Nikon 17-35mm 2.8 ?

anyone doing a profile for Nikon 17-35mm 2.8 ? Surprised it wasn't included in the first place.

Thanks for sharing your profiles with the community. That is why Adobe created the ALPC and make it freely available, because we don't believe a single vendor can provide all the profiiles that our users need.Keep up the good work.
Cheers,
-Simon

Similar Messages

Does Lightroom 5.2 recognize Nikon 18-35mm f/3.5-4.5 G ?

Does Lightroom 5.2 recognize the new Nikon 18-35mm f/3.5-4.5 G ?
Is there in the lens profile?
Thanks

There are no Nikon 18-35 profiles that installed with Adobe products up through ACR 8.2 and LR 5.2.
Looking in the Lens Profile Downloader, there are six 18-35 Nikon lens profiles and while two say ED the other four don’t have a lens-type suffix, so it is unclear if any are for the G version.

Profile for Nikon AFS 17-35 f/2.8?

Is there a profile available for Nikon AFS 17-35 f/2.8? I cannot find it.

You're welcome for the info. and profile.
Yes, you should back the lens profile from the user contributed database, up to your local machine (your own hard drive) so you will not have to search for it each time.
WIthin Photoshop CS5, in the Lens Profile menu(that you have reached by choosing "Filter" on the top menu, then "Lens Correction"), you will see the middle menu on the right which states "Lens Profiles". Immediately to the right of this title is a small icon, that looks like a miniature triangle with lines beside it. Click it (left click). Choose "Save Online Profile locally". The profile is automatically saved to this location(I use WIndows XP and it varies according to your operating system):
C:\Documents and Settings\HP Owner\Application data\Adobe\Camera Raw\Lens Profiles\1.0
Downloaded
The file is not named well, I tried this with the D3S Profile and it is named with mixed up letters about 50 letters long. I would rename the file(right click the file and choose rename) to something more obvious, like "Nikon 17-35mm f2.8 AFS RAW" or such, and leave the extension as it is, which is .lcp.
Thus the lens profile is saved to your hard disk and Adobe should find it and show the new name if you renamed it,when you invoke the Lens Profile command and you have an image (Raw) shot with that lens and the exif data shows that lens to be the one taking the image.
Debra

Lens profile creator - Best Practises

Forgive me for my ignorance but I am completely new to Lens Profile Creator (and a novice photographer to boot ) and I must confess that I have not read the documentation in great depth, but I am a little confused.
I am a Lightroom 3 user and no lens profiles are availble in LR3 for two of my lenses. So, I took the plunge and have attempted to create the required profiles. The lenses in question are the AF-S Nikkor 16-85mm 1:3.5-5.6G ED and the Sigma 105mm 1:2.8D DG Macro. My camera is a Nikon D300.
The confusion is that documentation is not clear on how many combinations of aperture and focal length (for zoom lenses) is required (or recommended) in a single lens profile. For example, for my Sigma 105 should I shoot nine images at each available aperture (from f2.8 through f32 (i.e. a minimum of 72 images!) or is 9 images at a single aperture enough? If a single aperture is sufficient what should that aperture be?
Whilst I find the procedures to capture the required images straight forward ( if a little tedious) if I have to shoot nine images at each aperture for a zoom lens at minimum, maximum and the mid point of the zoom range, then the number of required images becomes enormous

