Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear => Topic started by: dwswager on November 14, 2015, 04:01:11 pm
-
I know this makes be look desperate, but then as a former D300 shooter waiting 5 years, I'm desperate. I'm going to Spain this summer and will be shooting a soccer amoung other things.
Any likelihood Nikon might get their thumb out of their backside and release a high frame rate cropped sensor camera to compete against the Canon 7DmkII? The D7100/D7200 are not bad cameras, in fact, for the price they are actually fabulous, but lack the body and frame rate advantageous to shooting some subjects.
-
My guess is that it is going to be announced together with the D5 in the coming 1-3 months.
The D3/D300 was one of the most successful announcement/pair of cameras in Nikon history, and, being lost as they are, I beleve they have decided to try that once more.
But how are they going to call the D400?... ;) The D50? The would make a bit of sense.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
D400, D500, D5YearsLateButBetterThanNever? I don't care what they call it!
-
My guess is that it is going to be announced together with the D5 in the coming 1-3 months.
The D3/D300 was one of the most successful announcement/pair of cameras in Nikon history, and, being lost as they are, I beleve they have decided to try that once more.
But how are they going to call the D400?... ;) The D50? The would make a bit of sense.
Cheers,
Bernard
I still have a D50, my first DSLR. Great camera for that time, won the comparison with a comparable Canon by feeling much more solid in hand (and 100$ cheaper) and now 10 years later almost looks like new despite decent use.
-
It has been clear for some time that Nikon just doesn't see crop format as 'professional' and their aim is to push serious users to full frame and the expensive lenses that go with it. They were very aggressive with their D3/D300/D700 releases because they had to be; they badly trailed Canon in the move to digital slrs. They got a lot of market share back and the sensors lead Canon so they no longer need to give as much in bodies lower down the range, even the D750 body controls are hobbled compared to the D800.
This may all come to bite them with mirrorless taking chunks out of the DSLR market since fast af, long lens, high fps use is the last area where these cameras will displace an SLR.
Your choice is a D7200, D750 or switch systems.
-
A D400 makes a lot of sense to users. It was true 3 years ago, 2 years ago and 1 year ago. But instead Canon came out with a mark II and nothing from Nikon. I think the chances of a D400 now are close to zero. If Nikon intended DX for professional use they would have built it by now. I hope they prove me wrong.
-
It has been clear for some time that Nikon just doesn't see crop format as 'professional' and their aim is to push serious users to full frame and the expensive lenses that go with it. They were very aggressive with their D3/D300/D700 releases because they had to be; they badly trailed Canon in the move to digital slrs. They got a lot of market share back and the sensors lead Canon so they no longer need to give as much in bodies lower down the range, even the D750 body controls are hobbled compared to the D800.
Your choice is a D7200, D750 or switch systems.
I also believe that that had been Nikons opinion: Professionals would want FX and amateurs would use DX. However, users didn't comply. Hence, the issue has been will Nikon admit they were wrong, and can they compete at the $1799 price point with the 7DmkII. But Nikon invented the DSLR with the D1 and then never followed up until the D3/D300 pair that took Canon's head off. Then they went back into stupid mode. Maybe it is actually time for them to come around again.
I'm still holding onto my RRS L-Bracket from the D7100 in case I have to opt for the D7200, but I'm hopeful.
-
Your choice is a D7200, D750 or switch systems.
Is anyone doing faraway birding/sports considering the V series yet? V4 should be coming out soon.
-
But Nikon invented the DSLR with the D1 and then never followed up until the D3/D300 pair that took Canon's head off. Then they went back into stupid mode.
True from a DX shooter standpoint.
On the FX front, I do think that the D3x/D800/D810 are cameras that moved the bar mode than any other camera since the Canon 1Ds. Let's not forget that before those, you pretty much had to spend 20,000 US$ to get a camera with good dynamic range.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
What about the D810, or its successor? It has similar pixel density to crop sensors, giving similar reach, and the full frame gives much more flexibility in framing and cropping, which, in many situations, outweighs the frame rate advantage (5fps being more than fast enough for most wildlife).
I went along on a casual shoot recently and found it much easier to get well-composed (after cropping), well-timed and in-focus shots with the 5Ds than the 7D2, with the final resolution of the 5Ds shots after cropping being equal or higher than that of the 7D2 (i.e. cropping to 1.6x max, often less)
-
What about the D810, or its successor? It has similar pixel density to crop sensors,
Not really, the best DX crop sensors are in the 24 to 28 megapixel range these days. The D810 in DX mode is a little under 16 megapixels.
-
Not really, the best DX crop sensors are in the 24 to 28 megapixel range these days. The D810 in DX mode is a little under 16 megapixels.
I'd expect the successor to be somewhere around that. The D810 is built around a three-year-old sensor.
The 5Ds crops down to 20MP when cropped to Canon's 1.6x APS-C size, which is the same as the 7D2. I'd expect the next Nikon to manage at least that.
