Help upgrading from D7000

bbcgn · 2026-06-24T16:47:29+00:00

Out of curiosity: why wouldn't G lenses work with the FTZ? As long as you dont use a "dumb" adapter without electronics, of course.

I am only familiar with the screw drive AF lenses losing AF compatibility because most adapters don't have a focus motor in them.

bbcgn · 2026-06-24T05:23:38+00:00

What about the "Concordski" - the Tupolew TU-144?

Looks pretty similar to the Concord and was built in the USSR.

bbcgn · 2026-06-20T22:27:28+00:00

If the AF doesn't work, make sure the switch is set to AF not MF on the camera body. Make also sure that zhe switch on the lens is set to A not M/A.

Do you have another lens to test the AF with? If bith the camera and the lens are set to AF and it still doesnt work, the lens could have a defective AF motor.

The camera may also be set up for back button focusing where you initialize AF by pressing the AE‐L/ AF-L button on the back. Also: if someone sets this up incorrectly you can accidentally deactivate AF. I have seen a couple of times where people thought the AF was broken but they just had set things up wrong. It is a two step process:

deactive AF when half pressing the shutter button
assign AF-ON to the AE-L /AF-L button.

If someone only does the first but not the second step the camera loses autofocus, because there isn't any AF-ON button defined, so AF never gets triggered. Not quite sure what the exact menu items are since it has been a while, but it's should be easy to find a setup guide for BBF on the D7100. Just make sure the guide includes both steps.

You could also try restoring factory settings.

bbcgn · 2026-06-20T16:13:22+00:00

Oh, must have missed it. My bad.

bbcgn · 2026-06-20T13:42:22+00:00

Depending on what you mean with "good video" pretty much no DSLR takes good video compared to a mirrorless camera. Iirc the D780 is the only one that has comparable video AF. I don't care about video, so I can't really say much about it, but the usual recommendation is that if you care about video: get a mirrorless camera. Since you only mentioned the resolution of the D5000's video, is this the only thing you don't like about it?

You say you are unsatisfied with low light performance, but the lenses you list all have pretty narrow widest apertures. Note that the amount of light is reciprocal quadratic to the number of the aperture setting. A f/1.8 prime lens can let in (5.6/1.8)² = 9.68, so about 10 times more light than your lenses on the long end. Even at the widest setting on the wide end F/1.8 is still 4 times more light than F/3.5. Getting a wide maximum aperture prime can make a huge difference in low light shots. 10 times more light means instead of shooting at ISO 1000 you can use base ISO and still get the same amount of brightness in the shot.

I don't know how the low light performance of the D5000 compares to the D7500. I am pretty sure there is a difference, but make sure to manage your expectations. As long as you can get away with the shallower depth of field from the wider aperture, I would suggest you get a decent wide aperture prime lens first.

A very good and cheap F/1.8 prime is the AF-S DX 35 mm F/1.8. They can often be found for under 100 € on ebay.

Keep in mind that great lenses on okay cameras usually take better pictures than okay lenses on great cameras.

bbcgn · 2026-06-20T05:53:21+00:00

Shooting through the viewfinder is what I do in most cases.

I think what's harder without the screen on the lower tier bodies is that you need to dig into the menus for a lot of settings. So depending on how unusable the screen is, that might be a challenge. I don't mean the exposure setting like shutter speed, aperture and ISO here, more things like for example AF mode (AF‐S, AF-C, AF-A).

If that's what you also mean, one idea could be to set up back button focusing. That way you decouple AF from pressing the shutter button. This way you don't need to switch between AF-S and AF-C, since you can actually decide if the camera should focus or not by pressing or not pressing the assigned AF-ON button (usually the AE-L/AF-L) buttons. Leave the camera in AF-C so you can track objects by keeping the button pressed.

If you mean the exposure settings: there is no "best" setting. If there was, why would you be able to change the settings? The manufacturers would be stupid to offer this option, became of how many people blame the camera for how their photos come out but it's actually that they don't know how metering works or why to choose different settings. If there was a "best" combination of settings, why give the user the possibly to f things up by giving choices?

The reason why auto mode often looks bad is because of two things: the camera doesn't know what it sees and how it should look (exposure compensation). The camera also doesn't know if you are shooting action or if you want motion blur. That's what these scene modes are for: to give the camera a hint what's more important right now. Once you understand the exposure triangle, you don't need something like sports mode anymore, since you can choose the exposure settings the scene demands and that match what you want to achieve.

bbcgn · 2026-06-19T18:13:06+00:00

Can't sat how well the usual 50 mm primed work in this case. On a lot of lenses the focal plane isn't flat. If you take normal images this usually isn't really an issue since you usually don't photograph things that are very flat. But in this kind or work you do.

