Nikon D800 "Missing Features"

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by acm, Feb 10, 2012.

  1. acm

    acm

    As many Nikonians were, I was also anticipating D800 with bated breath. Now that it has finally arrived, it feels like an anti-climax, partly due to the long delays and then a lot of information was already leaked in the media. I was a little disappointed at 36 MP sensor, what with requiring to update hard-disk, RAM etc. However I was expecting something more from this camera.
    How if Nikon had incorporated the following:
    1. Articulated LCD to take pictures at odd angles and perspectives as well as without alerting the subject.
    2. 90 degree rotatable lens mount-sensor assembly so as not to have to turn camera vertically to take pictures in portrait orientation ( Nikon owns the patent for this).
    3. Interchangeable sensor.
    4. More picture controls emulating for example Kodachrome or Velvia.
    5. A white/silver body model.
     
  2. Uhmmm..... There so many things that could be added or taken.....

    From your list.....

    1- I never use Live view, only the viewfinder.

    2- I'm trying to figure this out..... If I have the camera on a tripod or hand holding the camera and I
    rotate the lens mount, the sensor would stay in the same position, wouldn't it? How could that
    help?

    3- This could be good if there was a line of sensors to choose from. Specially one with only 12 MP.

    4- You can create them.

    5- For me, black is the way to go.

    In my list of things to get rid of:

    1- Too many pixels

    2- Movie. I have been playing with my V1 and I hate the movie switch. It's always on the way.
     
  3. acm

    acm

    Rene' when one rotates the lens mount, sensor would rotate with it. At least that's the theory.
     
  4. Got it!! Good when using a tripod..... easier the way it is when hand holding the camera, i think.
     
  5. The only thing I missed (and I`m not sure, I still don`t know the complete list of features) is about the flash. I`d have prefered a more serious thing; better than the usual "toy flash", something like a built-in SU-800 kind of commander, a really good triggering device or so.
    One more time we`ll have to deal with the almost useless (to me) "toy flash" and the IR panel. Another lost opportunity.
    Otherwise, the D800 seem to me a real wonder, exactly as it is. Personally, no need of articulated screens, rotating sensors, colors, film emulation, etc. Lesser is more...
     
  6. Well, instead of "rotatable sensor-lens mount" I'd prefer a square sensor with a quick menu ability to pick your desired frame: square, landscape crop 3/4...3/5...4/5 or portrait crop 3/4...3/5...4/5 etc. This is more helpful and easier to implement IMHO.
    I also miss the articulated LCD and as well a GPS module.
    It would be a great idea to have available a D800 barebone and one to have the option to pick between D3s, D4 and its 36MP sensor... but I doubt Nikon will go this path ever.
     
  7. Just because Nikon makes a patent on something, doesn't mean it's always coming out right away (or ever). Nature of the business.
    Honestly, the new cameras are amazing for what they are designed to do. The articulated LCD is, I think, very much an amateur feature, and probably prone to break anyway. The rotatable lens mount would add more to the cost than it would be worth to consumers. The interchangeable sensor is, I think, asking for a feature that no other DSLR-maker is offering, and I am not hearing a lot of clamor for it anyway. And black cameras seem to be working just fine for Nikon. White would get dirty and silver would look totally amateur.
     
  8. Jose...... Have you tried those little toy diffusers for the Mickey mouse flash on your D700? Of
    curse is still a toy flash but it does wonders...... I really like mine and it's on my camera 90% of the
    time.
     
  9. Apurva - interesting list, but I have to say that none of the things which you mentioned are things that I care about in a DSLR - with the possible exception of an articulated LCD, but I'd probably prefer that the camera be robust. That's not to say that your requests are invalid, I'm just demonstrating that not every Nikon customer matches your requirements; I'd go so far as to guess that - with price and robustness compromises - you might be in a minority with some of these. I'd be extremely surprised if 2 (because the mirror unit would have to move) or 3 (because the sensor is pretty integral to the camera design) ever appear in a Nikon DSLR - although a medium format back provides both, along with #5.

