New D200 user saying Hi!

Hi guys,

I'm Tony from NE UK and thought I'd drop by and introduce myself as I know I'll be popping in for info and advice and drawing on your experience during the coming weeks, so I hope you'll bear with me.

Just to explain - I am a neg film user ( MF - Bronica and Canon A1 for near 30 years ) and have decided it's time to consider 'converting' to digital by springtime next year and after searching for a suitable system to buy into over the past three months, have finally settled for the Nikon D200 as one the tools for my work. I have also tried out the D50 and D70 but the D200 just stood out! I've used a couple of bridge cameras as polaroid substitutes for my film work for the past three years but this is my first DSLR.

My work mainly consists of monochrome and some colour private portfolios/boudoir/glamour/large portraits for spolied housewives/girlfriends, mostly in low light usually shot in the clients home. I wanted a camera that was particularly 'manual' orientated and the D200 doesn't disappoint! The noise issues could have been a little better in the low light/high ISO work but with good exposures I can overcome those. However, the noise can be used to good effect and replicate film grain which appeals to me so that was another reason why I chose the D200.

All in all the D200 is a really good camera and it's certainly not a 'girly' camera that's for sure!

I got the D200 at the beginning of the week but have only just got round to trying it out for a few frames as I've been too busy with my other work which really infuriates me!

I'm well impressed with the out of camera sharpness and vibrancy which I was lead to believe wasn't that exciting without alot of PP'ing but I'm sure happy with it! It looks as though it will be very good for contrasty glamour and high key work and particularly monochrome work.

I reckon that within a month or two I will be introducing it into my work, in the meantime, as I am lucky to have a young girlfriend, she is being used as a guinea pig for my test images when we have time ( which is unfortunately usually just before bedtime so there is little time to spare).

I've given the camera a very quick try out to establish the DR and colour respose of the camera and while I'm not happy with the results as of yet, I know I will get there in the end.

My first question is: Will the ML-L3 remote shutter release work with the D200 or do I have to get the MC-36? I don't need any other functions than simple shutter trip!

Next question: I rarely shoot with a shallow DOF so working with the lens fully open isn't needed for me - I need lots of DOF in confined spaces and a lens that interests me is the 28mm f2.8 from the perspective POV for my work. Has anyone used it and if so, was it any good? The 35mm and 24mm because of their focal length,s are probably not sutable and I'd much prefer to use primes rather than zooms.
Anyway, that will do for now
Regards...
Tony
--
http://mysite.orange.co.uk/tsphoto/nikonimages.htm

Welcome!

Not positive, but I think that release will only work with the D50/D70. You will probably have to get a new shutter release.

I assume you are talking about the AI/AIS primes in 28mm and 35mm? If you are, I have both and won't part with them. Just remember the "crop factor" involved with digital CCD's. That 28mm become closer to 42mm, or about 50% more effective FL. A pretty good explanation is at http://www.earthboundlight.com/phototips/digital-crop-factor.html

tallwalker said:

Welcome!

Not positive, but I think that release will only work with the
D50/D70. You will probably have to get a new shutter release.

I assume you are talking about the AI/AIS primes in 28mm and 35mm?
If you are, I have both and won't part with them. Just remember the
"crop factor" involved with digital CCD's. That 28mm become closer
to 42mm, or about 50% more effective FL. A pretty good explanation
is at
http://www.earthboundlight.com/phototips/digital-crop-factor.html

Click to expand...

Thanks for that tallwalker

Yes I understand about the crop factor - that is why I prefer the 28mm. It's just about the FL that I need ( like you said about 42mm). I have a 60mm Zenzanon for my Bronica and it is just about the same FL perspective and a lens that while I don't use all the time, is a good FL between the 75 & 50mm.
The 35mm is maybe just that bit long and the 24mm just a tad short!
I also intend to get the 50mm 1.4 which should be good for portraits.
Regards...
Tony

Welcome to the D200 club. As for the remote, the ML-L3 will not work since the D200 only has the 10-pin hard-wired connector. The MC-30 is the less expensive of the 2 Nikon remotes (compare to MC-36). There is a wireless remote, if needed, whose receiver connects to the 10-pin socket, the ML-3. That's about $160 US though.

Another welcome.

It's of course your own choise if you rather not use zooms, but I find them fantastic. What I do is I first decide on the perspective by choosing my position (distance from the model) and then frame the shot with the zoom. This way you never have to compromise on perspective, like getting closer to 'fill the frame'. That's a bit horrible to me because you change the photo to gain more quality.

