Comments on: New entry level Nikon DSLR and D90 refresh expected, no word on D700 replacement

By: Micah

Micah — Mon, 24 May 2010 03:25:07 +0000

“A flat bed scanner gives a quality that is nowhere near what a dedicated film scanner can give.”

On what information do you base this opinion?

None of the Coolscans get more usable information–all the personal line CCD units give similar results, given they have the same resolution imager (you do realize that all the Nikons are only 4000dpi, right? The Minolta 5400 is actually 5400, but in the end I never saw more detail in scans when I tested them side by side). Of course if 4870 unit that is out of focus will give inferior results. I’ve tested my rig for optimal focus and use glass to flatten my negatives. The Nikon and Minolta and Canon units are still line CCDs. They just pass the film over the sensor instead of vice versa. No technical advantage and no discernible difference in results.

Output from my 4870 are around 27 mp native at 4800dpi. But, much like shooting at the top ISO settings of a sensor, grain/dye bloom limits the image detail film is capable of capturing.

I HAVE very good optics and know how to use them. I can show you images sharp enough to make your eyes bleed. I’m talking reasonable middle of the road apertures which get the best resolution, like f4 to f8.

By: Micah

Micah — Mon, 24 May 2010 02:42:43 +0000

Yes, with a true drum scanner you will see a difference. You’ll be able to see grain structure more accurately. That doesn’t give you any more detail in your image. I’m speaking from experience. Don’t assume you know unless you’ve tried it. Most of the people who argue about the virtues of film have an emotional attachment that goes beyond the rationality of any test or argument.

4×5′s do have more detail than a D3x shot when shot properly. However, if exposure is off at all or if you don’t filter for color, etc…there’s no room for error with film. If you go about removing the grain from film scans, you end up at only slightly more image detail than a D3x shot. More…but not a lot more. It’s just not worth the time.

By: Greenwood_Geoff

Greenwood_Geoff — Mon, 17 May 2010 17:33:06 +0000

Depending on price point I am with you. I do not want the bulk of the D3 body type. If I want a boost in FSP or battery life I can add the grip for those occasions.

By: Greenwood_Geoff

Greenwood_Geoff — Mon, 17 May 2010 17:31:15 +0000

Or stockpiles are so low they cannot get them. The AAFES (sells to military) pulled the D700 from the lineup a while ago. The reason is .. they get them DIRECTLY from Nikon.

Nikon is just likely running the last contractual batches of the D700 before they put out the replacement.

By: Greenwood_Geoff

Greenwood_Geoff — Mon, 17 May 2010 15:59:13 +0000

Agreed. Also in my case I CAN afford a d700 and just want more MP in THAT SIZE body. I do not want to lug around the extra size of a D3 all the time.

By: Joe J

Joe J — Mon, 17 May 2010 03:21:00 +0000

Yes FT, the moment the updated version of the D700 comes out, all photos taken with the D700 will be obsolete, and useless.
Note “outdated” is on the opposite side of the spectrum of “updated.” Think about it.
Buying a new camera body is a large investment for most people- whether you are a shoestring budget hobbyist or a six-figure income pro. Most normal people aren’t rich hobbyists who don’t care about blowing 3 G’s on a camera and then two months down the road their investment in a new tool just dropped 30%, and the updated version is far superior in multiple aspects, including video capabilities.
Did I say the D700 will suddenly no longer be a truly amazing camera once it’s outdated? I don’t believe so. I obviously was talking from a common-sense monetary standpoint.
Sounds like someone else is making silly statements by mis interpretation and misunderstanding…

By: Joe J

Joe J — Mon, 17 May 2010 03:02:18 +0000

1. I’m wasn’t just talking about Nikon DSLR’s- have you ever heard of something called Medium Format camera bodies? I would hope so, if you think your so knowledgable. Not to mention the Canon 1 D Mark I SLR syncs at 1/500th. Know your facts first.
2. You would only lose flash power as you increase shutter speed if the flash duration is longer. If a camera can sync at the same speed as the t-1 (not t-.5) duration, you still have full power; it’s simple math. Once again, I’m not talking about Nikon DSLR’s and all the nonsense you are spouting off in your reply, but all cameras in general.
3. You don’t get a black bar at 1/500 on Hasselblad 500 or H series cameras (H series sync up to 1/800), nor do you get any kind of back bar on Sinar Hy6 or Rollei 6008 at the 1/1000 flash sync. Why? Because they are designed to work at that speed. And a feature that is completely useful to anyone who actually uses strobes during mid-day sunlight.
Now remember your original quote-
“high speed sync is not that useful because you lose a stop of power each time you increase your shutter speed.”

Real “high speed sync” is found in the bodies mentioned, not in your Nikon User Manual. Learn the true definition of the term first, not one made up by two camera companies to sell more of their own brand flashes.
Now, instead of quoting people whom you don’t even know what they are saying, maybe you should think twice before posting and then you realize you know nothing!
Have a good day.

By: enesunkie

enesunkie — Mon, 17 May 2010 02:55:36 +0000

Don’t all the Nikons (and Canons) stop working on 12/12/12 ?