    There are things that each of us would like in a new camera. I submitted a request list to Nikon - some are in the D800, some almost definitely aren't, and I don't know about some of the others yet (and won't until the final firmware is released). The ones which are expensive or fiddly to implement are the ones about which I have the greatest doubt - for example, I'd love a sensor with rear movements. :)

    The commercialisation of any product is a compromise. I accept that not everything I want is going to be available in any given product, and I certainly accept that there are features I'm not going to use without feeling the need to suggest that they need to be removed from the camera. Despite my girth, the world doesn't revolve around me, and the people who do want these features are subsidising my camera purchase.

    There's some good stuff in the D800 beyond the headline resolution increase (and you can always shoot at lower resolution, although if there's a low-res RAW format then I'd be happier). I have to say, despite mostly wanting other features, the fact that it does have such a high resolution and therefore complements rather than replaces my existing D700 makes me more tempted to get one. I'm waiting to see how many other improvements are in there when we know about the BIOS. It's a little early to criticise except for those features which require mechanical implementation, and those are always the least likely to get included.

    This is, of course, in danger of turning into a wish list thread. Just saying. :)
     
  10. "…silver would look totally amateur"
    My old Leicas are pouting.
     
  11. Kent, silver looks great on a Leica. It looks like a 70s tourist camera on an SLR. just imho, of course.
    Seriously, we could all make lists of our dream camera. Nikon is making something at a price point for the masses, not custom designing a camera for me...
     
  12. Renè, I have just checked it in a previous post... thanks for the idea. I have already seen that Gary Fong also have the same item in his catalog.
    The problem is that this items only work with medium to small sized lenses. And, I like to use remote flash, mostly to avoid front illumination; this way I need to use either a triggering system or the in-camera CLS... most of the times the camera built-in flash is used (with the ever lost, painful IR accessory) to control the remotes.
    I think I will probably build an IR mask to be stucked and stored with the tiny flash. One day.
     
  13. acm

    acm

    I agree, rotatable sensor and interchangeable sensor are two things which require a total reconstruction of the machine and may not or not at all be available. However I would like ha to have articulated screen however amateurish it may look. It complements greatly to what you call "street photography" though I think no street photographer is ever going to need a 36 mp monster.
     
  14. Well to me that each of those things on the wish list would be bad things to have, and would devalue the camera in my eyes, and might even rule it out for serious use.
    Articulated LCD - this would near rule the camera out as far as I'm concerned. Who takes pictures looking at the LCD anyway except for family snaps on the point and shoot? I don't want something that is going to break off at the first sign of serious use, or that is going to leak and malfunction when it rains on it. 90 degree rotatable sensor - nasty gimmick that would get in the way of fuctionality. Interchangable sensor - no thanks, I want a camera that is optimised in every way for the sensor that is there. Picture controls emulating Velvia etc. - no, I don't want gimmicky amateur features from point-and-shoots, I want RAW files that capture enough information for me to work on. Offer the body in different colours - but why - is this a fashion accessory, or a camera?
    I don't think I'll buy a D800 anyway unless I'm forced to by client demand - it has too many pixels, and I'm waiting for better low light performance. Hopefully Nikon will come up with a lighter version of the D4, or similar.
    But gimmicks on the camera, no thanks!
     
  15. lwg

    lwg

    The large pixel count is one of my prime reasons for wanting and pre-ordering this camera. I can't justify buying a MF digital system, but I'm used to getting many more pixels from my MF and LF film scans than from my DX cameras. Having a digital sensor that comes close will be fantastic. I just don't understand all the negative comments about the sensor size. Hard drive space and RAM are cheap, at least in the context of how I shoot (only several thousand frames a year).
    The things I see missing are the custom settings modes (U1 and U2). I really like being able to set the D7000 U1 up the way I like it, and then always return to that setting when I switch back.
    I also wish there was an in body image stabilization, since I use a lot of older lenses. Of course I may find many of them aren't as good as I would like on this camera. But I never expected this from Nikon, so it's not really missing.
    Maybe it's in there, but in LiveView it would be nice to be able shoot without the mirror coming down. That should help keep the camera settled between rapid successive shots.
    I would also like an intelligent auto focus bracket option. This should be based on aperture and lens choice. Obviously would only work with AF lenses. Just doing three shots as fast as possible while leaving the mirror up. This could really help to nail focus for lenses that have a focus shift when stopped down, or where the AF sensor picked up the nose instead of the eye.
     
