Author Topic: No interests at Nikon Cameras (Read 18134 times)

RH · « **on:** October 12, 2008, 05:06 »

Hi everybody,
i wonder that nobody have posted in this forum. No Nikon users on board?

gunnar3000 · « **Reply #1 on:** October 12, 2008, 05:47 »

hi,

I have 2 nikon's, but there is no trouble with this cam's... so there is nothing to post.

both work realy fine...

CvanDijk · « **Reply #2 on:** October 12, 2008, 06:09 »

I also use Nikon camera's. Now using the D300, but I'm waiting for Nikon to come with the D3x/D4. I would really love a full frame with more Megapixels.

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #3 on:** October 12, 2008, 07:23 »

I have a D300 and D80.

vonkara · « **Reply #4 on:** October 12, 2008, 09:08 »

Same as CvanDijk, I have the D300 but I'm strongly waiting for something better in the Full frame with slightly more megapixels. A 16mpx would be just fine because I'm aware that 24mpx or something like would be too much for the sensor size and give maybe noisy and unsharp result early in the iso range.

What I have seen from the Sony 24mpx sensor, even if Nikon improve their Sony sensors, it wouldn't be a good upgrade from the D300 to the next Nikon full frame. I guess I will wait for many years to see something that I would like from Nikon. By this time I'm looking at this Canon 5D MarkII, but I have a set of professional Nikon lenses to sell at high prices for that. All my life is on some japanese shoulders, common guys!!

Bateleur · « **Reply #5 on:** October 12, 2008, 10:29 »

I'm a Nikonista too. Have been since 1971 when I spent a backdated pay rise on a Nikkormat FTn. Brilliant camera. I still have it, though the automatic exposure meter no longer works.

Graduated through various other film and digital Nikons, amassed a collection of lenses, and I now have a D3 ... another great camera.

Guess I'll stick with the Nik.

stormchaser · « **Reply #6 on:** October 12, 2008, 11:07 »

Nikons here too since 1982. Still even have all my old film cams, and 3 Nikon digi SLRs. Have never regretted a Nikon purchase.

The people here don't seem to be such gear hounds which is refreshing. They are all over at DPReview

RH · « **Reply #7 on:** October 12, 2008, 11:12 »

Thanks to all for your responses. I´m also working with Nikon SLR/-DSLR since 1979 and using now a D2Xs. Waiting for the D3X (@Bateleur: no more dreaming of (remember another topic

), it´s coming, it´s true!).
So my thoughts are, if you are a Nikonista (great word btw) or a archfiend

Canonista or any else you are it for lifetime, because without the pro-bodies (D2.., D3, 1Ds Mark...) mostly the lenses take the money. So if i decide me to change the company, i´ll have to buy all the lenses again. That´s tough!

rene · « **Reply #8 on:** October 12, 2008, 12:13 »

I'm using Nikon equipment since 1984. Still have 2 DSLR and 1 film SLR, lot of lens and strobs. I'm frustrated that new Nikons are only 12Mpix cameras. If nothing change soon, my new camera will be Canon 5DII. 21Mp and HD footage is what I need for microstock.

null · « **Reply #9 on:** October 12, 2008, 12:29 »

Quote from: RH on October 12, 2008, 11:12

mostly the lenses take the money. So if i decide me to change the company, i´ll have to buy all the lenses again.

You will have to change glass if you go to full frame, whatever the brand. Nikon will follow soon, after the new FF 24MP Sony. They can't afford not to. That's why I still hold on to my D200 for now (from 10 to a 12MP D300 isn't really a significant step) and I refrain from buying glass for the moment, glass that would become obsolete with FF anyways. The body indeed is the minor part of the total budget including strobes and glass.

nativelight · « **Reply #10 on:** October 12, 2008, 12:32 »

I guess I'm a "nikonista" too since 1982. My first SLR was a Nikon FE2 which I still have and is still functional. I went digital with a Nikon D70 and now I have that and a Nikon D200. If I ever get serious about stock and start making some real money, I'd live to move up to the pro level Nikon. I can't justify the cost right now though.

vonkara · « **Reply #11 on:** October 12, 2008, 12:37 »

Quote from: FlemishDreams on October 12, 2008, 12:29

Quote from: RH on October 12, 2008, 11:12
mostly the lenses take the money. So if i decide me to change the company, i´ll have to buy all the lenses again.
You will have to change glass if you go to full frame, whatever the brand. Nikon will follow soon, after the new FF 24MP Sony. They can't afford not to. That's why I still hold on to my D200 for now (from 10 to a 12MP D300 isn't really a significant step) and I refrain from buying glass for the moment, glass that would become obsolete with FF anyways. The body indeed is the minor part of the total budget including strobes and glass.

