Richard Williams

<blockquote> <p>Never underestimate people's ability to complain. The pixel count, especially, of these cameras was criticised, going up against the 18MP 7D (which could do 8fps without a grip) and the 21MP 5D2.<br /><br /></p> </blockquote> <p>Hardly fair to compare the original D300 to the 7D (which came out two years later!). The reviews at the time were universally positive, especially when compared to the D200. I guess there were questions about the density of the D700 sensor, though the low noise at high ISO argument was recognised by most reviewers. </p> <blockquote> <p>When a camera does do absolutely everything its predecessor could do, it's usually a minor update. Otherwise, there's always a compromise. Often it's a small compromise, though.</p> </blockquote> <p><br />You can often find some minor feature that's downgraded in the next generation, but the D300/D700 has a very useful combination of major features that a lot of people like (even before we factor in the price) - a camera that's relatively small and light, but can still manage 8fps with an optional grip.</p> <blockquote> <p>D90 launch price: $899.95. D300 launch price: $1799. D7100 launch price: $1199. Allow for inflation, and that's a big gap. The D7100 is definitely nearer the D90's position than the D300's.<br /><br /></p> </blockquote> <p>The D7x00 and D300s prices have overlapped for a long time, of course, though to be fair this was relatively late in the D300s life cycle.</p> <blockquote> <p><br />Huh? The D7100's autofocus is, as far as I know, every bit as good as the D300's. It doesn't have the latest D4s updates, but it's not far behind.<br /><br /></p> </blockquote> <p>That's true - I'd missed that this was fixed in the upgrade from the D7000 to the D7100 (though oddly not in the D610).<br /><br /></p> <blockquote> <p>Though that's 6fps without needing a grip - and 7fps (still without a grip) at 15MP, which is still more than the D300. As for the buffer, it's pretty big if you're shooting JPEGs, though I completely concede the problem if you're shooting raw. I'm not trying to be argumentative, just point out that the D7100 isn't that far behind the D300 on specs. (Handling is another matter.)<br /><br />Well, yes - though a gripless D700 tops out at 5fps too. At 1.2x crop you get 24MP at 6fps without needing a grip, and I strongly suspect still with better image quality than the D700.<br /><br /></p> </blockquote> <p>I'd say the pixel count (which is obviously higher in the newer cameras, as you'd expect) is less important to many of us than using the lens uncropped - I'm sure the crop modes can be useful, but the fair comparison is full frame, where the newer models fall short<br /><br /></p> <blockquote> <p>So. Um. A D4 then? I rest my case that many people wanting a "D400" actually just wish the D4s was cheaper. :-)<br /><br /></p> </blockquote> <p>I'm sure a cheap D4s would be very popular :-). But you missed out my first feature, which is just as important as the others 'A D300/700/800 style body (not too heavy, not too small).' It's not just the price. When I bought my F100, I could have gone for a secondhand F5 for not much more. But I didn't want to be stuck with a camera the size and weight of a medium format body, even when I didn't need the framerate.</p>

<p>Here are a few Leicas (pre-war models) with 'arrow' engravings:<br> http://www.leicashop.com/vintage_en/leica-ii-mod-d-sku23588-1.html<br> http://collectiblend.com/Cameras/Leitz/Leica-IIIa-%28Mod-G%29-Royal-Air-Force.html<br> http://collectiblend.com/Cameras/Leitz/Leica-II-%28Mod-D%29-%27Royal-Air-Force%27.html</p>