  16. acm

    acm

    Simon, there is more widespread use of LCD while shooting than what you suggest. Many landscapes on tripods are shot with the LCD for precise focus. Many press people use LCD to take overhead shots. Even some of D800 sample shots were taken on LCD rather than viewfinder according to the concerned photographer himself.
     
  17. I just don't understand all the negative comments about the sensor size​
    For studio type use it's not a problem. If you have to process several hundred images a week however, speed and size become an issue. Speed of transfer between discs, speed of processing the RAW files, speed of processing TIFFs, speed on burning discs for clients, and so on.
    In principle, I wouldn't mind 39 megapixels for my own personal use - though it's likely to outperform any currently available lenses - and no doubt computer processing speeds and transfer speeds will catch up, but at the moment, it's a bit too much for my everyday use. It introduces a slow down in the whole process, without any significant advantage yet becoming obvious.
    It remains to be seen, but I am sceptical that it will really offer competition to medium format. Smaller format lenses just aren't there, and can't be. They have been saying that medium format has been made redundant ever since the Nikon D2X, and of course, that is marketing hype - it hasn't been, and isn't likely to be any time soon. In the same way that adding extra pixels to micro four thirds doesn't mean that it seriously challenges FX format, adding extra pixels to FX format is very unlikely to make it seriously challenge medium format.
    So for the moment, 36 megapixels sounds very nice in theory, but in practise the advantages remain to be seen, while for the moment the downsides are evident (but will no doubt diminish with time).
     
  18. I'm actually quite happy with the D700's flash - it's better than nothing for an emergency, and it's not bad as a trigger. I'd prefer if it was as capable as the SU-800, but then I'd also like if you didn't have to buy the (more) expensive version of the external trigger to get a timed >30s exposure; if you want unusual features, I suspect Nikon would rather sell you them separately, on the basis that they won't make much difference to the D800 sales.

    As for silver, I love that my 28-200 is the silver version. Oh, it looks cheap, but it means that people don't notice I'm using a relatively expensive camera. My preferred colour depends on the weather - black is unobtrusive, white is easier to hold in direct sunlight (as Canon would claim). My LSM lenses are silver, admittedly. That said, I've never cared in the slightest what a camera looks like so long as it's functional.

    Mihai - square sensors. I'll restrict myself to saying "oh no, not again", and "you don't want to start with a system designed around 35mm film". There are plenty of threads on the subject, but I tend to believe that paying for film you're going to cut off is less criminal than paying for bits of sensor that you don't want (and I suspect the majority of the world's images are rectangular). But the D800 has plenty if pixels if you want to stick to cropping the edges off your frame and you don't mind being a little more telephoto than you might have been. I think any discussion of image shape or orientation is better started with a medium format back than with a system based on a fixed-orientation, fixed-size film strip.
     
  19. Even some of D800 sample shots were taken on LCD rather than viewfinder according to the concerned photographer himself.​
    Hardly surprising, Nikon's marketing people no doubt like the selected photographers to do their best to demonstrate the camera's 'features', they may have been asked to try to explore them.
    I'm not really intending to criticise the D800, I would love to get my hands on one, in principle wouldn't mind one at all for personal/studio use. And am incredibly grateful that it doesn't have articulated LCD's etc. on it. I am just put off, for the moment and until I read all the reviews, actually buying one (or rather, two - I need two) for work by the thought of all those pixels.
     