With the, opposed to 6x6cm, relatively small files from the D200 it is necessary to use the whole frame if you want to make large prints. With my Hasselblad and Sinar I could crop in the darkroom but with the digital cameras I try to prevent cropping in PP by using zoomlenses.

The modern zooms are about as good as the primes. If you don't need large apertures the infamous 18-35 is a real good one. Can be found reasonably priced second hand.

Anyway, just my take on the matter, ymmv.

tonymp said:

tallwalker said:

Welcome!

Not positive, but I think that release will only work with the
D50/D70. You will probably have to get a new shutter release.

I assume you are talking about the AI/AIS primes in 28mm and 35mm?
If you are, I have both and won't part with them. Just remember the
"crop factor" involved with digital CCD's. That 28mm become closer
to 42mm, or about 50% more effective FL. A pretty good explanation
is at
http://www.earthboundlight.com/phototips/digital-crop-factor.html

Click to expand...

Thanks for that tallwalker
Yes I understand about the crop factor - that is why I prefer the
28mm. It's just about the FL that I need ( like you said about
42mm). I have a 60mm Zenzanon for my Bronica and it is just about
the same FL perspective and a lens that while I don't use all the
time, is a good FL between the 75 & 50mm.
The 35mm is maybe just that bit long and the 24mm just a tad short!
I also intend to get the 50mm 1.4 which should be good for portraits.
Regards...
Tony

Click to expand...

--
Philip

Mark53 said:

Welcome to the D200 club. As for the remote, the ML-L3 will not
work since the D200 only has the 10-pin hard-wired connector. The
MC-30 is the less expensive of the 2 Nikon remotes (compare to
MC-36). There is a wireless remote, if needed, whose receiver
connects to the 10-pin socket, the ML-3. That's about $160 US
though.

Click to expand...

Hi Mark and thanks for the welcome.
I wasn't sure that the ML-L3 would work so that's cleared up!

I can manage adequately with a hard wired remote as I am used to using a common cable release so that will probably do for me!

However, if I can get one that is wireless, it may also be good so it might be good to have both as knowing my luck, it will go down just when I need it!

That is one thing about the old manual MF cameras...I can honestly say that I've never had one go wrong in all the time I've owned them! Even the worst I've had with my old A1's is that the battery went down!

The principles are the same with both media but it needs a whole new outlook to embrace digital fully! Something I am looking foward to!
Regards....
Tony

Flashlight said:

It's of course your own choise if you rather not use zooms, but I
find them fantastic. What I do is I first decide on the perspective
by choosing my position (distance from the model) and then frame
the shot with the zoom. This way you never have to compromise on
perspective, like getting closer to 'fill the frame'. That's a bit
horrible to me because you change the photo to gain more quality.
With the, opposed to 6x6cm, relatively small files from the D200 it
is necessary to use the whole frame if you want to make large
prints. With my Hasselblad and Sinar I could crop in the darkroom
but with the digital cameras I try to prevent cropping in PP by
using zoomlenses.
The modern zooms are about as good as the primes. If you don't need
large apertures the infamous 18-35 is a real good one. Can be found
reasonably priced second hand.

Anyway, just my take on the matter, ymmv.

tonymp said:

tallwalker said:

Welcome!

Not positive, but I think that release will only work with the
D50/D70. You will probably have to get a new shutter release.

I assume you are talking about the AI/AIS primes in 28mm and 35mm?
If you are, I have both and won't part with them. Just remember the
"crop factor" involved with digital CCD's. That 28mm become closer
to 42mm, or about 50% more effective FL. A pretty good explanation
is at
http://www.earthboundlight.com/phototips/digital-crop-factor.html

Click to expand...

Thanks for that tallwalker
Yes I understand about the crop factor - that is why I prefer the
28mm. It's just about the FL that I need ( like you said about
42mm). I have a 60mm Zenzanon for my Bronica and it is just about
the same FL perspective and a lens that while I don't use all the
time, is a good FL between the 75 & 50mm.
The 35mm is maybe just that bit long and the 24mm just a tad short!
I also intend to get the 50mm 1.4 which should be good for portraits.
Regards...
Tony

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Hi Philip and thanks for your welcome too.

I know just what you mean about cropping in the darkroom - all I ever seem to do is that! I regularly print monochromes at 16 x 12 up to 20 x 24 and sometimes 30 x 20 on my 5 x 4 enlarger.

