Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear => Topic started by: John Koerner on February 02, 2016, 10:00:59 pm
-
Just curious of the general consensus of things regarding superior ergonomics.
I am trying to acclimate to the Nikon D810 I just purchased, and I realize that I have grown used to Canon ergonomics.
(I don't have to "think" when switching "this and that" on my Canon, it just happens automatically.)
While I am fully-aware of the fact I need to learn how to use my new Nikon, and that (maybe) all of its features will become second nature to me soon as well, my gut tells me Canon simply has superior ergonomics to the Nikon (which is a pretty big deal to me).
The switching of ISO levels (which requires 2 hands with the Nikon), the ability to display a histogram, even f/stop and SS switching just seems easier and more intuitive on the Canon than the Nikon.
(When quick thinking, and fast-action, are required, this can be a big deal ...)
I am curious to hear other people's thoughts in this regard: i.e., the opinions of those who have used multi-systems ... their beliefs as to which system has the superior ergonomics.
Every system seems to be upgrading at the moment ... and my thinking is, as "brand specs" get closer-and-closer in features, etc., that (ultimately) user-friendly, intuitive ergonomics are going to be the deciding points on purchase decisions ...
What are your thoughts?
Jack
-
As far as ISO setting goes, you have 2 easier options on the D810:
1. Set easy ISO in aperture mode -> one of the dial can be used to set the ISO with one hand
2. Use auto-ISO, probably the best implementation of any manufacturer since you can define the minimum shutter speed with a lot of flexibility (absolute value or related to focal length with possible bias).
For the rest, it's really a matter of getting used to it.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
A friend and colleague of mine, a very well respected commercial photographer here, switched to Canon from Nikon about a year before the D3 came out. He needed the full frame and larger file of the Canon at the time. After making the switch, we were working together on a shoot. He had nothing good to say about the Canon ergonomics or operation. He was pleased with the files, but hated the tactile experience. I think it may be as much what you're used to. If you've spent years with your hands wrapped around one or the other brand of camera, switching is going to be tedious. When the D3 was announced I had just spent two weeks on a shoot in the wilderness with no phone or internet. I learned about the Nikon D3 announcement from a TSA agent in a tiny little airport as he was inspecting my equipment bags. The first thing I thought of was my friend and his switch to Canon. He is again a Nikon user, shooting the D800E and the D810. I'll have to find out what he plans to do about the D5.
In the film days everyone I knew had three identical camera bodies. Remember that? Every time you upgraded to a new model, you bought three of them. Now it seems you have three different camera bodies.
-
I've been using Nikon for a long time. A friend of mine lent me a Canon 7D for a couple of days and I hated the big wheel on the back, but the files were indeed nice. The menu was also a big issue for me, I'm used to the new Nikon menu. It was already painful when they switched cameras to that menu style, as I started on the old one on a Coolpix bridge, but this was minor compared to switching everything.
As for the feel, Canon do feel more "cheap" to me, despite being really tough. But it's just a tactile feel, I had the same impression of handling a toy when I tried the D810 and really didn't like it.
I never recommend switching systems, it's always a pain in the ass as well as a huge financial hit for the lenses.
I don't want to live in a world in which either Nikon or Canon have no direct competition. I want them both to coexists as it is beneficial to us customers, so I always tell people to go with whatever they find more comfortable and intuitive for them because the final image quality is less about the gear and more about everything else.
-
The top of the line Nikons have really nice ergos. I had D2 and D3 cameras. Take one step down, such as my current D800/E cameras, and the feel turns junky in comparison.
Can't say if Canon is the same. I've briefly handled 5D Mk2 cams, and they felt fine to me.
-
I prefer Canon, but that is just because I have used EOS for nearly 20 years. Now using Sony Alpha 7, no problem with it for the way I shoot (mostly aperture priority).
-
I also prefer Canon although I've been shooting with Nikon and other brands. I's just a matter of taste after all.
-
Just curious of the general consensus of things regarding superior ergonomics.
I don't think it's possible to to get consensus on ergonomics. It's too personal. You can only develop statistics what's more preferred vs. others, but that's not a consensus of what is superior (or not)
-
In my opinion, it comes down to
1. What the person is used to
2. The ability of the person to adapt to a different format
3. The willingness of the person to adapt to a different format.
Some can jump between different formats easily, others can't and still others can but choose not to.
-
I agree that it comes down to "taste" ... not "ability."
Some people hate the "big wheel" of the Canon, but to me this is what makes it so useful.
The letters/numbers in the Nikon viewfinder are tiny and poorly-illuminated compared to the Canon.
However, the LiveView I find better than the Canon.
I don't like having to switch the D810 body to AF, and then have to switch my lens to AF, in order to be able to use AF. (The extra step is a waste of time.)
With the Canon, I would just flip the switch on the lens and not have to look away from my camera.
With the Nikon, I flip the same lens switch (same Sigma macro lens), but then I have to pull my face from the camera, look for the switch on the D810 body, and flip that too, to have AF.
A lame concept.
Even if I get used to where the AF switch is on the D810 body, I shouldn't have to flip 2 switches to use 1 feature.
The ability to use AF should be a lens-switch only, not a camera body switch.
-
Out of 19 voters so far, 10 (52.6%) prefer Canon, 8 (42.1%) prefer Nikon, and only 1 (5.3%) prefers Sony.
Of these, I wonder how many have actually used both (all 3) systems?
-
I haven't seriously used a digital Nikon SLR (have used Nikon film SLRs) - one thing that always gets me is that Nikon lenses focus in a different direction than Canon lenses, and some third party lenses follow Nikon while others follow Canon. I have some Nikon-direction manual focus lenses I use on the Canon, and I need to just focus on anything when I start the day, just to get my brain to tell the hands to focus the Nikon way, not the usual Canon way. :)
-
Of these, I wonder how many have actually used both (all 3) systems?
I have not used the Sony system although I own three different Sony video cameras. I am a Nikon shooter. I have, however, used Canon enough to know I don't like it. I have no issue with the equipment itself or the images, just my preference and comfort with the Nikon system. I shoot quite a bit with a friend and colleague who is a Canon guy. Over the years I've shot a lot of images of him with his gear that wind up in magazines credited as Author's Photo. We've had a decade-long good-natured discussion over Canon/Nikon. A couple of years ago he needed to buy a waterproof camera capable of being submerged for shooting flyfishing images. He told me he looked as hard as he could to find a suitable Canon and couldn't. He said it really burned his butt, but he bought a Nikon 1 AW and loves it. That story doesn't have anything to do with the DSLR system discussion, but it does indicate that some people can overcome their brand preference when they have to.
-
Having used all three systems extensively I chose Nikon. Keep in mind, though, that I no longer use D-SLRs but do own & use a Sony A7r2. :)
-Dave-
-
I haven't seriously used a digital Nikon SLR (have used Nikon film SLRs) - one thing that always gets me is that Nikon lenses focus in a different direction than Canon lenses, and some third party lenses follow Nikon while others follow Canon. I have some Nikon-direction manual focus lenses I use on the Canon, and I need to just focus on anything when I start the day, just to get my brain to tell the hands to focus the Nikon way, not the usual Canon way. :)
I hear ya, this is something that still bothers me. I have so many film cameras I often use, and everyone focuses a different way or has aperture rings in front rather than the back, and they also turn a different way. It's just such a mess of systems and I have to switch my brain every time.
-
Just curious of the general consensus of things regarding superior ergonomics.
I am trying to acclimate to the Nikon D810 I just purchased, and I realize that I have grown used to Canon ergonomics.
(I don't have to "think" when switching "this and that" on my Canon, it just happens automatically.)
While I am fully-aware of the fact I need to learn how to use my new Nikon, and that (maybe) all of its features will become second nature to me soon as well, my gut tells me Canon simply has superior ergonomics to the Nikon (which is a pretty big deal to me).
The switching of ISO levels (which requires 2 hands with the Nikon), the ability to display a histogram, even f/stop and SS switching just seems easier and more intuitive on the Canon than the Nikon.
(When quick thinking, and fast-action, are required, this can be a big deal ...)
I am curious to hear other people's thoughts in this regard: i.e., the opinions of those who have used multi-systems ... their beliefs as to which system has the superior ergonomics.
Every system seems to be upgrading at the moment ... and my thinking is, as "brand specs" get closer-and-closer in features, etc., that (ultimately) user-friendly, intuitive ergonomics are going to be the deciding points on purchase decisions ...
