Jump to content

Any Nikon PMA products photographers would want?


eric friedemann

Recommended Posts

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"(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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 <B>extremily</B> 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.

<p>

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 www.bhphotovideo.com 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.

<p>

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...