daniel_smithson

<p>The law requires consumers to be educated, Nikon is COMPLETELY REFUSING TO TELL PEOPLE WHO MADE THE MOST IMPORTANT PART OF THE D7200, THIS IS ILLEGAL. Thus Nikon can change this sensor at will, or in fact be testing more than one sensor in this camera, which equates to the consumer being used as a testing source, as Nikon will eventually find out which sensors will fail first. This is not legal in the USA. </p> <p>It's not rocket science. </p>

<p>No my conclusion that VR is useless, is based upon the fact that the literature about VR and what is being said here, is that VR does not help with moving subjects, and that if this is the case, that the VR should be turned off. Thus VR is useless to wildlife photographers who have to expect that their subject will run or fly away, or be involved in a chase that they want to capture on camera. Paying double for a lens, then turning off the feature that you paid double to get on the lens is knucking futz. Furthermore as I said, while you are fumbling for the off switch, the bald eagle is flying out of range. This is a fact, as you can see in this useless 400mm image captured with a Nikon 80-400mm lens. <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/136279335@N04/22642432038/in/dateposted-public/">https://www.flickr.com/photos/136279335@N04/22642432038/in/dateposted-public/</a> My photos just confirm what you are saying, which is that VR can not be used for high speed photography which why it is useless to me, and to all others who shoot similar things to me. </p>

<p>It is not irrelevant who makes the sensor, as if the sensor is made by Sony, a new prospective buyer who has not bought Nikon yet, could easily opt to buy Sony instead, as it appears that Sony is now the world leader in image sensors. <a href="http://www.wired.com/2015/06/sonys-new-sensors-exciting-new-cameras/">http://www.wired.com/2015/06/sonys-new-sensors-exciting-new-cameras/</a> <a href="http://www.sony.com/electronics/cameras">http://www.sony.com/electronics/cameras</a><br> I build computers, so the parts are important to me, not to all perhaps, some people just push the button, however I connect the button to the motherboard. knowledge matters, and an informed consumer is a good consumer.</p>

<p>Barry, thanks you are correct of course, shutter speed is the best way to obtain a clear image of a moving subject. That said it is being said that VR can not be used over 1/500th of a second, thus you can not get a clear image from a VR lens of a moving subject, unless you turn off the VR, which means it is not needed, and should not be there if your targets move</p>

<p>Here is a photo I took out of my files, that does show that my 80-400 worked fine with my D80. <a href=" The only difference is the camera. </p>

<p>I can not bring my car into the woods where the animals are, I typically hike 5 to 10 miles per day. At any rate taking this part on and off every day, will wear out the connectors, it's a bad design. as for car charging, if there was a power port on the camera, you could charge that as well while you drove. Like I can do with my Sony Camcorder.</p>

<p>There is no website that explains what sensor is in the D7200, I personally contacted Nikon and they will not say what this sensor is. So until a website or competitor rips this camera apart and looks for identifying marks or serial numbers on the sensor, and divulges this information, no web site has any info on this part. Thus no consumer can make an educated decision, that is based upon the lack of information. This is clear.</p>

<p>I said that I did the tuning already, last night in my bedroom. I shot pics at plus 5 10 15 and 20, then at minus 5 10 15 and 20. NX view 2 confirmed those settings and every picture looked the same, no difference. I had to use flash of course, logically this can not be done, but no where is that said. Here is a test pic from the other day, the camera was tripod mounted and I used a slow landscape setting, and the maple leaves are just blurry. <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/136279335@N04/22660040709/in/dateposted-public/">https://www.flickr.com/photos/136279335@N04/22660040709/in/dateposted-public/</a><br> Does that pass any image test? Seriously I wish the lens were broken, but everything seems to be working, except for clear images.<br /> </p>

<p>Links and message displayed below. <a href=" <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/136279335@N04/22607791828/in/photostream/lightbox/">https://www.flickr.com/photos/136279335@N04/22607791828/in/photostream/lightbox/</a><br /> Just to be positive for a change, VR is needed for nothing in photography. Except doubling profits to corporations.<br /> <br /> PS. I just bought a Nikon 50mm1.4G, no VR, the lens is stunning as the above photos detail.............</p> <p> </p>

