Comments on: Possible Nikon D400 spy shot

By: David Johnson

David Johnson — Sat, 11 Apr 2009 00:28:36 +0000

The reason for ALL this speculation is quite simple. The Nikon D90 and D300s are really GREAT cameras. When the Nikon D400 comes out in DX (not FX for certain) it will be a GREAT TOOL. Many of us who have shot pro for years realize what digital DX has done for us. I shoot a wide variety of subjects none for ego…..I shot 8×10 and big panoramic film cameras for years and lucky for me…….I realized the 35mms I METERED with often stole the best shots of the day. High end gear WILL NOT by necessarily make better photos. But we are smart to pay attention to what new gear is coming out IF it has a practical edge. The D300 does. The D200 is still producing nice work. We just think the D400 will be worth the time waitib for it and money spent when it finally becomes available. Those who believe photos help them enjoy life more…..are not wasting our time eagerly awaiting the new releases. Look at Canon’s Mark II D5. That is a nice tool that should last many years. Simply put Nikon WILL introduce the D400pretty soon. So there truly is AMPLE reason to wonder, when? ARE THE prototypes being tested right now? My guess is YES. So this photo on your post does have interest! Even if it is not really a test mule. Still interesting!

By: Jacob

Jacob — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 14:50:49 +0000

Your comment was unnecessary and rude. FYI, the photographer that took this photograph has been in the industry for over 30 years. To his credit he’s directed and has shot advertisements for some of the largest corporations in the world. He’s taught photography at a university in Korea, and continues to teach in the Korean community in the States. Just because he takes a snapshot of some random person on the street, and his apprentice decides to post it on the web, doesn’t make him an amateur. The photo was posted as a POSSIBLE sighting, if people want to imagine things, then let them. I think it’s you who needs to grow up, and stop taking matters so seriously. I feel sorry for you, such a bitter cynic with illogical hate for something that shouldn’t really affect your life.

By: James Kettless

James Kettless — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 11:25:17 +0000

Anyone who has taken a self-portrait with a Nikon D300, SB-900, and 18mm-135mm DX lens will recognise this as the kit in the photo. I can’t believe this even sparked such debate. All points about the crome ring, and tape placement are not taking into account the angle the shot was taken from, ie slightly above, with sunlight reflecting off the ring. Get a D300. Get an SB-900. Get an 18mm-135mm DX lens. Get a friend to pose in the same lighting conditions. You will see that this is just a pic of a security-conscious amateur, taken by another amateur, and posted by a paranoid conspiracy theorist. Grow up.

By: Alex

Alex — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 15:20:14 +0000

Hmm… Look closely at the place where the “D300″ is written in the D300 product shot. It’s pretty high up. In the actual photographs, I don’t see any gaffer tape in that same area. It looks like there’s some gaffer tape to the left of the PC sync port, but that’s definitely not where the logo is on the D300. The logo is higher up than the PC sync port. I think maybe Nikon decided not to paint D400 on these testing models, and the gaffer tape to the left of the sync port is actually covering up a microphone.

By: EZEd

EZEd — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 13:59:09 +0000

The last time I taped a camera was during riots… an all black camera is a wonderful thing at night…

So, the real question is, why didn’t the shooter walk up and as the question… what are you shooting with?

By: Rory

Rory — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 11:50:34 +0000

There is one *very* good reason to tape your logos that no one else has mentioned yet: Re-Sale.

I tape all the text and chrome on my lenses and bodies if possible, as when it comes time for resale, off comes the tape, an suddenly my gear looks pretty fresh, even after lots of travel use.

And I must say, anytime I use a tapped body in public, someone comes up to me assuming I’m using a film SLR body! I’m guessing that thieves prolly get a similar impression.

By: Jason

Jason — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 08:08:05 +0000

Just getting back to the matter in hand for a moment . . .

Does anyone else thing that Red Gloves Lady brought some pretty odd gear with her to cover the new president’s inauguration? Wouldn’t you have packed your telephotos, and not bother with the flash? What’s she taking pictures of?

By: martin

martin — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 01:57:54 +0000

Please, I’m really hoping this few last comments are all jokes… otherwise it REALLY makes me scared

I do put a little bit of proudness into being a nikon owner (I know it’s silly and no, im not a retardedfanboy) So i hope all these unimaginably stupid comments are a joke.

By: [NR] admin

[NR] admin — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 01:15:00 +0000

Greg, I will remember your comment – we will revisit it in few weeks

By: MB

MB — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 20:05:11 +0000

Some EXIF data, that is otherwise always present unless it has been altered by some programs, is missing from the image. Nikon software does note remove that data. Adobe software does not also. Some other programs do discard that data. Intentionally or not the data has been altered.
Camera on the image has D300 body, bitten a little and missing plastic ring from the control knob, but otherwise unmodified D300 body. No difference whatsoever.
There is nothing intriguing really, unless you dream of redheaded girls in black leather disguise.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 18:18:20 +0000

maybe its the fuji s6 ??

By: greg

greg — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 18:10:44 +0000

I think this is person is Mikal from Chase Jarvis photography. He gives his staff new cameras to try (search the D90 chase jarvis) on youtube. If this is the case, she wouldn’t be a pro. I am willing to bet there will be another youtube video about the DXXX in 6 weeks after this model has been released.

By: JC

JC — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 15:18:58 +0000

Or perhaps you should find the edge of a bridge and then keep going forward… I think the writer was merely replying again to a point already expressed about three times in postings. For the record I completely agree with the points made.

By: Daf

Daf — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 10:00:20 +0000

I think the fingertips could be explained by using her knee to steady the camera – she seems to need to extend her fingers to get the viewfinder up to eye level.

Minor stuff really though.

By: Eton Eritas

Eton Eritas — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 05:23:52 +0000

I’d guess boredom has a lot to do with it…

By: Ultimate Authority

Ultimate Authority — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 05:21:32 +0000

“Deja vu all over again,” as the joke goes… this rant isn’t any funnier than it was the first time it was spewed farther up the thread.

Can someone page Billy Goat Gruff to come and butt this troll off the bridge?

By: Indisputable Truth

Indisputable Truth — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 05:17:31 +0000

(sigh) Someone’s daddy needs to change his screen-locker password…

By: Ranger 9

Ranger 9 — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 05:10:52 +0000

Thanks for clarifying that if I DON’T have the logos on my cameras taped over, I’m not “grounded,” that my manhood is small, and that I look like a t****r. (Tailor? Toiler? Taster? Tanner?)

Never mind that I don’t live in NY or London and seldom photograph in public. I guess I’d better get out a roll of tape and start gomming up my equipment. Or should I just shove the tape down the front of my pants to create a bigger bulge?

Sheesh. I’m starting to feel about professional photographers the same way Clarkson feels about letting The Stig talk.

By: Ernst

Ernst — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 04:22:47 +0000

The camera in the photo is indistinguishable from a D300 with gaffer tape over the Nikon logo and model number. Why are we talking about this?

By: DS

DS — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 03:13:54 +0000

No one from Nikon in possession of any new model SLR yet alone a D400 or unreleased SLR of any sort would shoot with an SB800, this model was discontinued which is rare for Nikon to discontinue anything. Anyone that works for Nikon or was special enough to have an early model SLR in their hands would never shoot it combined with an SB800 which was not designed to work with a new SLR in the same way an SB900 is, only SB900 will be seen combined with a new model SLR. This image provides no insight into future products.