I have developed five profiles so far and I can help you somewhat. You may also wish to hear from Adobe. The hardest profile that I developed was for my point and shoot, the Nikon Coolpix P6000, which shoots raw images, of .NRW Type, and my profile was for raw images, as are all of the profiles that I have done. I think the lens resolution is very low for that Coolpix camera compared to my other excellent fast Nikons, and the coolpix caused me much problems in my profiles, but I found ways around some of the issues, and had to use less images in some of my sets and I had to use the advanced tab to use less parameters in some cases, and that helped.
You want to vary at least the aperture in your sets. Sets are considered to be images with at least one thing common - such as aperture. So, you could have eight sets of nine images = 72 images, as you said, for your Sigma, if you use each aperture. However, you may also want to vary the distance from the target. Thus if you used two distances for each aperture, 72 x 2 = 144 images.
For your zoom; yes, I did shoot sets at each zoom focal length setting when I recently profiled my Nikon 17-35mm f2.8 lens. I had twenty sets of images with nine images in each set. That equals 180 images for that one lens. And I did not shoot different distances for each focal length. If I had done that, I could have had 360 images of course. I shot images for that lens at f2.8, f8, f11, and f22, and at zoom focal length settings for each aperture, of 17mm, 20mm, 24mm, 28mm, and 35mm.
You can choose to use the same chart or different charts; I used 3 charts for my 17-35 images, size 29x41, 36 points, and I also used chart with huge squares, size 9x13, 108 points, and a third chart of size 27x45, 54 points. *Be sure* to measure the needed square size for each set and change the chart size per what you used in that set and the square size, entered on the right side.
For my other profiles that I have done, I have used a minimum of twelve sets of nine images each, up to twenty sets of nine images each. I always shot mine at the minimum aperture, and at f8, and f11(per Eric's recommendation to use f11), and also at either f16 or f22, whichever I felt I used the most for that lens(nine sets each). I also used the minimum aperture for a given zoom fully zoomed out(my 24-120 at 120 yields f5.6) and zoomed in(the 24-120 at 24mm is at f3.5). And I used at least four focal lengths for my zooms(and I used different distances also for the point and shoot P6000 profile).
Hope this helps you.
Debra

Nikon 35mm 1.8 lens- Backordered or not selling any more?

I went into a BB location the other day seeing if they had the 35mm 1.8 Nikon lens. They didn't have any on the floor so the salesgirl looked up on her computer to see if any other stores had any.
Every store in the city showed a "0" and then she pointed out the word Deleted. She said that means that Best Buy doesn't sell it anymore.
So I noticed it's backordered on the web site.
So is it just available online? And is the estimated time of delivery accurate? It says from 5/20/6/01

Its backordered pretty much everywhere. Ever since its introduction a couple years go, it can sell out quickly when Nikon makes a batch. And the placces that may still have one, jacked the price up to insane levels (seen $450 already for a $200 lens).
But since the quake and tsunami, they are behind their schedule with no idea when they will get back to normal production schedules. Even though the 35mm is made in Taiwan, my bets the glass elements themselves are made in Japan. Estimates I've heard on various forums is that it may take over a year to get back to 'normal production levels'. Was waiting to see the specs on the forthcoming D4 as a replacement for my D3, but I'm pretty sure its been pushed back.
Just keep checking back online. Its a great little lens.
King of the World...

Lens Profile for Nikon Nikkor AF-S 18-35mm 1:3.5-4.5 G ED

Hi,
I'am missing the Lens Profile for the above Lens from Nikon. The Lens is build since January 2013 and I hoped that the new Lightroom 5 includes a Profile für this lens.
Does anybody know when Adobe will update Lightroom with this Profile? Or does anybody has build his own Lens Profile?
Best regards
Winfried

According to the Adobe Lens Profile Downloader:

35mm slides in FCP

Hi
I'd like to import 35mm slides into a FCP project.
Could anyone advise me on a good slide scanner to be used on MAC ? I've seen a few of them on the web, but it is hard to choose without using them...
Thanks in advance
Ivan

Any device that will run under Lion is a good bet.
Scanning slides is a tremedous chore, unbelievably labor intensive and a real time sponge–this is not for the timid. Moving the images into FCP is easy, save as TIFF.
But, big but, do not scan at a higher resolution than you need for your video. My Nikon Coolscan 8000 (completely obsolete, won't even connect to an Intel Mac) will do 16 bit color at more than 4k with granular control over every color and level adjustment. PITA.
bogiesan

Tamron 55-200mm f/4.0-5.6 DI-II LD AF Nikon

As the subject suggests, does anyone else out there have the Tamron 55-200mm f/4.0-5.6 DI-II LD AF lens that they use on a Nikon DSLR?
I'm actually using mine on a Nikon D70, which i doubt anyone uses any more considering it's a bit dated now, but figure it's worth a try anyway.
I may try creating my own lens profile for this since i'm guessing it's not a common lens/camera combination. I was just wondering if anyone else has done this yet to save me the trouble, if not i'll go through with trying to make one myself.