<p>There you go again (to quote Reagan) every time someone has an important photo to take, they have to turn off the VR. I hate to be redundant, but if you had to turn off your CPU or hard drive to use your computer, there would be a problem. The fact is that anything you need to turn off in order before you take a photo with a camera lens, should not be there in the first place. And here is what makes it worse than impossible, while you are looking for the switch and turning it off, the shot just left town. You need to be ready when the shot happens, not turning stuff off, in order for the camera to work. It's a con.</p> <p> </p>

<p>The easy design change would be to incorporate a power port on the camera, like my Sony camcorder has, then the grip could be installed on the camera and never removed, unless the battery fails.<br> It's not rocket science.</p>

<p>The 200-500 has VR, NOT VR11, my lens has VR. The fact that Nikon is still selling VR after the advent of VR11, is inconceivable. Then again they are still selling a 16mp camera for $6,000.00, which is really sad.</p> <p>Data on the 200-500 <a href="http://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/camera-lenses/af-s-nikkor-200-500mm-f%252f5.6e-ed-vr.html">http://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/camera-lenses/af-s-nikkor-200-500mm-f%252f5.6e-ed-vr.html</a> </p> <p>And a 16mp junk for $6,000.00 <a href="http://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/dslr-cameras/d4s.html">http://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/dslr-cameras/d4s.html</a> <br> It's illogical.</p> <p> </p>

<p>A consumer can not make an educated choice, if they do not know what sensor is in the camera. If the sensor in the D7200 is made by Sony, an educated consumer can certainly choose to buy a Sony camera based upon the information that Nikon believes that Sony sensors are the best in the world, and better than anything that they can make on their own. This is logical...</p> <p>Seriously, has anyone bought a computer without knowing what CPU was inside? Lets make that question a poll, how many people bought a computer without knowing what was inside the case......................<br> Say yes and you admit ignorance, because the case does not matter, the guts do.</p>

<p>The 200-500 has the same VR system as my 80-400 lens, it does not even boast the new VR11 as my 18-200 has. So the 200-500 is just another $1500 flushed and you actually say that it is having problems that require it being sent back to the manufacturer for repairs. Sanity alert. I can take my 80-200 and computer zoom to 500mm and probably have better clarity, though I have to spend the $1500.00 to find out.<br> Been there done that.</p>

<p>Ok, so I want a second battery in my 7100 because for some reason after updating the firmware my batteries seem to be going dead sooner, and I want the external power grip. My question is, if I want to have two batteries in the camera, do I have to take this grip off every time I use the camera to charge the main camera battery, the one under the grip, not the one in it? Because this seems to me that this would be very time consuming, or is there a way to charge this battery without removing the grip?</p>

<p>The VR option is marketed to require less technique, as it enables hand holding according to the sales pitch. My camera settings are engineered by Nikon, not chosen by me, that said if they do not work, Nikon is to blame. People with this lens just believe that the other guy who takes stunning photos is a better photographer than they are, when in reality all that matters is that the lens that they have should work. Thus the photos of others are meaningless, that is like saying the other guys new car ran well, so your new car has no guarantee of fitness for purpose.</p>

<p>Competitors lenses are not a viable option, as they can not keep up with changes made to new Nikon cameras. Sure they may operate well at first use, but Nikon will deliberately make modifications to new cameras that favor their own lenses. The fact that you say and I quote<br> " Ok. We get that you're not happy with the performance of your old, discontinued 80-400, which is a lens that many of us were asking to be replaced before Nikon actually did it."<br> Is actually your saying that you agree with me that the lens is krappola, and should have been marketed as fertilizer for tomatoes. So you are agreeing with me, for which I actually thank you.</p>

