cc_chang1

<p>The D7/5/3xxx series traditionally have the same sensor technology but they differ in other ways. Thus I don't think anybody should be surprised that a new D3300 camera is slightly better than the now almost two years old D7100. When the D7200 comes out, it may be better, IQ wise, than the D3300, and this will go on. For my intended use, D7100 has the feature sets as a whole so it is my camera of choice.</p>

<p>From the reviews I read, the lack of AA filter makes a very very small difference in the D7100 so for all intents and purposes, you should treat it the same way as any other dSLRs before it. I think the improvement in sharpness gets better in cameras after D7100. In any case, whether it is sharp or not sharp enough varies from person to person and from image to image. I do seem to sharpen RAWs from D7100 less than I did with D90, but this could be entirely psychological (to justify the purchase of a new camera). It is suffice to say that you are not going to look at D7100's RAWs and jump in the air b/c of the increase in sharpness. </p>

<p>When you factor in the lens, the EM10 package will be much smaller. For rock climbing, you should get a much wider lens instead, such as the 9-18, 7-14, or the 12. If you plan to climb and shoot, the 7-14 may be a bit too big, and I would just get the 12/2. </p>

<p>I too would like to ask you to keep it simple, and if you can tell us where this will take place, it will help to get more focused great advice. A few points to fill the gap of information that you have already received:</p> <p>No new lens needed, even the kit lens is sharp enough, but the focal length is important as you need to allow everyone to fill the frame without leaving people at the edges to look distorted, which happens when too wide a lens is used and when shooting too close to the subject. Indeed 30mm sounds about right but you still need to look in the VF to make adjustments. You may want to leave some room on the edges, which can be later cropped out, and do not put ladies there who will be very upset if their bodies look wider than normal.</p> <p>If you have several rows of people, you may run into problems of not enough depth of field — some rows are in focus while others are not. You can fix this by changing the arrangement of the people, using a smaller aperture (high f number), and/or pointing the focus slight behind the very front row. You need to experiment. Another option is to have the camera set up higher than the group so it is shooting down, which flattens the filed and reduces the depth. You may or may like this look, though.</p> <p>Buy a remote (ML?, can't remember) and set your camera such that after you press the remote, it will take 2 sec before it triggers the shutter. In this way you do not have to run from the camera to where you are in the group, and will not get caught with your hand holding the remote. You trigger the shutter and quickly put the hand down to hide it.</p> <p>A good tripod is definitively needed for this and for any other general group pictures. If you are semi-serious with photography, get a carbon-fiber version rated to hold the heaviest camera+lens that you have now and may own in the near future. The lighter it is, carbon fibers are both strong and light, the more likely you will use it often.</p> <p>If you are shooting indoors and there is no direct sun light, a good flash plus a diffuser seems inevitable, which will add to the list of things you need to buy.</p> <p>(Hope you are still planning to do this and not going to quit …)</p>

<p>WOW, these ISO 6400 shots from the D800 are very nice ...</p>

<blockquote> <p>I've never understood the phrase "travel light" (my D800 usually has an L-plate on it just in case, even though I'm not usually bringing a tripod...) so I didn't really have a problem carrying a D700.</p> </blockquote> <p>Andrew, are you "traveling" alone just to take pictures or are you, like me and others, traveling with family with kids? If like me you have two toddlers who just want to run away from you for fun and you are in a city (with cars running on the street), very often you will be shooting with one hand (and spanking them with another), plus the diaper bag, bags of food change of clothes, stroller, etc that you must carry as part of the kit. Of course, if you are very strong with large hands, and you don't mind checking luggage for air travel, then you will have a higher tolerance for camera size. The need to be "light" does seem relative. What is not relative is the weight that each system will require. A 2 kilo FF kit is much heavier than one that is just around 500 g (0.5 kilo). Whether the light kit can deliver the IQ one wants again varies from person to person. </p>