Dear imigra..
Thanks for your reply.
Within Adobe camera raw and canon digital photo professional, the photo using with "Tamron SP AF 17-35mm F/2.8-4 Di LD Aspherical (IF)", it shows as "17-35mm" only. both are the same.
within aperture, it is not the case. the information cannot display correctly. i really wish or hope apple dev team can fix this problem.. or any any brothers are sisters could help me on this matter.. my problem has not been solved yet.
Thanks again..

Nikon D2Xs NEF not working with Aperture

This is so shocking. I should have researched more..... but I cannot believe that Nikon and Apple do not have it together on Aperture??
I just switched from the Canon 1DS, which worked like a charm with Aperture, to the Nikon D2Xs and Apertrue will not support NEF files from the camera. Frankly. I am pretty stunned. What's the deal? I find a lot of chatter in the forums about other Nikon model NEFs that are not working.
Since there are only 2 serious top of the line pro-digital SLR manufacturers out there, I would have thought that they would both be supported fully.
Nikon Tech support said that their plug-in developer kit has been available for a long time, it is up to Apple to take advantage of it.
Am I out of line here - ranting on..
Does anyone know of a solution to this issue, other than dumping Aperture and moving to Nikon's Capture NX (when they get to finally release it) and Photoshop?
Many thanks for you help in advance,
NIck

So you switched from Canon to Nikon. I decided to do
the switch vice versa. What were your reasons to pick
Nikon?
The EOS and the D2x are both very excellent cameras. Some things I find better with the D2x:
Image quality.
First off, as far as I know prints from Canon's best and Nikon's best are similarly excellent. In spite of the EOS's ~50% higher cost and additional pixels it does not provide significantly better prints. Nikon worked some pretty good engineering to achieve that.
Price.
Most photography involves price tradeoffs with faster/better lenses, etc. costing more. In the case of the D2x the arguably equal and in some ways better camera actually costs $thousands less.
Speed.
The D2x shoots RAW at 5 to 8 fps versus the EOS 4 fps. When you are trying to capture the "perfect" instant of a rapidly changing scene higher frame rates increase the likelihood of catching the perfect moment. Or if you are auto-bracketing, faster speed captures your bracketed images before the scene changes. The concept of shooting a burst of 5-20 frames just to catch the very best pic is new to most photogs, because with film it was impractical. With cameras like these DSLRs new photo workflows may evolve. [Edit: My workflow has evolved. I now shoot almost all dynamic shots and many group shots as a burst of 2-5 pix at 2-5 fps.]
8 fps Crop Mode.
The D2x will shoot 6 megapixel images taken from the center of the frame at 8 fps. So if one wants to shoot tele action shots like sports it is ideal.
Buffer capacity.
IMO a much bigger issue than fast frame rate is the buffer capacity at that fast frame rate. The D2x captures about twice as many pix (~22) as the EOS does before the buffer fills.
Card capacity.
Canon built a slower camera with 30% more pixels and that leads to less images per card, slower file transfers, etc.
LCD size.
The D2x LCD is more than 50% larger than the EOS. The larger LCD changes everything as far as the ergonomics of DSLR workflow are concerned. Just try a D2x side-by-side against the much smaller EOS LCD.
Exposure Compensation (used constantly in DSLR workflows).
+/- 5 EV for the Nikon versus +/- 3 EV for the Canon.
Weight.
Being a 200# male with large hands I don't worry about size and weight too much. The Canon does weigh almost a pound more. Dimensions are pretty similar, with the Nikon a few mm larger. If size/weight are issues the Nikon D70s and Canon 20D are much smaller but sacrifice pro features like good viewfinders.
Self-timer.
Nikon has choice of 2/5/10/20 seconds whereas Canon is only 2 or 20 seconds. I find 2 seconds is sometimes not enough to let the camera settle down on the tripod if it is extended, so typically I use 5 seconds. Using 20 seconds as a cable shutter release substitute would drive me crazy. Often this is moot because I almost always have a cable shutter release with me.
Framing.
Some folks prefer a DSLR to be the same lens factor as 35mm film. Other folks do not. Quality superwide lenses are achieved at a $500-$1500 cost while supertelephoto is a $5000-$15000 cost; personally I prefer the 1.5 factor since it extends the expensive telephoto range. However, 1:1 versus 1:1.5 is a matter of personal preference rather than one being "better" unless print quality were to suffer.
The high end EOS does beat the Nikon D2x hands down in lower noise at ISOs of 800 and above. I am not familar with the high ISO performance of the D2xs, however.
-Allen Wicks