  20. lwg

    lwg

    Simon, I sort of see where you are coming from, but how much of this is really just impatience? I usually let lightroom import and then start working on the first images as the new ones come in. The will still import way faster than I can mentally process them. Since I don't burn discs for clients, or batch process large numbers of files routinely it's a not issue for me. Heck, even opening a 1GB drum scan isn't unduly painful to me, but I did need to add extra RAM to the system for that.
    As far as the lenses go, I know many lenses I have easily have enough resolution in the center to be sharp at the pixel level on the D7000, so they will work fine on the D800. What remains to be seen by me is how they hold up on the corners and the edges. But unless I'm working on a tripod, or using very fast shutter speeds, it seems must of the resolution is lost from camera movement. This will be very true on the D800. And with it's relatively low flash sync speed may make hand held fill flash shots with long lenses not look much better than a 12MP camera. So I can certainly see how it's not going to automatically give you three times the resolution. And I really doubt it will replace my Hasselblad for portraits. What I hope it will do is let me get good shots when carrying the 4x5 is a non starter because it takes to long to setup.
     
  21. how much of this is really just impatience? I usually let lightroom import and then start working on the first images as the new ones come in.​
    I do similarly. I try to get the computers to do as much of the work while I'm sleeping or working on something else as possible. But in the high season, I sleep very little, because I'm constantly, when not actually photographing, processing files, perhaps 16 hours a day, nearly every day. There is limited scope for waiting longer while RAW files are converted, files are transferred between discs etc. etc. The thought of more megapixels at the moment just doesn't sound appealing!
    Actually, that's not true, I would be very happy if there was a D800 with 20, maybe even 24 megapixels. 12 nowadays is almost not-quite-enough. I could even live with 36, but what I really want is stellar dynamic range, great colour/bit performance, and even more extraordinary low light performance (which the D700 is great at, but even more fantastic would be better). We don't know yet about the D800's dynamic range etc., but it doesn't look like it's going to be a great leap forward in ISO. More megapixels for me is somewhere between indifference and positive disadvantage. Even if it slow things down a bit that would be an issue for me. Plus of course, I'd have to go out and buy a thousand pounds worth of new memory cards...
    On LCD screens etc.: if when you stamp on it wearing heavy boots and pour water on it from a watering can, or bend it backwards and forwards 30,000 times, if there is any risk that it will snap off, or short circuit, or that the contacts will wear out, or that the software controlling it will do a blip then it's a bad idea.
    I have a D700 that has been in hospital for the last four weeks, they just telephoned me yesterday to say that yet another spare part is needed and its going to be a few more weeks. Luckily it's the quiet time of year, and there's the other D700 to play with in the meantime, but reliability and robustness is all-important. And anything that adds extra buttons or dials to the camera is also inherently a Bad Thing, it has too many all ready.
     
  22. Rotating lens/sensor would add to the complexity of the design IMHO costs would go up I think way up. Then 1% of the market (wild guess) would want pay the price for that. As Rene mentioned this could come useful on a tripod but maybe not, it would not work as well in handheld mode as it would take time to rotate the assembly. They use this type of assembly in medium format due to the size of the camera (easier to rotate the back rather then than the body).
    As to removable sensors I dont know about that. How many end customers would like to fiddle with removing and re installing a sensor. I think that a better design would be a electronically controlled about of pixels (I think they alerady have that implemented).
    Those are all interesting ideas but I don't think we will see then on DSLR soon IMO
     
  23. I'd like to add an interchangeable viewfinder such as in the good ol' F3. Have the flash integrated in the "normal" view-finder and remove it together with it, if you want to put an alternative one. I find the nntegrated flash important to be used as a remote flash trigger.
    I'd like to remove 12 M pixels to get back to totally suficient 24 of them. Or can you have 18Mpix-raws right away with better noise performance?
    I'd like to remove another 100 gramms of the weight and some millimetres here and there.
    I'd like to see 2-EV steps in bracketing. And three.
    In case they didn't, i did not verify, I'd like Nikon to remove the 100-shots limit in serials to be able to take longer star-trails.
    And I'd like to have it in hands asap in order to stop dreaming of totally irrelevant features it does not have and use the ones it has...
     
  24. Rotating lens/sensor is the way of making difficult something easy; a solution looking for a problem. The rotating back on a Mamiya 6x7 is great; try to take a portrait just revolving the whole camera; a DSLR is way smaller, the viewfinder is not as bulky, the grip work in both ways, and there are accessory vertical grips if you like on short bodies (pro bodies already have them). Better to attach a second tripod thread, or to design a body with an ArcaSwiss type profile in both sides!

