D70 to 300s for architectural work.

I think it's time to hang up my d70, the sensor is showing some banding at high ISO (particularly in the red channel) and the front selector ring has stopped working (so manual is now impossible)... how much to repair?

I use the camera for architectural work, and will also start experimenting with filming video.

I currently have :-
50mm f1.4
18-200 VR
12-24 f4
one day I hope to afford a tilt-shift emoticon - smile

Was looking at the D90, as a good upgrade (increase MP in particular), but having seen the D300s, the increased speed, improved focussing and more rugged construction are good reasons for paying more.

Is this good enough justification?

Given that my work is mostly architectural, the other option is to think about going for a non-cropped sensor, but given my lens stock is DX then I'd have to invest in a new wide-angle wouldnt I ? Please excuse my ignorance!

Well, any suggestions from other architectural photographers would be appreciated.
Thanks!

How are speed and "focusing" (I assume you mean the AF module) important to architectural work?

P MACDONALD said:

I think it's time to hang up my d70, the sensor is showing some banding at high ISO (particularly in the red channel) and the front selector ring has stopped working (so manual is now impossible)... how much to repair?

I use the camera for architectural work, and will also start experimenting with filming video.

I currently have :-
50mm f1.4
18-200 VR
12-24 f4
one day I hope to afford a tilt-shift emoticon - smile

Was looking at the D90, as a good upgrade (increase MP in particular), but having seen the D300s, the increased speed, improved focussing and more rugged construction are good reasons for paying more.

Is this good enough justification?

Given that my work is mostly architectural, the other option is to think about going for a non-cropped sensor, but given my lens stock is DX then I'd have to invest in a new wide-angle wouldnt I ? Please excuse my ignorance!

Well, any suggestions from other architectural photographers would be appreciated.
Thanks!

Click to expand...

I think the D90 is fine for architectural work. This is a slow, methodical type of shooting where speed doesn't matter. Unless you would benefit from the extra speed, build and features in other areas then it's worth it.

From an IQ standpoint you would need a D3X to see any meaningful gain over the D90, even the D700 won't offer you much more. I would buy the D90 and use the money saved to invest in a better lens to fill the 24-50mm range. A Tamron 17-50 f2.8 is a good lens to fill this gap, barrel distortion is pretty low for a zoom.
--
Newest galleries:
http://www.pbase.com/gipper51/portraits
http://www.pbase.com/gipper51/architectural

I know its not a common issue, but when taking photos in changeable weather conditions, I need to be able to quickly take a series of photos to stitch into a panorama
.

I work in the UK so we often have weather with high speed little fluffy clouds which play havoc with working with bracketed or stitched panoramas! Any increase in speed is an advantage.

Only this weekend I was cursing my D70 for not being quick enough on the focus (also it struggled when shooting towards the sun dispite the sun not being in frame)...

The faster the shooting speed, the less ghosting I'll get in HDR images.

I know its not as important for architectural work as it is for sports and events photography, but that doesn't mean speed doesn't play a part.

I'm just trying to weigh up whether these advantages are worth the extra premium. (in particular a more weatherproof chassis)

For work where a tilt shift lens is valuable a FX camera like the D700 will provide you with a much wider horizon and fewer pictures to stitch together. But for use with a standard lens the D70 camera should be fine - just manually adjust the focus which should be at 30' and allowing the hyperfocal distance for rear focus be at infinity.

Sharpness of your images is more likely to be reduced by camera motion if you are shooting hand held and this can reduce the image contrast as well. A tripod mounted panoramic head may help you more than a new camera.

If weather is a concern a $10 plastic camera and lens slip cover will work just fine.

With FX the 16mm f2.8 fisheye can be purchased used for about what you can get selling the 10.5mm f2.8 lens. The 16mm is a true fisheye on the FX cameras and a great ultra wide angle rectilinear lens on a DX camera.

Thanks, I appreciate your comments. Looks like the obvious answer is the D90 and use the money for other extras.

I'm getting a Manfrotto with 055xprob with 410 head... this should improve things greatly (I had to shoot hand held this weekend ... dont ask!).

Once I find a good price for a D90 body I think that's the way I'll go.

Other than the tamron, which sounds like a great lens, what other options should I consider to improve my shooting possibilities; I was thinking of going for a super-wide (rectaliniear if possible) prime.

Thanks again!

P MACDONALD said:

Other than the tamron, which sounds like a great lens, what other options should I consider to improve my shooting possibilities; I was thinking of going for a super-wide (rectaliniear if possible) prime.

Thanks again!

Click to expand...

Might consider swapping your 12-24 for a Tokina 11-16/2.8. That is a phenominal UWA lens. Very low distortion and super sharp across the frame.

I've found 11mm wide enough for almost all uses of architectural photography. Any wider and perspectives get very funky although there are times I wish for 9mm. A T/S lens would be great but I've found Photoshops perspecive and distortion control can work wonders.
--
Newest galleries:
http://www.pbase.com/gipper51/portraits
http://www.pbase.com/gipper51/architectural

calson said:

If weather is a concern a $10 plastic camera and lens slip cover will work just fine.

