 |
| |
| This site requires new users to accept that a small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondslr.uk after requesting a new account. Thank you. |
| Moderated by: chrisbet, | ||
| Author | Post | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
jk
|
There have been rumours that the D400 will be released in the April 2012 but I have heard little. The D300 really is the weakest link in the DX range. Time for replacement. :hi: |
|||||||||
ArcticRick
|
I bet in the fall time October maybe |
|||||||||
jk
|
Think I will have lost patience by then and got a D800. |
|||||||||
Ed Matusik
|
jk wrote: Think I will have lost patience by then and got a D800.My problem with the D800 is burst rate. I'm waiting for the D300 replacement as well, but I'm also seriously considering the D4. - EdM |
|||||||||
ArcticRick
|
I honestly think the 4/19/12 press conference will be for the D3200 , ALTHOUGH i would like to believe it would be the D400. Like I said in the other post , a nice used D700 or a New D7000 is the way I am looking. I have never had a new camera body , always used |
|||||||||
jk
|
Yes I think the announcement this week is for the D3200 |
|||||||||
Iain
|
I've got so fed up waiting that I have been looking elsewhere, but there has been a lot of other things happing of which I will tell all later. |
|||||||||
jk
|
Iain wrote: I've got so fed up waiting that I have been looking elsewhere, but there has been a lot of other things happing of which I will tell all later.As long as you arent getting rid of all your Nikon gear.  |
|||||||||
Iain
|
That would be telling. |
|||||||||
richw
|
Iain wrote:That would be telling. Still got the best options IMO. |
|||||||||
Ray Ninness
|
My buddy John also a forum mate, a lurker most of the time is itching to get a D800. And I would be interested is seeing how it works  BUT I really want to get a down sized kit going that will provide imagery on a par with the D700... I'm getting too old to lug around the 29 pound Domke.. To say nothing about my big glass, it hasn't seen the light of day since last October!!!  |
|||||||||
Doug
|
Don't tell Iain, but it's going to kill the 7D |
|||||||||
jk
|
Well he has committed to getting the Canon 7D and the 400mm f5.6. Looks like he is using it already from his last post! It's a constant catchup and leapfrog game with Nikon and Canon. |
|||||||||
Iain
|
If the D400 had come out by now and had been 16mp I might not have moved but I had to make a decision on what was about now and the fact that Nikon have never filled the 400 f4/400f5.6 prime slot. |
|||||||||
whiteiris
|
The Fuji XP100 is as good as the D700. IMHO The new pro version with lens interchangeability may well give the lightweight flexibility you need...without the temptation of longer heavy lenses. |
|||||||||
jk
|
I agree Eric about the X100 quality. The new XPro1 is more refined and the interchangeables lenses really make it a dream. I have 60mm f2.4 and 35mm f1.4 lenses. I will get the zoom lens next in 2012/13 when it is released. In the mean time I have got the Kipon adapter coming so I can use my Nikon lenes on the Fuji XPro1. |
|||||||||
Doug
|
Iain wrote:If the D400 had come out by now and had been 16mp I might not have moved but I had to make a decision on what was about now and the fact that Nikon have never filled the 400 f4/400f5.6 prime slot. The 70-200 F4 was another glaring Nikon oversight |
|||||||||
jk
|
There are rumours of a 70-200 f4 being made available soon. |
|||||||||
Robert
|
Well I'm not hugely impressed with my first 'slow' lens. I came upon VERY cheap new D3100, and an even cheaper brand new 18-105 f4-5.6 AFS-VR lens. While it's fine outdoors in bright light the noise is horrendous in poor mixed light. I thought the D200 suffered a it in this department but nothing like the 3100. It's a kind of gritty noise, which admittedly can be dealt with in Lightroom but untreated it spoils the image. Not really a problem because low light images are not particularly important to me, merely snapshots, For what I actually got the camera for will be fine in good light. A sample: DAD, WHEN will it be fixed? Attachment: _DSC0739.jpg (Downloaded 51 times) |
|||||||||
whiteiris
|
Ed Matusik wrote:jk wrote:Think I will have lost patience by then and got a D800.My problem with the D800 is burst rate. I'm waiting for the D300 replacement as well, but I'm also seriously considering the D4. - EdM Using the optional multi-power battery pack increases the burst rate. |
|||||||||
ArcticRick
|
Ray Ninness wrote:My buddy John also a forum mate, a lurker most of the time is itching to get a D800. And I would be interested is seeing how it works If you want to ditch more of that heavy gear let me know . I'll cover shipping |
|||||||||
GeoffR
|
I am not sure that there will be a D400 just yet, the D7000 does a pretty good job in that market slot. |
|||||||||
whiteiris
|
GeoffR wrote: I am not sure that there will be a D400 just yet, the D7000 does a pretty good job in that market slot.I think you may be right. I am surprised more people lusting after a D400 havent opted for the D7000. It is a very capable DX camera (6fps is faster than the D800!). The only down side I have encountered is that with cheap consumer lenses it focuses a bit slow. Stick a pro lens on and its fine. |
|||||||||