You can still buy the FF lenses. I have the new 24-70 f2.8 that I use with my D300. Only thing is that you don't have the wide angle anymore

zstoimenov · « **Reply #12 on:** October 12, 2008, 12:59 »

I am using Nikon D80 for a few months, but I really love it! Hope that my next step will be a FF Nikon, hopefully a few years from now

Bateleur · « **Reply #13 on:** October 12, 2008, 15:31 »

Quote from: rene on October 12, 2008, 12:13

I'm frustrated that new Nikons are only 12Mpix cameras.

Megapixels are not so very important. It's sensor size that counts. If Nikon goes up to 16Mp it just means they'll be cramming more pixels into the same size sensor, which will probably increase noise.

One of the main reasons I got the D3 was because because it has a full-frame sensor. It does everything I need it to and photos from it are acceptable in any agency.

Bateleur · « **Reply #14 on:** October 12, 2008, 15:33 »

Quote from: stormchaser on October 12, 2008, 11:07

The people here don't seem to be such gear hounds which is refreshing. They are all over at DPReview

Right on. That's what I like about this forum, too. It's not the equipment you use. It's the eye and brain behind the lens.

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #15 on:** October 12, 2008, 16:00 »

Quote from: stormchaser on October 12, 2008, 11:07

The people here don't seem to be such gear hounds which is refreshing. They are all over at DPReview

It seems to depend on which section you hang out in. When I went from the D80 to the D300 area there seems to be a lot less "my Nikon kAmerA rulz and yer Kannon suckz" posts. Seems the higher the camera food chain the more respect for other brands. I like Canon but I just prefer Nikon.

vonkara · « **Reply #16 on:** October 12, 2008, 16:21 »

Quote from: Bateleur on October 12, 2008, 15:31

Quote from: rene on October 12, 2008, 12:13

I'm frustrated that new Nikons are only 12Mpix cameras.

Megapixels are not so very important. It's sensor size that counts. If Nikon goes up to 16Mp it just means they'll be cramming more pixels into the same size sensor, which will probably increase noise.

It's technically right, but the technology from today and the one from last year have changed already. They are able to put more pixels with about the same results as the newer Canon's does right now

RH · « **Reply #17 on:** October 12, 2008, 22:47 »

Quote from: FlemishDreams on October 12, 2008, 12:29

Quote from: RH on October 12, 2008, 11:12
mostly the lenses take the money. So if i decide me to change the company, i´ll have to buy all the lenses again.
You will have to change glass if you go to full frame, whatever the brand. Nikon will follow soon, after the new FF 24MP Sony. They can't afford not to. That's why I still hold on to my D200 for now (from 10 to a 12MP D300 isn't really a significant step) and I refrain from buying glass for the moment, glass that would become obsolete with FF anyways. The body indeed is the minor part of the total budget including strobes and glass.

That´s not correct anyway. Only one of my lenses is "DX". All other lenses working also on a full frame Body. Have you bought only "DX" glasses you´ll have to change.

RH · « **Reply #18 on:** October 12, 2008, 22:55 »

Quote from: Bateleur on October 12, 2008, 15:33

Quote from: stormchaser on October 12, 2008, 11:07

The people here don't seem to be such gear hounds which is refreshing. They are all over at DPReview

Right on. That's what I like about this forum, too. It's not the equipment you use. It's the eye and brain behind the lens.

Absolutely correct. I don´t think here are gear hounds which want to boast with their equipment. My meaning is, if somebody spends a lot of money in a Pro-SLR/DSLR-Body and Pro-Lenses, they also have an eye and mostly the brain behind the lens.

null · « **Reply #19 on:** October 12, 2008, 22:56 »

Quote from: RH on October 12, 2008, 22:47

That´s not correct anyway. Only one of my lenses is "DX". All other lenses working also on a full frame Body. Have you bought only "DX" glasses you´ll have to change.

Yes I have DX. Actually I'm quite ignorant about all this. I really need a 50mm prime for studio shots as soon as I can manage to get softboxes thru customs and transport without considerable theft and bribes (this is still the Philippines) but is there a way you can use a FF 50mm on a D200? No rush though...

Bateleur · « **Reply #20 on:** October 13, 2008, 01:23 »

Quote from: FlemishDreams on October 12, 2008, 22:56

... is there a way you can use a FF 50mm on a D200? No rush though...

Yes, no problem. The only thing is that the lens will have an equivalent focal length of about 75mm. This is because the D200's sensor is smaller than a 35mm frame.

The problems come if you try to use a DX lens on a full-frame sensor. Then you get vignetting.

.shock · « **Reply #21 on:** October 13, 2008, 02:27 »

Hi, I'm happy Nikonian to, before with D80, now with D300 and waiting somethng with FF sensor and more megapixels. Look at www.nikonrumors.com, they speedking something about D800, D900 and D3x...

nativelight · « **Reply #22 on:** October 13, 2008, 10:45 »

Quote from: .shock on October 13, 2008, 02:27

Hi, I'm happy Nikonian to, before with D80, now with D300 and waiting somethng with FF sensor and more megapixels. Look at www.nikonrumors.com, they speedking something about D800, D900 and D3x...

I was under the impression the D700 is full frame. Is that not the case?

vonkara · « **Reply #23 on:** October 13, 2008, 10:51 »

Quote from: nativelight on October 13, 2008, 10:45

Quote from: .shock on October 13, 2008, 02:27
Hi, I'm happy Nikonian to, before with D80, now with D300 and waiting somethng with FF sensor and more megapixels. Look at www.nikonrumors.com, they speedking something about D800, D900 and D3x...

I was under the impression the D700 is full frame. Is that not the case?

Yes the D700 is a full frame with the same sensor as the D3 in a less professional body. But it doesn't have more pixels

Aetherial · « **Reply #24 on:** October 13, 2008, 11:13 »

I use a D90. had D80 and D70 before.

vonkara · « **Reply #25 on:** October 13, 2008, 11:18 »

Here's what will be the "Keanu Reeves" of all the new Nikon cameras. It will save us from going Cannonist because of the tempting 5D MarkII. Note that it's not official at all. But I find this hypotetic D800 very sexy and hopefully will have more pixels that will make crash my computer.

[youtube]http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=Dm0yQo1jcDo[/youtube]

antoniodalbore · « **Reply #26 on:** April 16, 2009, 03:49 »

Nikon here...

FM2n
FM3A
D100
D2x
D300
D3
D700

Cheers!

Dreamframer · « **Reply #27 on:** April 16, 2009, 04:56 »

I still use D80

ibogdan · « **Reply #28 on:** April 16, 2009, 05:24 »

D80 too.
I saw now the brand new D5000 with rabatable display, HD movie (similar to D90) and 12,3MP.
Seems my D80 is faaar behind..

Wampa · « **Reply #29 on:** April 16, 2009, 06:33 »

I have D90.

anton9 · « **Reply #30 on:** April 16, 2009, 06:35 »

D300 here and nothing to report

goldenangel · « **Reply #31 on:** April 16, 2009, 17:00 »

D80 here and I got it just a couple of weeks before D90 came out. Oh well, these things are destined to become obsolete fast anyway.

noam · « **Reply #32 on:** April 16, 2009, 17:24 »

D3 and happy

donding · « **Reply #33 on:** April 16, 2009, 17:33 »

D200 here...it's been a good camera but I think it's getting worn out...starting to have problems with my control dial..always got to shut the camera off then back on to change the aparture with aparture priority same with shutter priority. I don't know if it's a in camera setting I set wrong or just the camera getting worn out. If any one can suggest if I might have set something wrong let me know where to look for the setting...thats like looking for a needle in a haystack!....lol

null · « **Reply #34 on:** April 18, 2009, 09:16 »

Quote from: donding on April 16, 2009, 17:33

D200 here...it's been a good camera but I think it's getting worn out...starting to have problems with my control dial..always got to shut the camera off then back on to change the aparture with aparture priority same with shutter priority. I don't know if it's a in camera setting I set wrong or just the camera getting worn out. If any one can suggest if I might have set something wrong let me know where to look for the setting...thats like looking for a needle in a haystack!....lol

I had something similar after a year. Can't trust the AP any more so I went to manual but in between shots, the speed changes by itself from 1/10 to 1/800. Pretty annoying since in between shots, I have to dial the right speed every time. Im quite disappointed in this cam but at least the focus keeps working.
My photography partner ordered a Canon 450 for May and since school starts again in June and he ruined my previous old Sony, I will request it for my use too. If I'm happy about that cam, I won't ever look back at Nikon.

epixx · « **Reply #35 on:** April 18, 2009, 12:06 »

D80, Fuji S3 and S5. D80 is a great camera for microstock, and very cheap now.

digiology · « **Reply #36 on:** April 18, 2009, 12:16 »

D80 here too. But ready to jump ship and get the Canon 5D MKII.

vonkara · « **Reply #37 on:** April 18, 2009, 13:30 »

OMG The dream camera at Nikon Rumors. Though the flip LCD is worthless. A 3.5 inch would have been lot more useful than this. Still just a rumor but exiting

Also D400

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #38 on:** April 18, 2009, 13:48 »

Yeah, I saw those. Nice, but not enough of an upgrade to my D300. I don't think Nikon will release a 24MP D700. It would cannibalize the D3X too much. A 16MP - 18MP version makes more sense.

Canon already put their flagship 21MP sensor in a mid-level body for $2,700 so the damage is done. I like Nikon but I'm planning on picking up a 5DII.

null · « **Reply #39 on:** April 18, 2009, 13:57 »

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on April 18, 2009, 13:48

I don't think Nikon will release a 24MP D700. It would cannibalize the D3X too much.

