Author Topic: Why is Hitler so mad at Nikon? (Read 7991 times)

Pixart · « **on:** February 25, 2009, 14:50 »

You think Hitler is pissed, I cried for a week when I found out how much they want for a D3X.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnwf2RShNV0[/youtube]

Graffoto · « **Reply #1 on:** February 25, 2009, 17:05 »

Very clever.... But the whole time I was wondering what he was REALLY saying.

Pixart · « **Reply #2 on:** February 25, 2009, 18:14 »

Quote from: nosaya on February 25, 2009, 17:05

Very clever.... But the whole time I was wondering what he was REALLY saying.

We'll have to ask Freezingpictures !

null · « **Reply #3 on:** February 25, 2009, 18:23 »

He said he lost the war. Sometimes it's fun to be multilingual

In fact, Herr Schicklgruber (the real name of "Hitler") was right. The D3x is a big disappointment for the Nikonians, especially its price setting. Can't imagine they sell many. If Nikon doesn't come out with something really appealing around summer (like an upgraded 700), I might as well shift to Canon and put my Nikon glass on ebay.

It's good to know mr. Schicklgruber only shot JPG. Anybody not using RAW we can call "nazi" now.

vonkara · « **Reply #4 on:** February 25, 2009, 20:10 »

Quote from: FlemishDreams on February 25, 2009, 18:23

The D3x is a big disappointment for the Nikonians, especially its price setting. Can't imagine they sell many. If Nikon doesn't come out with something really appealing around summer (like an upgraded 700), I might as well shift to Canon and put my Nikon glass on ebay.

I'm lucky I have found a store where to sell my Nikon equipment at. But shortly there is the 2009 PMA (next week). I heard of a possible new D400 either 14mpx or 24mpx. I really hope for the 24mpx D3x sensor in the D400.

But I won't buy it If Nikon doesn't retouch all his in camera noise reduction, a bit like Canon did with the 1ds and 5DII. Adding the anti-dust and everything also. I hope to be able to make a choice between the 5DII and this D400 in the next weeks

null · « **Reply #5 on:** February 25, 2009, 20:50 »

Quote from: Vonkara on February 25, 2009, 20:10

I heard of a possible new D400 either 14mpx or 24mpx. I really hope for the 24mpx D3x sensor in the D400.

Nikonrumors.com? The # of megapixels isn't that important, but the density is. A large sensor with relatively little megapixels gives very low noise levels, even at higher ISO. I was thinking about the D5 too, especially since LisaFX spoke so high of it.

Update: Nikonrumors.

Quote

PMA starts in a week. For our not-so-regular readers, here is a recap of the PMA Nikon rumors:

* D400: the one thing we know for sure is that the D400 will be released by July 2009 - this is when a Nikon D400 book will be available in Germany (the book was confirmed by multiple sites in Europe).
* New entry level Nikon DLSR - it should be similar to the D90 but without the built-in AF motor and the top LCD screen (Nikon D40 is now officially discontinued and Nikon has to release a successor):
o could be called D5000
o with a new type of built-in flash (something like a built-in SB-400)
o with a swivel display
o video + LV.
* New Nikon flash SB-700. The SB-400 will be discontinued, since the new entry level camera will have something similar buitd-in. If this is true, it will leave Nikon with 2 flash models: SB-700 and SB-900 (and of course the close-up and commander models), which makes complete sense.

vonkara · « **Reply #6 on:** February 25, 2009, 21:22 »

I read this at Slash gear and I just look and Nikon rumors and they had the news the same day than Slash... Nikon rumor said 14 a bit before, but now it looks to be set for a 24mpx, that's great.

But still not sure about if it can equal the 5DII. It seem to be only a matter of in camera processing. As example you can't compare the A900 and D3x images. They are very different but it's the same sensor as you know.

Someone on the Istock forum told me it was wrong to say that the pixel density of the D3x was worst than the 5DII. I can't find the thread anymore? But the link she gave me had the different camera models pixel density ratio written. The D3x was having almost the same as the D300. Today I still can't say how it could be right. The D300 sensor is 1.5x smaller and the D3x have 2 times more resolution

Still I think the 5DII give ~~better~~ different results than the D3x. The D3x is sometimes more sharp at high iso and saturated at all iso's but too noisy for me
_______________________________

Here's the december 10th rumor http://nikonrumors.com/2008/12/10/nikon-d400-specs.aspx

New 14.8 megapixel DX format CMOS sensor effective 14.3 megapixel
Self-cleaning sensor unit (low-pass filter vibration)
ISO 100 - 6400 (with boost up to ISO 25600 and down to ISO 50)