By: [NR] admin

[NR] admin — Sun, 16 May 2010 19:49:54 +0000

We have covered that in the past – there were several D400 books, the publishers are just “guessing’.

By: Erick

Erick — Sun, 16 May 2010 14:57:58 +0000

I don’t know if this is related or if you have seen it but there is a Nikon D400 book on Amazon Germany:

http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.de%2FProfibuch-Nikon-D400%2Fdp%2F364560037X%2Fref%3Dsr_1_1%3Fie%3DUTF8%26s%3Dbooks%26qid%3D1274021639%26sr%3D8-1&sl=de&tl=en

By: Fried Toast

Fried Toast — Sun, 16 May 2010 12:33:15 +0000

I understood it. And I’m sure many people here understood it. But there might be a few n00bies running around that might get the though in their head that one *has* to upgrade their camera every time a new model comes out. And it was for those people that my sarcastic response called out Joe’s silly statement. As well, “outdated” isn’t generally a financial term (therefore easy to confuse those that *don’t* know).

By: Mauricio

Mauricio — Sat, 15 May 2010 17:53:57 +0000

I am sure you understand they are talking about financial value.

By: july

july — Sat, 15 May 2010 15:15:31 +0000

could you specifiy what is missing in the 5d mark II beside focusing points? you said you get paid same money disregardless pixel size. I was talking about the stock photography especially in the istock photo which is biggest stock agency in the world. Get reserch yourself. If you don’t know very well in pro area, please do not pretend.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 15 May 2010 14:13:29 +0000

I could not justify buying a D3s. Plus I’m not a pro nor do i wish to appear like a pro with a D3s. I would pre-order a D700s or replacement in a nanosecond.

By: Canon Fanboism

Canon Fanboism — Sat, 15 May 2010 13:24:55 +0000

Canon 5d Mark II SUCKS!!!!!!!!!!

By: kevin

kevin — Sat, 15 May 2010 13:21:24 +0000

How is $100 not cheap in terms of camera equipment for something that you own permanently?

By: kevin

kevin — Sat, 15 May 2010 13:20:17 +0000

Actually as a photographer you are paid the same for any picture you take regardless of the megapixels in the image. I sell my 12mp landscape shots for the same I sell the 24mp shots for and NOBODY can tell the difference between which is 12mp and which is 24mp.

The D700 has also been sold out for quite some time now so get your information straight. It’s still a better camera than the 5D Mark II ever will be. The video feature on the 5D Mark II really isn’t as good as what people make it out to be either. The 1D Mark IV video on the other hand is very nice.

I’ve owned a 5D Mark II and it wasn’t as good as my 1Ds Mark III. The only reason a so-called pro would use the camera is because it has 21mp and it’s cheap. It lacks EVERYTHING else you would demand in a professional level body.

By: The invisible man

The invisible man — Sat, 15 May 2010 13:05:37 +0000

Look very interresting (but not very cheap).
Thank you !
(the visible woman’s husband)

By: LGO

LGO — Sat, 15 May 2010 08:42:54 +0000

I look at it differently.

Re Video

D300s required some work to make it video-capable. The D3s is already video-capable and requires less work to adapt it to a new D700s than adapting the current D700 and making it video-capable. Because of this, I expect Nikon to either keep the D700 as it is or to release a successor using the D3s sensor.

Re D700s

If Nikon is selling a lot of D3s, imagine how much more it will be able to sell if a D700s is released. Most people who will buy a D700s will not buy a D3s.

The D300s is not much changed from the D300. A D700s incorporating the sensor from the D3s will be a much improved D700s. This D700s model will then hold then ground for this camera-body type when Nikon introduces the D4. Some time later, completely new D800 based on the D4 will replace the D700s.

Re D90 replacement

I agree that an improved replacement on the D90 will sell well. Yet so would a D700s. Nikon need not just concentrate on one if it can develop both. I think this is well within Nikon’s capabilities.

By: july

july — Sat, 15 May 2010 07:50:25 +0000

maybe you missed something in here. what is the great camera about? why do you have to own a super dslr body. it because that you wanted take some of the best images possible against your technical capability. 5d mark II has a capability of higher or equal resolution plus video than any other nikon bodies out there and many 5d mark II users are actually making some serious money out of it . What am I talking about? If you put same tomato pictures in stock markets with 12 mega and 21 mega pixels, you get paid more money when customer buy higher resolution. 12 mega pixel is only very basic in that market right now. you crop the pictures, you ended up like below 10mega pixels. with 5d mark II, you get 15 mega pixel at least. I am talking about how much D700 or d3s making money in their life cycle compare to 5d mark II. that is the point. there is no perfect cameras in the world. 5d is cheap pieces of crap? i don’t know what you are reffering to. pros use it and most of them are happy. nikon could not produce something like 5d mark II. they are still struggling to compatitive on resolution matter. that’s why they are doing d700 dry out sale forever. it is a part of the reason that you have to wait another 6 months for d700 replacement. i know that they have something to replace it but when it comes to P&L, you simply cannot release the new products. if you tak that risk, many nikon dealers will not happy at all. nikon lost all the money in first quarter 2010 while canon made all of them. hey i am nikon girl. i am just saying about my husband.