<blockquote> <p>We can "armchair QB" all we want, but if Nikon doesn't have a current model camera that will work for what you photograph (even if you only count the latest generation, not the older cameras that are still in the pipeline), it's possible that you are one of those "nothing is ever good enough" folks, at least as far as cameras is concerned.</p> </blockquote> <p>When the D300 and D700 were launched I don't think there were many people saying they weren't good enough. If anything, these cameras were higher specified than most were expecting (great sensors for the time, 8 fps with grip, etc.), perhaps the best price/performance ratios that Nikon has ever achieved within the limits of the available technology. Each was also a versatile 'digital F100' - top of the range AF and decent framerate (with buffer to match) in a nicely sized durable body, the sort of camera you could use to get decent snaps of the peleton speeding past in the Tour de France, but light enough to hang around your neck all day.</p> <p>The 'problem' is that Nikon has never really replaced either of these cameras, so if you want to upgrade you have to compromise on something. In place of the D300/300s we have the D7x00 series, somewhere between the D90 and D300 in spirit (but sold at the higher price point!), with second string AF, no way of going faster than 6 fps without cropping, and relatively small buffers. In place of the D700 we have the D800 and now the D810. That crazy pixel count has its uses, of course, but even the upgraded model tops out at 5fps full frame. A viable 'D400' or 'D900' would have:</p> <p>- A D300/700/800 style body (not too heavy, not too small).<br> - First class AF with appropriately spread focus points.<br> - At least 8fps, uncropped, probably requiring a grip.<br> - A buffer to match.</p> <p>This isn't a long list. I didn't even mention pixel count (hardly an issue when even the entry level bodies get 24 Mp). I suspect we will eventually get it with FX (unless Nikon decides the D900 must be 48Mp+), but perhaps not with DX (although the rumoured 'D9300' may surprise use). There's nothing here that Nikon couldn't include if they chose to (after all, they already have in the past).</p>

<blockquote> <p>Nikon announced earlier that Capture NX-D would replace both Capture NX2 , and that from that point in time there would be no more updates to and View NX2, <em><strong>so possibly the D810 will not be supported</strong> </em>in the current Nikon Software suites ( there is no mentioning about what happens to Control NX though..)</p> </blockquote> <p>I would bet money that, even if CNX2 doesn't support the D810 officially, the old trick of changing the 'Model' metadata tag in the NEF to 'Nikon D800' (with something like ExifTool) will make the files readable...</p>

<p>Shame they couldn't make it 6fps in FX with the grip, as the rumourverse had predicted (most of the other important rumoured specs were correct). At least we now have parity with the D700 when running without a grip at 5fps, but still well below the 8fps FX the D700 manages with a grip. Predictable UK price hike, of course, relative to the sub-£2k D800 or the £2350 D800E. But we can hopefully expect significant price drops by next year - the D800E launched at £2900, but was down to current levels within 6 months or so.</p>

<p>The FXD doesn't have an aperture display in the viewfinder, just LEDs on a shutter speed scale (that can be a bit hard to see in bright light). I think the 139 does, though - perhaps this is the camera with a similar problem?</p>

<p>This wouldn't tbe the first time that manufacturers have allegedly attempted to game reviews. According to one investigation, many Android devices detect when the bechmarking software typically used by reviewers is running and artificially optimise for it, e.g. by boosting CPU speed at the expense of running hotter than normal:<br> http://www.anandtech.com/show/7384/state-of-cheating-in-android-benchmarks<br> When choosing a product like a PC component I don't download the manufacturer's spec sheet, I just read a comparative review. I've no idea what motivated the change in components in these drives, but it hardly seems beyond the realm of possibility that a desire to perform well in early reviews while saving money in the long term (at the expense of performance) is a factor.</p>

<p>I'm guessing that Manuel is posting from the UK. Not sure what the service situation is here (and I have a 167). On an old site that probably hasn't been updated since Kyocera gave up on Contax, they mention 'a maximum period of 10 years' for service, starting in 2005:<br /> http://www.contaxcameras.co.uk/support/support.html<br /> This thread has some suggestions for various countries:<br /> http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=34687<br /> but the UK service centre mentioned seems to be defunct:<br /> http://www.alphadigitalservices.co.uk/<br /> An earlier thread here also suggests that support will end internationally in 2015:<br /> http://www.photo.net/leica-rangefinders-forum/00aqoi<br> Kyocera doesn't list a UK location, and suggests contacting Japan, but there are still some European centres:<br /> http://global.kyocera.com/prdct/optical/global/index.html<br /> Of course they may still be independents around who will work on them, provided they can find the parts.</p>

<p>Don't know what you're getting in the kit, but if I were spending that kind of money I'd probably go with a reputable dealer rather than handing over £1100 to a stranger in the West End. A G2 with 3 lenses can be had for about the same money from somewhere like http://www.ffordes.com , or a G2 with a 45 for about half that. As noted above, the G2 may be a 'rangefinder' camera in some broad technical sense, but by this definition so are (e.g.) any number of point and shoot film cameras from the 80s and 90s, like the Canon SureShot. Just think of it as a AF camera with an optical viewfinder and a (rather fiddly) option to focus manually, but with excellent lenses. I don't know what the service situation is these days - I expect repairs won't be available for as long as they will for some conventional, largely mechanical, rangefinders. A Leica M6 with an older 50/2 would probably cost about the same as this G2 kit, and can probably be kept running for as long as there is film, but of course there's no AF! </p>