What are your thoughts?
Jack
Switching can be tough. As a Nikon shooter, when Canon folks ask me how to manipulate their cameras it's almost like they are handing me kryptonite!
As to ISO, yeah it is a button and dial usually so 2 hands, but your eyen never needs to leave the viewfinder. I use Auto ISO quite a bit in manual mode. This allows me the flexibility to manipulate both shutter and aperture as situations dictate without having a minimum shutter speed mess me up. You have to ensure that in high light levels there is enough shutter speed available though.
As to MF to AF, you can keep the camera on AF and flip the lens switch to manual and then flip it back to AF. No need to manipulate the switch on the body. And you can manually focus most Nikon lenses even when lens it set to AF. If you back button focus and set shutter button to release only, that also preclude accidently activating AF when you have MF the lens in AF mode and it also save battery because VR only activates when the shutter button is pressed instead of when focusing.
-
Jack, I thought you were going to switch to the D500. I concede that there are good reasons to buy the D810. I have one myself and really like it a lot. Are you still planning to buy the D500? I'm just curious about your reasoning. Please give us the Cliff Notes version. Thanks.
-
I did not vote, I have used the Canon system for years, from FD to EOS to digital EOS and now use the Fuji a lot and I really like the Fujifilm interface.....
Alan
-
Jack, I thought you were going to switch to the D500. I concede that there are good reasons to buy the D810. I have one myself and really like it a lot. Are you still planning to buy the D500? I'm just curious about your reasoning. Please give us the Cliff Notes version. Thanks.
I have the D810 and the D500 on pre-order.
I am considering re-thinking that position and combining those resources to just go with the 1 Dx Mk II.
The cliff notes version as to "why" would be I don't like the ergonomics of the D810, and the reading I have done indicates the D5 and D500 have so-so 4K, while the 1 Dx Mk II appears to have world class 4K.
(BTW: B&H Photo is a great outfit. You can use the products and, if you don't like them, send them back for full-credit and/or refund.)
Jack
-
The 1DXmkII seems to be a great camera but is a totally different beast compared to the D810/D500. I am less and less clear about your needs. ;)
As far as video goes, none of those seem to come close to what Sony/Pana offer for significantly less cash.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Switching can be tough. As a Nikon shooter, when Canon folks ask me how to manipulate their cameras it's almost like they are handing me kryptonite!
I am sure the preference works in reverse, also.
As to ISO, yeah it is a button and dial usually so 2 hands, but your eyen never needs to leave the viewfinder. I use Auto ISO quite a bit in manual mode. This allows me the flexibility to manipulate both shutter and aperture as situations dictate without having a minimum shutter speed mess me up. You have to ensure that in high light levels there is enough shutter speed available though.
When you consider the optimal hand-positioning when using a camera [left hand clasped underneath the lens (L/thumb on side of lens), right hand holding the camera grip (R/thumb on the back of the camera, R/index finger on top), all operations should be geared toward this reality.
The Canon does exactly this.
My left hand never has to leave the lens, and can control the lens in exactly this natural position.
My right hand can control anything it needs to with right thumb + right index finger combinations.
I remain in the natural shooting position throughout whatever combinations I need to make.
By contrast, the Nikon makes me take my left hand off the lens and fiddle with the left side of the camera body, while my right hand has to fiddle with the right side of the camera body, to achieve any number of combination settings.
It is simply not ergonomically friendly.
Also, taking my hand off the camera on the left side can startle many macro subjects to which I'm going to be moving close as I attempt to nail a shot.
Taking my left hand off the lens to adjust the setting on the left side of the camera, and then bringing my hand back to the lens, can scare off a butterfly (or make a jumping spider flip to the other side of the leaf), etc.
In this respect, I believe the Canon provides a much better-thought-out ergonomic interface. I can instantly make whatever lens adjustments I have with my left thumb, never taking my hand off the lens, and make whatever ISO/f-stop/shutter speed adjustments I need to with my right hand, all the while in the natural camera position. This is simply preferable.
As to MF to AF, you can keep the camera on AF and flip the lens switch to manual and then flip it back to AF. No need to manipulate the switch on the body. And you can manually focus most Nikon lenses even when lens it set to AF. If you back button focus and set shutter button to release only, that also preclude accidently activating AF when you have MF the lens in AF mode and it also save battery because VR only activates when the shutter button is pressed instead of when focusing.
Thanks for the tip.
I am still working with the camera and enjoy the image quality. I'm trying to figure out pre-set ways I can handle some of these ergonomically-unfriendly realities.
I like the focus dots better on the D810 than the Canon, and I like the LiveView on the D810 quite a bit better.
Life is full of compromises and trade-offs. I'm still trying to us to decide the trade-offs are worth the complete switch.
Jack
-
The 1DXmkII seems to be a great camera but is a totally different beast compared to the D810/D500. I am less and less clear about your needs. ;)
That makes 2 of us, as I am trying to clarify my own needs ;D
I do not think the 1Dx Mk II is a "totally-different" beast than the D500.
The high-ISO is an appealing prospect (for both), as I try not to use flash if I can help it.
As far as video goes, none of those seem to come close to what Sony/Pana offer for significantly less cash.
Cheers,
Bernard
Can you clarify?
-
That makes 2 of us, as I am trying to clarify my own needs ;D
I do not think the 1Dx Mk II is a "totally-different" beast than the D500.
The high-ISO is an appealing prospect (for both), as I try not to use flash if I can help it.
My understanding is that you are coming from the 7D. I shot DX Nikon bodies from 2007 till I bought the D810. My D810 purchase was predicated on selling my D7100, however, for some period of time I used both. When I sold the D7100, it was tough. My point is that each camera has areas of strength and weakness and while you can normally work around them, it is never as satisfying or effective. And now that I am back to one body, I know how incredibly handy it is to shoot with 2 bodies. I've shot both sports and events with dual bodies and it is awesome. which is why I will be buying a D500 to go with the D810. Once I tasted it, I can't go back.
Attached is an image showing the 4 cameras in discussion 7D, 1DxMKII, D810 and D500. Listed are the crop from full frame, the Megapixels, the frame rates and the effective focal length equavalent of a 600mm lens. That Sigma Sport 150-600mm is 960mm equavalent on your current body at just slightly smaller pixel count than the 600mm it will be on a 20MP 1DxMKII!!!
While there are a few areas where the 1DxMKII would certainly be the best camera to have of the 4, I suspect about 90% of all shooting circumstances will be covered better by the D810 or D500 or combination of both.
-
My understanding is that you are coming from the 7D. I shot DX Nikon bodies from 2007 till I bought the D810. My D810 purchase was predicated on selling my D7100, however, for some period of time I used both. When I sold the D7100, it was tough. My point is that each camera has areas of strength and weakness and while you can normally work around them, it is never as satisfying or effective. And now that I am back to one body, I know how incredibly handy it is to shoot with 2 bodies. I've shot both sports and events with dual bodies and it is awesome. which is why I will be buying a D500 to go with the D810. Once I tasted it, I can't go back.
Yes, I had the 7D, and its features were second nature to me. It has just been too far-passed by modern technology to be happy with it anymore.
I agree with you, and the 2-Body Paradigm is what I hope to begin this new season with, and to facilitate this in the field I have purchased the 2-Camera Cotton Carrier (http://buy.cottoncarrier.com/2-camera-carrier-vest-system-p/124rtl-d.htm) to make "instant usability" a snap.
Basically, my goal in the field is to try to document specimens + habitat ... and switching lenses is a pain in the @$$.
(Hence the need for 2 cameras, with totally-different lenses attached.)
I have my Sigma lenses as field lenses + wide-angle.
At the moment, I still have my 7D + 10-22 as the "habitat" camera/lens combo.
Eventually, I will get the Nikkor 14-24 mm and have that on the D810 for habitat, with the Sigmas attached to the D500 for specimens.
Right now, all I have is the D810 because the D500 isn't available.
Attached is an image showing the 4 cameras in discussion 7D, 1DxMKII, D810 and D500. Listed are the crop from full frame, the Megapixels, the frame rates and the effective focal length equavalent of a 600mm lens. That Sigma Sport 150-600mm is 960mm equavalent on your current body at just slightly smaller pixel count than the 600mm it will be on a 20MP 1DxMKII!!!
It's funny. When I first decided on Canon, several years ago, it was because Nikons were more expensive and Canon's offered "more for less."
Now, it is the opposite.
The Canon 200-400 is $11,000 ... compared to the Nikkor 200-400 II for $6900.
The Canon 5DSr is is $3800 ... compared to the Nikon D810 for $2800.
I just can't justify staying with Canon, financially.
Okay, so the Nikon D5 is a bit over-priced at $6400 compared to the new 1D X II at $5900.
But the D810 was a no-brainer at $2900, compared to the 5D Sr at $3800.
Yes, the Canon 200-400 is the best ... but it's not $4000 better :o
Yes, the Canon 11-24 is better than the Nikon 14-24 ... but it's not $1,100 better :o
For me, this is just too much of a disparity in price to justify the modest gains in quality.
The simple fact is, the D810 is a better overall camera than the 5DSr, and the 14-24 is an excellent lens.
With a D810 + 14-24 combo, I am out of pocket $4600 for an exquisite combo.
With the 5Dsr + 11-24 combo, I am out of pocket $6,800, with a better lens but a not-better camera.
Nikon is simply offering better cameras and a better value now (IMO) ... and superb lenses also.
While there are a few areas where the 1DxMKII would certainly be the best camera to have of the 4, I suspect about 90% of all shooting circumstances will be covered better by the D810 or D500 or combination of both.
The 1DX Mark II seems to be a better value than the new Nikon D5.
(I like the look of the D5 better, though ... and I will bet its price goes down shortly ...)
The D810 is a WAY better value than the 5DSr ...
The D500 is simply BETTER than the Canon 7D Mk II in every possible way ...
Ultimately, I don't want to invest a bunch of money in the 1DX Mk II and have only 1 camera.
I would rather buy 2 cameras and have both at the-ready ... to alleviate the need to change lenses.
I have been tinkering more with the D810 since I last posted, and have benefited from your tip to just leave AF 'on' on the body.
I have set the ISO to 'auto' so I don't have to move my hand of the lens to adjust the ISO.
From there, I can tinker with f/stop + Shutter speed, and the ISO will intelligently select the best choice (even though I prefer to select my ISO myself).
I hope to take it out for its first real spin over the weekend.
Jack
-
If you're used to the layout and ergonomics of one system, then handle another system, it will almost always feel awkward at first.
For me, Canon is very straightforward, and you can go from a 5D, 6D, 7D, 5DS, and they are all laid out the same way.
-
I am a big fan of the Cotton Carrier system. It allows you to use hiking poles or both hands in a scramble, without worrying about the camera. Yes, the Nikon D500, being newer, is going to have more features than the 7D2.
-
If you're used to the layout and ergonomics of one system, then handle another system, it will almost always feel awkward at first.
I figured it would be like this, but was surprised at some of the design decisions.
Fortunately, the AF issue is resolved.
On the ISO situation, I am not as concerned anymore, as the files I am getting at ISO 1200 on the D810 look better than the files from the 7D at ISO 100.
Another thing, of which Dwswager reminded me in private, is that I can take "darker" photos with the D810, and still pull out detail in post, whereas any under-exposed images were simply shot with the 7D.
The more I get used to the Nikon system (and having customized my settings, the playback display, etc.), the more I can concentrate on shooting ... and I am really enjoying the file quality.
For me, Canon is very straightforward, and you can go from a 5D, 6D, 7D, 5DS, and they are all laid out the same way.
I agree. Very straightforward.
The playback on the Canon, for example, I could see the histogram + all relevant info on one screen.
With the Nikon, I can look at the histogram, but then then I have to hit the button to see the file info, then again to see the highlights, etc.
This bothered me at first, but I am growing to like it now ;D
Jack
-
I am a big fan of the Cotton Carrier system.
Ditto 8)
It allows you to use hiking poles or both hands in a scramble, without worrying about the camera.
Ditto x2.
For me, it allows me to carry my snake tongs (http://tongs.com/gentlegianttongwsupertongoption.aspx) and insect sweep nets (http://www.gemplers.com/product/RJR100/Professional-Net-15-Sailcloth-Net) 8)
What I especially like with the Cotton Carrier (http://buy.cottoncarrier.com/2-camera-carrier-vest-system-p/124rtl-d.htm), is that you can hardly feel the weight of the camera. Yeah, you see the pictures of it on the ad, but I was curious about how it would feel "on" ... and it feels wonderful (hardly notice the weight, when compared to having the camera on a tripod over your shoulder, or around your neck).
Yes, the Nikon D500, being newer, is going to have more features than the 7D2.
Let's be real here.
The Nikon D500 is what the Canon 7D Mk II should have been ... but wasn't.
All the same technology was there when the 7D Mk II came out (4K, wireless, articulating screen, everything).
Canon just sat on its corporate a$$ ... and tried to "dress-up" outdated technology with the 7D II ... and (quite frankly) it pissed me off.
(I tried to like it, I really did, but in my heart I was ultimately turned-off ...)
I had been saving, and saving, and saving to re-invest with Canon ... and they didn't deliver anything to make me send my money their way.
By contrast, Nikon simply delivered with the D500 ... they included absolutely everything and didn't hold back.
That is why, after saving for several years, I made the decision to switch brands.
I was a little put-off by the Nikon ergonomics, at first (hence the thread), but after acclimating ... and, especially, after seeing the files ... I am glad I made this decision.
With a D810 + landscape lens ... and a D500 + field lens ... I am looking forward to a very fulfilling new season :D
Jack
-
I teach an advanced level photography course (a portion of a 6-month curriculum for post-secondary students) a couple times a year. The students are generally split 65% Canon, 30% Nikon and 5% Sony. I use Canon (1Dx and 5Ds). From working with the students' cameras I can say, from a menuing standpoint, the Sonys are a disaster and the Nikon follow closely. One of the things I teach the students is the use and importance of doing custom white balance. With Nikons (and granted, these are not the D4 -- and I can't remember precisely the D810), it took no less than 10 menu steps to find, create and register a custom white balance! Truly ridiculous. Some Nikon engineer should have had his ass fired. I found on both Nikons and Sonys, many important or useful menu items were buried. It's absurd. I'm not always happy with Canon, though it's made huge leaps is usability since my first 1D. My own bias is that I greatly prefer the ergonomics of the 1Dx over my 5Ds. One thing is certain -- regardless of brand -- it seems no two cameras are ever the same in ergonomic handling.
-
I teach an advanced level photography course (a portion of a 6-month curriculum for post-secondary students) a couple times a year. The students are generally split 65% Canon, 30% Nikon and 5% Sony. I use Canon (1Dx and 5Ds). From working with the students' cameras I can say, from a menuing standpoint, the Sonys are a disaster and the Nikon follow closely. One of the things I teach the students is the use and importance of doing custom white balance. With Nikons (and granted, these are not the D4 -- and I can't remember precisely the D810), it took no less than 10 menu steps to find, create and register a custom white balance! Truly ridiculous. Some Nikon engineer should have had his ass fired. I found on both Nikons and Sonys, many important or useful menu items were buried. It's absurd. I'm not always happy with Canon, though it's made huge leaps is usability since my first 1D. My own bias is that I greatly prefer the ergonomics of the 1Dx over my 5Ds. One thing is certain -- regardless of brand -- it seems no two cameras are ever the same in ergonomic handling.
I'm not sure what "registering" a custom white balance means in Canon speak, but with a Nikon D810 it takes exactly 0 menu steps to create and utilize up to 4 (I think) custom white balances that are then saved and can be retrieved at a later time.
I tend to shoot with a Colorchecker passport most of the time so I usually shoot RAW on Auto white balance unless I'm in a controlled lighting situation.
-
I'm not sure what "registering" a custom white balance means in Canon speak, but with a Nikon D810 it takes exactly 0 menu steps to create and utilize up to 4 (I think) custom white balances that are then saved and can be retrieved at a later time.
I tend to shoot with a Colorchecker passport most of the time so I usually shoot RAW on Auto white balance unless I'm in a controlled lighting situation.
"Registering" a custom white balance is just that -- taking an image and making it the "Custom White Balance". Glad to know it's a "no-brainer" on an 810, though I doubt it takes "zero steps". You must first take a reference frame, then select it and set it as your custom white balance. The other Nikon models suck in this regard. (You can find a YouTube video that guides you through the mechanics on one particular model. If my memory serves me well, it was 10 separate steps.)