    Removable sensors could be a very expensive, and maybe a technically non-viable solution. Together with the sensor, I suspect many other electronic or even mechanical components should be removable too because they work in conjunction; imagine a car with removable, upgradable engines. The cost of the engine removal/installation could be too high, and the future engine designs could be then subject to many limitations. Even the real life span of the car/camera could make this idea not worth it.
     
  25. The only thing I'm missing is someone willing to send me the $3000 to buy one. I may have to do that on my own.
     
  26. Rotating lens/sensor might be a great idea if you only have an electronic view finder, but how are you going to "rotate" the fixed size 24x36mm mirror, screen and prism setup. There is no room in the camera body for a mirror and prism to work with a portrait format 36mm high frame size.
     
  27. My guess is that we won't see an 'options list' like you propose on a pro DSLR for some time, if ever. In fact, the 800/800E is the only 'option' package I can remember ever having on a pro DSLR, unless you count the various 'S' models, that came out later. I assume the 'S' stood for 'Second generation.'
    An options list on an F3 makes sense, since cameras used to have a much longer life cycle, and are top end. And it makes sense on various Leicas and Mirrorless cameras, because those are often purchased for reasons of style and personal expression, beyond the personal expression of the actual photos. But doing so greatly increases production costs, as you now have to track which serial number camera is going where and pull of from this production line and put it in that one, rather than just letting them all go down the same line.
    It reminds me a bit of guitar production. If you want to buy a custom-colour guitar from a manufacturer that does not use an automated system, it's not a whole lot more than the regular price. They're doing everything themselves anyway, so it's not much more work to mix a new paint colour. But if you want to buy a custom-colour guitar from a company that uses an automated system the price difference is astronomical, because now they can't use a machine to paint the guitar. Of course, not using an automated system means that the guitar is a lot more expensive to begin with, even if it's all stock.
    Options packages are also often used to make a less expensive product look or perform as well as a more expensive one. In that case it makes sense on the F3 (then the most expensive model), but why would you want to give customers the option of 'building' a D800 that is better, and possibly cheaper, than a D4 or D4X? Or stripping a camera down so they can get it for less? The company would have to charge so much for it to protect their price points, that it probably wouldn't even be worth it for you to buy one.
     
  28. I was a little disappointed at 36 MP sensor, what with requiring to update hard-disk, RAM etc.​
    You do not have to always shoot at maximum 7360 x 4912 resolution. Here is the list of other options for d800 : 6144 x 4912, 6144 x 4080, 5520 x 3680, 4800 x 3200, 4608 x 3680, 4608 x 3056, 3680 x 2456, 3600 x 2400, 3072 x 2456, 3072 x 2040, 2400 x 1600. Choose the resolution which suits the job.
     
  29. my wish is that i wouldn't have to buy 2 cameras to get one with D4-like pixel count and one with the D800's configuration. i don't doubt there'll be a D4-lite down the road, and i'm conflicted on which is more attractive to me (but isn't it always the case that we want most what we can't have?). at this point, however, i'll keep using the D700 and augment it with a D800, and be grateful for what i have.
     
  30. I am not interested in this camera for now. As someone said above, buying this camera means that : 1 - You need to have better lenses; 2 - You need to have a computer with more storage, more RAM and a much better video card and 3 - you need to have money to buy it. I don't like 4 fps, I don't like video either and I don't like 36 mp. Even though the D7000 is not a FX camera, I would be more happy to switch or buy this camera than the D800. I am always looking for IQ, high ISO performance and speed and the D7000 have all of that. For now my D300 does the job well except for the ISO. My next upgrade so I can have my D300 as a second camera, will be the D7000 unless Nikon comes up with the D400 in the near future but we don't know yet if Nikon has decided to give us that camera. Probably they want us to switch to a camera like the D800 which give us the chance to use it as DX and FX at the same time.
     
  31. Looking at the list, hah.....I feel a lot better!! I am going for it.....Personally, I'd have been happy even without a video!! Only disappointed about the 36MP.
    Hey Tell me something.....If I shoot lower resolutions, does it use the whole sensor to catch a smaller res image (E.g. using 4pix as One or something) or does it snap up full resolution (36MP) and (internal software) size it down to what I specified and store it?
    :-D
     
  32. If you shoot at lower resolutions it will simply resize the image from the full 36MP to another res, just as if you did it in Photoshop with resize (well there might be algorithmic differences but the basic idea is that). Then it will write a JPG on the card. But, it's a JPG.
     
  33. You can also shoot in DX format using only a part of the sensor and get 15Mp Raw or jpeg.
     
  34. Connectibility with the internet.
    Some stying as it looks like it eats at McDonalds every day. Basically it's fat and ugly.
     
  35. Wider range of ISO's is the only thing it doesn't have that I'd want.
    I'm with most here in that it could have left the video part out too...
    Dave
     
  36. For you guys who want to block visible light from the pop up flash without a large clip on diffuser I've tried this and it works 'fairly' well.
    4 - 6+ layers of this filter material taped to the flash lens really only lets IR / near IR to be emitted. The dk. blue absorbs most of the visible light yet seems to be transparent to IR, at least that's what I hypothesize. I tape the layers together, then use a simple piece of tape to hold the 'assembly' to the flash. You could get fancier and use velcro too.
    Elegant it is not. Woodshed functional, most assuredly. It also may be just a silly old guy screwing around in his worksop too long, sawdust in the brains :eek:)
    http://www.amazon.com/181-Congo-Blu...67SK/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1328890775&sr=8-2
    10" x 10" sheet yields 200 pieces of filter for a Nikon D7000 sized popup flash, and at let's say a 5 layer stack then that piece equals enough material for 40 cameras at a whopping cost of $2.65 total (plus shipping), or speaking sillier ... less than 7 cents per camera !
    Beat that SG-31IR development team!
    Now, I'm sure the "Jim Kludge Add-On" range is reduced over the real Nikon product, but I know that it does work out to about an 8-10 foot radius from the camera to the CLS SB600's I use, indoors. So given that, using this in my 'studio', it's OK.
    CCC Jim
    (cheap, crazy coot Jim)
     
  37. Rotating lens/sensor would add to the complexity of the design IMHO costs would go up I think way up. Then 1% of the market (wild guess) would want pay the price for that. As Rene mentioned this could come useful on a tripod but maybe not, it would not work as well in handheld mode as it would take time to rotate the assembly. They use this type of assembly in medium format due to the size of the camera (easier to rotate the back rather then than the body).​
    Quite - rotating the sensor is a lot of effort for minimal gain unless you've got the camera on a tripod, although arguably that's going to happen more with the D800 as people have a little more trouble holding it steady and getting the focal plane right; that's certainly what I've heard from reviews of the medium format backs. Then again, 1.7x the linear resolution of a D700 that I can hold perfectly steady enough in most lighting conditions doesn't scare me that much. An 80MP back might scare me a little more.

    I think I suggested that Nikon think of following Pentax's medium format bodies and put a second tripod socket on the camera. That said, I doubt I'd use it; putting a 90-degree curve on the bottom left corner and actually letting the tripod mount slide around would be interesting in a camera though. I imagine that someone's made a tripod mount that lets you pivot the camera (for the times when you aren't using a tripod mount on a lens), but I've never been looking for one. Then again, I mostly use a tripod with longer lenses with tripod collars anyway.
    Connectibility with the internet.​
    I believe the D800 supports Eye-Fi cards. Good enough for me.
    Hey Tell me something.....If I shoot lower resolutions, does it use the whole sensor to catch a smaller res image (E.g. using 4pix as One or something) or does it snap up full resolution (36MP) and (internal software) size it down to what I specified and store it?​
    What would be the distinction whether the processing is done at the sensor level or inside the image processor? I strongly assume that the image processor does the downsampling, but since you'd only see the final file anyway, I'm unclear why the detail of where it's processed matters.
    Wider range of ISO's is the only thing it doesn't have that I'd want.​
    I wonder whether the D3, D700 and D3s have primed Nikon owners towards low-light shooting (assuming that there aren't that many D3x owners out there). Even if it's only as good as the D7000, the low light performance is pretty good. Not that I'd turn down a D3s if a cheap one falls on my lap, but I see the D800 as a complement to my existing D700 rather than a replacement for it.
    The large pixel count is one of my prime reasons for wanting and pre-ordering this camera. I can't justify buying a MF digital system, but I'm used to getting many more pixels from my MF and LF film scans than from my DX cameras.​
    Likewise (when I get around to deciding I can afford it). The D800 is a substitute for my Pentax 645, making my recently-acquired 35mm lens a bit of a waste, and might stave off my urge to go 5x4 for a bit.
     