<p>The standard M6 50mm framelines are supposedly pretty accurate at 0.7m, the closest the RF focuses. For other working distances, contributors to the Nemeth Leica FAQ offer some guidelines:</p> <p>http://leica.nemeng.com/006ba.shtml</p>

<blockquote> <p>Also, the M6 is a better camera because the shutter speed dial is smaller which had always been and should never be changed. The M6 shutter is still a truly mechanical shuttle while the shutters of M6TTL and M7 are not. The M6TTL has a on/off switch which is a pain.</p> </blockquote> <p>If you're new to Leica and aren't planning on buying earlier models, it hardly matters that the shutter dial is bigger on the TTL (and rotates in the opposite direction) - most users would probably see it as an advantage. The TTL shutter is in fact 'truly mechanical', just like the original M6. Don't see a problem with the 'off' switch - you don't have to use it, but if you do it protects against accidental battery drain if the shutter release gets pressed in your bag. On the original M6, I use the 'B' setting to switch off the electronics for the same reason (though apparently this trick doesn't work on the TTL).</p>

<p>Although they're rather less common, the E43 50/1.4 lenses can be quite reasonably priced when they come up for sale, overlapping with recent versions of the 50/2. You'd probably have to go for a vintage Summicron to get something substantially cheaper.</p>

<blockquote> <p>Either an older version (CS5, CS6) or another product. Would you go on location to shoot a job with one camera body?</p> </blockquote> <p>If Nikon were to come up with some sort of cynical, self-serving firmware update rental scheme where I had to make regular payments (and internet connections) to keep the camera body operational, my backup plan wouldn't be to buy an older Nikon model, it would be to ditch Nikon and move to Canon. Unfortunately, Adobe have no 'Canon' to keep it keep them humble - without effective competition, they obviously felt safe enough to impose an endless subscription on their flagship product, knowing their customers had nowhere else to go. The only realistic backup for this sort of situation is a copy of an older version of CS, another sale for Adobe if you're just entering the business and don't already have one. I haven't read the detailed EULA for CC, but I wouldn't be surprised if it's as one-sided as the CS3 licence above - are Adobe obliged to provide any particular standard of online service for the subscription they demand? Does the subscriber have any recourse if the servers go offline for a longer period next time?</p>

<blockquote> <p>I have never seen a flash socket on the front - with a Leica III this would not be possible since the slow speed escapement resides in that location.</p> </blockquote> <p>They are out there - my IIIa has one on the front, so there must be a bit of room beneath the slow speed mech.</p>

<p>Looks real. That's a common position for a third party flash sync socket, which will reduce the value. The top plate finish, especially the wear on the engravings, looks a bit odd, so maybe not in original condition, but that might just be the photo. How to spot a fake: http://rick_oleson.tripod.com/index-213.html (check the rangefinder cam when you see it). Incidentally, if you've ever held a real Leica and worked the mechanism, you'll know a fake (re-engraved FED/Zorki) straight away - they don't feel or look the same close up.</p>

<p>Jim, The current Sixtomat F2 goes down to EV -2.5 according to Gossen. This is probably the same for all the versions of this meter (certainly for my Sixtomat Flash), and I'd assume it's an accurate limit, though I've never tested it against another meter that goes this low.</p>

<blockquote> <p>I like the Gossen Luna-Pro digital - easy to read and use.</p> </blockquote> <p>Another vote for this meter, not to be confused with the original Luna Pro. The digital version is a completely different design, with no protruding dials and a nice, clear LCD display. It's not as tiny as some of the meters mentioned above, but it fits nicely in my hand or pocket (smaller, though thicker, than my smartphone). Gossen have made various versions of this with and without flash metering. The current version (which I haven't tried, but it looks very similar to my 'Sixtomat Flash') is the 'Sixtomat F2' ('Sixtomat' has always been the name outside the US, and is now used everywhere): http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1016936-REG/gossen_go_h264a_sixtomat_f2_exposure_meter.html</p>