greg_berthelot Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 I recently purchased a N75 after reading good reviews and have now shot two rolls but I am not 100% satisfied. I have a 28-100 G lens. I think my point and shot did just as good. Could I be doing something wrong? The quality of 50% of the prints is marginal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gary evans Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 <p>Learn to use the camera!</p><p>2 rolls of film is not much of a test</p><p>Pick up a good beginners book, read this site, shoot and see what works and what doesn't</p><p>An extreme beginner's book that I ejoyed and still pull out for reference every once in a while is the Complete Idiot's Guide To Photography Like A Pro (or something similar, but it is the Complete Idiot's Guide) Sounds to me like you need to learn about basic photography and a beginner's book such as the aforementioned is a good place to start.</p><p>Don't give up on the N75 just yet. It's the camera I own and I get some very nice pictures with it. I rarely notice the limitations of the camera when compared with more expensive models. You should be able to take some fine pictures with it, when you learn how to properly use it. I cannot speak to the quality of your lens, as I have never shot it.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mskovacs Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 My wife took my latest roll of print film into the local Walmart style lab. The prints have improper gamma, colour casts and sharpness issues. I took the negs, loaded them into my film scanner and they are dynamite. I'm lucky they didn't scratch the &*)(G& out of the negs. So consider your processing too. This is the main reason why I stick to slide film. WYSIWYG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricM Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 and maybe try a different/better lens? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbq Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 Maybe the problem is with what you didn't change (the printing). I shoot lots of bad pictures with decent cameras and lenses. There's no way around it. 50% of pictures discarded right away at first glance isn't bad. On vacation in Greece and France I snapped about 800 pictures in a month, and I'd say that the quality of 700 of those pictures is marginal at best, even when I print them myself (I know, I had to force myself to select 100 pictures to fill an album, and I know that next time I'll aim for fewer than that). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arnabdas Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 >and maybe try a different/better lens? - Eric Milner Quite so. The N75 SLR may be a more capable camera than your prior point-and-shoot, but the optics may have been quite better on the P&S. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_sereda Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 When I got my F75 with the 28-80G lens, and started shooting photos with some crummy film, the photos I got were better than my previous Pentax P&S - not by a lot mind you, that Pentax took some mighty fine photos, but enough to notice. Then I started to shoot some better film (Fuji Reala, NPZ), and noticed the photos starting to come out much better. Then I bought a 70-210/4-5.6, and noticed some fantastic photos starting to pop out. Then I got a 50/1.8, and WOW, I've been doing enlargements on shots and been incredibly pleased. This is the lens I use 95% of the time now, and I'd say I notice 100% of my photos turning out better than those from the P&S, not to mention than with the 28-80G. Of course, along the way, practice also makes perfect, both in terms of getting used to the camera as well as technique. Sure, there are some things about the F75 that annoy me, like no ISO override, only one dial for aperture and shutter speed, etc. But with a nice piece of glass on the front, it is only a dark box holding film after all. Try some better lenses. 50/1.8 is a nice place to start, and really cheap - I bought mine for $100CDN, which is probably $75USD or so. Good luck! Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris haake Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 So many good answers here, so little time to consider them all! I have the N75, too, and I really like it. I got it through Ritz with the Quantarray 28-90 zoom, and I've taken some very nice pictures with it. However, these "kit" lenses definitely have their limitations, and investing in other equipment will help. As suggested, the 50 1.8 is fantastic to have, and so useful. From there (assuming you get it), add on lenses according to your needs, desires, and (gulp) budget. But what film were you using? Where was it processed? Also keep in mind that if you were using it in darker conditions with the built-in speedlight--especially fairly close up--your exposure will not be that great. You'd need a lens with a greater max aperture and/or a better flash. Practice, learn, and HAVE FUN...that's what I always say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg_berthelot Posted January 30, 2004 Author Share Posted January 30, 2004 Thanks for all responses. I have years of experience with a semi-manual SLR. I used Kodak 200 and used two processors. I guess I need to give it more time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
katha_chalotorn Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 To Dave...Where did you buy your 50/1.8 at that price? Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dominic_. Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 I second the notion for a 50/1.8 prime, maybe a 1.4 might be an even better investment though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeca Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 Why Dominic? Do you think the quality and speed of the 1.4 justify the price difference over the 1.8?The 50mm f/1.8D is the best bargain in the market! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul_dibiase3 Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 I have an N75 and I truly enjoy it. I enjoy its light weight. I enjoy the many features it offers for the cost. The meter is excellent. I have shot under many different lighting conditions and the meter is usually right in all but the most extreme cases. Overall, it's and excellent body for the cost. I do not know much about the lens you are using. I use the 24-85mm AS-F lens and get great results. With my 50mm prime lens the images are very sharp. Did you use a tripod when you took the photos? If not your shaking may the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g._armour_van_horn Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 My wife shoots an N70, which I think is pretty much the same as your N75. She uses a Tokina 28-200 zoom, she uses the internal flash only when the viewfinder tells her she must, and I can't recall her ever asking to use a tripod. I shoot a battered FM, predominantly with a MicroNikkor 55/2.8, and I almost always use a tripod. My slides are better than her negs, and of course her negs are better than her prints (although she never sees the negs). I don't think the cameras make the difference here. Primes are sharper than zooms, and camera shake is far more often a quality factor than focus in my experience. A really potent flash to get away from low shutter speeds and wide open apertures could also make a huge difference. I don't reject autofocus, by the way. I have a F4S on the way, although I haven't bought any AF lenses yet. Van Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrishickman Posted February 1, 2004 Share Posted February 1, 2004 One thing I wanted to ask about the N75...got my wife one and the Nikon G 28-200 zoom, and man this combo focuses slower than I don't know what! Maybe I'm just spoiled using an N80 with AF-S 24-85 f/3.5 - 4.5, but I don't know, it's crazy slow! Is it the camera, the lens, or both? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe_paulo1 Posted February 1, 2004 Share Posted February 1, 2004 greg could you please post some of these not so good prints so that we can see whats wrong with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stefaan_boonen Posted February 5, 2004 Share Posted February 5, 2004 I have the exact same body & lens. Before that I used an N80, N65, lenses Nikon prime 50mm, Nikkor 28-80D. AFAIK there is nothing wrong at all with the N75, nor lens for that matter. May indeed well be (as others suggest) your inexperience with the camera and of course film. Use a good slide film like Provia or Velvia and check those results. I used that and let me tell you: results are more than A OK (always considering pricing). IMHO the N75 + 28-100G is a terrific starter kit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prof-K Posted February 7, 2004 Share Posted February 7, 2004 Re: Christopher Hickman Chris, Its without any doubt the lens...N75 uses the same focusing technology (MultiCam 900) as N80. The 28-200 and other bigger and cheaper non-AFS lenses are very slow on most bodies (e.g., 70-300G). Thanks. Shakil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now