Quite true, at higher ISOs.
If there is enough light (or a tripod) the M10 and the DF lag behind by 1.5 stops at low ISO settings, as mentioned earlier. You’ll be able to take pictures with whatever camera you choose. Concentrate on the image, composition and such things. It’s not pixels that are important…
Thanks for the complement but when the formula’s and calculations are starting i am lost too.
I learned the basics and try to understand the definitions so i can connect things together.
So that’s what you can try. Wrap your head around the basics, delete all clouds in your head. Take time to understand, knibble information pieces.
Most things in the box are, wel just in the box. You only need to know which button to push to get something done. And yes it’s better to understand what a button is activating inside the box but if not and the box is doing what you want that fine too.
Don’t forget to ackknowledge what you do know.
Well, anything I buy, with rare exceptions, will lag behind tomorrow. I can play that game with Leica, but see no need to do so. I can play that game with Nikon, but I can’t afford to. I fully understand Joanna’s reasoning for the D850 - it may well be the last DSLR from Nikon that will satisfy her needs - just as the F6 was the last SLR, after which there was - well, the DSLR. And after the DSLR, there will be Mirrorless. I fully agree with the words that I highlighted, but in my case I already have the D750, and for the kinds of photos I’ve been taking lately, it’s technically the “best” camera I now own.
Does it matter? Probably. Composition and timing and “the image” are most important, but I can’t picture Ansel Adams using a lens for which he had a better replacement.
I guess I’ll be finishing up my photos from my recent trip, including my “homework” for Joanna, and then perhaps dust off the D750 and challenge it, and me, to get at least a single image each day that I am satisfied with. Then there’s the processing - but I feel better about that now than at any time in the past two years.
Translated into my brain - find the optimum balance for whatever dynamic range I am dealing with… …and if possible, realize how I am using what I’ve learned here to achieve that.
If I can accomplish both, I will have accomplished at least part of what Wolfgang is suggesting. (…and I have no intent in starting a new discussion on a different topic until I am comfortable with Dynamic Range.)
PhotoLab has many tools, which does not mean that we have to use them all. Processing features can help make a picture or break the image. Happiness has more to do with wanting what you’ve got, than with getting what you want.
Using a camera or software is like wearing blue jeans. It takes a while before it gets comfortable. Happy to hear you feel better about the things you do.
Thank you! 
Your welcome,
Tonecurve can help go get that LightRoom saturated feel you get when using there “dehaze function”.
You have to understand the difference between Dehaze and Clarity.
This has something to do with sharpening, Clarify, and nonsharpening blackdots adding, Dehaze.
In DxO you have intelligent Clearviewplus which is a combination in microdots on edges (sharpening) and colorsaturation by adding blackdots in colorplanes.(nonsharping)
As i suggest in this post collect some images to play with and push everything around till it’s overdone and then push more to see what’s breaking down.
This shows most different contrasty tools behaviour besides the local adjustment version which behave the the same but with more local controle which use is a different chapter.
Every time you encounter a unsolvable problem in a image : create a Virtual Copy on the stage it’s developing get stuck and start pulling and pushing several tools which would suspect to help around, create every time you find a certain solution leave it and create a new VC to try something else. After awile you start to see the different outcome’s on the different part’s of the image due the use of different tools and combination of tools.
VC’s don’t be real Harddisk space taking image’s so they don’t turn up in other application’s to confuse you.
And enjoy searching for clues. 
You should try moving to LF from digital, like we did but, when scanning a 5" x 4" negative gave us a 115Mpx image, when our digital cameras at that time were only 6Mpx, seemed very futuristic.
Now, of course, I could always move up to the Hasselblad H6D-100c with 100Mpx but, at a price of $33,000 for the body, I would not be making enough money out of it to warrant the price difference between that and my Ebony, which only cost me £1,500 at the time.
Or maybe we should all jump on the ship of Samsungs latest 200Mpx smartphone camera chip? One minor problem (well several actually) - a fixed focal length of “wide” and no external knobs to twiddle.
Agreed 100%
The beauty of Nikon digital bodies is that you can choose the quality of glass without having to replace the whole camera, just as you can with an LF camera.
The biggest problem with modern digital cameras is the most “average” people prefer to use zoom lenses, which straightaway reduce the quality of any image over a prime lens. The biggest problems with prime lenses are needing a big sack to carry them all in and the possibility of dust on the sensor every time you change lens. Compromise, compromise, always compromise - unless, of course, you buy one body for each lens 
And about time too 
And don’t bother with the apple for the teacher, I already have a couple of those 
I admit it I am an average photographer and use zoom lenses for almost everything…
it’s just a lot easier and a lot less swapping lenses.
It helps to keep up with the group because changing lenses on foot wile walking often means waiting for trouble. falling down, lenses falling down, lampposts crossing spontaneously… you name it it could be happening to you.
i have one backpack which is a compromise in storing photostuf and personal stuf. when it’s full it’s full.
So if i buy a new lens something else needs to go. on a shelf or on secondhand market.
i am eyeballing a pl 35-100mm f2.8ii but this pushes my 14-140mm f3.5-5.6 out. (which is a great little walkabout lens in daytime.)
Every time a 35-100mmf2.8 goes by on secondhand market i restrain myself… "don’t need it, You don’t need it! No!!! use what you have more, don’t wast your money you have the focal length it adds nothing to the set…,vs it’s only money! it’s a few dinners in a restaurant! which is gone after two day’s down the drain… So get it! you life one’s! the wife doesn’t have to know! she buy’s shoes and clothing! so you can… 
and then it’s often gone bought by an other enthousiast … saved by the bell so to speak. 