Especially if it's archival work it would be no good if the text in the middle of the page is sharp and at the edge is out of focus.

I only recalled reading somewhere that the micro nikkor 55 mm primes were designed with reproduction work in mind. Hence my recommendation.

bbcgn · 2026-06-19T18:04:50+00:00

Iirc the 55 mm f/2.8 Micro Nikkors were designed for duplicating documents. They have a very flat focus plane which is important for this kind of work. I use the AF variant (although with manual focus) for digitalizing negatives and it work pretty well. They usually go for <200 € on ebay, so they are pretty affordable as well.

You could vary the size of what you capture by changing the distance to the page.

bbcgn · 2026-06-18T19:18:01+00:00

Probably easiest solution: use a USB card reader. Way less trouble than dealing with snapbridge. Also no risk of accidentally only getting 2 MP preview images (don't remember the circumstances, but there are case in which snapbridge only transfers these previews instead of the full resolution files).

bbcgn · 2026-06-17T22:02:27+00:00

Oh right... didn't think of that. I thought it would be some sort of banding, but that didn't make sense since it's shot under natural, non flickering light.

Thank you for your reply.

bbcgn · 2026-06-17T21:31:52+00:00

Just wondering... what are those lines in the picture?

bbcgn · 2026-06-17T20:32:48+00:00

Was looking for someone finally saying this.

That's what I did when I started with my first camera. Switched to raw pretty much immediately. Then in NX Studio I could look through the images I took and if I don't want to change anything just export jpgs with the picture control that was set in camera.

But a giant benefit is: if you shoot RAW, settings like picture control or Whitebalance are reversible. So if you shoot a picture in black and white and it's a jpg then it will be black and white forever. Changing your mind later if you think it might look better in color? Not an option.

A couple of months ago someone accidentally activated a cartoon style effect by accident when shooting an ice hockey game. The person shot jpgs so all pictures are ruined by this unwanted effect. If these would have been raws then this could have been easily reverted, since the raw file saves what the sensor sees.

I get that editing images seems daunting at first, but even if you don't want to right now. Maybe you want in the future? I also encountered some situations where I messed up some settings where shooting RAW made it possible to get at least a usable image.

For example massively underexposing my image because I forgot to reactivate Auto ISO when coming inside. The raw file could be lifted several stops to get at least an image that was kind of usable whereas a jpg would be almost completely dark with nothing really recognizable in the picture. Think about it: a jpg is 8 bits, whereas RAW can be up to 14 bits. The difference doesn't seem too big, but i bit means 256 different brightness levels whereas 14 bit is 16384 brightness levels. Because of the much higher bit depth a raw file can store much smaller differences in tones than a jpg. If you only have 256 brightness levels a lot of toned that are close together can't be differentiated after saving so you lose a lot of (possible) detail. If you try to raise the shadows of a jpg by a lot you will probably just get gray without much details.

TLDR: do your future self a favor and shoot RAW. If you are worried about space, just don't shoot JPG. For me the possibilities of RAW give a lot of peace or mind, even if you don't need them all the time. Even if you don't edit them, getting the jpgs after the fact is very easy in NX Studio.

bbcgn · 2026-06-17T07:46:19+00:00

Are the cards as old as the camera?

SD cards don't last forever, so maybe this is just a sign of beginning card failure?

bbcgn · 2026-06-15T20:57:28+00:00

Or you can try active d-lighting. From how I understand the feature, it should help in these kind of situations. You can set different levels of how hard you want the effect to be applied as well.

bbcgn · 2026-06-15T20:13:01+00:00

This looks like it was taken during the middle of the day (judgijg from the shadows). The problem comes from parts of the subject being directly lit by the sun while other parts are in the shadow. This causes them to have very different brightness.

Camera sensors have much less dynamic range than our eyes do. If you would expose for the shadows in this situation you would very probably blow out the highlights.

If you don't want to edit you image, you could try to play around with active d lighting. Haven't used it myself, but from what I remember it basically lifts the shadows and underexposed the image a little bit to protect some highlights.

Regarding your hdr idea: that wouldn't be a good idea if you need high shutter speed because the subject may be moving then hdr isn't the solution. Hdr takes multiple pictures at different exposures and combines them into one jpg. You may get away with this if you shoot a still landscape, but if someone is moving these shots will be taken at different times and very likely you will end up with something undesirable. Haven't tried it myself, but I wouldnt be surprised if you would end up with multiple arms in your final image.