As for using a Color Checker, I use that as well, but for my commercial jobs, prefer to also have a custom white balance set within the image as well. I do this with an Expo Disk which has served me very well over the years. For me, professionally, I shoot RAW+JPEGs, and the clients use the JPEGs for their FPO edits and I want the color balance to be correct for them, not arbitrary for me to set in post. As such, I teach the students the mechanics of this. A 1Dx will store up to 5 different white balances, though, since most of my work is location, I rarely use the same one twice, since the shots can vary greatly. Again, for my students, I'm teaching a consistency of method and how to achieve custom white balance embedded within their photos.
-
The D7000 requires about 3 or 4 steps, it can save five settings and you can then switch to any of them the same way you set any other WB setting (without the menu but using WB button and the control wheels). There is one more step, optional, that lets you further refine the settings with a color matrix.
It's not intuitive at all, that I can say, but if you need it often it will become a no-brainer in no time, just like any other setting.
-
"Registering" a custom white balance is just that -- taking an image and making it the "Custom White Balance". Glad to know it's a "no-brainer" on an 810, though I doubt it takes "zero steps". You must first take a reference frame, then select it and set it as your custom white balance. The other Nikon models suck in this regard. (You can find a YouTube video that guides you through the mechanics on one particular model. If my memory serves me well, it was 10 separate steps.)
As for using a Color Checker, I use that as well, but for my commercial jobs, prefer to also have a custom white balance set within the image as well. I do this with an Expo Disk which has served me very well over the years. For me, professionally, I shoot RAW+JPEGs, and the clients use the JPEGs for their FPO edits and I want the color balance to be correct for them, not arbitrary for me to set in post. As such, I teach the students the mechanics of this. A 1Dx will store up to 5 different white balances, though, since most of my work is location, I rarely use the same one twice, since the shots can vary greatly. Again, for my students, I'm teaching a consistency of method and how to achieve custom white balance embedded within their photos.
Not sure this is what you are asking, but for a D810 (Helpful photo attached)
1. Press and Hold WB button.
2. (If not already set) Rotate rear dial to select "Pre" (Preset) as your white balance selection.
3. (If you want to save into some position other than the current one) Rotate front dial to select which position you want to save into.
4. Release and then Hold WB button until display flashes.
5. Shoot the reference frame and you have stored that white balance into the position you selected.
If the camera is already set to "PRE" WB and all you want to do is store a new one then only steps 4 & 5 are required. You never have to go into the menus. It has pretty much been this easy on the D70, D300, D7100 and D810 that I have owned.
If I am distributing JPEG out of camera, then yeah, I use a custom white balance. Normally though I shoot NEF only, download, set white balance and convert using a custom profile while adding a little overall sharpness to a reasonable size JPEG and provide those.
-
As someone that has done Human Reliability Analysis for nuclear power reactors and nuclear weapons systems, I can assure you that any preference to one system is, in large part, predicated on your prior experience (bias). That is, if you shoot Canon, you will be partial to Canon and find Nikon somewhat frustrating and the other way around. This gives no indication of which is better only to which you are already acclimated. Even the rare individual that knows well and uses multiple systems will be biased by their prior experience and the system they use on a primary basis. The whole field of Human Factors Engineering is predicated on understanding bias (of all types) and resulting expectations and attempting to account for it.
-
As someone that has done Human Reliability Analysis for nuclear power reactors and nuclear weapons systems, I can assure you that any preference to one system is, in large part, predicated on your prior experience (bias). That is, if you shoot Canon, you will be partial to Canon and find Nikon somewhat frustrating and the other way around. This gives no indication of which is better only to which you are already acclimated. Even the rare individual that knows well and uses multiple systems will be biased by their prior experience and the system they use on a primary basis. The whole field of Human Factors Engineering is predicated on understanding bias (of all types) and resulting expectations and attempting to account for it.
Very good point.
Maybe the poll should have had 6 questions:
1) I prefer Canon and shoot mainly Canon
2) I prefer Canon and shoot mainly Nikon or Sony
3) I prefer Nikon and shoot mainly Nikon
4) I prefer Nikon and shoot mainly Canon or Sony
5) I prefer Sony and shoot mainly Sony
6) I prefer Sony and shoot mainly Canon or Nikon
My bet would be that answers 2, 4 and 6 would be a large minority vs. 1, 3 and 5, but could be wrong of course
-
The biggest thing any camera manufacturer could easily implement to improve the human factors of their camera would be to allow the user to save the state of the camera to a group of Settings Banks! Everything on a modern DSLR is set electronically. Hence, I should be able to save the current state of the camera to memory and recall it later. I should be able to name these and recall them at least by going into the menu. A dedicated button and command dial spin to step through them would be ever better.
Nikon has the Shooting and Extended Shooting banks which are almost useless because they work the exact opposite as needed. What is needed is to save a set of base starting states while the Nikon banks end up as ever changing ending states. IDIOTS!
-
I agree that it comes down to "taste" ... not "ability."
...
Taste and experience is important, but I don't think that it is only that.
Some user interface/ergonomy concepts are probably easier to accept and like than others. I am guessing that the corporate culture (how much weight to put on engineering resources, test groups and "expert" beta testers) affects ergonomy a lot. Perhaps also the degree to which one stays with conservative ways of working as opposed to new ways of working.
I have had my RX100M2 for a few years now, and even though it is a very different camera from my Canon DSLR, I have accepted that I will probably never be as familiar with it as I am with my Canon. There could be many reasons why. It enables great images in a small package tough.
-h
-
Taste and experience is important, but I don't think that it is only that.
I agree.
Some user interface/ergonomy concepts are probably easier to accept and like than others. I am guessing that the corporate culture (how much weight to put on engineering resources, test groups and "expert" beta testers) affects ergonomy a lot. Perhaps also the degree to which one stays with conservative ways of working as opposed to new ways of working.
Again I agree ... and good point.
I heard it said once that, "Canons are made my computer guys, Nikons by photographers."
I don't think that is necessarily true, as I think the Canon is ergonomically-friendlier, but it captures the concept of what you're saying.
I have had my RX100M2 for a few years now, and even though it is a very different camera from my Canon DSLR, I have accepted that I will probably never be as familiar with it as I am with my Canon. There could be many reasons why. It enables great images in a small package tough.
-h
I still have to "think and look" when I use my Nikon, compared to just "knowing where everything is" on my Canon.
With the Nikon, even though I know how to adjust f/stop and shutter speed, the dials are smaller and tougher to find "in an instant" for me.
(I am sure this lull-and-look will diminish with time and with use.)
On the positive side, one thing that has me very excited about the Nikon glass is that they still make 100% manual, all-metal short primes, such as the 50mm f/1.2 (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/36976-USA/Nikon_1435_NIKKOR_Normal_50mm_f_1_2.html), the 35mm f/1.4 (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/36949-USA/Nikon_1429_Wide_Angle_35mm_f_1_4.html), and the 28mm f/2.8 (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/36925-USA/Nikon_1420_Wide_Angle_28mm_f_2_8.html).
All of these are manual focus only.
All of these are manual aperture only.
All of these have 52mm front-thread size.
This is important to me because I am going to try reverse mount macro photography, applying a reverse ring (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/37171-REG/Nikon_2657_BR_2A_Lens_Reversing_Ring.html), to these lenses, and explore reverse-mount macro imaging to achieve 1:1, 2:1, and 3:1 magnification, respectively, as a replacement for the Canon MP-E 65mm (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/183199-USA/Canon_2540A002_Macro_Photo_MP_E_65mm.html) lens.
That these Nikon lenses are all-metal, and manual aperture, is vital because the ability to control the aperture is removed from AF/auto-aperture lenses when you reverse-mount them. Not so with manual aperture lenses!
The Canon MP-E 65 is a legendary lens to macro shooters, but it has always been regarded as somewhat soft. I think that, after I configure my Nikon D810 with these reverse-mount lenses, that I will ultimately get MUCH better ultra-close-ups with this combo than I did with the 7D and MP-E 65mm.
Jack
-
Not sure this is what you are asking, but for a D810 (Helpful photo attached)
1. Press and Hold WB button.
2. (If not already set) Rotate rear dial to select "Pre" (Preset) as your white balance selection.
3. (If you want to save into some position other than the current one) Rotate front dial to select which position you want to save into.
4. Release and then Hold WB button until display flashes.
5. Shoot the reference frame and you have stored that white balance into the position you selected.
If the camera is already set to "PRE" WB and all you want to do is store a new one then only steps 4 & 5 are required. You never have to go into the menus. It has pretty much been this easy on the D70, D300, D7100 and D810 that I have owned.
If I am distributing JPEG out of camera, then yeah, I use a custom white balance. Normally though I shoot NEF only, download, set white balance and convert using a custom profile while adding a little overall sharpness to a reasonable size JPEG and provide those.
This illustration forms the sum and substance of my beef with Nikon.
The very fact you have to "hold" a button with your left finger (taking your left hand off of where it belongs, the lens), while rotating dials with your right finger/thumb, is simply ergonomically-lame compared to the way Canon does it.
I don't have to take my left hand off the lens, to push a button with my left finger, while my right finger/thumb rotates dials.
Instead, my right index finger pushes a button, while my right thumb dials, all the while my left hand remains where it belongs: supporting/adjusting the lens.
Jack
-
This illustration forms the sum and substance of my beef with Nikon.
The very fact you have to "hold" a button with your left finger (taking your left hand off of where it belongs, the lens), while rotating dials with your right finger/thumb, is simply ergonomically-lame compared to the way Canon does it.
I don't have to take my left hand off the lens, to push a button with my left finger, while my right finger/thumb rotates dials.
Instead, my right index finger pushes a button, while my right thumb dials, all the while my left hand remains where it belongs: supporting/adjusting the lens.
I concede that some settings on a Nikon DSLR take 2 hands, but their goal is that you can do it while shooting and never have your eye leave the viewfinder. Canon's setup for lots of things can be done one handed, but requires you to stop shooting and bring the camera down to look at the menu and top LCD.
The Canon method to change WB on the 7DmkII is a 12 step process as shown here (http://support-sg.canon-asia.com/contents/SG/EN/8202216600.html). Nine steps if you assume the camera is already on and set to the shooting mode you want and we drop the last step of taking a picture. On a Nikon it is 2 steps. Press and hold WB button till it "PRE" flashes and shoot the WB reference.
It's a matter of opinion, like most things, but personally, I think Nikon wins easiest "Set Custom WB" in a walk! Personally, I think needing to go into the menu is a Rube Goldberg solution.
Oh, and I do a one hand set of Custom WB on my Nikons. While holding the camera by the underside of the lens with my left hand, I push and hold the WB with my right index finger. Then I shoot the reference with the shutter release button also with my right index finger. Only if you want to change from some other WB setting to Custom WB or if you want to store the reference into a different register than the current one does it require a 2nd hand.
-
One handed white balance may be very useful if you are shooting jpgs for rapid turnaround time or other reason. I just leave my Canon on auto-WB and shoot in RAW - I have time to process.
-
One handed white balance may be very useful if you are shooting jpgs for rapid turnaround time or other reason. I just leave my Canon on auto-WB and shoot in RAW - I have time to process.
Agreed.
I always leave AWB and shoot RAW.
However, 1-handed ISO selecting can be critical if you're shooting wildlife macro.
(One minute you're standing in the sun, where you can use base ISO and a very high shutter speed, the next minute you have to trail some critter off the path and under shaded canopy, where now you have to drop your shutter speed and increase your ISO. The ability to keep my eye on the view-finder in such cases, and one-handedly adjust my ISO with my right finger/thumb, is infinitely more ergonomically-convenient than is having to take my left off the lens, push a button with my left finger, scrolling-up the ISO with my right).
For the time being, I am just using auto-ISO with the D810, but I would prefer it if the Nikon had the Canon's ergonomic-friendliness in this regard.
-
Agreed.
I always leave AWB and shoot RAW.
However, 1-handed ISO selecting can be critical if you're shooting wildlife macro.
(One minute you're standing in the sun, where you can use base ISO and a very high shutter speed, the next minute you have to trail some critter off the path and under shaded canopy, where now you have to drop your shutter speed and increase your ISO. The ability to keep my eye on the view-finder in such cases, and one-handedly adjust my ISO with my right finger/thumb, is infinitely more ergonomically-convenient than is having to take my left off the lens, push a button with my left finger, scrolling-up the ISO with my right).
For the time being, I am just using auto-ISO with the D810, but I would prefer it if the Nikon had the Canon's ergonomic-friendliness in this regard.
Ask and ye shall be saved!
On the D810 and other recent Nikons, you can assign the "preview" button and the "Fn" button to do various things. One selection is to access the top item in your My Menu settings. Hence, if you set ISO Sensitivity as the top item in your My Menu settings and then go to the f5 control settings and assign the Fn button to the top item in your My Menu, then you should have 1 handed operation. Give it a shot.
-
Ask and ye shall be saved!
On the D810 and other recent Nikons, you can assign the "preview" button and the "Fn" button to do various things. One selection is to access the top item in your My Menu settings. Hence, if you set ISO Sensitivity as the top item in your My Menu settings and then go to the f5 control settings and assign the Fn button to the top item in your My Menu, then you should have 1 handed operation. Give it a shot.
Interesting, and I will.
Thanks for another tip.
-
I teach an advanced level photography course (a portion of a 6-month curriculum for post-secondary students) a couple times a year. One of the things I teach the students is the use and importance of doing custom white balance. With Nikons (and granted, these are not the D4 -- and I can't remember precisely the D810), it took no less than 10 menu steps to find, create and register a custom white balance! Truly ridiculous. Some Nikon engineer should have had his ass fired. It's absurd.
Perhaps your students would benefit if you did a little more homework. I've shot extensively with both Nikon and Canon and setting the WB on Nikons is quite easy. Both systems have their quirks but your comments about Nikon are absurd. Ever tried setting mirror lockup on older Canons? Nikon's bank system is a joke. Switching between auto and manual ISO on Canon's is a pain compared to recent Nikons. Live view implementation on most Nikons is pretty lame. You can go on and on.
-
Nikon's bank system is a joke...
I agree.
As an all time nikon user i never understood this banksystem nor saw i good reasons to use it.
I am sure a much clever menu system could be possible.
Also i miss some menu locks.
As a d810 user i never shoot small basic jpegs only, but i did yesterday for it was only one click away from raw+ small jpegs
-
Perhaps your students would benefit if you did a little more homework. I've shot extensively with both Nikon and Canon and setting the WB on Nikons is quite easy. Both systems have their quirks but your comments about Nikon are absurd. Ever tried setting mirror lockup on older Canons? Nikon's bank system is a joke. Switching between auto and manual ISO on Canon's is a pain compared to recent Nikons. Live view implementation on most Nikons is pretty lame. You can go on and on.
I think that might be a touch harsh. I assume he is instructing photographic technique and not how to manipulate your particular camera body. I get lots of folks asking me how to do X on my Canon and I can usually figure it out, but that doesn't mean I did it the easy way!
However, his comments about 10 MENU steps to set register a custom WB highlights my point about bias. Most long time Nikon shooters would consider it a major human factors fail if we have to go into the menu for simple camera settings that you are likely manipulate during a shoot. We consider the menu for setting up the camera, not for adjusting camera settings. I did a double take on the D500 noticing there is no AF-L/AE-L button sitting next to the AF-ON.
The Nikon Shooting Banks are close, but backwards which makes them useless. Combine the shooting and extended banks and make it a set starting point that never changes unless I say reset this stuff to something else. Then you could always go back to a known starting point. This is so intuitive that I find baffling that no camera maker has implemented this yet. On a Nikon, the closest you get is the U1/U2 banks on the Enthusiast bodies.
-
Both systems have their quirks ... You can go on and on.
Not just quirks, but also benefits.
No system is perfect; each has its features/advantages, strengths & weaknesses, as well as its shortcomings.
The idea of the thread was to talk about those features/advantages and impediments ... because one system may help Photographer A and yet be intolerable to Photographer B.
Jack
-
Interesting, and I will.
Thanks for another tip.
BTW, John, on the Nikon D500, they swapped the ISO and Mode buttons so it is truly one handed to change ISO. You can also repurpose the Video Rec (red dot) button to be the Mode button when shooting stills.
(http://www.lydogbilde.no/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/D500-topp.jpg)
-
That is definitely an improvement, thanks for pointing it out.
Will be watching the initial and subsequent reviews like a hawk ...