I'll try and restrict my digital shots up to A3 size to make life easy and just shoot MF film when it calls for larger sizes.

I take your point about the short zoom versus the prime but I also use primes all the time and as I have a couple of fixed sets which are best shot at about the 28mm ( 42mm) FL. I want to get the nearest lens to that in prime version, but if the 18-35 is as good as you say, I will certainly check it out as it would be as you say, better than adjusting the shot to get the extra quality. I don't need wide apertures as I need a good DOF in almost all shots so anything that gives good results at f5.6 - f8 will be fine.
Regards...
Tony

tonymp said:

That is one thing about the old manual MF cameras...I can honestly
say that I've never had one go wrong in all the time I've owned
them! Even the worst I've had with my old A1's is that the battery
went down!
The principles are the same with both media but it needs a whole
new outlook to embrace digital fully! Something I am looking foward
to!

Click to expand...

Tony, I resisted going digital for a long time. I had used Nikon SLR's for many years and had amassed a decent collection of lenses. I didn't want to do digital with a P&S so I waited. Finally the D70 was affordable in 2004 and I made the switch. I haven't used film since. Of course, over the last 2.5 years I've spent a lot more $$$ on additional lenses and moving to the D200 -- it never ends. I assume you're looking at some digital editors. I currently use Photoshop CS2. You'll probably need to accept the "fact" that you're going to need to do some editing to get the most of your digital images, even if that only means some sharpening, cropping and other minor adjustments to brightness, etc. Once you see the results you're able to get without getting a lab involved, I think you'll really embrace your move to digital. Best of luck with the move!

Mark53 said:

tonymp said:

That is one thing about the old manual MF cameras...I can honestly
say that I've never had one go wrong in all the time I've owned
them! Even the worst I've had with my old A1's is that the battery
went down!
The principles are the same with both media but it needs a whole
new outlook to embrace digital fully! Something I am looking foward
to!

Click to expand...

Tony, I resisted going digital for a long time. I had used Nikon
SLR's for many years and had amassed a decent collection of lenses.
I didn't want to do digital with a P&S so I waited. Finally the
D70 was affordable in 2004 and I made the switch. I haven't used
film since. Of course, over the last 2.5 years I've spent a lot
more $$$ on additional lenses and moving to the D200 -- it never
ends. I assume you're looking at some digital editors. I
currently use Photoshop CS2. You'll probably need to accept the
"fact" that you're going to need to do some editing to get the most
of your digital images, even if that only means some sharpening,
cropping and other minor adjustments to brightness, etc. Once you
see the results you're able to get without getting a lab involved,
I think you'll really embrace your move to digital. Best of luck
with the move!

Click to expand...

Hi Mark - thanks for your encouragement.

I use PhotoShop 7 and have got Rawshooter to convert my RAW files so I'm ok for the moment and it will do most of what I need but I think the Nikon software will be the next stage.

I have a really good A4 printer which gives print quality results, but I will also buy a good A3 printer before I start using the D200. ( Maybe an R2400 or similar).

I don't have any brand loyalty as none of my 35mm lenses (FD)are of any use! It's a pity as some are cracking lenses.

I will get another D200 as backup and about 3 good primes and a zoom to cover what I need and then I'll be ok.

I'll stick to my old Metz(s) 45 and 60s for my flash as I will be shooting manual only, 95% of the time so really, I am quite pleased with the costs so far as it won't break the bank!

None of my work is what can be called action so I can continue as I have done and do all my cropping and exposure in-camera, so really it's mainly getting used to a different medium. Lighting, exposure, ISO, F-stops and shutter speeds are all the same - it's just getting used to a differing DR, so I think I can adjust!
Regards...
Tony

Hi and welcome to the digital SLR world .. and this forum.

About lenses, if money is not an issue, the 17-55 f2.8 should work very well for you. Optical quality indiscrenible from prime, except for a little distortion at the zoom extreme.

Can you elaborate about the D200 DR. Maybe we can provide a tip. DR at ISO 100 on the D200 is in excess of 8 ev, which is very good for a dSLR.

Finally two tips: one is to consider buying the very informative D200 e-book by Thom Hogan ( http://www.bythom.com/d200guide.htm ). The other is to visit another informative (and more friendly) forum: http://www.nikoncafe.com/vforums

Congrats and good luck with the camera.
--
Thierry

TOF guy said:

Hi and welcome to the digital SLR world .. and this forum.

About lenses, if money is not an issue, the 17-55 f2.8 should work
very well for you. Optical quality indiscrenible from prime, except
for a little distortion at the zoom extreme.