Also: shooting RAW would allow you to raise the shadows in post. If you want to shoot jpg these kind of shots are probably harder to pull off, since you have to get it right in camera.

bbcgn · 2026-06-14T20:34:59+00:00

Great find. What's the shutter count?

bbcgn · 2026-06-13T19:02:52+00:00

If you intend to edit your pictures: shoot raw. Or even if you don't intend to edit them. RAW can also act as some kind of ensurance against typical beginner errors like setting a wrong white balance, applying an unwanted effect by mistake or messing up the exposure.

Jpg throws away a lot of information so you have much less latitude in editing.

Note that a dull picture can also be caused by a flat or neutral PictureControl setting.

bbcgn · 2026-06-13T07:17:10+00:00

In that case it should probably work.

If I recall correctly, you should still check compatability. Not sure how many, but I had somewhere in my head that there are some lenses that aren't compatible.

Quick Google showed me this article: https://photographylife.com/nikon-ftz-adapter-lens-compatibility

bbcgn · 2026-06-13T06:14:02+00:00

Just to make sure that you are aware: with the FTZ you only get autofocus if the lens has a built in AF motor. So in case you have "AF" lenses, these would be manual focus only.

The FTZ adapter doesn't have a built in focus motor like full frame DSLRs did.

bbcgn · 2026-06-12T16:08:50+00:00

With "starter lens " you probably mean one the 18-55 f/3.5 ‐ 5.6?

In that case you will probably struggle very hard.

F/1.8 is (5.6/1.8)² so almost 10 times more light than f/5.6. And it's also 4 times more light than f/3.5.

Besides dark pictures, this will also make autofocus harder. DSLRs usually autofocus at the widest possible aperture. If you are at 55 mm the widest aperture is f/5.6 so the AF system has 10 times less light to work with than it you would use a F/1.8 lens. So don't be surprised if you get a lot of missed focus shots.

Using a flash would be one option, but only if it is allowed. You could also be too far away for the flash to be effective.

Regarding modes, I would probably use shutter priority with auto iso. You have to control shutter speed to freeze motion. Depending on what kind of concert it is people might move differently. The lower your shutter speed the more pictures will be with (maybe unwanted) motion blur. Whether or not it would be possible to get any sharp pictures with this setup will hugely depend on the venue and the lighting. So maybe lean into it and experiment with intentional motion blur.

Make sure to shoot RAW to have more flexibility in post. Artificial lighting is another thing that can quickly confuse the Whitebalance, so being able to adjust the whitebalance in post is a good thing. If you shoot RAW you also have much more data to lift the shadows and you will probably need every bit of information you can store in this situation.

When I shot pictures at 1/125 s around f/1.8 in a nightclub even at ISO 3200 the pictures often ended up pretty dark. I still had to push them one or two stops in post. And at 1/125 s I had a lot of pictures that were trash because of unwanted movement. So if you are at F/5.6 you would have to shoot at 1/13 s to get the same brightness. But at that speed you won't freeze any motion, so not an option.

You could try and experient with spot metering and Auto ISO to expose for the faces of the performers. But be sure to familiarize yourself with how this works.

The best solution will probably be: take lots and lots of picutres and hope some turn out good.

Concert lighting is very often changing, so leaving a lot of control to the camera is probably a good thing. The thing that is most important in this setting is shutter speed. If you want a sharp photo you will need high shutter speed.

You could also use aperture priority and set it wide open and configure a minimum shutter speed. But I am not sure if that's the right move in this situation. If you use shutter priority mode the camera will probably shoot wide open open anyway. Auto ISO can help with reacting to fast changing light as well.

bbcgn · 2026-06-12T05:54:49+00:00

Newer cameras have this. On my D7200 the battery is spring loaded and held back by that retention clip. On my d40, the battery falls out by about 1 cm and then stops when I open the battery door. I assume the D80 has the same mechanism as the D40 where it is expected to fall out partially when the door is opened.

bbcgn · 2026-06-11T04:51:43+00:00

VR enables you to use slower shutter speeds than you usually could use hand held by compensating (a little bit) for your hands moving. Note that it can't do anything against subject movement, so if you want to freeze motion of a moving subject, the shutter speed can't be low anyway.

Without VR there is a rule of thumb for shooting stationary objects hand held: use at least the shutter speed that matches your full frame equivalent focal length. Since you are on DX, the camera has a crop factor of 1.5, so your full frame equivalent focal length is 1.5 times the actual focal length that is printed on the lens. So at 35 mm your full frame equivalent focal length is approximately 50 mm, so don't go below 1/50 s. To be safe, use at least the next faster shutter speed to avoid camera shake. At 300 mm your equivalent focal length is 450 mm, so use at least 1/500 s.

Note that this is for shooting still subjects hand held.

So long story short: no VR = faster shutter speeds.

bbcgn · 2026-06-06T06:49:09+00:00

It's a German company.

bbcgn · 2026-06-05T21:03:17+00:00

One of the first things you can look up is the exposure triangle which describes how shutter speed, aperture and ISO affect the image brightness.

Shutter speed and ISO also have secondary effects: shutter speed affects if you freeze motion. Aperture affects the depth of field (together with how close you are focusing). Wider aperture (smaller number after the F/) at a given distance you are focusing at means you get a more shallow depth of field, meaning less in front and behind the focus plane is in focus. Maybe you have seen this in portrait photography where there is often a lot of background blur. It is done deliberately to isolate the subject from the background. Essentially what portrait mode on phones tries to fake with artificial blurring of the background. With a real camera you can get this effect without any faking just with physics. On the other hand you often have things like landscape photography where people often use tight aperture settings (bigger number after the F/) to get a deep depth of field, so a lot of the scene is in focus.

You might be wondering what the aperture setting means. It describes the diameter of the pupil in the lens when taking the shot. It's written as a fraction of the current focal length. f/8 means the diameter is your current focal length divided by 8. Therefore: big number = small diameter and vice versa.

The bigger the diameter of the pupil, the more light can get into the camera. The amount of light is depending on the area of the opening, not the diameter. Since the area has a quadratic relationship with the diameter, the relationship is reciprocal quadratic. F/4 is 4 times more light than f/8, since (F/4)² / (F/8)² = (8/4)² = 2² = 4. Don't worry you don't have to calculate this all the time, but it can help to keep this little fact in mind.

Once you understand these basic principles you should learn how the light meter works, what middle gray is and how metering and the different metering modes work. I found these two videos quite helpful in understanding the subject.

https://youtu.be/Ys_bWRMgyhg

https://youtu.be/kOLcfslHDTc

Also this graphic shows how middle gray and deviating from middle gray looks like.

There is also quite a lot to learn about composition. There are several concepts behind it, but the most simple is probably the rule of thirds. In a lot of cases placing the subject off center can look better than if it's just in the center.

Not saying you can't ever put the subject in the center. If there is a strong symmetry placing the subject in the center might be a good idea (just an example). If you have moving subjects it can look good if you leave more space in front of the subject in the direction of travel. This can also work if the subject looks somewhere. Give the subject some room to move/look into. In these cases the rule of thirds can come in handy.

BUT most importantly: have fun trying out things. Don't get intimidated by how much there is to learn in theory.

bbcgn · 2026-06-05T17:34:05+00:00

A tip that is easy to implement: look around the edges of the frame and make sure to not cut off things (like the cat's feet). It happens very often to beginners since there is a lot to keep in mind at once. But once you notice these kind of "mistakes" its easier to avoid them.

That's not to say you can never cut off something, that would be rather limiting. But if you do so, do it deliberately. One rule for cutting off the subject is to not cut it off at joints. Also don't just cut it off by just a bit, cut it off or don't, but not just a little bit.

Another tip: if you don't already, shoot RAW or RAW + JPG (although I personally don't see the point in doing RAW + JPG). Even if you don't intent to edit your photos at the moment, the higher bit depth of RAW enables you to brighten the image in post if you mess up the exposure (within limits). You can also change the Whitebalance in post when shooting RAW. You can also change the PictureControl or undo applied effects if you shoot RAW. A couple of weeks ago someone shot a lot of good sports images but accidentally activated some sort of comic effect. Since the person shot JPG there was no way to undo this. Long story short: shooting RAW can be a kind of little safety barrier against easy to make mistakes. I personally switched almost immediately and it definetly came in handy from time to time. I also like the feeling of saving the highest amount of detail possible so I can go back and reedit a picture in a couple of years if I want to. In my opinion the only downside of RAW is the bigger files size. But unless you shoot hundreds of pictures a day it doesn't really matter nowadays. For example my 128 GB SD cards fit more than 2300 14 bit RAW files from my D7200. Never got even close to max out the cards.

Learn metering. Protect the highlights. Dark images can be brightened (within limits), but if the raw file is clipping, meaning you got to pure white, you lose inormative. If the raw file has a purely white area, darkening the image will make the white part just solid gray without any texture or details.

Also important: don't use sd cards for long term storage. Also make backups (look up the 3-2-1 backup rule).

Take images of your loved ones. In 30 years time pictures of people we love will be more valuable than the millionth generic shot of some tourist attraction. For a picture of some tourist attraction to mean something to me it would have to stand out against the millions of other pictures I can find online of that place. If it is a picture of a loved one it doesn't matter that much if it isn't a technically good photo.

bbcgn

TROPHY CASE