Any Nikon PMA products photographers would want?

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by eric friedemann, Feb 16, 2005.

  1. Nikon has made its pre-PMA announcements. There is an updated
    version of the the idiotic, overpriced, 4 MP D2H. The new
    overpriced "D2Hs" will now shoot up to 50 crappy, low-rez images at
    8 fps. With an MSRP of $3,500, D2Hs sales should make F6 sales look
    robust by comparison.

    For the balance of its pre-PMA announcements, Nikon has swung for
    the fences with several me-too P&S cameras. Just when I was through
    being underwhelmed by Nikon's existing P&S digitals, we have a new
    crop that so-so snapshot cameras.

    Nikon hasn't announced a replacement for the D100 with more than 6
    MP. Based on Nikon's six-plus-month announcement-release schedule
    established with the D2X (which still isn't in stores), this means
    we may not see another DSLR this year.

    Also, Nikon hasn't announced any fast, wide DX primes. After years
    of selling APS-C DSLRs, Nikon still has only one DX prime lens, the
    limited-use 10.5mm fisheye. This might be understandable if Nikon
    made a fast lens as wide as Canon's 24mm f/1.4L, but Nikon doesn't.

    There is a reason Canon sells more digital photographic hard goods
    than Nikon. Canon makes more and better digital products than Nikon.
  2. No coolpixes please.

    Yes, Canon is overwhelmingly a more innovative camera company at the moment.
  3. My question is this: why should we care about new camera bodies after the D2X comes out? I played with it and it's definitely my camera. Even Eric should love it, because it will focus that 28/1.4 of yours very fast and quietly compared with the D100.

    As for Canon, when are they going to get rid of that orange-yellow-brown color cast that their DSLRs produce by default? All images are of similar color. At least my D70 reproduces colors that remind me of the original scene without calibrating the camera.
  4. Wow, I own a crappy D2H. I make a living with it. Never had any problems. It is perfect for the kind of work I do. I shoot for web companies and local publications. The 4 mp is more than enough for this type of work. The D2H was designed for the working photojournalist and is built for speed and reliability. It is built like a tank. What I am trying to say is that you simply need to get the right camera for the right job. In my case, the D2H was it. Every camera company has made its share of great cameras as well as some not so great cameras including Nikon, Canon, etc. I am not a big fan of Canon cameras but I do not bash them because of that. They simply do not make a camera that suits my needs the way the D2H does. If the Nikon line of cameras bothers you so much, why worry about it?
  5. You are right. If you are a buyer/user of cameras, the D2X (albeit with its crap factor) should do OK. If you are selling, it is a different scenario.

    Eric still would get only close to a 35mm's 50mm lens equivalent angle of view with his 28mm f/1.4 lens with a D2X, however fast it may be. It still isn't wide enough.
  6. "(W)hy should we care about new camera bodies after the D2X comes out? I played with it and it's definitely my camera. Even Eric should love it, because it will focus that 28/1.4 of yours very fast and quietly compared with the D100."

    Assuming that the D2X ships at the end of the month (more than six months after its announcement and several years after Canon started selling DSLRs with more than 6 MP), it will retail for $5K- 2.5X the price of an F5. And why should I have to spend $5K to get a DSLR with more than 6 MP that will do an acceptable job of focussing a $1K plus lens.

    Not being at the ass-end of technology, Canon has USMs built into all their better lenses. With Canon, you don't have to rely on a camera body for AF that isn't slow and whiny.
  7. Eric, the villagers will not appear on your doorstep with torches and pitchforks if you buy a Canon. If Canon has what you want and Nikon doesn't, what's the beef?
  8. Perhaps it would help us if we understood what you need 6MP for. It's a historical fact that 2.7MP is good enough for newspapers and magazines, the proof is in the conversion en masse to the original D1.

    12MP will be nice for those times I'm shooting on a tripod with a prime lens stopped down to f/8, a cable release and MLU, but that's not my first consideration, what I want is CLS, MultiCAM 2000, the new battery system, etc etc in a nice high-eyepoint body. If I didn't already have the pre-order I might consider the D2HS...
  9. My initial reaction to Nikon's pre-PMA announcement was "What the F..."/similar to Eric's.