Can you elaborate about the D200 DR. Maybe we can provide a tip. DR
at ISO 100 on the D200 is in excess of 8 ev, which is very good for
a dSLR.

Finally two tips: one is to consider buying the very informative
D200 e-book by Thom Hogan ( http://www.bythom.com/d200guide.htm ).
The other is to visit another informative (and more friendly)
forum: http://www.nikoncafe.com/vforums

Congrats and good luck with the camera.
--
Thierry

Click to expand...

Hi Thierry
Thanks for the welcome.

I think it's just a matter of finding out how the DR of the D200 compares to film.

So far I have established that blacks are very well recorded with digital as compared to neg film. I know it may sound odd, but it's surprising just how many shades of black there is!!!! This is clear in the shadow details which are much better recorded with digital than neg film.

I understand about blown highlights too - with film, it's difficult to not find some detail in the highlights unless the exposure was way out! With digital it's similar to transparencies! It's all too easy to lose all the highlight detail with just a little over-exposure...once it's gone it's really gone...unlike film which can usually offer some detail even if 2 stops over exposed!

One advantage of digital over film that I've found is that with colour neg film, once the exposure has gone past about 2 or 3 seconds, reciprocity failure sets in rapidly! The results can be highly unpredictable and it often requires lots of testing to get consistent results! With digital, it doesn't seem to suffer from that problem so I think I am on to a winner here.

One thing I would like to find out about is using the older manual focus Nikon lenses - I always use and actually prefer manual focus and I understand that these older lenses are compatable with the D200 - am I right in thinking so? I like some of the early glass as I still get great results from my old FD lenses which I've accumulated over the years!

Although I'd never normally use a variable FL lens, I must admit the 17-55 sounds good and I've gathered it's very well received by Nikon users. However, the 55mm end would be very important to me which is why I wanted a 50mm prime but I certainly wouldn't dismiss it if it's as good as you say!

I reckon 3 or 4 primes ( say 28mm, 50mm, 60mm & 85mm) would certainly cover the equivalent FL range of lenses I've used with my Bronicas - I don't shoot action or wildlife so that's about the sum total of all the lenses I'd want! A 16mm may be on the list later, but it wouldn't get used much.

I'm going to try and resist the temptation of buying that 'extra lens'!!! I have maybe 14 very good FD lenses and apart from the odd occasions, I usually only used about 2 or 3 regularly!
I doubt if I can stick to it but I'll try LOL!
Regards...
Tony

tonymp said:

One thing I would like to find out about is using the older manual
focus Nikon lenses - I always use and actually prefer manual focus
and I understand that these older lenses are compatable with the
D200 - am I right in thinking so? I like some of the early glass
as I still get great results from my old FD lenses which I've
accumulated over the years!

Click to expand...

Some "really old" Nikkors are pre-AI, I think prior to 1977. They should not be mounted on newer bodies because of clearance issues and can cause damage. AI/AI-S or AI-modified lenses can be mounted safely. And, the D200 has AI metering capability, unlike some of the lower level bodies. Also, pre-AI lenses can still be modified at a nominal charge, about $35 US. A guy here is pretty well known, John White. He has a web site that shows the differences in lens types and illustrates the modification.

http://www.aiconversions.com

Mark53 said:

tonymp said:

One thing I would like to find out about is using the older manual
focus Nikon lenses - I always use and actually prefer manual focus
and I understand that these older lenses are compatable with the
D200 - am I right in thinking so? I like some of the early glass
as I still get great results from my old FD lenses which I've
accumulated over the years!

Click to expand...

Some "really old" Nikkors are pre-AI, I think prior to 1977. They
should not be mounted on newer bodies because of clearance issues
and can cause damage. AI/AI-S or AI-modified lenses can be mounted
safely. And, the D200 has AI metering capability, unlike some of
the lower level bodies. Also, pre-AI lenses can still be modified
at a nominal charge, about $35 US. A guy here is pretty well
known, John White. He has a web site that shows the differences in
lens types and illustrates the modification.

http://www.aiconversions.com

Click to expand...

Thanks for that Mark.

I think I'll stick to the safe end and avoid any damage - I have a friend who is an ex-Fleet Street PJ and a Nikon fanatic with lots of lenses - when he gets back into the country, I'll borrow his and give them a try!

I'm not terribly worried about metering as I still use the old hand-held which has served me well but it's good to know!
Thanks again for you input...
Regards...
Tony