arun_seetharam

<p>Haha.....I know, for him it must be a very serious thing. My question was<br>

"Not something serious that everyone has to update"<br>

What if I dont care about 800mm f5.6? Do I really need to update?<br>

I dont think so, right, Shun?</p>

<p>Looks like this is just a Support for the AF-S NIKKOR 800mm f/5.6E, isnt it? Not something serious that everyone has to update. Right?</p>

FUD is a perspective, Shun. I don't think it is propagation, after all the assurances from the forum. But taking care is a

part of buying any expensive product for that matter. Demanding quality is customers rightful duty.

 

:-)

My only concern with the issue is that. I have no problems paying a fortune for an engineering marvel. No problem cleaning

the sensors, which I have many times. But, I don't expect a scientific instruments company I have known for years to

deliver quality and reliability, come out with something that they expect the customers to put up with.

 

No way I would like to put my fat fingers or brushes and pumps into the heart of the camera on day one. Nor deal with

customer service a buncha times on day one. I know Nikon has been going through a lot of upheavals in the recent times.

I am still a loyalist. Love their stuff.

 

:-)

<p>I have had bodies, which I have mucked up changing lenses and then cleaned them, the sensors. Really something I am familiar with. But what I could not fathom is, hearing that a brand new camera could be messy and sending it back and forth to Nikon....and all that.<br>

But yea, totally agree, the internet is frought with FUD. Information could be exaggerated.<br>

It really helped melting that FUD in me about D600, hearing from you all.<br>

Thanks a lot gentlemen!! Ye'all just made me a coupla grand poorer.<br>

:-D</p>

To be honest, I am a little surprised that this seemed to slip through Nikon quality control. Dust, oil, sticky shutter and so on. I would have

definitely thought this was accidental or bad samples if it was just a hand full of customers. It doesn't certainly doesn't seem so!!

 

These issues seem to be reported at several vendor and review sites by several people!! I really was waiting for something like D600 for

long. Now I feel so despondent to drop 2 grand on it. I would not bat an eyelid if the Quality was good. Average customer rating across

popular multiple sites is like 3.5 out of 5!!

 

My question is should I? Any news that these issues have gotten Nikon attention? Can any recent buyers confirm that their cameras have

had no such issues?

 

Your input would really help.

 

Thank you.

<p>Basically, pictures taken with different ISOs should all look alike, assuming the lightmeter is zeroed in and metering is matrix.<br>

Upto ISO 6400 at least.<br>

Isn't that a correct assumption?</p>

 

<p>Just searched the forum and didnt find this issue discussed.<br>

What I am finding is my D700 overexposes a bit at hier ISOs. More so at ISOs greater than 800. I know there is a bit of a loss in the dynamic range but some seem a bit too much. It is a new D700.<br>

From what I understand, The pictures at should look somewhat similar in exposure as you increase the ISO. For convenience sake, Lets take the apperture or shutter priority mode and 3D Matrix metering. Colors may change slightly.<br>

Is this an incorrect understanding? Do I need to watchout for something else or adjust some setting apart from this? Does the camera need calibration?<br>

Indeed appreciate your thoughts on this.<br>

Thank you<br>

Arun</p>

 

<p>Nothing fixed, really. Lets say D700, because D200 sukz after 200.<br>

Broad day light, Studio/Strobes - 200<br>

Cloudy day, Action, Party, indoors - 800<br>

Available light, concerts, night shots etc. - 1600<br>

I would hate to lose the dynamic range.</p>

<p>:-)</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Lots of lovely pictures.....<br>

Taken with D200, 85mm, 1.8D, F5, 1/125sec, ISO 200.</p><div></div>

<p>It is always fun to observe these little creatures. But this time I realized what slow means. It would take 20 mins for a good pose, but the good part is, it stays. Fast as a snail....D200, 24-85 2.8-4 on the macro side, flashed. Manual exposure, 75mm, 1/250s, ISO 200.</p><div></div>

<p>Sorry!! dropped the picture....<br>

A day at the airport, D200, ISO200 Nik 24-85 f11 24mm 1/500 sec. </p><div></div>

<p>I always set my</p>

<p>High ISO Noise reduction to "Normal" <br /> Long Exposure Noise Reduction to "On"</p>

<p>on D700 and D3s. I shoot only RAW. Post process in Lightroom and sometimes in NX2.</p>

<p>My images begin to show perceptible noise from ISO 1200 onwards. These two settings seem to have a mind of their own. Because when I look at the EXIF for the raw images using Nikon View NX, sometimes they are shown OFF and OFF, sometimes NORMAL and OFF, respectively. It doesn't seem to correspond with the camera settings. They confuse me always. Please correct me if I am wrong, as I understand these settings do apply to the RAW Images and are carried as meta-tag data. <br /> My firmware version is 1.02. Is there a way to make these settings correspond with the camera?</p>