-
I think the D810 hand/finger grip is one the best designed on the market and I really love that aspect of it...and one of the best I've ever used. Period. I've used a Canon 5D sporadically and I always thought it felt like a club or piece of wood (like "grabbing a 2x4) in the hand/fingers...without the proper curving indent for fingers and too shallow. I basically can't stand how they are designed. My set up with dials etc. on the D810 has no downsides as well...it all works well.
-
John, I don't think the D500 will meet the overall SensorScore of the FX Nikons, especially with respect to noise. I am hopeful there is a little magic to boost it reasonably above the DX D7200 (don't think they would have released it otherwise), but the physical limitations of the pixel size compared to even the D810 make it unlikely it will perform as well as the FX models.
I think the D810 hand/finger grip is one the best designed on the market and I really love that aspect of it...and one of the best I've ever used. Period. I've used a Canon 5D sporadically and I always thought it felt like a club or piece of wood (like "grabbing a 2x4) in the hand/fingers...without the proper curving indent for fingers and too shallow. I basically can't stand how they are designed. My set up with dials etc. on the D810 has no downsides as well...it all works well.
They changed the grip significantly from the D810 to the D500 which is why the battery goes in sideways. Supposedly the narrow at the bottom to thicker at the top design is supposed to be easier and more comfortable. Time will tell. I have a D500 on Pre-Order to go with the D810 I'm shooting so I'll get a good opportunity to compare and contrast!
(http://www.photographybay.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Nikon-D500-bottom-700x402.jpg)
-
Ask and ye shall be saved!
On the D810 and other recent Nikons, you can assign the "preview" button and the "Fn" button to do various things. One selection is to access the top item in your My Menu settings. Hence, if you set ISO Sensitivity as the top item in your My Menu settings and then go to the f5 control settings and assign the Fn button to the top item in your My Menu, then you should have 1 handed operation. Give it a shot.
And there is even a better way. You can assign the the movie record button to change ISO (f13 in the control menu). With the movie button reassigned to ISO, you hold the button down and the rear command wheel changes the ISO and the front command wheel toggles Auto-ISO on and off. Once you have this set up you'll never go back unless you shoot video.
-
Just curious, what is the limitation of auto-ISO that explains this frequent need to change the ISO manually on the fly?
The only time when I change ISO manually is prior to shooting panos (I switch off auto ISO and set it manually to the value I need ti get correct exposure with the desired speed/aperture), otherwise I have been 100% auto-ISO for almost 10 years (since the D2x in fact).
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Just curious, what is the limitation of auto-ISO that explains this frequent need to change the ISO manually on the fly?
The only time when I change ISO manually is prior to shooting panos (I switch off auto ISO and set it manually to the value I need ti get correct exposure with the desired speed/aperture), otherwise I have been 100% auto-ISO for almost 10 years (since the D2x in fact).
Cheers,
Bernard
What shooting mode do you use? I have no real issues using Auto-ISO in Manual, but if shooting Apereture Priority, I am sometimes foiled by the minimum shutter speed setting.
-
Just curious, what is the limitation of auto-ISO that explains this frequent need to change the ISO manually on the fly?
The only time when I change ISO manually is prior to shooting panos (I switch off auto ISO and set it manually to the value I need ti get correct exposure with the desired speed/aperture), otherwise I have been 100% auto-ISO for almost 10 years (since the D2x in fact).
Cheers,
Bernard
I'm a wildlife shooter Bernard, shooting in the 400-1200mm range most of the time. For rapidly moving subjects, like birds in flight, I want to be in manual mode, as the background could quickly change from sky to dark forest, but the light striking the subject is usually the same. However, when the subject moves into shade I usually prefer to shoot with auto ISO.
Another scenario is when I am shooting normally reflective subjects using auto ISO but may have an opportunity to shoot a bird with white feathers. I will have an exposure in mind and will want to quickly switch out of auto ISO.
-
(http://static.bhphoto.com/images/multiple_images/images750x750/1452090703000_IMG_571711.jpg)
The Nikon D5 also corrects the poorly-thought ISO position of the D810 ... by allowing the user to change the ISO with the right hand only ... so I am sure I am not the first to raise this issue.
Here is the ISO button placement of the D810 by comparison, which prompted me to create this topic, because it requires letting go of the lens with the left hand to use both hands to change the ISO setting:
(http://static.bhphoto.com/images/multiple_images/images750x750/1403815585000_IMG_402721.jpg)
-
Just curious, what is the limitation of auto-ISO that explains this frequent need to change the ISO manually on the fly?
The only time when I change ISO manually is prior to shooting panos (I switch off auto ISO and set it manually to the value I need ti get correct exposure with the desired speed/aperture), otherwise I have been 100% auto-ISO for almost 10 years (since the D2x in fact).
Cheers,
Bernard
Auto-ISO almost always selects a value that leads to over-brightness.
For example, a butterfly may have white spots on a darker background, and the Auto-ISO will expose the image for the "general value" of the entire photo, which (if dark background) will lighten the general darkness to the point of blowing the highlights of the very light areas.
For this reason, it is preferable to be able to manually-set the ISO and create my own (slightly-dark) exposure, because I can keep the details in the light areas, and move the shadow-slider in Lightroom to balance the image out later.
Same thing with taking photos of very light flowers against a darker background: Auto-ISO simply doesn't do what I, manually, would have chosen. Almost invariably, Auto-ISO will jump to a higher value than where it really needed to go.
In even light, Auto-ISO works fine. But if your subject is very light, and the background is very dark, it doesn't work quite so well.
Jack
-
And there is even a better way. You can assign the the movie record button to change ISO (f13 in the control menu). With the movie button reassigned to ISO, you hold the button down and the rear command wheel changes the ISO and the front command wheel toggles Auto-ISO on and off. Once you have this set up you'll never go back unless you shoot video.
Crikey, when I went to check this, I discovered this is actually how my D810 is already set up. I just don't switch ISO on the fly during shoots so I guess it wasn't an issue. I usually have something in mind going in and set ISO accordingly. I don't do video.
I'm starting to think that Canon is more like iPhone and Nikon like Android. Canon has one consistent method for doing most things that isn't always the most efficient, while Nikon has multiple methods to achieve the same ends, but at the price of a higher learning curve. I guess that is why Thom Hogan's favorite phrase when Nikon introduced a new camera was "Who moved the cheese?"
-
Jack,
What you point out isn't an autoIso issue, it is a metering issue.
You can set up the camera with easy exposure compensation to apply an exposure correction by simply rotating the dial. This works also in M mode btw, which is pure genius!
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Jack,
What you point out isn't an autoIso issue, it is a metering issue.
You can set up the camera with easy exposure compensation to apply an exposure correction by simply rotating the dial. This works also in M mode btw, which is pure genius!
Cheers,
Bernard
Thanks for the correction.
All things considered, I am going to be sending back my D810 to B&H.
(And credit to B&H for their impeccable service!)
I bought the D810 right before the D5 and D500 came out (seconds before, actually).
With the ergonomic issues I don't like in the D810, and with the advent of the new Nikon Flagship D5 ... not to mention the fact the D810 just dropped another $200 in price in the last 3 weeks since I've had it ... I am pretty sure a D900 is on the immediate horizon 8)
And I am also sure that the new D900 is going to have the more sensible ISO configuration of the D5 + D500, for the reasons articulated in this thread topic, not to mention the fact I expect the D900 to surpass the Sony A7R II in specs, plus have a multitude of ergonomic features that the A7R II does not have ;D
Therefore, as soon as my refund gets credited back to my account, I am going to get the Nikon D5 as my field camera ... and, when it comes out, I am going to get the D900 as my high-res camera, both of which will have the specs (and ergonomics) that I am looking for.
The Nikon D500 looks like a wonderful APS-C camera, but I want to move beyond an APS-C at this point.
Thanks for everyone's input,
Jack
-
With the ergonomic issues I don't like in the D810, and with the advent of the new Nikon Flagship D5 ... not to mention the fact the D810 just dropped another $200 in price in the last 3 weeks since I've had it ... I am pretty sure a D900 is on the immediate horizon 8)
And I am also sure that the new D900 is going to have the more sensible ISO configuration of the D5 + D500, for the reasons articulated in this thread topic, not to mention the fact I expect the D900 to surpass the Sony A7R II in specs, plus have a multitude of ergonomic features that the A7R II does not have ;D
Therefore, as soon as my refund gets credited back to my account, I am going to get the Nikon D5 as my field camera ... and, when it comes out, I am going to get the D900 as my high-res camera, both of which will have the specs (and ergonomics) that I am looking for.