<blockquote> <p>to get a USED lens mentioned above [85mm f1.4D or 85mm f1.8G or 105mm DC or 105mm VR or 80-200mm f2.8D] … My intention is to buy a tele lens which I can use for both occasions,</p> </blockquote> <p>With regards to the 85mm lenses, I can give me my personal experience which agrees with reviews that you can find on these lenses. I had the 85/1.8 D, a lovely sharp lens, and I had no problem focusing it in dim dim light on a D90. Its bokeh, however, is ugly. The new 85/1.8 G has much better bokeh, is light, and the images are beautiful. Thus between the two lenses, I would go with the 85/1.8 G. One nice thing about the AFD version is that it does have an old fashion aperture ring. If you are planning to use an 85mm lens to shoot videos (see below) in the future when you have a body that can do that, this gives a you direct control to the aperture. (Most Nikon bodies cannot control the aperture on a G lens once you are in live view)<br /> <br /> For me personally, if I am traveling for fun, D700 is not the camera I will bring. This is where a lot of people are going into the mirrorless camera systems to save weight and bulk. I can bring an E-PL5+12-35/2.8+20/1.7+45/1.8 set which will weigh about the same (if not less than) as a D700 body alone! This may sound like you need to start buying another system, but you will appreciate the dramatic saving in weight and bulk to allow you to enjoy the trip more. The mirrorless cameras from SONY and Panasonic are outstanding in shooting videos (Olympus is not bad but Fuji is clearly behind them all) so you can later use these in your wedding job. You can mount your Nikon lenses with a simple cheap "adapter" (a metal ring, really).</p>

<blockquote> <p>I know the 28 is wide, is it to wide? How wide is the 35 compared to the 50?</p> </blockquote> <p>The wider it is, the closer you have to be with your subjects. If you are shy, go with a longer lens … :)</p>

<blockquote> <p>meaning what, exactly? 36 mp sensor? multicam 3500 AF module? 4k video<br> </p> </blockquote> <p>I hope not, I just don't think the AF and the EVF in the mirrorless systems are good enough as a D800 replacement. What I and many others want is a simpler FF mirrorless for "casual" street use where size and cost of the system are critical, and we already have the technology to make such a camera. I feel that the SONY A7 missed the bar by not including a built-in flash, which many find useful for a carry-around camera. They also fail to deliver a set of good and inexpensive lenses. They just could not do it or they tried to protect the sale of RX1? Since so far there is only one player in this market, it would be easier for Nikon with a broader user base to compete. I will not buy a Coolpix type of camera b/c my Olympus EP-L5 + the 20/1.7 lens seems to work even better. I would love to spend more to get a FF compact, but not at the $2800 that SONY is asking for the RX1. The key is for Nikon to make a very focused product and priced it properly. This unfortunately has not been seen lately from Nikon.<br> </p>

<p>The advantage of a mirrorless camera are:<br> 1. Much smaller camera size — just look at SONY A7. The lenses can be a little smaller too.<br> 2. Much cheaper to make — just look at SONY A7, which is selling at some places for around $1,100, brand new.<br> 3. EVF/Live view/Video. Yes, I actually like an EVF for its ability to show you what exactly your sensor is seeing, all shooting parameters, level gauge, live histogram, guide lines, … you name it.<br> 4. Shoot all MF lens with a simple cheap adapter.<br> However, judging from current Nikon's offers in live view AF technology, I worry that the Nikon's live view AF is going to be slow so this will not be a sports camera. However it could be ideal for landscape shooters. If Nikon, unlike SONY, can introduce it with a set of small, fast, and inexpensive primer lenses, this could be ideal for casual, social, street photography. Unlike SONY A7, please add a built-in flash.</p>

<p>One key flaw with the "review" is to omit much lower end dSLRs, such as Nikon's D7100, which has essentially the same AF system as in the D4s that currently costs less than GH4 and XT1. Likewise, they should have included D5300 or even D3300 to see if these cameras can beat the bottom tier of the dSLRs.</p>