    Unless they are waiting with a D100-replacement announcement to open the show, I think Nikon will have an increasingly hard time holding on to it's amateur users that now have used D100/D70s for quite some time and want something that matches Canon's line-up.

    By the way, am I the only one noticing a lot of double-lines in the bokeh of my Nikkor primes on the D70?
  10. My first reaction as a Canon owner was this is a fine camera for photojournalists and sports. Unless you are printing larger than 11x14, the 4 megapixel sensor is more than enough. The speed and depth of the buffer make this a competitive camera. I shoot mostly landscapes and large sensors are appreciated. If I needed 8 fps and didn't already have canon glass, I would be looking at this camera.
  11. Edward, what I want is for Nikon to make a full line of DSLRs that are compatible with the thousands of dollars in Nikon lenses and other accessories I already own. Since, Nikon has been advertising for decades that it makes a full, professional "system" of products, I'd like the company to actually produce a full, professional "system" of products. It would be extremely expensive for me to switch to Canon- and I shouldn't have to.

    Guy, I wouldn't give a rat's ass if Nikon was dicking around with D2H-variants for a non-quality-concious seqment of its market, as long as Nikon also had professional and prosumer DSLRs and lenses for photographers whose work doesn't appear exclusively on web pages or newsprint- one step up from reproducing images on toilet paper. But yes, I do think its stupid to pay almost two times the price of a Nikon F5 for a D2Hs just to get four lousy megapixels.
  12. "It's a historical fact that 2.7MP is good enough for newspapers and magazines, the proof is in the conversion en masse to the original D1.
    12MP will be nice for those times I'm shooting on a tripod with a prime lens stopped down to f/8, a cable release and MLU"

    This is not logic, this is simply psychology. When photographers are still shooting film, they claim film is better and their scans are higher resolution, better colours etc than any digital image. They will fiercely defend what they are using. The moment they switch to digital, you will hear them speak about the merits of digital. About the absence of grain, the clear colours etc. Those using a 2.7MP camera will defend it is enough. But once they own the D2X they will look down in pity on the 2.7MP and defend the need for 12MP. It is psychology. If there is something you can't own, you will start finding "excuses" to justify why it is that you don't need it. Once you have it (and have paid serious money for it), you will start finding "excuses" to justify the purchase. Lets face it, we are all just humans. :)

    As a Canon user (1DMkII) I am sorry that Nikon can't produce anything better. Let's face it, this new D2Hs is the competitor for the 3 year old EOS-1D, not for 1MkII. I honestly wish Nikon would produce some more competitive products. Both Nikon and Canon users would benefit from some more serious competition!

    That said, I will be attending Nikon's NPS day next week when they really introduce the D2X and let us shoot with it all day long.
  13. Nikon has a winner against the D300/D20 so why should they bother. If you are a professional you might choose to buy a D2X for high resolution or D2Hs for low resolution. They can just release an updated D70 to get more customers. Its Sony sensor supports 6fps and they might release some firmware updates to keep up.
  14. Wow. All this anxiety make me happy that I'm a non-pro working with manual Nikons and Leica rangefinders (which haven't changed appreciably in 40 years)....
  15. Eric, you've payed a lot more than 5k for you set of lenses. In fact, I can't think of any high-end Nikkor which you don't have (but then I don't keep such precise track of them ;-)). You should be able to afford the D2X quite easily and then shut up. Or maybe you don't have any of those lenses and you just want to entertain yourself on the Internet? ;-) <sorry, I had to say it>

    You don't have a point. The product you need/want exists and you've demonstrated having the money to buy it so it's just idle talk from your side.
  16. Why in the hell do people keep comparing the prices of DSLR's to their film counterparts? The pricing structure simply is NOT comprable on a one-to-one basis. With a DSLR, the consumer is paying for a film SLR (minus film transport, which is not the most expenisive part of the camera), plus they're paying for some very expensive, sophisticated electronics. On top of this, film and developing costs will be nil, and one only has to pay to print the photos they want, not an entire "roll."