Better cannibalize your own product than be eaten by the 5D MKII. By the time Nikon rolls its mythical mid-price 21MP out, the market will be taken by the 5D MKII.

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #40 on:** April 18, 2009, 14:15 »

Quote from: FlemishDreams on April 18, 2009, 13:57

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on April 18, 2009, 13:48
I don't think Nikon will release a 24MP D700. It would cannibalize the D3X too much.

Better cannibalize your own product than be eaten by the 5D MKII. By the time Nikon rolls its mythical mid-price 21MP out, the market will be taken by the 5D MKII.

Nikon will probably try to cutoff or even reverse the cannibalism process the 5DII started. They'll release an 18MP FF body that has more goodies than the 5DII (video focus, swivel LCD, etc) and will charge a few hundred more for it. That way nobody can say it's a baby D3X and it also won't be a direct competitor to the 5DII. It will be a totally different camera with no direct competitor which is the game Nikon has been playing with Canon for the past few years.

The 5DII has been out since 09/2008. Nikon has had 7 months to even whisper something about an answer to it. It's pretty amazing that it's still selling out and is at or above MSRP. Either manufacturing volume is low or there is massive demand.

21MP would give me XXL and XXXL, and a lot of cropping and downsizing room especially for Getty. More MP = more money and less time wasted. I'm done waiting.

vonkara · « **Reply #41 on:** April 18, 2009, 15:13 »

I would add that the 5DII give the same performance than the D3 If not better and that at 21mpx versus 12mpx for the D3. They must work very hard to make a better sensor than the D3 with more resolution

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #42 on:** April 18, 2009, 18:13 »

Quote from: Vonkara on April 18, 2009, 15:13

I would add that the 5DII give the same performance than the D3 If not better and that at 21mpx versus 12mpx for the D3. They must work very hard to make a better sensor than the D3 with more resolution

I wouldn't even consider a D3. My D300 is also 12MP for what I need to use it for I don't consider that an upgrade. A D3 is for an action, wedding, or studio shooter with lower resolution needs.

Now the the 24MP D3X is a different story. Most of the review sites including http://www.dxomark.com/ show it outperforms all other DSLRs. If I could justify $8K today I'd buy it. A $3K 5DII will do everything I need for $5K less.

epixx · « **Reply #43 on:** April 18, 2009, 21:36 »

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on April 18, 2009, 18:13

Now the the 24MP D3X is a different story. Most of the review sites including http://www.dxomark.com/ show it outperforms all other DSLRs. If I could justify $8K today I'd buy it. A $3K 5DII will do everything I need for $5K less.

Why don't you consider the Sony A900? The Zeiss lenses are fabulous, and I've seen some really great images. It's important to use the right RAW converter though. Have a look at this:

http://translate.google.com/translate?prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.alpha-numerique.fr%2Findex.php%3Foption%3Dcom_content%26view%3Darticle%26id%3D264%3Aalpha-900-comparatif-de-9-logiciels-de-developpement-de-fichiers-raw%26catid%3D70%3Adeveloppement-des-raws%26Itemid%3D321&sl=fr&tl=en&history_state0=

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #44 on:** April 18, 2009, 21:53 »

Quote from: epixx on April 18, 2009, 21:36

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on April 18, 2009, 18:13

Now the the 24MP D3X is a different story. Most of the review sites including http://www.dxomark.com/ show it outperforms all other DSLRs. If I could justify $8K today I'd buy it. A $3K 5DII will do everything I need for $5K less.

Why don't you consider the Sony A900? The Zeiss lenses are fabulous, and I've seen some really great images. It's important to use the right RAW converter though. Have a look at this:

http://translate.google.com/translate?prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.alpha-numerique.fr%2Findex.php%3Foption%3Dcom_content%26view%3Darticle%26id%3D264%3Aalpha-900-comparatif-de-9-logiciels-de-developpement-de-fichiers-raw%26catid%3D70%3Adeveloppement-des-raws%26Itemid%3D321&sl=fr&tl=en&history_state0=

I looked into it and it seems pretty nice but:
- No Liveview - After shooting manual focus macros with liveview and magnification all day I can't imagine not having it
- No Video - This isn't a huge deal but I've been planning on starting to submit video
- Limited ISO - Seems that anything over ISO 400 starts to get a bit noisy

The A900 seems really geared toward old schoolers who want a no frills camera. Maybe they should have also made an A1000 version that had all the extras for around $3,500 - $4,000.

Edit: Just looked at the RAW review and while it's interesting the A900 isn't for me.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: No interests at Nikon Cameras (Read 18134 times)

vonkara

vonkara

vonkara

vonkara

vonkara

digiology

vonkara

vonkara

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors