Prices on the 70-200 Nikon cover above start at $79.99, and I’ve got to admit I’m really tempted. There are a number of different camo styles to try too.

Although the Lenscoat site has covers up to 600mm listed, they do custom jobs too; check out the video for making a cover for Canon’s 1200mm f/5.6 lens on the Lenscoat home page.

Nikon have just announced the launch of the D300s, the successor to the number one selling D300. Aimed at the prosumer, the D300s will be the flagship DX body for Nikon ahead of the D90.

The most striking addition is the ability to record HD video. As I’ve discussed before, I’m not a fan of video on DSLRs so this isn’t a big point for me. Dual memory card slots is useful though – that was one of the features from the D3 that I would have loved on the D700. Apart from this the only other headline grabber is a new Quiet Shutter mode, which locks the mirror up for a while when you take the shot. I’ve never considered Nikon shutters to be noisy in the first place but this will be useful for wedding or nature photographers at those critical moments.

The only update I can see on the new 18-200mm DX VR lens is a focus lock button – the VR side of things hasn’t been changed. The original version is still a cracking lens and in my opinion should be in the arsenal of all Nikon DX users.

Nikon have also announced an update to the popular (and my favourite) 70-200 AF-S VR lens. Some criticism was levelled at the first version mentioning soft corners; personally I’ve never experienced this to any great degree. This new version is optimised for FX users (D700, D3, D3X) and the VR is boosted too – it’s going to be a wonderful lens, but I’m not upgrading yet.

Details of all the new gear is on the Nikon website.

If this is true then well done guys. I’m a firm believer that you should use the right tool for the job and I’d personally use a nice 3CCD high definition camcorder. Then again I’m not a film maker so what do I know?

Reverie‘s synopsis is as follows:

Set in the remote wilderness of the Illinois River Valley six years after a catastrophic fire devastated the area, a series of events draws the paths of two former friends towards intersection. Their reunion reopens the wounds of a dark past and threatens to collapse the fragile lives they have constructed since.

I bet their wounds were caused by the inclusion of HD video on DSLRs. Check out the details at IMDB.

Check out this great video from LensRentals.com comparing the different sizes of Nikon telephoto lenses. I’m never going to grumble about the size of my 70-200 f/2.8  again!

To think that wildlife shooters use a 600mm f/4 regularly as well – at least their wallet would be lighter…

This is one of the reasons that I chose the AF-S 17-35 f/2.8 over the 14-24 – I’d be paranoid about scratching the front element every time I used it. The 17-35 uses the same 77mm filters as my 24-70 f/2.8 and 70-200 VR. One (admittedly expensive) circular polariser will suit all three.

Oh, and it costs $624.95. But at least the shipping’s free. If you’re interested, you can order the filter holder from Adorama here.

• Not letting the shutter fire if there’s no memory card – this hasn’t happened to me yet but you hear of the horror stories!
• Using the rear scroll wheel to move through the pictures you’ve taken (instead of using the multiselector).
• Instant zoom in on an image using the centre button on the multiselector
• Customising menus for frequently changed settings.

Rather than go through exactly how to do each of these watch the episode – you can find it at Nikon D Town TV.

I just thought I’d post the aftermath of my challenge at the weekend. As I managed to get my month old son covered in soot (no, not up the chimneys yet, it was a steam engine – honest) it meant a bath was running almost as we walked in the door. A little later Tom was lying gazing out into the twilight and I had a f/1.4 lens on the camera. Available light – fantastic.

Nikon D700, 50mm f/1.4, 1/30 at f/1.4

The narrow depth of field shooting at f/1.4 is something else – check out the shot above. I was aiming to get the eye closest to the lens in focus, and even with him being so small Tom’s left eye is blurred. I was lucky on the first shot in being able to move myself into position so I was roughly parallel.

Next lens challenge – 70-200 I think!

I completed a pilgrimage of sorts recently by managing to visit Grays of Westminster. Based in Pimlico, this is an exclusively Nikon camera store from a bygone age.

It’s an interesting place, in perfect character with the surrounding stores in Westminster. Upstairs is where the new equipment is displayed, and pride of place belongs to the new D3X. Downstairs past their reading room is the second hand equipment – an array of F5 bodies in the first cabinet is testament to the demand of digital. The most recent second hand digital body was a D3, but I’m happy with my D700. Unless anyone wants to donate one of course…

Image courtesy of Prweb.com

Spoiler alert – don’t read on if you want to know their findings. If I tell you all three cameras have the same number of pixels (12.3 MP) it should tell you the answer.

The “shocking” result was that the four-thirds sensor gave the most detail and therefore looked sharper in low ISO studio conditions. As the lighting conditions changed, the D3 came into its own, and gave consistent results past ISO 3200. The D300 slotted comfortably in between.

Why is this predictable? All three sensors have the same amount of pixels. So the G1 fits 12.3 million pixels into a sensor measuring 18 x 13.5mm. The D3 sensor is 36mm x 24mm. As the pixels are closer packed on the G1 they are able to record more detail, but also suffer from more noise in adverse lighting conditions.

This is the same reason that some wildlife photographers still maintain an APS-C body like the D300 alongside their full frame camera. If you are taking shots of a distant animal intending to crop them later you’ll potentially have more detailed shots as the pixels are more closely packed.

So why have a D3? Because amongst other things it’s consistent and reliable across all lighting conditions, not to mention the build quality and incredible AF. But only a priviledged few can afford to spend over £2000 on a camera. This article shows if you want a light camera that gives decent results in good lighting then the G1 is worth a look.