D40 pics

[Tullio]

D40 w/ 18-55mm

[Tullio]

D40 w/ 18-55mm - indoor, low light

[Tullio]

D40 w/18-55mm

[Tullio]

D40 w/ 18-55mm

[Tullio]

D40 w/ Raynox DCR6600 PROWA converter attached to the KIT lens. The WA converter significantly increases the field of view. However, it's pretty much useless since it produces very soft edges at full wide angle. Oh well...at least the tele converter works!

[Aero]

Looks fine to me! Is that converter heavy? I have one very massive old sony teleconverter and afrait to use it with (Nikon D50) kit lens. It might broken because it's plastic.

Sharp images in that sizes, must say!

- Aero

[mtclimber]

Tullio-

Impressive images. Thanks for posting. But now to the flash problem. You complain about under exposure, and having to use Exposure Compensation to +0.7. Where or what is the ISO setting being used? Can you provide a sample photo?

This might be as simple as just increasing the ISO setting.

MT/Sarah

[JDar]

You've put me one step closer to buying the D-40, and thanks for the tip about the RIcoh tele-converter. You are getting great results and the D-40 has enough settings to give exactly what you want.

[Tullio]

Thanks to all of you for your comments.

Aero, the two converters I have are very compact, specially the Ricoh tele. It's an excellent piece of glass and so far, it has worked with my FZ20, H1 and now the D40. The greatest advantage of these two converters I have is the fact that theyboth have a 52mm mount, so no need for astep up ring. I also have an Olympus TCON 14B 1.45xand a Sony 1.7x tele converters.Even though the Olympus is an awesome lens (it allows you to take macro shots through it), it's huge and very very heavy. I would not even think aboutattaching it to the cheap plastic thread of the D40 kit lens. The Sony is bigger than the Ricohbut it's not a heavy lens and ithas more magnification.However, the difference between 1.5x and 1.7x is not that greatso I'll probably stick to the Ricohto get a bit closer to the subject.

Sarah, I have the camera set to ISO 200 and ISO AUTOON. Theoretically, the camera should pick the proper ISO setting according to the available light. This indeedoccurs if flash is not being used. However, itappears that when flash is used, the camera sticks to the ISO setting (200 in my case).Very poor implementation of flash/ISOif you ask me. Irregardless whether I'm using flash or not, the camera should meter the light, select the appropriate ISO and adjust the flash accordingly. I should not have tomess around with ISO settings justbecause I'm using flash.I'll provide an image when I get home tonight.

JDar, I was skeptical when I first thought of using a tele converter on a dSLR camera. As I mentioned, I haven't read any one doing such a thing. But, I'm glad I did try it. The use of theWA converter may be limited to wide open landscape shot whereblurred edgesmay not be as obvious.

[mtclimber]

Tullio-

I agree with you. The flash should work properly, and ISO 200 should certainly be sufficient. That only leaves the range. Was the subject decidedly beyond 15 feet?

That is the last factor to consider.

MT/Sarah