ArcticRick
|
I'm leaning that way but have to price things out |
|||||||||
theman1050
|
whiteiris wrote:Ed Matusik wrote: That's only in DX mode if I remember correctly. Attachment: Screen Shot 2012-04-20 at 5.51.02 PM.png (Downloaded 52 times) |
|||||||||
Eric
|
theman1050 wrote:whiteiris wrote: Ah -didn't know that. Shame. |
|||||||||
theman1050
|
Personally, I love my D7000 and use it in professionally circumstances (University newspapers, University Athletic webpages) and serves all my needs. I shoot all sports with that and a 35 1,8G 50 1,8D 70-300VR. The clean high ISOs (shooting 3200 is no problem) makes these lenses shine (especially the 70-300). 6 FPS is fast enough for me to shoot any sport. |
|||||||||
Eric
|
theman1050 wrote:Personally, I love my D7000 and use it in professionally circumstances (University newspapers, University Athletic webpages) and serves all my needs. I shoot all sports with that and a 35 1,8G 50 1,8D 70-300VR. The clean high ISOs (shooting 3200 is no problem) makes these lenses shine (especially the 70-300). 6 FPS is fast enough for me to shoot any sport. I suspect Ed's requirement is for something faster than the D800s 4fps. Coming from the old school, I rarely use anything other than single shot anyway. |
|||||||||
theman1050
|
Eric wrote:theman1050 wrote: Coming from the D40 (which might as well be single shot for sports) ^ FPS lets me capture more moments than before-so it's a win for me. |
|||||||||
ArcticRick
|
that info on the D7000 is just what I need to hear, 1st of July I am ordering one . Tired of the D400 wait |
|||||||||
Iain
|
I think you will be fine with the D7000, I preferred the D300 for sports but that was just me. |
|||||||||
Eric
|
Iain wrote:I think you will be fine with the D7000, I preferred the D300 for sports but that was just me. Yes I agree. For me the D7000 just doesn't snap focus as fast and sure as the D300 and the D3. Nevertheless the D7000 is a good performer with the right lenses. |
|||||||||
theman1050
|
Eric wrote:Iain wrote: Sure the 2 extra fps (300s does 8 fps) helps, but I found the cleaner, high iso and ability to film HD movies more important than 8 FPS. But everyone has their own needs. |
|||||||||
ArcticRick
|
Hmmm D300S fitted with 80-200 2.8 should do wonders .. Thanks now more things to research MORE ADDED 4/21/12 11:05 AM .. B&H has none of the following in stock D300S , D700 , D7000 and with no D400 coming I want to scream. I wouldnt upgrade till after end of june anyway but man what are they waiting for ? Im no pro I cant afford 2500 for a new body . Honestly 1800 is about as high as I dare go ... Severly annoyed now |
|||||||||
Eric
|
theman1050 wrote:Eric wrote: Actually I found the D300 to have cleaner noise than the D7000. It was a little more obvious but the colour fidelity was better...especially in artificial light. In fact it was one of my disappointments with the D7000 and we had lengthy debates about this on the old forum, with Phil and Ed. The other difference, already mentioned, is that it doesn't snap into focus as well as the D300. Having said that, I rarely used the D300, prefering the D3 FX format, and so I have been happy to add the D7000 for general photography and occasions when I need DX. Never been bothered by C speeds or video. |
|||||||||
theman1050
|
Eric wrote:theman1050 wrote: |
|||||||||
Iain
|
I have to agree with Eric as I felt the same after using both the d300 and the d7000 |
|||||||||
Robert
|
I don't know how the D3100 compares with the D7000 but I find the noise from that is gritty and objectionable compared with the D200. Being fairly fine noise it responds well to noise reduction but then the detail goes, so back to square one. |
|||||||||
richw
|
ArcticRick wrote:Hmmm D300S fitted with 80-200 2.8 should do wonders .. Thanks now more things to research If your primary need is sports shooting I'd hold on in there for the D400. If it has the same focus as the D800 and D4 (which it will) that will be make a huge difference for a sports shooter, just easier to get that bang on focus you need quickly. |
|||||||||
Eric
|
Robert wrote:I don't know how the D3100 compares with the D7000 but I find the noise from that is gritty and objectionable compared with the D200. Being fairly fine noise it responds well to noise reduction but then the detail goes, so back to square one. Not sure if the D3100 is different to the D7000. From day one (you will recall my discussions with Phil?) I questioned the colour fidelity of the high ISO noise of the D7000. Under mixed and uncontrolled lighting it can introduce colour 'blotching' which may not be as obvious or objectionable to many but personally I preferred the D300 purity, more film grain like appearance. Having said that, I have come to enjoy the results from the D7000. I have even gotten use to the smaller body size! it's a very capable body under most circumstances. I only use the D200 for IR so can't compare its noise colour to the other cameras. But it does also seem to have more film grain like noise. |
|||||||||
theman1050
|