The only prime i have is a 15mm f1.7 marvellous color and contrast rendering sharp as a blade.
My Nikon lens collection includes lots of old high-quality glass manual-focus lenses for the original F and F2 cameras, and as of when I bought my F4 several (old) auto-focus lenses, many of which are AI. My newer (not “new”) lenses were for my digital DSLR’s, and as of today all my lenses (with rare exceptions) will work on my Nikon Df, and most of the more important lenses will work on the D750.
I spend a lot of time (or used to) in India, which is horribly dusty, and a zoom lens was a better solution than constant sensor cleaning.
Fast forward to today - I’ve got all these lenses, and more. I can use my older glass lenses, or my newer lenses (several are zoom). I suppose if I knew what to buy for the highest quality, I could even buy new lenses.
Rather than sort this out right now, can I ask you which lenses you prefer the most for high quality images, a wider angle, a normal, and a mild telephoto? My 80-200 zoom is big, bulky, heavy, and as sharp or more so than any other lens I own. I don’t know about Nikon’s “consumer” 50mm lenses. I have the standard “AF-S Nikkor 50mm 1:1.8 G” lens, along with my “AF Nikkor 24mm 1:2.8” lenses, which I have used the most. Both are light, and reasonably inexpensive. For prime lenses, what do you suggest?
The SD card is still in my M10 - I spent yesterday at home catching up and ordering a Wolff oven, and never even left my home. Today I’m “back in business” so to speak, but first thing on my agenda is a nice breakfast, as soon as I finish catching up on my computer. As for an “apple for the teacher”, I have some I plan to donate to Aravind Eye Hospital in India. Maybe I should send one to you?
Hi Peter,
and like a friend of mine said …“imagine you die now! …what’s with all the money you can’t take with you into the grave”
Black humour but… 
Yep they can use the last penny to screw the covin-lid tied and burn it. 
First i need to go out more to visit places take the cam and wonder around.
Too buzy burning time with nothing special.
administration, pc things, housekeeping errands, kids things, wife’s things, work, sport, sleep, couch binche watching series, say covid’s indoctrination for home being pattern’s.
Buying stuff doesn’t change that.(much)
Let say i am one legg over the fence… 
keep you posted
I have always found Ken Rockwell to be a good source of advice and one zoom lens that I have, that he rates highly, is the Nikon 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6 VR, which he reckons, and I agree, can replace a whole bag full of lenses for everyday use.
Apart from that, and the 80-400 I mentioned in the B&W thread, our other lenses are:
I used to have the 28-200 zoom but it suffers from a lot of chromatic aberration and DxO do not do an optical module for it and it badly it needs for distortion and vignetting correction.
So focus stacking only works with these new lenses with an “S” as you noted?
If I buy anything “new”, I should future-proof my lens be looking for this?
I had no idea…
AF-S-lens. Silence wave motor. The lens has n internal motor to focus. Older lenses have an focus system driven mechanical by the camera: AF lenses.
George
Gotcha! A few of my lenses have this, will need to check.
Not planning to buy anything new, yet.
And now a camera with that function.
George
Right before I got to take my (not very impressive) homework photo of the night sky, I set up my camera to capture the launch of the Lucy Rocket two nights ago from Cape Kennedy. I put my 50mm Voigtlander on the M10, resting on my travel tripod, took a few exposures to see if I was in “the ballpark” (meaning I could tell the difference between sky and land after 20 seconds or so. I saw the blast of orange light at the bottom, opened the shutter, and held everything steady for around 20 seconds until I was sure the rocket was out of my field of view.
I got to process it in PL4 earlier this morning. In the dark black background of PL4 I got to where I could barely see colors in the trees and bushes in front of me. While I was standing there, I could barely see the outlines of the trees.
I’ll post my end result below, and ask if there is anything I could do better next time.
I think I see slight wavering of the path of the rocket, which I suspect is movement in my camera/tripod/hand. My stars are lines, not “dots”, but that’s because I forgot my “hold the earth still tool”. I love having a bit of color in the trees and vegetation, and the dashed line at the lower right must have come from an airplane.
I will also post my homework assignment from Joanna below, but I think it deserves a grade of “D” if that. Also with the 50mm lens, but I was just guessing at a lot of things. Maybe it gets a C- but no more. 
No processing - not sure where to start, other than turning off everything from PL4 and adding my watermark before mailing to my brother. Some stars appear “blue” - probably my fault somehow. This was the brightest part of the sky, and at the time, I mostly wanted to get back into bed!
L1003521 | 2021-10-16.dng (22.0 MB)
L1003521 | 2021-10-16.dng.dop (12.0 KB)
L1003523 | 2021-10-16.dng (26.2 MB)
Maybe you can ask them to go off again and kept the rocket inside the frame?
Then you would be seeing what caused the flamy line.
al that said, wel done handheld… holding your breath for 20 sec… don’t pay attention on the heartbeat ramping up and don’t forget to watch the cameraviewer and not the rocket.
Like I wrote, it was on my tripod, but I was trying to stabilize everything with my body, watching ONLY the rocket and trying my hardest NOT to think about the camera. My tripod has a “hook” at the very bottom. I think if I attach a brick to it, that will keep things steadier. I can take a photo of it. We had a discussion here about tripods a while back, and I didn’t like the light-weight choices. I figured I only had one shot at this (for the upcoming three months I’ll be home, no rockets), and this is the best I’ve ever done, thanks to all of you and PhotoLab !
true, and the same goes for gear