The Nikon D500 looks like a wonderful APS-C camera, but I want to move beyond an APS-C at this point.
Thanks for everyone's input,
Jack
I'm sure you will love the D5 - it looks like a great camera. The relocation of the ISO button is an improvement for sure, but I don't think it will make the ergonomics that much superior to the D810, so I'm not sure I understand your problem there. As discussed, you can make all exposure and focus adjustments with your right hand with the D810. I imagine the followup to the D810 will be arriving sometime in 2017.
-
A bit surprised to read this.
I have a D5 on order too, but I probably won't use it for the applications where my D810 has been excelling for 18 months, and I will most definitely keep my D810 after the D5 shows up (I am less sure about the D750).
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I'm sure you will love the D5 - it looks like a great camera.
It really does look beautiful 8)
The relocation of the ISO button is an improvement for sure, but I don't think it will make the ergonomics that much superior to the D810, so I'm not sure I understand your problem there. As discussed, you can make all exposure and focus adjustments with your right hand with the D810. I imagine the followup to the D810 will be arriving sometime in 2017.
It is most definitely an improvement and a superior, better-placed amendment.
It is not really necessary that you understand my decisions ;D
I will say that Nikon itself must have agreed with my point, and that enough other photographers/designers must have repeatedly-made the same point, by virtue of the fact Nikon took the time (and committed the expenses) to totally relocate the ISO button to its now-better position, which is exactly where it belongs (and is on the Canon).
You are used to your D810 so you probably "don't notice" the difference ... but, trust me when I tell you, those who are used to better ergonomics ... notice ... and must have similarly complained enough to precipitate the total Nikon revision.
Jack
PS: Credit to Nikon for listening to its consumers.
-
A bit surprised to read this.
Why?
The D5 has 4K video, has the exact ergonomics I like, is Nikon's latest flagship, and is more of a field camera anyway.
I have a D5 on order too, but I probably won't use it for the applications where my D810 has been excelling for 18 months, and I will most definitely keep my D810 after the D5 shows up (I am less sure about the D750).
Cheers,
Bernard
Congrats to you :D
If my D810 were 18 months old, I would keep it too.
However, mine is only 3 weeks old, where I hit the "buy" button (literally) like a day before the new Nikon announcements. Since I still have the option of a full-refund, I am going apply this to getting the D5, which is less than a month away from being released. It is perfect timing, actually.
Moreover, as mentioned, the D810 just dropped another $200 in price, right after Nikon's major announcement of the D5 and the D500. I am predicting that there will be a D900 by the mid-/end-year.
More importantly, since I am looking for 2 cameras to carry in the field, I don't want one set of ergonomics (the way I like it) on the D5, with another set of ergonomics (not how I like it) on the D810.
My bet is that the new D900 will share the same, superior ergonomics of the D5 and D500, and consequently will provide a much friendlier "switch between cameras" ... than will switching from the new D5 to the old D810.
Cheers back :)
Jack
-
It really does look beautiful 8)You are used to your D810 so you probably "don't notice" the difference ... but, trust me when I tell you, those who are used to better ergonomics ... notice ... and must have similarly complained enough to precipitate the total Nikon revision.
Yes, I am one of those who complained about this - back when the D3 was introduced. ;D Nikon first responded with the re-programmable movie button, so the movement of the ISO button was a logical further enhancement. As you know, UI redesign is slow and methodical on both Canon and Nikon.
I shoot extensively with Canon and their ISO implementation is less than perfect as well. They have a nice option to combine the set button with the upper main command dial to manually change ISO, but there is no quick way to turn auto-ISO on/off.
Ideally the camera should permit the user to easily adjust the following with their gloved right hand without taking their eye away from the viewfinder (control of exposure and focus):
- Exposure mode
- Aperture
- Shutter speed
- ISO + auto-ISO toggle
- EV adjustment
- AF Focus (back focus btn)
- AF Focus point selection
- AF Focus area (number of points to use)
- Focus method
-
Yes, I am one of those who complained about this - back when the D3 was introduced. ;D Nikon first responded with the re-programmable movie button, so the movement of the ISO button was a logical further enhancement. As you know, UI redesign is slow and methodical on both Canon and Nikon.
I shoot extensively with Canon and their ISO implementation is less than perfect as well. They have a nice option to combine the set button with the upper main command dial to manually change ISO, but there is no quick way to turn auto-ISO on/off.
Ideally the camera should permit the user to easily adjust the following with their gloved right hand without taking their eye away from the viewfinder (control of exposure and focus):
- Exposure mode
- Aperture
- Shutter speed
- ISO + auto-ISO toggle
- EV adjustment
- AF Focus (back focus btn)
- AF Focus point selection
- AF Focus area (number of points to use)
- Focus method
Good post.
I think we essentially agree.
Here is an article (https://photographylife.com/nikon-d5-vs-d4s) depicting the very ergonomic differences I suggested were upgrades in the newer Nikons. Relevant quote:
- "First of all, the camera Mode button, which has always been on the right side of the top of the camera, has been moved to a button on the left dial – it replaced the Bracketing button. In its place and a bit closer to the shutter release, Nikon has placed a brand new ISO button. Finally! This is something I have personally been waiting for – no more need to reprogram the Video recording button to change ISO! Now you can easily change ISO with just your right hand, which is great. If you change your camera modes a lot and you are used to accessing the Mode button with your index finger, you might not like this change, as you will have to now engage your left hand to hold the Mode button while rotating the camera dial with your right hand. I personally fiddle with ISO a lot more than with the camera mode, so for me this ergonomic change makes a lot more sense. Interestingly, the Nikon D500 also went through a similar change, which means that Nikon will most likely be using this updated layout on all future high-end cameras."
Cheers,
Jack
-
One thing I still do not like about Nikon is the white lettering in the buttons. I wear it off on the AF-ON button I use it so much. The commonly used buttons on the Canon (except the set btn) have the text beside the button.
-
Shooting identical bodies is the best. Having shot the D300 for a long time, I never was comfortable shooting the D7100 (Dial interface) by itself, let alone in tandem with the D810. Which is why I have a D500 on pre-order.
Between the D810 and D500 or D5 however, the movement of the ISO button is just not all that significant to me. Not that it is not better to be on the right side in the first place, but we have 3 options (Rec button, Fn Button, Preview button) to get it there if we want it there on the D810. Not ideal and not identical, but similar enough not to be an issue.
To me there are just too many differences between a D5 and D810 to compare them as similar cameras. Start with more than double the price and almost double the size and weight. Add the significant difference between 20.8MP and 36MP and to me they are too different to be considered alternatives to each other.
Rory, by the time I would wear the lettering off a button, I pretty much know what the button does already to the point of not needing it.
-
I think we essentially agree.
Here is an article (https://photographylife.com/nikon-d5-vs-d4s) depicting the very ergonomic differences I suggested were upgrades in the newer Nikons.
BTW, I have to chuckle at your source. See comment #19 series. (https://photographylife.com/6-simple-and-useful-tricks-for-nikon-dslrs) ;)
-
Rory, by the time I would wear the lettering off a button, I pretty much know what the button does already to the point of not needing it.
Tougher to sell though.
-
BTW, I have to chuckle at your source. See comment #19 series. (https://photographylife.com/6-simple-and-useful-tricks-for-nikon-dslrs) ;)
:D
-
Tougher to sell though.
Had 157,000 shutter actuations on the D300 and sold it for $700 a couple years ago. White letters still on it though.
-
2 other key differences btw the D810 and D5 are the presence of ISO64 and the lack of AA filter on the D810.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
2 other key differences btw the D810 and D5 are the presence of ISO64 and the lack of AA filter on the D810.
Cheers,
Bernard
I need to reel myself in. Been saving for awhile and want to make some good long-term decisions that will last me for the next 5 years (at least).
Since pulling the trigger, and getting the D810, it was somewhat disappointing to actually use it ... hence the thread ... but it has grown on me.
As I hovered over the "Buy" button, the D5 is too expensive for what it offers IMO ($6500, low-budget 4K).
I think the Canon 1Dx II is the better buy ($5,900, FAR better 4K, probably comparable low-light performance).
Still, neither one has the absolute image quality of the D810, so you're right to point these things out.
Plus, the idea of sending the D810 back, and spending another $3,200-$3,700 isn't all that appealing to me.