    Now, when we're comparing Nikon to Canon: one could pay $4,500 for 12.4 MP or one could pay $8,000 for 16 MP, a difference in resolution that (under real-life conditions) is barely noticable, if at all. And let's not forget the features that make the D2X more suitable to action photography than the 1DS MKII. Yes, Nikon needs to improve in some areas, but there are others where it's doing just fine.
  17. 1. The D2X isn't on the market.

    2. No, the $1,700 28mm f/1.4 AFD Nikkor doesn't have an internal, ultrasonic focus motor. This is true of all of Nikon's sub-telephoto prime lenses. And even on a D2H, the 28mm f/1.4 doesn't focus nearly as fast or quietly as AFS lenses.

    3. Telling someone they don't have a point and questioning their veracity is not a substitute for logical debate.
  18. Eric,

    The only "surprise"that can come out of the PMA could be improvements in the coolpix series (not kidding).

    For example, at photokina, Nikon introduced a teleconverter for coolpix with diffraction optic (they call it different). This makes it hanging the tele attachment on coolpix a lot lighter.

    Nikon took the clue from Canon after Canon had this innovation in their pro grade optics for some years.

    Like Patrick hinted above, if Nikon can not even compete with Canon in making good optics, why worry about their cameras? They are still running on the name they made themselves by bringing in good lenses decades ago. How long is it going to last?
  19. OK, forget about the REAL Nikon branded D100 replacment.

    I treat Fuji S3Pro as the D100 replacement (S3Pro is the repalcement of S2Pro and S2Pro is the alternative of D100).
  20. OK, I'll refrain from speculating since PMA is only one week away. Perhaps Nikon is holding on a D100-replacement announcement until that time - who knows?

    If there isn't any, even pre-announcement, I think Nikon is setting themselves up for a pretty bad year in the adv.amateur segment of the market. I guess there will be even more Nikkors on eBay this year...
  21. My point Eric is that you can get what you need by placing an order for the D2X at B&H and waiting a few months. Is that so hard? You've bought extremily expensive lenses such as the AF-S f/2.8 zooms, the 28/1.4, the 14/2.8 (which you sold), maybe you have a 85/1.4 too. Then you complain about a body which may revolutionize the technical quality of the photographic results from all of your existing lenses. Better AF, better viewfinder, better white balance, tons of pixels (which you always complain about in the context of the D2H, but you forget to say that the D2X does have them). Now, if you refuse to buy what is good for you just because it wasn't taylor-made to your needs or it costs more than an F100 which to my last recollection doesn't include 500000 exposures worth of film and processing costs in the price. That is purely your own problem and of no interest to this forum.
    However, please feel free to create a "Nikon whiners' forum" for all who care not about using their equipment to make photographs but just complain about stupid self-imposed problems, I'm sure it would be very popular among people who don't like their products. However, it is mildly put annoying that someone who can afford absurdly expensive lenses cares not pay the correct market price for a camera which would solve those problems which you complain other cameras not solving. Please look at the solution and order it and go take pictures. Please?! Would a link to the D2X on help? Just click "add to your cart" and proceed to checkout. After a couple of months someone will knock on your door and give it to you.
    You complain about the late availability of the D2X but then wish for other models with similar features. Why would Nikon create cameras for similar purposes in different models? I can't see why. Would you like your D2X in red or blue, or yellow like they sell Hasselblads? Or stripes perhaps. Do you get my point? If the D200 had been announced, it would still have lousy AF, poor viewfinder, maybe 8 MP (which isn't available because no one makes an 8 MP APS sensor except Canon), and available even later than the D2X, perhaps September or October. Would you then order that, while the much better D2X you could have in a couple of months. I think you need help.
  22. Yeah Eric -- it's either the D70 or the D2x .. the choice is yours whether you want bang for the bucks or the features you need. If you can't decide, buy the D2hs. Wonderful.
  23. I was hoping that Nikon would continue to expand its lineup of VR-equipped long lenses. The truth is that for anyone starting out in bird photography (example), Canon today is the logical choice, based largely on its offering of 500mm. and 600mm. IS telephotos. The 400mm. f5.6L lens helps, also, as Nikon has no equivalent there, either.