Lens Profile for Nikon 18-35 f/3.5-4.5

Will there be a lens profile available for the Nikon 18-35 f/3.5-4.5? I am using LR5 & PS6.

Download and install Adobe Lens Profile Downloader 1.0.1.
With this program you can download a lens profile for 18-35mm f/3.5-4.5 FX format, raw type only and for DX format, raw and jpeg type.

Nikon D300, Just got it.

I'm posting this in case any of you are considering a purchase of a D300.
I've only done practice shots under different lighting conditions around my home. Checking out performance at various ISO's and so-forth. Well, I've got to say that I'm really impressed.
Please keep in mind that I'm not really at ease with it yet because there are sooo many settings available and the manual is 400+ pages. I don't know that I have it set to the "best" settings.
This is what I think so far.
The monitor is truly great. Compared to other monitors it is like going from a 20" regular TV to a 42" high definition. It is sharp and bright. You can zoom in on preview and see sharpness of small details,
Noise at higher ISO's is very well controlled. I did a few shots at ISO 800 and I think they look at least as good as, the best 400 speed film. Did a couple prints without any Photoshop noise reduction and base my opinion on those prints. Did a shot in a dimly lit room at ISO 3200. It was noisy but a couple minutes in Photoshop did miracles. I have no plugins for noise, just use CS.
Focus is very fast and accurate. Even in dim light and without the built-in AF assist light.
Color is very accurate.
Dynamic range (with special settings) is fairly good, for digital. There is a setting (adjustable) for getting better shadow details while not blowing out the highlights. I think this does a pretty good job.
I took one image (ISO 200) and enlarged to 20 X 30. Sharpened slightly and increased contrast a little in Photoshop. Cropped section to 8x10 and printed it on Epson R1800. It left nothing to be desired, a really nice print.
My thoughts are based on my experience. I've shot a lot using Fuji 12 meg cameras, not my own. My own cameras have been Nikon D70's. They have served my well in my wedding and portrait work. Before going digital I used only 35mm. I'm not comparing this to medium or large format. I also am not comparing to any other brand. I only shoot in manual mode.
My cameras are not better than your cameras
My photography is not better than your photography
I'm not a better person than you
Peace,
Q

LRK,
Hello to you also. How is the wedding photography going? Good, I hope. Nice to hear from you and thank you.
Lawrence,
I am comparing to My D70. I don't have enough knowledge as to other brands to make a judgment. One report (who can believe reports?) says that it compares favorably with the Fuji. In some circles the Fuji is considered the best digital for weddings because it has a fairly wide dynamic range, again for digital.
When I shoot I rely on the "high-lights" flashing in the monitor. I then check the levels, if I need to. This is just faster for me in the heat of battle. I did a snapshot of my neighbor yesterday. On the monitor it indicated that the part of his home (light tan) in the sunlight was in the white range. I opened the photo in Photoshop and it was clearly tan, with reasonable detail. Not as good as film but very good. A great improvement I think.
Nick,
Thank you so much. Yes going from D70 is an improvement. At the same time, I have to say that I really appreciate that the D70 came out when it did. It made my switching from film affordable. In my opinion, if you were able to get a good price for your D200 it possibly would make sense to get the D300. But I sure would not make the change if it meant a big financial loss. Some things aren't practical no matter how much we want the latest and greatest. I'm sure I'm not telling you something you don't know.
Ramona Dear,
Here I'm all happy about my new D300 and you come in here and say you want a D3 as a BACKUP! I hate you Not really, just kidding. I do have to ask what it would be a backup to? Again, just kidding about the "hate you" comment.
Peace,
Q