Click to expand...

Ah good idea... must get me one of those.

calson said:

With FX the 16mm f2.8 fisheye can be purchased used for about what you can get selling the 10.5mm f2.8 lens. The 16mm is a true fisheye on the FX cameras and a great ultra wide angle rectilinear lens on a DX camera.

Click to expand...

10.5mm 2.8 ? I don't have one of those to sell! Are you suggesting getting the FX 16mm so it would be something I could get good use of if one day I do move on to FX body ?

Interesting. I always find I could do with a tiny bit more wide so 11-16 would be great. Combined with my 18-200 that would keep most bases covered, although I would look to get the 17-50 f2.8 as you suggest to provide better IQ at that range... the 18-200 lens I bought for travelling, great for the daytime, crap at night!

Big thanks for your quick and useful comments... much appreciated!

One other quick question on this subject, I'm planning to purchase a B+W 77mm 3.0 ND filter for capturing long exposures. Given that I'll be shooting at wide angle alot of the time, should I find something larger than 77m? or will the vignetting be something I can live with and clean up in PS?

P MACDONALD said:

I know its not a common issue, but when taking photos in changeable weather conditions, I need to be able to quickly take a series of photos to stitch into a panorama
.

I work in the UK so we often have weather with high speed little fluffy clouds which play havoc with working with bracketed or stitched panoramas! Any increase in speed is an advantage.

Click to expand...

I don't see how AF speed is a factor for that. It's possible to just focus once by either switching to manual focus after using AF, or by re-assigning the AE-L button to AF-ON so that you acquire focus by pressing AE-L and then the camera won't try to refocus each time you press the shutter release.

I used AF-ON with my D70 for years, but the problem I encountered when shooting panoramas was buffer depth: the D70 could only take 3 raw shots before the buffer filled. The D90 has a buffer capacity of about 9 shots, and the D300 is probably about 20 shots. If you're turning the camera after each shot, either camera will have the image written to the card before you're ready to take the next one.

P MACDONALD said:

Only this weekend I was cursing my D70 for not being quick enough on the focus (also it struggled when shooting towards the sun dispite the sun not being in frame)...

Click to expand...

While the D300 has a better AF system than the D90, the differences are mainly in tracking ability, coverage of the frame, more cross-type AF sensors, ability to fine tune for problematic lenses, etc. I wouldn't actually expect initial acquisition speed to be much different between the D90/D300, but as I mention above if you have a static subject you need only focus once (in fact I'd consider that to be a better approach, since the AF could mis-focus one of your shots in a sequence).

P MACDONALD said:

The faster the shooting speed, the less ghosting I'll get in HDR images.

Click to expand...

I think that's wishful thinking.

I've done HDR at 5fps with a D200, and ghosting is still an issue.. particularly when using slow shutter speeds.

P MACDONALD said:

I know its not as important for architectural work as it is for sports and events photography, but that doesn't mean speed doesn't play a part.

I'm just trying to weigh up whether these advantages are worth the extra premium. (in particular a more weatherproof chassis)

Click to expand...

Ergonomically, the D300 will no doubt beat the D90, unless you prefer smaller cameras.

--
http://www.pixelfixer.org

P MACDONALD said:

One other quick question on this subject, I'm planning to purchase a B+W 77mm 3.0 ND filter for capturing long exposures. Given that I'll be shooting at wide angle alot of the time, should I find something larger than 77m?

Click to expand...

Consider one of the thin filters. There's no thread onto which to stack another filter and that's probably okay for you. I don't own the 12-24 but I think that will be okay right down to 12mm if you use a thin filter. I'm guessing that a regular filter will be good down to 14mm or so.

Thomas Comerford said:

I wouldn't actually expect initial acquisition speed to be much different between the D90/D300

Click to expand...

I don't know about what you consider "much" but I would expect them to be and have un-scientifically observed them being noticeably different. Not for anything like architectural photos, though.

I was hoping to get an 1.8 or 3.0 ND filter, but can't seem to see any at that range that are low profile (thin). The best I could find was this http://www.microglobe.co.uk/catalog/product_info.php?pName=hoya-77mm-pro1-digital-nd8-filter

or for something totally out of my budget, this! http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&sku=609253&Q=&is=REG&A=details

Given that I'm a virgin when it comes to using ND filters, I'm not sure what to expect from either a 1.8 or a 0.8... Given that I want to eliminate moving objects from long exposures, the higher the better...

The filters aren't cheap, and as they will be used on a wide, stacking is out of the question. So, I guess the question is, what rating of filter do you architectural photographers typically end up using when you want to achieve a nice degree of motionblur? is 0.9 enough to achieve long enough exposures?