  38. "Rotating lens/sensor is the way of making difficult something easy; a solution looking for a problem."
    Exactly. Complex (very complex) solution looking for a minor problem that doesn't exist or has already been solved with a simpler and much cheaper method (L-bracket).
    Reminds me of the story (probably an urban myth or just a joke) of NASA and the Russian space programs in the 1960's searching for a way for their astronauts to write data and observations on a piece of paper in zero gravity. NASA spent mega-dollars developing a ball point pen that would write in zero gravity. The Russians used a #2 pencil. :)
     
  39. I wonder whether the D3, D700 and D3s have primed Nikon owners towards low-light shooting
    I'm not sure if that's the case, since Canon for a long time had a better lineup of fast primes. But the low resolution of those cameras has led to people associating FX with low light, while it could be also high resolution, as in the new D800.
    Custom L-brackets are expensive but excellent. I got the RRS made one for the D3X and I'm very happy with it. It's surprising how much sway that I blamed on other parts of the tripod apparatus were actually due to the quick release plate or L bracket which was not custom designed for the camera. Now, it's rock solid.
     
  40. acm

    acm

    For you guys who want to block visible light from the pop up flash without a large clip on diffuser I've tried this and it works 'fairly' well.​
    A crude but simple solution. Almost entire of my vintage car series has been shot with pop-up flash covered with my handkerchief as I was careless enough not to replace cells on my SB-800 which died in the early part of the session.
     
  41. I believe the D800 supports Eye-Fi cards. Good enough for me.​
    I never heard of that until now. Sounds good I guess. Of course with a 36mp camera you will need huge cards plus plenty of time to transfer the huge files. Anyway I was just kidding about it, I have no use for a giant picture file anyway and my AT&T interent service could not handle it if I did.
     
  42. Any smart manufacturer/seller is going to be constantly evaluating/analyzing technological advances in the market while also listening carefully to what buyers want and will buy. There are countless photographers with every concievable list of "ideal" features. I venture Nikon will look at the combination of features that utilize profitable new technology while satisfying the largest number of customers possible. What often happens when you try adding features beyond this "sweet-spot" is that you please a handfull of new customers but lose a larger number of those that didn't want these features to begin with.
     
  43. Very true Maury. .
     
  44. ad 2.) Why not make a quadratic sensor and rotating the camera will not be necessary anymore?? Is it the marketing unit of the manufacturer having fear people would not accept it?
     
  45. Good grief, Nikon releases a DSLR that leap frogs over Canon for the first time, and all for an extremely reasonable introductory price and it is already being criticized by some. Strange.
     
  46. Reminds me of the story (probably an urban myth or just a joke) of NASA and the Russian space programs in the 1960's searching for a way for their astronauts to write data and observations on a piece of paper in zero gravity. NASA spent mega-dollars developing a ball point pen that would write in zero gravity. The Russians used a #2 pencil. :)
    Yeah, but who got to the moon first?
     
  47. Only because Sputnik scared the cosmos out of us.
     
  48. "Yeah, but who got to the moon first?"​
    Nobody. Everybody knows that the moon landings were actually faked on a sound stage in Pasadena. :)
    Because the Russians used a pencil and put their resources to better uses than zero gravity pens, they were the first to put a man in space. ;-)
    -
    "Good grief, Nikon releases a DSLR that leap frogs over Canon for the first time, and all for an extremely reasonable introductory price and it is already being criticized by some. Strange."​
    Hardly surprising is it? For some, even the latest and greatest is never quite enough. :)
     
  49. Not sure if they added the option to adjust iso from the "non-active" 2nd control wheel when using A or S program mode. Simple and easy to add. Pentax has had this since K-10d. So should everyone else.
    One more. Ability for LCD screen to show and adjust all SU800 functions. And, add additional group or two. SU-800 is just an IR transmitter that should be able to be programmed by camera to send any coded messages required for flash control. Just an idea.
     