I shot my school's annual cardboard boat race today and I killed it. Nailed a ton of great shots and my D7000 355 1.8 DX and 70-300 VR really earned their stripes. I shot at F8 and ISO 1250 so I could freeze the water droplets. I also took some great video I'm editing soon. Here's one of my favorites as a scaled down sample, and I'll link to my facebook album https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10150849721883023.482102.625038022&type=1[url][/url] Attachment: 2012042720120427ROS_9051 (2).jpg (Downloaded 35 times) |
|||||||||
Robert
|
theman1050 wrote:I shot my school's annual cardboard boat race today and I killed it What the D7000? Water damage, dropped or what, is it repairable? Tried your link but got nowhere... Attachment: Screen Shot 2012-04-28 at 08.35.37.jpg (Downloaded 33 times) |
|||||||||
jk
|
Robert wrote:theman1050 wrote:  The camera is OK, he killed the event with the camera! It seems to have performed well but on a sunny day a little fill-in flash might be also needed to reduce the blown highlights. |
|||||||||
jk
|
That is the problem with all these social media sites they want you to have a login to see anything! |
|||||||||
Robert
|
jk wrote:Robert wrote: Never heard of that before??? :baffled: |
|||||||||
Robert
|
jk wrote:That is the problem with all these social media sites they want you to have a login to see anything! You have to log in? Not signing up to Facebook, no way! Sharon (my ex wife) recently spent an hour trying to convince me how useful it is, I was unconvinced. :popcorn: |
|||||||||
theman1050
|
Robert wrote:theman1050 wrote: Sorry about the slang there haha. Here is the Google Photos link: https://plus.google.com/u/0/photos/107856959498960681285/albums/5736510363983861809 A fill flash would have been nice-but I would have lost some time while it recycles (at least on the on camera flash) Barring any damages to my D7000, I'll be sticking with it for some time. No need to upgrade (FX is nice, but not pertinent) if I'm getting results like this.[url][/url] |
|||||||||
Robert
|
theman1050 wrote:Robert wrote: Probably my fault, I have led a sheltered life!!! Good set of images, all made of cardboard? A liberal coating of resin should make them pretty strong? Or is that against the rules... |
|||||||||
theman1050
|
Robert wrote:theman1050 wrote: I'm not sure if you could use resin but there were some limitations to what you could and couldn't use. I'm not sure if this is an officially official rules site, but everything matched up with how the event was run. http://www.rothregatta.net/rules.html[url][/url] |
|||||||||
Squarerigger
|
Robert wrote:jk wrote:  This was a fun read. Obviously theman1050 is much younger than some of us on the site - I won't mention names. Sometimes I need an interpreter when listening to conversations involving my sons and their families. They have an entirely new language they communicate with.  |
|||||||||
theman1050
|
Squarerigger wrote:Robert wrote: Haha it was fun to see the gap. I'm still only a freshman in college (although not for long) for those who were curious. |
|||||||||
jk
|
theman1050 wrote:Robert wrote:That was only a passing comment. Even with a fast flash. It can slow the shooting rate down especially wih sports. I love the faster shutter speed and he freezing of the water.
DX format works better for sports as you dont need to use super-telephotos. The 70-300 VR is a great lens. |
|||||||||
theman1050
|
jk wrote:theman1050 wrote: True that! |
|||||||||
Doug
|
Next time you have a similar situation play around with keeping the shutter and aperture, but drop the iso by 3 to 6 clicks (1 to 2 stops) use raw, and check for minimal flashing highlights on the review screen (highlights must be turned on in menu>playback>display settings) You can then easily lift detail out of the shadows in Lightroom, aperture etc. (caution: you must retain some flashing highlights or risk burying your shadow detail and generating noise when you attempt to recover this detail - do a duckduckgo search (non creepy google alternative) for 'shooting to the right' for more detailed explanations Instead of shooting Raw try making sure that d-lighting is on and experiment with varying the ISO until you control the highlights effectively Base your exposure on the sunny 16 rule to get a starting point Sunny 16 indicates correct exposure as f16, 1250ISO, 1/1250 You have adjusted your aperture by six clicks to f8 and to get those highlights back you must increase shutter speed or reduce ISO resulting in something like; f8, 1250ISO, 1/5000 OR f8, 320ISO, 1/1250 OR F8, 640ISO, 1/2500 (I haven't attempted to check the metadata, but I suspect your shot above is at a shutter speed far l owner than 1/5000 resulting in the extensive highlight clipping in the image) Using any of these three variations on 'sunny 16' the highlights should be close to holding detail and d-lighting should lift those shadows to give more of a fill effect I would look to avoid flashing highlights on the face where it is exposed to the sun, but permit it to occur on the cap, arms, background etc. Btw I'm not sure fill flash would help With this subject distance fill flash would force a low shutter speed, changing the image dynamics somewhat (high speed flash sync will let you keep your shutter speed, but would require your flash to be within a cople of meters of your subject (and that's with an external sbxxx flash. - the built in flash would be useless)) |
|||||||||
Current theme is Blue
| A small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondsl.uk Thank you. |