<p>I would indeed appreciate your insight into this. <br /> Thank you!! <br /> Arun</p>

<p>No, you cant compare the two shots......sharpness-wise. A close-up and a distant. Distance also has an effect on sharpness, verymuch like a human eye. The near focus and the far. <br>

A like shot, with the same lens and lighting, Similar object may help judge a lot better. I think D7000 is a very good camera...with excellent IQ...</p>

<p>You think these cameras are using an in camera noise reduction software? And the image right out of the sensor may be different? I always wondered about this. <br>

Anyone has an idea? </p>

<p>D4?? D800? Where.....where.......where is it? I placed my order on the 12th of Feb, and the B&H was very sympathetic towards me when I wondered about my chance. Hope I will get one by fall......<br>

;-)</p>

<p>This was a pet Macaw, a very noisy fella. Watching him sunning himself and preening his colorful feathers triggered a reflex action in me to get my weapons. And shot him......D90, 105mm micro AF-D, 1/640, f8, ISO 200. I dunno why, I always loved the AF-D version is far better than the AF-S version. </p><div></div>

<p><em>'possibly requiring tripods all the time?'</em><br>

Why do you think so? I was thinking the other way around....</p>

<p>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.<br /> 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?<br /> :-D</p>

<p>I use both lenses extensively (50 1.8G & 85 1.8D). 50 AF-S 1.8G is really good. Beyond f5.6, it is tack sharp. Fairly good bokeh too, but cant match 85 1.8. 50G is almost as good as 85 1.8D. But they have their purposes. I would definitely own both. But if I have to choose, it is very difficult one. I will go for the 50 1.8G. Lot more versatile, you can crop always.... Very sharp and lovely rendering. Great price performance ratio.</p>

<p>To get started with? Anything will do.... :-) Even a point and shoot. But when you are talking about f3.....the best cheapo prime lens available is 50 1.8 AF-D. Real good lens. 35 f2 is not bad at all, if you want a little wider. 85 f1.8 AF-D....excellent for portraits. For F3 I will choose these primes. But if you are looking for a zoom to cover all these and also be a cheapo, then 24-85 f2.8-4 is the one to go for. But this zoom cant beat the primes I mentioned. But pretty close.<br>

More that one camera baby? body? May not be for the starters......but eventually. When you get addicted to the game. If you go for primes, sure......a spare body would help.</p>

<p>Good luck with it, Jay!!</p>

<p>Honestly? I would take both of them. The new 50 1.8 AF-S is a bit better than the AF-D. Costs around $200. I really like the 85 1.8 (as a cheaper alternative for 85 1.4. Costing $500?) for fashion. Now I wouldn't be bothered about the bokeh so much because the shoot is indoors I am presuming, a studio with a barrage of backgrounds and light sources etc.Ramp is a slightly different ball game where bokeh may come to play.</p>

<p>Now it is important to know that these two are distinctly different purpose focal lengths. 85 gives you a bit of a distance from the subject and hence movement space. 50 is a lot closer and a standard human eye perspective.</p>

<p>Both are nice lenses to have. 85 mm is a lot sharper than 50 1.8.<br>

:-)</p>

<p>I used 24-85 2.8-4 for sevral years now for several types of photography. It is a great lens for most appertures under 75mm. But I would always use over f4 or 5.6. After 75mm it is a bit soft. f8 - f12 is the sweet spot. It is sharp, great colors and is a wonderful lens. 24 - 45mm has been all round wonderful.<br>

I also use the 24-70 2.8. It is just unfair to compare the two. Ha! Ha! AF-S makes it superfast focus. This has the magic glass also or the ED elements which really makes a difference. Truly pro, this is a fantastic lens. So there is a separation between the two lenses.<br>

Honestly, I wouldnt have bought 24-70 2.8 if a job didnt pay for it. But having it, is special. Interestingly I never sold away my 24-85. I still use it widely. And it keeps giving me surprisingly pretty results.</p>

<p>If you are particular about Nikon glass, 80-200 is the clear winner in terms of price/performance ratio. Anything below 175mm, is tack sharp through most aperture range. A great lens with a great bokeh. Slightly soft at 200mm. below f8 and above f11. Definitely much better than the 80-400 which is slower and a bit heavier too. But 80-400 has great optical quality too. 80-200 used to be many a professional's choice a few years ago before 70-200. :-)</p>

<p>Remco, After several years in technology industry, one of my small learning is<br>

specification is just an acceptance criteria but is no measure of the quality in an absolute sense.<br>

Quality is the product of design, materials, workmanship, assembly etc. It should fall within the acceptable limits (spec) of divergence, or flaring or sharpness etc. But that may not make it professional grade. Hence the famous debate about the lens samples or consumer/prosumer/professional grade equipment. <br>

I would love to buy a 'Made in China' Nikon 70-200 VRII or a 24mm 1.8 or a 24-70 2.8.<br>

;-)</p>