Keeping the D810 will allow me to use the extra $$$ and apply it to a 300mm Nikon lens, which has Otus-like specs.
I don't shoot birds, so I don't need a super-long telephotos lens; whereas many people have told me using a 300mm makes a better field lens than any macro.
In actually comparing the stats on LenScore, it is easy to see why, and for mere "close-ups," not needing 1:1, a 300mm is better in every way than any macro.
So I will stick with the D810 for now (B&H honored the new lower price, and credited me back another $200, so basically I have a D810 for $700 more than the APS-C D500.)
I am more of a "single-image" shooter anyway, than a rapid-fire shooter, so it makes more sense to wait for the D900 (or D850, whatever they are going to call it) as my second camera.
In the meantime, I will just deal with the minor inconveniences of button placement, incorporating some of the tips mentioned here to bridge them.
I believe the ergonomic changes to the D5/D500 are going to be applied to the D900 as well (might have articulating screen also), so that will ultimately be my wildlife camera, while I will use the D810 with a wide lens for habitat shots.
Jack
-
Keeping the D810 will allow me to use the extra $$$ and apply it to a 300mm Nikon lens, which has Otus-like specs.
I don't shoot birds, so I don't need a super-long telephotos lens; whereas many people have told me using a 300mm makes a better field lens than any macro.
In actually comparing the stats on LenScore, it is easy to see why, and for mere "close-ups," not needing 1:1, a 300mm is better in every way than any macro.
So I will stick with the D810 for now (B&H honored the new lower price, and credited me back another $200, so basically I have a D810 for $700 more than the APS-C D500.)
I am more of a "single-image" shooter anyway, than a rapid-fire shooter, so it makes more sense to wait for the D900 (or D850, whatever they are going to call it) as my second camera.
In the meantime, I will just deal with the minor inconveniences of button placement, incorporating some of the tips mentioned here to bridge them.
I believe the ergonomic changes to the D5/D500 are going to be applied to the D900 as well (might have articulating screen also), so that will ultimately be my wildlife camera, while I will use the D810 with a wide lens for habitat shots.
Jack
Can you describe how you propose to use the 300? I assume you mean the 300/2.8 VR. Or are you referring to the new 300/4 PF? Or the older 300/4?
-
I need to reel myself in. Been saving for awhile and want to make some good long-term decisions that will last me for the next 5 years (at least).
Since pulling the trigger, and getting the D810, it was somewhat disappointing to actually use it ... hence the thread ... but it has grown on me.
As I hovered over the "Buy" button, the D5 is too expensive for what it offers IMO ($6500, low-budget 4K).
I think the Canon 1Dx II is the better buy ($5,900, FAR better 4K, probably comparable low-light performance).
Still, neither one has the absolute image quality of the D810, so you're right to point these things out.
Plus, the idea of sending the D810 back, and spending another $3,200-$3,700 isn't all that appealing to me.
Keeping the D810 will allow me to use the extra $$$ and apply it to a 300mm Nikon lens, which has Otus-like specs.
I don't shoot birds, so I don't need a super-long telephotos lens; whereas many people have told me using a 300mm makes a better field lens than any macro.
In actually comparing the stats on LenScore, it is easy to see why, and for mere "close-ups," not needing 1:1, a 300mm is better in every way than any macro.
So I will stick with the D810 for now (B&H honored the new lower price, and credited me back another $200, so basically I have a D810 for $700 more than the APS-C D500.)
I am more of a "single-image" shooter anyway, than a rapid-fire shooter, so it makes more sense to wait for the D900 (or D850, whatever they are going to call it) as my second camera.
In the meantime, I will just deal with the minor inconveniences of button placement, incorporating some of the tips mentioned here to bridge them.
I believe the ergonomic changes to the D5/D500 are going to be applied to the D900 as well (might have articulating screen also), so that will ultimately be my wildlife camera, while I will use the D810 with a wide lens for habitat shots.
Jack
Jack,
You need to decide DX versus FX or both. I really am looking forward to going back to having both side by side and getting to choose a single based on the shooting situation.
DX Benefits
Longer Apparent Focal Length
More pixels on Target when going longer rather than cropping
More DOF
Less Perspective distortion
Cut's the center of an FX lens so get the best part. (Also much better than adding a TC which smears lens performance over larger area, slows AF and causes light losses.)
FX Benefits
Larger pixels at same MP count means better sensor performance.
Easier to control DOF
Easier to go wide.
-
Can you describe how you propose to use the 300?
I am pretty much a macro shooter, but most of my wildlife shots are "close-up," not true 1:1 macro.
Most of the true 1:1 (and beyond) shots I do are studio, or assisted, shots in some way, and not what I would call a legit nature shot.
There are exceptions, of course, as many slow-moving arthropods can be approached closely, especially those that don't move at all.
But if you want to take a photo of a fast, highly-alert jumping spider, the size of a grain of rice, you are probably going to have to manipulate the scene in some way, so it cannot properly be called a "nature" shot at that point.
On the other hand, I also shoot highly-alert lizards, snakes, and other reptiles that will not allow you very close proximity at all. In these cases, time of day (and species) will determine how close you can get to them. In the hot AZ and CA deserts, spiny lizards, collared lizards, etc. can be very tough to approach with a "macro" lens (even a 180 mm one). Racers, coachwhips, etc. are too.
Some of the species, like rattlesnakes, are easy to get close to, as they stand their ground.
In any event, I want a mid-range telephoto of exceptional quality. The 180 mm macro lengths served me well in that capacity, but sometimes very wary lizards (and even butterflies) will not allow that close of an approach.
I have seen many people use 300mm lenses as "macro" lenses for butterfly shots, that were outstanding as such. I also think they would work well for the reptiles I like to shoot, even better than a macro lens. LenScore shows that the Nikon (and Canon) 300 mm lenses are way above even the best macro lenses in quality, in every category, while offering the blazing IS/AF that made me like the Sigma 180 so much. I am thinking that purchasing a 300mm telephoto would be like having a 180 macro "on steroids": almost double the reach, equal build quality + weather sealing, with even better optics.
I assume you mean the 300/2.8 VR. Or are you referring to the new 300/4 PF? Or the older 300/4?
Yes to the former, the Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 300mm f/2.8G ED VR II (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/672200-USA/Nikon_2186_AF_S_NIKKOR_300mm_f_2_8G.html); no to the latter.
This lens is "Otus-like" in quality (and in price), and based on its LenScore (http://www.lenscore.org) specs, will produce better field results than any macro lens on the list.
Jack
-
Jack,
You need to decide DX versus FX or both.
At this point, I want FF (FX).
What I want is simple: the maximum image quality I can achieve, after taking the time/effort to drive/fly hundreds of miles to come into contact with a subject of interest.
I also want to enjoy ease-of-use, and simplicity-of-function, in the process to facilitate the effort.
Therefore, while the D500 looks like a fine camera, I think I will wait for the D900 instead.
Thanks for all your input.
-
Yes to the former, the Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 300mm f/2.8G ED VR II (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/672200-USA/Nikon_2186_AF_S_NIKKOR_300mm_f_2_8G.html); no to the latter.
This lens is "Otus-like" in quality (and in price), and based on its LenScore (http://www.lenscore.org) specs, will produce better field results than any macro lens on the list.
Jack
I have the previous VR version and it is a fantastic lens - heavy though ... works great with the TC14 too. The minimum focus distance is around 7.5 feet, but with the D810 you'll have lots of room to crop if you need to. The image quality is very nice indeed. But it is a heavy sucker. Works great for compressed landscapes too.
-
I have the previous VR version and it is a fantastic lens - heavy though ... works great with the TC14 too. The minimum focus distance is around 7.5 feet, but with the D810 you'll have lots of room to crop if you need to. The image quality is very nice indeed. But it is a heavy sucker. Works great for compressed landscapes too.
Indeed, I used to own the first gen VR lens for 4-5 years also and loved it. I sold it last year in exchange for the new 400mm f2.8 E FL since I needed a bit more reach for some applications, but I still love the way the 300mm f2.8 draws. Those lenses are best used on top of monopods, my personal preference being the RRS one.
This being said, the current 300mm f2.8 VRII is likely to be replaced by a lighter E FL version in summer time frame (hopefully together with the 200mm f2.0 E FL which is likely to be my next Nikon lens purchase).
Cheers,
Bernard