Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Geoffc" data-source="post: 194860" data-attributes="member: 8705">Art, I have no doubt about the quality of the originals and images like the first one at sunset would be challenging to say the least without the dynamic range of the D800. I would also agree that the 16-35 is a fantastic lens. I sometimes use mine on my D300s as well and it's silly sharp, I assume because it only uses the centre of the lens.I've had my D800 for a while and it was only on my recent holiday that I really started to love it. One reason is that I let the auto ISO run up to 6400 in low light situations and got some very acceptable results. For example I took this set handheld with my 24-120F4. They are not all at 6400 but&nbsp; I just let the camera keep the shutter speed where it needed to be via ISO.<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/teerecks/sets/72157635412546002/" target="_blank">http://www.flickr.com/photos/teerecks/sets/72157635412546002/</a></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Geoffc, post: 194860, member: 8705"] Art, I have no doubt about the quality of the originals and images like the first one at sunset would be challenging to say the least without the dynamic range of the D800. I would also agree that the 16-35 is a fantastic lens. I sometimes use mine on my D300s as well and it's silly sharp, I assume because it only uses the centre of the lens. I've had my D800 for a while and it was only on my recent holiday that I really started to love it. One reason is that I let the auto ISO run up to 6400 in low light situations and got some very acceptable results. For example I took this set handheld with my 24-120F4. They are not all at 6400 but I just let the camera keep the shutter speed where it needed to be via ISO. [URL]http://www.flickr.com/photos/teerecks/sets/72157635412546002/[/URL] [/QUOTE]

Verification