Here's the latest rumor (Feb 6th) http://nikonrumors.com/2009/02/06/nikon-d400-specs-24mp-touchscreen.aspx

Model D400 (single)
Time to market 2009
Digital camera type SLR Digital Cameras
Effective Pixels 24,400,000 pixels
Optical zoom multiples Depending on the lens may be
Operating mode With full manual functions
Sensor type CMOS sensor
LCD screen size 3.5 inches
LCD screen features Touch Screen

Elenathewise · « **Reply #7 on:** February 25, 2009, 21:44 »

I have Nikon D300. Now, possible upgrades for me - D700 (same megapixels) or ultraexpensive d3x (24 mpx). IN BOTH cases I have to get new glass, since its a full sensor. If I am getting a new glass anyway, why not get CANON EOS-5D MK II which is reasonably priced and will give me 21 mpx? I don't see a reason why. I don't know what Nikon is doing but they better come up with some reasonable upgrade path for D300, and soon....

vonkara · « **Reply #8 on:** February 25, 2009, 21:59 »

Consider the new 24-70 f/2.8... It's expensive but I never had a sharper lens and I only use it on my D300. It would be even greater on a FF sensor

null · « **Reply #9 on:** February 26, 2009, 00:18 »

Quote from: Vonkara on February 25, 2009, 21:59

Consider the new 24-70 f/2.8... It's expensive but I never had a sharper lens and I only use it on my D300. It would be even greater on a FF sensor

What about fringe at the wide angles? I noticed lately that I spend a lot of time removing fringe on wide angles (18) of my Sigma 18-125. I do a lot of landscape and editorial. I was so desperate I planned buying a prime 50mm.

Xalanx · « **Reply #10 on:** February 26, 2009, 01:29 »

I notice an impressive number of people that are willing to switch to Canon. Truth being told, 5D Mk2 is really a good option - you can get this an a lot of excellent quality glass for the price of d3x body.

Imagecom · « **Reply #11 on:** February 26, 2009, 02:47 »

It was funny -i was just laughing and laughing,
by the way I'm also a Canon guy

vonkara · « **Reply #12 on:** February 26, 2009, 10:17 »

Quote from: FlemishDreams on February 26, 2009, 00:18

Quote from: Vonkara on February 25, 2009, 21:59
Consider the new 24-70 f/2.8... It's expensive but I never had a sharper lens and I only use it on my D300. It would be even greater on a FF sensor

What about fringe at the wide angles? I noticed lately that I spend a lot of time removing fringe on wide angles (18) of my Sigma 18-125. I do a lot of landscape and editorial. I was so desperate I planned buying a prime 50mm.

It's well controlled from what I've read in magazines and on the web. Reviews are not the exact same everywhere but show the same trend.

24-70

50 f/1.4 (f/1.8 have more chromatic aberration)

As you see the 2 lenses don't really go over 0.8 pixel width aberration. I never saw chromatic aberration on my 24-70. Though I almost only does studio with

null · « **Reply #13 on:** February 26, 2009, 21:07 »

Quote from: Vonkara on February 26, 2009, 10:17

As you see the 2 lenses don't really go over 0.8 pixel width aberration. I never saw chromatic aberration on my 24-70. Though I almost only does studio with

Thanks for your extended info. I don't get CA in studio, but when I do tropical landscapes (with very hard sun and shadows) I have apparently often CA of more than 3 pixels wide. I try to post some full size crops later, in a new topic since it doesn't involve Hitler. Maybe it's not CA, maybe I'm doing something wrong.

cdwheatley · « **Reply #14 on:** February 27, 2009, 01:48 »

Quote from: FlemishDreams on February 26, 2009, 21:07

Quote from: Vonkara on February 26, 2009, 10:17
As you see the 2 lenses don't really go over 0.8 pixel width aberration. I never saw chromatic aberration on my 24-70. Though I almost only does studio with

Thanks for your extended info. I don't get CA in studio, but when I do tropical landscapes (with very hard sun and shadows) I have apparently often CA of more than 3 pixels wide. I try to post some full size crops later, in a new topic since it doesn't involve Hitler. Maybe it's not CA, maybe I'm doing something wrong.

I'm not sure there is anything you can do about the "chromatic aggravation" outdoors in bright light with heavy contrast. It is what it is, part of life. I get it on all cameras and lenses I've tried, not on every shot but it always shows up. Luckily its pretty easy to fix. If you ever find the magic solution please share

,maybe the solution is shoot in the studio.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Why is Hitler so mad at Nikon? (Read 7991 times)

Pixart

Graffoto

Pixart

null

vonkara

null

vonkara

Elenathewise

vonkara

null

Xalanx

Imagecom

vonkara

null

cdwheatley

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors