http://blog.spencerkellis.net/2009/06/dont-think-about-active-d-lighting-active-d-lighting-active-d/ An experiment in writing of life as I live it Sat, 04 Sep 2010 10:09:49 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 http://blog.spencerkellis.net/2009/06/dont-think-about-active-d-lighting-active-d-lighting-active-d/comment-page-1/#comment-32 Spencer Sun, 21 Jun 2009 04:26:57 +0000 http://blog.spencerkellis.net/?p=73#comment-32 It's sad but true. Check out the <a href="http://www.nikonusa.com/pdf/manuals/noprint/D300_noprint.pdf" rel="nofollow">D300 manual</a> pages 166 and 405-6. Evidently it takes more time to record the images b/c of the extra processing for Active D-Lighting. On both our cameras the buffer registered the same amount of shots with and without ADL, so I doubt CF speed had an impact. It’s sad but true. Check out the D300 manual pages 166 and 405-6. Evidently it takes more time to record the images b/c of the extra processing for Active D-Lighting. On both our cameras the buffer registered the same amount of shots with and without ADL, so I doubt CF speed had an impact.

]]> http://blog.spencerkellis.net/2009/06/dont-think-about-active-d-lighting-active-d-lighting-active-d/comment-page-1/#comment-31 Jason Sat, 20 Jun 2009 03:37:49 +0000 http://blog.spencerkellis.net/?p=73#comment-31 Were you using the same speed cards? I'm skeptical. The lighting could take more processing but more buffer space. Maybe they read from one write to another and it halves the buffer Were you using the same speed cards? I’m skeptical. The lighting could take more processing but more buffer space. Maybe they read from one write to another and it halves the buffer

]]>