    Nikon simply cannot match Canon within this particular photographic niche, and the longer this technology gap continues the more the world of long-lens photographers will be dominated by users of white lenses.

    Were Nikon just to offer even one additional lens, a 500mm. f4 VR, that would render its system MUCH more attractive to aspiring bird photographers. Sure, people will argue that Nikon's existing 500mm. F4 AF-S is a fine lens and VR "isnt' everything," but the truth is this feature provides enough of an edge to Canon that it really makes sense for bird photographers to use Canon, not Nikon.
  24. I was waiting for Nikon to release a DSLR which is a little more 'pro' than the D70 and is within $2K. In that respect, I'm disappointed. I know the D2H is in that price range but I want more pixels. I'm not a sports/action photographer. So I don't see any reason to compromise resolution for speed. And the D2X is outside my price range. Maybe the D2Hs' resolution is more than enough for most sports/action photographers, but it still looks a bit weak compared to the competition. Now I wish I had not invested in the Nikkor lenses. That is the only reason I'm still a Nikon user. Just feeling disappointed. Hence the rant.
  25. Oh well, Nikon produce new products that I don't want or replace my existence DSLR. I guess Nikon Stock will go South again this year. Anyone thinking of switching to Canon and getting 1dMKII???
  26. If I remember back only a few years (perhaps 1999 or 2000) before the D-SLR boom. Nikon had a line-up of:

    F55(?) F65 F80 F100 F5

    with the F90 and the F4 still loitering around.

    This should be replicated in the Digital Domain. All we have at the moment is the F80 in digital (D70/100) and the F5 in two variants (D2h/x). I don't see this as a product line-up that has broad appeal, without even starting to consider the gaps in their lense line-up.
  27. I wish everyone who complains about Nikon would sell their Nikon gear and switch to Canon. That would drive down the prices of used gear for those of us who couldn't care less what Canon does.
  28. I'm with you, Edward C!
  29. I have a D2h and while Eric thinks that is is only suitlable for printing on slighttly better quality paper than toilet paper, I have found it exaclty what I need even if it only has 4mp.

    HERES THE REASON - A 4MP image that I got in focus and captured using a camera I can afford is so much better than a 6mp image I captured but was blurred due to action or a 12mp image I didnt capture because I wasnt able to afford the camera.

    OH ERIC BTW - Are CD-Jackets made out of toilet paper, because I have done several with my D2h as well as full size posters magazine spreads? Perhaps you are used to printing your published works on a different medium than what is commonly known as paper. :)

    The above is my opinion only. You are entitled to yours as well. I reserve the right to be "wrong" in your eyes as you resever the right to be "wrong" in my eyes.

    More MP is fine if it answers a photographic need rather than a desire to have the best or more than somebody else.
  30. Eric, I am one of those guys who has his stuff printed on a medium slightly better than toilet paper. Geez, get a life.
  31. I think folks are missing the primary problem: management at Nikon Incorporated, Tokyo, Japan.
  32. I'm a little perplexed at the (few) dismissive answers in this thread. I understand "loyalty to Nikon," which overall I, too, still feel, having used Nikon equipment since 1968. But I think that the concern about Nikon's lagging development of new products that has been expressed by some of us is not just abstract and irrelevant. If Nikon indeed is having problems competing, its user base will dwindle, as new photographers choose the system that they perceive has the most potential for growth and expansion. This, in turn, will render Nikon's (apparent) problem of lack of resources for r & d ever-worse. This will, sooner or later, affect the photographic endeavors of many, if not most of us.

    At present, most of us probably have the tools we need to take the pictures we wish to take. But some of us (me included) already are looking at Canon's product lineup and seeing (for example) lenses with features that we know would assist us in our photography, features that Nikon (still) cannot match.

    This is slightly annoying in the very short run, but if Nikon continues to "disappoint," eventually it will be worse than annoying.

    Disloyally (I guess),
  33. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    Douglas, very well said. I am very puzzled by some of Nikon's recent moves. The F6 makes no sense at all, even though it may be selling pretty well in Japan. And it was almost immediately available after the announcement. Meanwhile, the D2X is having a long delay. And now Nikon is admitting that the original D2H has enough problems that it needs to be replaced after being on the market for barely a year. However, the replacement is yet another 4MP DSLR while 8MP is the minimum Nikon's competition is now producing. I know 4MP is sufficient for some of its intended application, but that is a pretty seviere restriction for pros and serious amateurs.

    Camera are merely tools. It is not a marriage and talking about some "loyalty" simply makes no sense. If one brand of tools doesn't meet your needs, it is time to switch to another. I know replacing a collection of lenses can be expensive, but investing more money into a product line whose manufacturer is making a lot of poor decisions can be worse.
  34. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

    Eric F and Douglas are on target. I also have nine very expensive primes and three fast zooms and flashes and blah blah blah. They're all for sale very soon if something doesn't change.
  35. If the D2x could do 8fps at 6MP why not make the D2hs at least with a 6MP sensor? I don't know of many prosumer dicams comming out these days with just 4MP, do you? Also, for sports and PJ specific camera why not innovate with VR built is like Minolta, Panasonic/Leica and others have.
  36. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    Canon's 1D Mark 2 could do 8 fps at 8 MP a year ago. It is a matter of having a faster CPU and more memory to move the extra bits around. Given that electronics are so cheap in these days, it should be very doable. Today, the 1D Mark 2 is just below $4000 at B&H, so the cost is not that big a problem either.

    One problem I pointed out a couple of months ago when the D2H's price took a dive and there was already speculation that Nikon would soon replace it was that if Nikon makes an 8 MP D2Hs, it would really compete against the 12 MP D2X. At least personally, I would pick an 8 MP DSLR with 8 fps over a 12 MP one with a slower frame rate because I am also into wildlife action photography. Once you reach 8MP or so, a few MP will only give you margainal gain. 4MP is still a pretty serious disadvantage, though.
  37. What I was hoping for was a F100 based body with better color metering and Ittl it could have the current F100 Af its quick enough for me. I wanted 8MP and a 1.25x crap factor so my existing lenses would still be of some value on a DSLR.
  38. There's a certain other digital photography forum where someone recently took a poll of whether people are happy or not with Nikon at PMA. Shockingly to me, the happy people are in the majority. This absolutely floors me. I can understand being satisfied with Nikon's current product line if it suits your current needs but PMA is about where the camera makers are going. It seems that Nikon is going nowhere. In every segment with the possible except of the low end, Nikon is behind Canon in the kind of features that really sell. And yes, all other things being equal, megapixels *DO* matter for image quality.

    For better or worse, once you seriously buy into one of these brands, you are locked in unless you want to take a big financial hit. I've been using Nikon for 10 or 12 years now and I have a lot of expensive lenses. I like those lenses and I'd like to keep using them. I also don't really want to spend $5000 on a D2X that isn't even available yet. I'd be willing to spend around $2500 on a well specced 8 to 10MP body. A 4MP body does nothing for me.

    Nikon, get off your arse.
  39. I'm perfectly happy. The only lens I'd still like to see is a small, light, affordable 70 f1.8 DX or something like, no AF-S or VR please. The D2X is my perfect camera, and I can wait for a couple years for the price to drop to what I can afford used. In the meantime I have a perfectly adequate D70, which will remain useful for things where the D2X is too heavy. I don't imagine a D200 or whatever with a better viewfinder and faster autofocus will be lighter than the D70, which is heavy enough already.