-
What about the D810, or its successor? It has similar pixel density to crop sensors, giving similar reach, and the full frame gives much more flexibility in framing and cropping, which, in many situations, outweighs the frame rate advantage (5fps being more than fast enough for most wildlife).
I went along on a casual shoot recently and found it much easier to get well-composed (after cropping), well-timed and in-focus shots with the 5Ds than the 7D2, with the final resolution of the 5Ds shots after cropping being equal or higher than that of the 7D2 (i.e. cropping to 1.6x max, often less)
Since selling the D7100, I have been shooting the D810 for sports. I shoot it in 1.2X (25MP) mode to give 6fps. And it operates faster than the D7100. However, Some of that is down to the upgraded Expeed 4 processor that is in the D7200 and would likely be in a D400/D500.
I can't speak to Canon users, but it would be a major fail if Nikon released a professional DX sensor camera at 24MP and it was bested in speed of operation by the D810!
BTW, I personally think the D810 is the best general purpose DSLR on the planet.
-
I agree about the 810 - it's a cracker of a machine and reasonably cheap compared to the big pro DSLR's.
I had a 7100 as a backup for a while and used it a bit, but I found the layout to different from the 800's to make it comfortable to use at the same time.
Certainly nothing wrong with the image quality given it's low price though.
-
That is one of the 2 problems with the D7100/D7200. After having used the D300 button interface for so long, I never really took to the dial interface style of the Enthusiast line of cameras. I also didn't appreciate some of the artificial dumbing down of the camera. For example, we know the Expeed 4 processor can handle 14bit, 24MP images much faster than 5fps. And we know the D7200 can shoot at least 6fps mechanically. Hence, there is no reason that it can't shoot 6fps in 14bit RAW, but it can't.
The one thing on the dial interface cameras that beats the button interface is U1/U2. Not fully a complete state of the camera, but at least as close as Nikon gets to user presets. The shooting banks on pro cameras are just stupid. No one wants the camera to remember the end state, they want a known starting point. It just baffles me that in 2015, when everything on the camera is set electronically, we don't have namable menus that can store like 10 camera states we want to use. How about running aps on camera?
But I do agree that at a $1000 street price, the D7200 and the D7100 (Toshiba sensor) were exceptional value based on image quality and functionality. In fact, if they just took most of the guts of the D7200, wrapped it in a button style interface body with at least an 8fps shutter box, big buffer, and add some of the live view functionality of the D810, you have a D400!
-
BTW, I personally think the D810 is the best general purpose DSLR on the planet.
I personally think the 5Ds R is the best general purpose DSLR on the planet.
-
I personally think the 5Ds R is the best general purpose DSLR on the planet.
Maybe, I can't argue the point because I have only played with the 5Ds R and not used it in all the different scenarios. But, since I already find 36MP somewhat overkill in a lot of lesser scenarios and a speed drag for action, I would think 48MP might be even worse. And I like the small low light and dynamic range advantages the D810 has.
-
Maybe, I can't argue the point because I have only played with the 5Ds R and not used it in all the different scenarios. But, since I already find 36MP somewhat overkill in a lot of lesser scenarios and a speed drag for action, I would think 48MP might be even worse. And I like the small low light and dynamic range advantages the D810 has.
The Canon is 50MP and not 48 ;) Anyway my comment was partly directed to all those who claim a certain camera is the best without any direct use of the camera. There is a lot more to a camera than DxO measurements (as you know) :) I'm shooting both cameras. I really like that the 5Ds R has EFCS all the time in LV where the D810 is strangely implemented as if it was not intended to be used. Both cameras lack ETTR metering which I would have liked.
-
The Canon is 50MP and not 48 ;) Anyway my comment was partly directed to all those who claim a certain camera is the best without any direct use of the camera. There is a lot more to a camera than DxO measurements (as you know) :) I'm shooting both cameras. I really like that the 5Ds R has EFCS all the time in LV where the D810 is strangely implemented as if it was not intended to be used. Both cameras lack ETTR metering which I would have liked.
+1, on the ECFS for Nikon, very strange implementation. Not sure what they were thinking on that, and I have hoped to see a firmware update on the D810 that would make it a cleaner process, but as it's not happened by now, it ain't. Such is the way Nikon works.
BTW, just like Nikon was able to add a real intervalometer to the D810A, i.e. one that allows you to not be limited to the 1/30th of a sec. and instead use bulb. How hard would it have been to add that to the D810? not hard at all.
Paul C
-
The Canon is 50MP and not 48 ;) Anyway my comment was partly directed to all those who claim a certain camera is the best without any direct use of the camera. There is a lot more to a camera than DxO measurements (as you know) :) I'm shooting both cameras. I really like that the 5Ds R has EFCS all the time in LV where the D810 is strangely implemented as if it was not intended to be used. Both cameras lack ETTR metering which I would have liked.
Agree on Nikon EFCS implementation. But Live View is a subset of all use cases for a GENERAL PURPOSE camera.
48MP/50MP same thing!
-
Agree on Nikon EFCS implementation. But Live View is a subset of all use cases for a GENERAL PURPOSE camera.