  50. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    Not sure if they added the option to adjust iso from the "non-active" 2nd control wheel when using A or S program mode. Simple and easy to add. Pentax has had this since K-10d. So should everyone else.​
    Nikon has the option to adjust exponsure compensation from the non-active command dial (main is inactive in Aperture priority and sub is inactive in Shutter priority and Program). That feature is called Easy Exposure Compensation has been around for a few generations. It is controlled by Custom Setting gruop b.
     
  51. Nikon releases a DSLR that leap frogs over Canon for the first time​
    First time? I know throughout history they have been doing it... but really the advent of the D3 was a leapfrog in Nikon's favor. The D700 and D7000 did it again in their classes. Canon really didn't even leapfrog back with the 1D X, it's extremely similar to the D4 on paper.

    Canon's having a rough patch trying to keep up.
     
  52. Shun Cheung [​IMG][​IMG][​IMG], Feb 12, 2012; 02:16 p.m.
    Not sure if they added the option to adjust iso from the "non-active" 2nd control wheel when using A or S program mode. Simple and easy to add. Pentax has had this since K-10d. So should everyone else.
    Nikon has the option to adjust exponsure compensation from the non-active command dial (main is inactive in Aperture priority and sub is inactive in Shutter priority). That feature is called Easy Exposure Compensation has been around for a few generations. It is controlled by Custom Setting gruop b.​
    Then we are almost there. Now we just need to have option of having exposure compensation done by changing iso.
     
  53. The biggest missing feature on the D800 is my finger on the shutter release.
     
  54. March 18Same here. Mine's on order. Amazon says March 18. Or 22. (I put in orders for both versions, so I can take my time deciding which I want and which to cancel and not get stuck with it being backordered for 6 months...)
     
  55. Simon, who uses Live View? I do. It was one of the main reasons I moved to the D7000. I shoot a lot of nature macro and find digital SLR viewfinders very difficult to focus accurately compared with the old film bodies' focusing screens. The ability to zoom into the focus point using Live View is invaluable. Plus I am disabled and in many circumstances I cannot physically contort myself to get my eye anywhere near the viewfinder. Most macro shots at ground level would be impossible for me were it not for Live View. An articulated screen would probably help me, but I'd have the same concerns as others about its robustness and longevity.
     
  56. I think you are oversimplifying the process of designing and building a camera. Rotatable sensor? No . . . not practical. They would have to redesign the whole thing. The camera would get bigger. The mirror would have to get bigger. The viewfinder would nave black bands across the top and bottom or down the sides, while shooting. Where would they put the data displays in the viewfinder? The viewfinder would have to get bigger. Many many more problems would present themselves, if you were to make an attempt at such a dramatic re-design. It's just not practical. It's much easier, cheaper, and more practical to just integrate a grip along the bottom and add some buttons and dials . . . which is why the pro cameras are like that. This is conjecture, but I suspect that if you do the research, you will find this to be true.
    There are MANY features that are left out of every camera. That's life. I wish that all DSLR cameras had the simple fold-out screens of the cheap little video cameras and point-and-shoot cameras. Unfortunately, for some reason, most of the manufacturers can't seem to understand that would be a dramatic advantage. Sony gets it. The others are just a bunch of ostriches or something. It's coming . . . just slower than many of us wish.
    I wish they would have contracted with Sigma to make them a full-frame Foveon sensor. It would be nice to see Sony's virtual monopoly broken. A 90 megapixel (30x3) Foveon sensor in a Nikon would be very cool. They already proved the Foveon can produce high quality, virtually noise-free images at that density up to about ISO 800. Doubling the number of photo-sites with a sensor twice the size would be AMAZING!
     

Share This Page

1111