Nikon P7000 and Aperture with latest RAW support

Hi,
Does anybody have the same issues with RAW files from the Nikon P7000 in Aperture with the latest RAW support update?
Aperture is showing the wrong ISO and not the 35mm zoom length.
It's showing always 6400 ISO.
Regards,
JO

I can confirm that. The EXIF seems to be wrong, no matter which software you use to read it. Happens only with full auto iso selected it seems. Unfortunately not only does the actual iso not match the EXIF value, the auto iso algorithm seems to have flaws aswell. In brightest sunlight we have experienced actual iso values of probably at least 3200 if not 6400 choosing a ridiculous values of f/2.8 with 1/1000s in P mode.... My D7000 chose something around iso 125 under he exact same conditions.... So yet another firmware update for the P7000 is hopefully on it's way - other than that: really great camera that could replace my d7000 if carrying the DSLR is impossible.
.martin

Sigma 35mm Upright Doesn't Work Properly

Hello,
I am using Lightroom 5.7
Equipment I use is:
Nikon D800E
Sigma 35mm f1.4
Tamron 24-70 f2.8
I shoot raw
The problem is when I use Sigma 35mm, Lightroom auto upright function tilts all pictures too much to the right. The profile is correct (Sigma 35mm f1.4). See sample pic below.
It works correctly with Tamron 24-70.
Does anybody have an idea how to solve this apart from doing it manually for every picture?

Reboot your computer in Safe Mode and then try to reset all Skype settings.
Go to Windows Start and in the Search/Run box type %appdata% and then press Enter or click the OK button. The Windows File Explorer will pop up. There locate a folder named “Skype”. Rename this folder to something different, e.g. Skype_old.
Next go to Windows Start and in the Search/Run box type %temp%\skype and then press Enter or click the OK button. Delete the DbTemp folder.
Reboot in normal mode and try to start Skype.
N.B. If needed, you will still be able to re-establish your call and chat history. All data is still saved in the Skype_old folder.

35MM Camera for Black and White Photography.

What are good 35MM Cameras for black and white photography?

Pretty much any Canon, Nikon or Pentax old school film SLR should give what you want. I still have my old Canon AE-1 from 1982 and its still fully functional. Problem locally getting my hands on film now and developing is getting $$$ here.
King of the World...

If juju can ...I can ... (Nikon 28mm f/2.8 AI-s wanted)

Nikon 28mm f/2.8 AI-s
Sorry guys... bit cheeky I know but I am on a world wide search for a 28mm nikkor lens (see link) and I am hoping some one here may have one of these in a box , in a dark cupboard or somewhere that they will sell me to complete my set of Nikkor lenses for my Letus DOF adapter system.
I promise that anything I shoot with it, I will edit on CS4 Premiere Pro
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/28f28ais.htm

Craig,
I have one, but it is pre-AI, and I never made the conversion, even when Nikon was offering it for nearly nothing. IIRC, even places like Marty Fourcher (NYC/USA) cannot get the parts for the conversion now. If mine had been updated, I'd gladly allow you to use it. I'm sure that the diaphram could use some working out. This would be predicated on my finding it amongst my historical stuff!
I'd look to some of the reputable used dealers, like B&H and Calumet. I'll also poke into Tempe Camera (PHX/USA) and see what they have in their used Nikon department. Though PHX is not the largest pro-photo market, Tempe Camera does have some interesting stuff. If I run across one of these, I'll shout at you.
I always thought that the Nikkor 35mm f/2.0 was the sharper, though slightly longer. I used mine with bellows and reversing rings for some good micro shots - until we got the Apo-EL Nikkor 105mm. That was the ultimate, but horribly pricey - ~ US$4k back in 1980 $'s. Still, it was the ultimate. We shot it and also used it for 8 x 10 dupe trans at 1:1. Wide-open, it was the sharpest lens I have ever used. However, as it was produced for NASA and then in very limited quantities, it saw little use in the real world. After about 10 years of service, we sold it for US$3k, so it did have its followers. It was, however NOT a wide-angle, unless you were shooting 4x5, or 8x10. No shutter, so you either used strobe in a dark studio, or the lens cap for a shutter.
If I find your lens, you'll hear about it.
Hunt

Nikon 17-35mm 2.8 ?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for