elliot1

<p>took my son to the range</p><div></div>

<p>Flower</p><div></div>

<p>Sunrise</p><div></div>

<p>I find the video to be pretty good (not all agree). My only issue is AF - I typically only shoot video using MF. Perhaps the book will provide some AF tips you can share with us.</p>

<p>Not really, I find the EM1 pretty easy to use and its built-in help menu and manual adequate enough when I do have concerns. The reviews on that book seem to be favorable so far. What are your thoughts on it at this point? Does it have a section of mastering continuous AF? I just updated the firmware to 3.0 last night and hope it improves CAF. </p>

<p>Nikon sensors have improved since the D3, BUT image processing software has made noticeable improvements over the same time span, making high ISO images (ISO 6400) from the D3 remarkable good, delivering excellent color and detail without any noise IF you are a RAW shooter. These advances in image processing has given the D3 (and other similar and lesser Nikon bodies) a bit of a reprieve. </p>

<p>The D3 still beats out all current DX bodies in high ISO performance and still rates pretty well when compared to the newest FX bodies (according to the DXOMark site). The D3 is a great body and still represents a good value.</p>

<p>Both the N systems and O systems (and C and S and all the others) have their good points and bad points. But not knowing how to use any of the systems properly is a recipe for unpleasant results, regardless of the system. </p>

 

<p>Thanks for the tip. I had lost my original Olympus hot shoe cover but had a couple of Nikon BS-1 covers. Works perfectly! And seems to fit a bit tighter than so Olympus cover so hopefully it won't disappear!</p>

<p>IQ, in general, is pretty much the same. But under some shooting conditions, you will see differences in color/contrast. Certain colors, including blacks, may vary a bit. Print size comes into play. You best bet is to do a series of test shots at the three levels of resolution, then print them at the size you normally print at to compare the differences.</p>

<p><em>"How bad is the continuous AF"</em><br>

<em> </em><br>

Not good enough to use effectively. I never use it, even when shooting sports. But in fairness, some say they are able to get good results with it.</p>

<p>Last one.</p><div></div>

<p>2nd shot.</p><div></div>

<p>Surf's up!</p><div></div>

<p>The reality is that there will be little difference from Nikon's 36mp sensor to Canon's 50mp when it comes to IQ.</p>

<p>The image size from Canon is 8700×5800. The D810 is 7360×4912 image size. Not a huge difference. It will likely be difficult to see any differences in image quality between the two, just as it it difficult to see any difference from the D750 to the D810.</p>

<p>I wonder if the continuous AF has been improved. Much of the sample video they have really doesn't test the AF system. They really need to offer 4K also at this time. Perhaps the EM1 II will have it.</p>

<p>I sold my D800 about a year ago and kept my D3 - for the type of shooting I was doing, there typically wasn't enough of a difference in IQ, if any, between the two, and I prefered the feel and overall features of the D3. Unless you are making poster sized prints or shooting at very high ISO a lot, you likely will not notice much of a difference, if any IF you are shooting RAW. One feature I do miss is the ability to AF accurately when using a TC, which the D800/D810/D750 bodies excel at (can AF at f8). Save your money on the body and buy a new lens or two or accessory you need.</p>

<p>Another Sunrise</p><div></div>

<p>Sunrise</p><div></div>

<p>Jose, well put! The 14-24mm is not nearly as big as some of Nikon's very popular lenses. Considering the zoom range and aperture, and exceptional IQ (in line with the primes), it represents an exceptional all around value. But I guess a good copy of the Rokinon 14mm lens is a great value as well. Allan, your best bet may be to wait until the Rokinon becomes available again to see if you get a better copy.</p>

<p>If you really like the D300 and want a bit of a 'boost', you may want to consider a D3 (used obviously) which is very, very similar to the D300. You will get a nice performance boost and an small increase in low light IQ. IMHO, you might be happier with the feel and performance of a D3 over a D7???.</p>

<p>When it comes to high ISO IQ, the D300 and D7100 are not that far off from each other (when comparing identically processed RAW files - the D7100 has a small advantage). In-camera JPGS are far improved with the D7100 over the D300.</p>

<p>3rd shot...</p><div></div>

<p>My son is a member of the Civil Air Patrol and was cleaning the landing gear,</p><div></div>

<p>Several WWII aircraft were on display at a local airport</p><div></div>

<p>The 'right' lens depends on where you will be shooting from.</p>

<p>The 'right' body depends on what size prints you will be making.</p>

<p>And ultimately both choices are limited by budget. What is your budget?</p>

<p>B-17G Flying Fortress from WWII. </p><div></div>