Thanks for your thoughts Thomas,
Its becoming clear from comments that the d90 will be sufficient for my needs...

size and handling of the camera isn't much of a concern as I should/will be using it mostly on a tripod so the small the camera the better.

Thanks for all your suggestions... you make this forum a fantastic resource!

P MACDONALD said:

The filters aren't cheap, and as they will be used on a wide, stacking is out of the question. So, I guess the question is, what rating of filter do you architectural photographers typically end up using when you want to achieve a nice degree of motionblur? is 0.9 enough to achieve long enough exposures?

Click to expand...

I would guess not.

Have you considered one of the Cokin or Lee filter systems?

They give you a lot more flexibility without too much cost. They're inconvenient to use hand-held but not too much hassle if you're shooting from a tripod. It might be a way to get started. Of course, if you find one filter that works for you most of the time, you might want to buy a screw-in just for convenience. But at that point, you'll be absolutely certain about what you want/need.

gipper51 said:

Might consider swapping your 12-24 for a Tokina 11-16/2.8. That is a phenominal UWA lens. Very low distortion and super sharp across the frame.

Click to expand...

For anyone else interesting in the Tokina, here's an interesting review http://www.kenrockwell.com/tokina/11-16mm.htm

malch said:

Have you considered one of the Cokin or Lee filter systems?

Click to expand...

Cokin seems pretty cheap, although I am limited to a max of 1.2 ND. Maybe this would be fine for my requirements?

http://www.play.com/Electronics/Electronics/4-/8902870/Cokin-P-Series-Filter-Holder/Product.html?ptsl=1&ob=Price&fb=0&&engine=froogle_electronics&keyword=Cokin+P+Series+Filter+Holder&_ $ja=tsid:11518|cc:|prd:8902870|cat:Camera+Accessories

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&sku=111008&is=REG&A=details&Q=#features

Stacking 2 1.2's would definately give enough stops down but you then would suffer IQ degredations as a result ?

I shoot architecture on quite a regular basis albeit non-professional (at least kind of), and I've been thinking a lot about my equipment. I'll share some of my thoughts, maybe they're helpfull.

If you can't afford a FX body with a TS lens or a FX body with a nice wide angle lens your best bet is to get a DX with as much MP as possible. With the current Nikon line-up that would mean either a D300(s) or a D90. Of those 2 I'd certainly pick the D300. Of course you don't need the super AF of that camera but the handling of a Dx00 body is simply a lot nicer imo. Besides that, if your architecture shooting includes interiors then I wouldn't want to live without a proper MLU.

That being said I'm going to suggest something that might upset some people here but it's simply something that I've been seriously considering myself. My suggestion would be to consider switching to Canon. There's several reasons:

1) Canon simply has more MP. Sure Nikon will catch up, but Canon has always been ahead in the MP race and with architecture MP matter. When you don't have a TS lens you need to correct the perspective of your images or compose in a way that there's not much distortion. In both cases, every MP counts.

2) Canon has an affordable option to get into the FF game (important if you want to use TS lenses). Both a used 5D or a new 5D mkII are offers I wouldn't refuse.

3) Canon has a 17mm TS lens. I'm sure Nikon will be introducing bodies that will match the current Canon offering in MP but I'm not sure they'll ever produce a lens like that.

Am I saying you can't do architecture photography with Nikon? Of course not. It's just that if you'd have to buy into a system based on the current line-ups Canon seems to be the best choice for architecture. I really believe that the Nikon advantages that are being touted around here are real, but they're simply not that relevant to architecture photography...

When it comes to lenses I wouldn't sell the Nikon 12-24 for the Tokina 11-16. You may get a little more resolution with that lens but you'll also get some more CA as well. I'd save the money for a FF setup.

--
http://www.klaastuin.nl

P MACDONALD said:

Cokin seems pretty cheap, although I am limited to a max of 1.2 ND. Maybe this would be fine for my requirements?

Click to expand...

I have a Cokin filter holder but I now think the Lee product is slightly better designed.

Also, I've heard some bad comments about Cokin's grad ND's adding a color cast. The HITECH grad ND's are very well thought of.

I realize that a straight ND is a slightly different beast but I assume they use the same basic technology/processes.

P MACDONALD said:

Stacking 2 1.2's would definately give enough stops down but you then would suffer IQ degredations as a result ?

Click to expand...

Stacking 2 or even 3 is not uncommon. Obviously, you'll need to take care to keep the filters clean and unscratched. But I wouldn't completely rule it out.

I think you're in the UK but you could try calling or emailing these people:

http://www.2filter.com/

They do filters all day, every day, and I've found them incredibly helpful in figuring out what to get. They have good prices and they do ship internationally. It can't do much harm to ask, anyway.

sell everything you have and buy a 14-24 and a D700 - then you're really rocking architurally speaking. what I mean is you have to go full-frame as you're serious about architecture. if budget is limited buy used 5D (my mint example is up on Ebay right now) and a 16-35 L
tony