enough room. Sometimes you have to realise your limitations. This is why people buy expensive f1.4 lenses to eliminate that restriction and gives them more freedom.

Did some more fashion work last weekend.

 

D810 with Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 VC @ 30mm, f4, 1/200s, ISO 64 and Godox AD600 with SMDV Speedbox A90 octa.

 

Maddison Hill by Crew One Photography, on Flickr

 

And 56mm (everything else the same)

 

Maddison Hill by Crew One Photography, on Flickr

I'm going to throw a spanner in the 24-70mm love here. But if I was shooting a DX camera that 16-85mm would be a definite on my list. No, it's not constant aperture. Yes the 24-70mm has superior image quality. But how amazingly convenient is that focal range?

For me 24mm on DX just isn't quite wide enough if doing landscapes. 24mm on FF is great so ideally I'd be looking for that 16mm equivalent focal length.

Wonder why they never made it a constant f4 as it is basically a DX 24-120mm?