48MP/50MP same thing!
Like you said you like low light capability :) This is also a subset... It should be clear that I mention one thing that annoys me on the D810. I could mention more if need be...
Anyway why do you defend writing the wrong resolution for the 5Ds R? It's like saying that the D810 is 34MP.
-
Like you said you like low light capability :) This is also a subset... It should be clear that I mention one thing that annoys me on the D810. I could mention more if need be...
Anyway why do you defend writing the wrong resolution for the 5Ds R? It's like saying that the D810 is 34MP.
I don't defend it, my original point was that 48MP file size and handling will be a detriment in a lot of cases. Even 36MP is to some extent for some use cases. 50MP just makes it a teensy bit worse.
That said, there really isn't all that much difference between 36MP and 50MP and essentially none from 48MP to 50MP. Reasonable, but not gigantic since we are looking at a square function. If we use 24MP as a baseline, 48MP is not double the resolution, that would be 96MP. 48MP is double the pixel count, but we have to account for 2 dimensions. Notwithstanding that File size and Pixel count have become stand-in references to give an indication of actual resolution without respect to aspect ratios.
-
I don't defend it, my original point was that 48MP file size and handling will be a detriment in a lot of cases. Even 36MP is to some extent for some use cases. 50MP just makes it a teensy bit worse.
That said, there really isn't all that much difference between 36MP and 50MP and essentially none from 48MP to 50MP. Reasonable, but not gigantic since we are looking at a square function. If we use 24MP as a baseline, 48MP is not double the resolution, that would be 96MP. 48MP is double the pixel count, but we have to account for 2 dimensions. Notwithstanding that File size and Pixel count have become stand-in references to give an indication of actual resolution without respect to aspect ratios.
OMG ;)
-
Is there any upper shutter speed limit for EFC on the 5 Ds?
Cheers,
Bernard
-
OMG ;)
;D Just be glad you're not in the discussion on XDA-Developers about whether a Legacy USB cable can transmit 3A of power safely!
-
Is there any upper shutter speed limit for EFC on the 5 Ds?
Cheers,
Bernard
I have not found a limit (and I can't find one in the manual either), but I only shoot in live view at shutter speeds less than 1/100s-1/200s. Otherwise I let the mirror flap.
-
Pixel binning and a properly-implemented sRAW render all arguments of file size issue moot.
Not only can it reduce file size to that of a 12 or 24MP file, but, unlike a native 12 or 24MP file, a properly-binned file (i.e. downsampled from all 48MP, not just using every second pixel) also eliminates colour aliasing, all but eliminates moire and greatly reduces lateral CA.
-
Pixel binning and a properly-implemented sRAW render all arguments of file size issue moot.
Not only can it reduce file size to that of a 12 or 24MP file, but, unlike a native 12 or 24MP file, a properly-binned file (i.e. downsampled from all 48MP, not just using every second pixel) also eliminates colour aliasing, all but eliminates moire and greatly reduces lateral CA.
While on computer file size might also be a consideration, I was really talking in-camera file size. The file processing and data transfer times, as well as buffer space all contribute to slowing down the camera operation. For example, just shooting at 1.2X 25MP mode on the D810 allows an additional fps faster shooting at 6fps rather than 5fps in FX 36MP.
-
Is anyone doing faraway birding/sports considering the V series yet? V4 should be coming out soon.
I've made a few successful bird photos with my Nikon 1 V1, but it's hard going and very frustrating.
I get a much higher success rate with either the D3s or D800E.
You get a nice reach, but the quality at a pixel level is poor.
The biggest frustration is the operation, stupid fiddly controls that change too easily without your intending and without your noticing, slow image review and viewfinder freezing and so on.
-
I've made a few successful bird photos with my Nikon 1 V1, but it's hard going and very frustrating.
I get a much higher success rate with either the D3s or D800E.
You get a nice reach, but the quality at a pixel level is poor.
The biggest frustration is the operation, stupid fiddly controls that change too easily without your intending and without your noticing, slow image review and viewfinder freezing and so on.
Thanks pw-pix. I wonder if newer iterations have addressed some of these issues.
Jack
-
I've made a few successful bird photos with my Nikon 1 V1, but it's hard going and very frustrating.
I get a much higher success rate with either the D3s or D800E.
You get a nice reach, but the quality at a pixel level is poor.
The biggest frustration is the operation, stupid fiddly controls that change too easily without your intending and without your noticing, slow image review and viewfinder freezing and so on.
The nikon 1 J5 is the first Nikon1 that has a better sensor.. at last.
20MP, more dynamic range and somewhat better low iso. Also it has more focus points.
I will try it soon.
-
Thanks pw-pix. I wonder if newer iterations have addressed some of these issues.
They fix some things and make other things worse.
The EVF was removed, then made an accessory, the battery changed (my V1 uses the same battery as my D800E which is handy).
None of the updated V versions has made me want to update.
As Kers noted, the current J5 has a better sensor and other improvements, but the J series are more point and shoot style, maybe there'll be a V5.