<p>The law speaks for itself. <a href="http://definitions.uslegal.com/c/consumer-bill-of-rights/">http://definitions.uslegal.com/c/consumer-bill-of-rights/</a> If Nikon refuses to disclose what the main sensor is in the D7200, they are in violation of American right to know laws. Buying a camera without knowing who made the main part, is like buying a new car, without knowing if the engine was made by that same car manufacturer, this is the clearest violation that there can be. Nikon told me straight out, that I as a buyer have NO RIGHT TO KNOW WHAT SENSOR IS IN THE D7200. Thus they could change the sensor at any time after the first several thousand cameras are produced to a lesser quality part, and no one would know, this is bait and switch and is illegal in the USA, disagree if you choose, but that does not make the situation any less illegal in the USA.</p>

<p>My technique produces stunning shots, none of which has ever been taken with the 80-400 lemon. This lens works just good enough to pass as working, like Rockwell says if you shoot sports or wildlife, it's useless and it is. As for my technique, here is some of it, remembering that none of these photos was taken with a handheld 80-400 VR dud.............. <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/136279335@N04/">https://www.flickr.com/photos/136279335@N04/</a> </p>

<p>Understood, but Nikon markets these lenses as being able to take photos in the most difficult conditions and produce great photos. I know that none of us has to buy an expensive digital camera, but none of us had to buy a VW diesel either, and if the company marketing the product is clearly lying to consumers they should be held liable. VR just does not do what it claims, never did, it might someday, but this lens was never able to be handheld at any setting with the VR on, and produce world class images. Fast forward to now, and Nikon refuses to tell consumers what processor is in the D7200, which makes comparison shopping impossible, which is a violation of U.S. consumer protection laws, as an educated consumer might well opt to buy a Sony camera if the main part in a Nikon camera is made by Sony. <a href="http://definitions.uslegal.com/c/consumer-bill-of-rights/">http://definitions.uslegal.com/c/consumer-bill-of-rights/</a> <br> My point is proven by my 50mm1.4G which is taking stunning photos right out of the box, with no three weeks of tuning and test pictures krappola. <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/136279335@N04/22607791828/in/dateposted-public/">https://www.flickr.com/photos/136279335@N04/22607791828/in/dateposted-public/</a> </p>

<p>When the telephone transformer flaps it's wings and flies away, please take some more test pictures. </p>

<p>I did not misquote Rockwell, the quote was and still is, "IS and VR work great for subjects that hold still, which is most of what I photograph. VR doesn't do anything for subjects that are moving, like sports and kids."<br> That is the quote, and it is correct, so if one is going to photograph Eagles and Ospreys diving for fish, VR is useless and will result in a missed shot.<br> It's just that simple, these types of shots begin at 1/1000 and go as high as color saturation will allow. So if VR can not be used at over 1/500, then leave it at home, or photograph non moving telephone pole mounted transformers, as if that is exciting.<br> Sheesh, there is no argument here, VR is useless, as it can not be used when needed.<br> The end.......................</p>

<p>Ok I did test tuned shots at plus 5 10 15 and 20, then minus 5 10 15 and 20. Did this in my bedroom with the built in flash at 400mm on some books, and all the photos look equal. I viewed the data in NX2, and it was as I said, but all books look equal. WTF, how can that be?</p>

<p>I agree that the polarizer has use, certainly for cutting glare on water or for highlighting clouds. The problem is that you can not use a hood and the polarizer needs to be adjusted for every situation, so one must remove the hood and adjust. This can be done for landscapes but not for anything that requires any amount of shooting speed.</p>

<p>What is scene capture mode normal? I typically use sport or landscape, I might have used the green setting for this shot that came out very nice <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/136279335@N04/23012965225/in/dateposted-public/">https://www.flickr.com/photos/136279335@N04/23012965225/in/dateposted-public/</a> I edited this shot to this <a href=" The thing is that I was at a 210mm zoom, I wanted 400 but had a mountain at my back. So my lens can take a useable photo after all, but I still miss every shot at 400............WTF times 10<br> Also what Nikon or other software should I be using to do the initial view of my photos, where I can get all the photo data with the photo at he same time such as camera, lens, and all the exposure and scene program data</p>