Jump to content

yuri

Members
  • Content Count

    10
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. yuri

    Image Stabilisation

    Thanks for suggesting Tamron. I tried the short 17 - 50 2.8. Interesting range ... but it it not very sharp, and that is what I expect in a wide angle lens: a lot of detail, as wide shots usually have a lot of detail. The Tamron also 24 - 70 2.8 seemed a good option. There is no comparable lens by Nikon. Nikons 24 - 70 2.8 does not have an image stabiliser. But, sorry - I am sending back the Tamron tomorrow. It is not a 2.8, rather a 2.8 1/2. It has a yellow tone to it. It has by way less contrast than the nikon lenses. It has a lot of distortion a the lower end of the range. And again, it does not give enough detail for a wide angle. The image stabilizer works quite well, though, and  I also like the manual focusing on this one. It works better than the modern Nikon lenses. So after a lot of testing I ended up with a Nikon 24 - 120 4.0. VR . The image stabilization is excellent for filming. It has a lot of detail - even more than my Nikon 24mm 2.8.. Manual focussing is a problem though - the image "jumps" when you change the direction of the focus ring. A group of lenses is moving sideways. It has a lot of distortion at 24 to about 35 mm. But what is really giving me a headache - it is only a 4.0. By still, i did not find a better solution, so I will stick with that lens for now. By the way - in the very nice Nikon 16 - 35 4.0 VR the image stabilization does not work nearly as effective as in this one. And the 16 - 35 is almost impossible to focus manually, the distances are so close together on the focus ring. Otherwise this would have been my choice. It gives good contrast, distortion is not so bad, and it gives a lot of detail, as you would expect in a wide angle. 
  2.   I shot with the d5200 for a couple of days, and watching the footage today I also discovered some banding in the shots - this is frustrating. The banding appears in low contrast areas such as nearly white sky or white walls with almost no detail, but sometimes also in dark shadows ...
  3. yuri

    d5200 hack

    this might work for the d7100 - I choose the d5200 though. First it has that little display you can move, which is very important for the project I am on, second, d7100 produces strange artifacts in very fine detail. I saw that in the test I made, and I guess it is because of the missing low pass filter on this camera. The d7100 gives even more detail then the d5200, but these artifacts are a problem - they look like scaling artifacts. On the d5200 it don't find these artifacts, and also I don't see any moiree problems so far. So this is the better camera for filming, but it does not accept any full manual lenses, or anything without a chip.
  4. yuri

    d5200 hack

    Actually I only tried a AF-S lens on the d7100 - that lens of course has a chip. By the way - problem only exits in live view, but you need live view for filming.
  5. yuri

    d5200 hack

    Sorry folks, that's what I was expecting, when I bought the camera. But actually it does not accept any of my nice old manual focus Nikon lenses. I simply gives an error message, when you connect any old lens without chip to it. Liveview does not work with these lenses. The same thing happens with any AF-S lens, as soon as you start moving the aperture ring in liveview mode. The camera demands to set the aperture back to f 22 and lock it. If you are trying this while recording, it immediatley stops recording. You here the "clack" of the mirror, and that's it. That is why I send back the first d5200 I had bought for the project I am shooting right now - you cannot change the aperture while in live mode. No way. Then I bought the 5D Mark III, because with this it is no proplem. Handling is fine with this Camera, as well as with the Mark II. Also using the Nikon lenses with an adapter by Novoflex works well. But looking at the graded an sharpened footage I had shot, I was very unhappy with the Canon camera. The little Nikon simply has more detail and the image in general looks more natural, no moiree, less artifacts. I am shooting for a documentary for the big screen - so I send the Mark III back and bought a d5200 again - despite all the trouble with the aperture setting - and this really is a problem, i guess you know what I mean. By the way, I also made a little test with the d7100 - same thing, you are not allowed to move the aperture ring manually. The error message on both cameras covers 3/4 of the screen, and it is also displayed on the HDMI-out signal. So you cannot record this pictures externally. You will tough see the effect of opening an closing the aperture on the part of the image that surrounds the error message - it is only, you can not use it. The camera ist capable of doing it, but the software says No! That's why I am asking for a hack! Only for demonstration:
  6. yuri

    Image Stabilisation

    thank you, folks.         Is there a 17-55 2.8 with VR? Seems a good option, but I don't think it exists. Only without VR! I tried that in the store, it's nice, but no VR! Is the Tamron 17-50/2.8 VC really any better than the Sigma?     sorry, but with a viewfinder and a pistol grip I am not invisible anymore. I got some shots using a Zacuto Z-Finder evf I connected to the camera with a simple Manfrotto tripod plate and a ballhead. With this simple construction the Z-Finder evf almost was at the same level as the lens. Images were fine - very steady, in a medium wide shot using the 35mm f2.0. Especially if you are following an object, this gives nice shots, an it is kind of fun, except for the poor resolution of the Zacuto Z-Finder evf. (By the way - does anyone know a better viewfinder? Small, lightweight, but better resolution? Full 720p would be great for this camera.) But obviously this will not work for the shots I am thinking of - just holding the camera in your hands, no viewfinder attached, looking at the display from above, and filming wide shots, little movement / movement only in the distance. So far the Nikon 16-35 f/4 VR for me seems the best option - only the focus ring on the lens does not move very fluid. It has this strange friction to it, that some of the modern nikon zooms have. So once you start focussing manually, you will somehow move the camera. That was the good thing about the Sigma lens - the focus ring runs very easy and fluid in manual mode.
  7. yuri

    d5200 hack

    Who is hacking the d5200? Need to change the aperture while shooting!
  8. yuri

    Image Stabilisation

    Hi there,   I am a german-based cinematographer an I have observed dslr video only from a distance until recently. To many problems to really see the picture. The GH2 I once played with for a day or two, I actually liked he best - lots of detail in the pictures, and that little screen is useful - but than again the clipping of the highlights and the banding in the sky, and worst, those deep shadows - not really an option. Now I have a project I have to shoot with a small camera, it need to be almost invisible. I did some testing with the Mark III and the d5200. At first I was really impressed with the d5200 - I like the image, it has a lot of detail, the dynamic range is not bad, an it feel rather natural. But then there is the noise in low light ... and the handling is a mess. You need to go out of the live-view to change the aperture - not very usefull. Then I had a close look at the Mark III, which has a much better handling - except for the fixed screen. But comparing the images of both, in the Mark III I saw all the things I don't like about dslr video. So for me it is the d5200 - the pictures feel much more natural an organic. Anyway, here is my Topic: I am looking for a proper wide angle zoom with image stabilisation. I am shooting documentary style, and I cannot use a shoulder rig or anything like that. Has anyone got experience with this type of lenses? I am talking about the nikon 1:4 16-35mm VR or similar. I am right now testing a Sigma 2,8 17-55, and it is not convincing. To soft, to much distortion, all straight lines are bending, no matter whether it is at 17, 21, 24 or even 50 milimeters. So what is a proper lens with image stabilisation?  
×
×
  • Create New...