    I no longer care about the 1.5X crop since getting a 12-24 - for me the APS sensor is a fine compromise between high ISO noise and cost, I don't forsee being able to afford any full frame cameras. so I'm not stressed about Nikon's supposed ride to hell, I'm happy.
  40. Yup, all's great in my world; when shooting 35mm, I'm happy with my Nikon gear. My you digital geeks lead complicated lives.
  41. Rob that is so true it gave me a good laugh. Personally I use an N80 and a 4x5 Crown Graphic. These two cameras are good enough for my needs.
  42. *sigh*

    Yet another sneering thread which ultimately boils down to team loyalty. We
    are no more entitled to a single perfect commercial decision than anyone else (truck
    drivers, computer users, vacuum cleaner users). We are not required to buy into a system
    and then vituperatively attack the competition in this way (I realise that this may be
    difficult to understand for football fans, and I don't just mean the big word >;)

    To update the old saying: You picks your most important features, you pays your money,
    and you takes your chances. If it worries you so much, use your money wisely and do not
    commit to a single system. Nobody else has it any better, so QUIT WHINING.

    If you are already so sure in your mind of the complete and total merit of Canon over
    Nikon, sit happy with your Canon kit, but remember your unflinching brand loyalty in
    twenty years when Canon is a lazy monopoly, there are no other camera manufacturers,
    and you're deleting spyware from your camera between crashes.

    This is the natural outcome when this brand-loyal mentality is allowed to flourish. You
    may be loyal to their products, but companies are only loyal to their shareholders, not to
    technology, quality or progress.
  43. Are you saying Nikon users should just be happy with what Nikon is coming out because if
    they go Canon, they'll eventually shoot themselves in the foot? Much of what you say self

    In fact, it's easily arguable that Canon does currently have better offerings. The 20d
    *does* produce better images than a D100. That's not the whole story of each system but
    it's indicative of Nikon falling behind.

    Also, there's the practical reality of buying into one of these systems. It's an investment
    (or at least a huge sunk cost) that people don't want to repeat. They want to be able to
    use their lenses for a long time. Also, this is not the film world. With film, you can put
    new emulsions in an old camera and get images of pretty much equal quality to todays
    cameras. What if in 1970 you bought in to a system who's film format became obsolete? I
    doubt you'd be happy. If you've ever been involved in any business to business
    transactions, you know full well that purchases are made with the expectation that future
    improvements will be made.

    Personally, I complained directly to Nikon though I don't know if my complaint will be
    heard. Nikon users do have a perfectly valid reason to complain.
  44. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

    "Personally, I complained directly to Nikon though I don't know if my complaint will be heard. Nikon users do have a perfectly valid reason to complain."

    Heard? Not likely. Ever emailed them with a question in regards to their gear? They don't even have an auto response like most corporations. They have never gotten back to me via email. It's a lame corporation really. At least Nikon Canada. Three times I've sent bodies in for an estimate, and three times it's been shipped from Vancouver to Toronto and repaired without approval. Would you pay $400 bill on a beat up F90x? They have screwed me over on loaner NPS gear. The last time was they tried to give me a coolpix when my D70 went in. Can you believe it? I demanded the body that I sent in, "How about a D100?" I can't believe it. More frustration. I'm on great terms with them, so the counter guy drove across two suburbs with a D70 to the camera shop to drop it off. He did so without a body cap or any other case or protection on the camera. The thing bounced on the front seat of a car for 40 mins and came waltzing into the store with a body full of dust that I had to deal with. Tonight, I'm furious actually now, tonight was another Nikon mind bender. I just got a new laptop and tried to load Capture 4.2. Then I went backwards against the updates trying to get this to load. No. Blue screen of death everytime. Think there is something on a Nikon website about it? No. Do a google search on "Nikon Capture Problems". We did, and found a bug in capture that shuts down Xp while trying to load third part software from start up. Think Nikon cares about fixing their own software or offering a bit of help? No. Everyone with an AMD or Intel clone (m chip) of the AMD 64 bit chip, has this problem. That's a hell of alot of people that might purchace Capture. Mac owners have more problems with it. Disgusting. Now I've had to disable a security feature in XP in order to load and run it. No wonder there's so many white lenses out there.
  45. "Ever emailed them with a question in regards to their gear?"

    Yes - and every time I've gotten an intelligent reply within 24 hours. Including such vague questions as "I want to do multi-flash TTL with an F5, what cables should I buy?" This is Nikon Europe.

Share This Page