http://nikonrumors.com/forum/ where there’s smoke there’s forum fire en-US Tue, 09 Mar 2010 20:09:21 +0000 http://bbpress.org/?v=1.0.2 q http://nikonrumors.com/forum/search.php http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1705#post-29088 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 15:55:57 +0000 Regulator75 29088@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/ <p>I laughed... </p> http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1704#post-29087 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 15:54:34 +0000 Regulator75 29087@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/ <p>SDHC are everywhere. What's the problem?</p> <p>I have two 16GB class 6 Verbatim SHDC cards and I've had no issues.</p> <p>Edit: Where are you located? </p> http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1651&page=3#post-29086 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 15:46:15 +0000 Graphicnatured 29086@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/ <p>It's great see all the awesome updated photos since I've been away.</p> <p>Great protest shots from the middle, Poster.</p> <p>Chris AMC, those candid shots are awesome.</p> <p>Aaron Foto, that's a fun shot.</p> <p>Nice and sharp, Regulator.</p> <p>Here's from my first try at maternity photos. My wife is now at 38 weeks with our first baby boy and it's exciting to also have some new opportunities to practice new types of photos. For this shot, I know its the over-done color over black and white, but it just seemed too fitting and symbolic in this case. I also had to be sure to explain to my wife that she's not "black and white old," and that it just an expression. Let me know what you guys think.</p> <p><a href="http://www.theartoftylerjordan.com"> <img src="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4029/4419953987_f4e83d9523_o.jpg" /> </a> </p> http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1669&page=2#post-29085 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 15:40:44 +0000 pabnj 29085@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/ <blockquote><p><cite>monty11 <a href="http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1669#post-29045">said</a>:</cite><br /> Such wannabe professionals should be charged with fraud as they give the profession a bad name.</p> </blockquote> <p>I agree Monty, she obviously fooled someone into being a pro, and the truth she was not even close. She was just someone with a better than P&amp;S camera who thought she took really good pictures, and could make money at it. There are those people who know nothing of shooting, and try and make a buck. I am glad the judge saw her incompetence.</p> <p>As for your question regarding wedding costs, $1,300 is on the low side, and $5,000 to $10,000 is more of the norm for the North East. In other areas of the US, costs are more reasonable. On the high end I know of a photographer in North Jersey who starts at about $20,000 and goes up to the $40,000 area. This really is the upper end, and no he does not show-up at a wedding with an XTi with a kit lens. </p> http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1705#post-29084 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 15:37:05 +0000 JorPet 29084@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/ <p>Why is he talking out of his nose?!? :-P </p> http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1651&page=3#post-29083 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 15:31:13 +0000 PB PM 29083@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/ <p><a href="http://robdphotos.smugmug.com/Photography/Bird-Photography/7921214_wYZCX#806076761_m2mpt-A-LB"><img src="http://robdphotos.smugmug.com/Photography/Bird-Photography/RDB3899/806076761_m2mpt-L.jpg" /></a> </p> http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1704#post-29082 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 15:30:52 +0000 NSXType-R 29082@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/ <p>Slightly off topic, but why do some photographers use Lexar CF cards? Are they really that much better? </p> http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1705#post-29080 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 15:23:42 +0000 pabnj 29080@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/ <p>ROFL, Now that is comedy. </p> http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1705#post-29079 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 15:21:25 +0000 Willis 29079@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/ <p>So I got this cryptic card in the mail today... Not sure if its oficially from Nikon or not.</p> <p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/8980397@N05/4420678846/" title="New Nikon Marketing Blitz? by TCWillis79, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4038/4420678846_d2150d98d5_o.jpg" alt="New Nikon Marketing Blitz?" /></a></p> <p>Any thoughts? </p> http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1696#post-29078 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 15:18:55 +0000 Willis 29078@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/ <p>My girlfriend called it "Dances with wolves in space with a happy ending".</p> <p>So there's that. </p> http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1669&page=2#post-29077 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 15:10:37 +0000 smarterchild 29077@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/ <p>Niko- You are right again, it does give the industry a bad name. </p> <p>The Expansion of Digital cameras is the blame for all these "professional" photographers running around. </p> http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1697#post-29076 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 15:03:03 +0000 JorPet 29076@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/ <p>I am waiting...</p> <p>Not for the next DSLR, but for the D700 I ordered. I thought about waiting, but do want to upgrade my current DX camera and the concern that the D700 upgrade will come out at a street price of $1,000 higher than the current D700 made me decide to pull the trigger now.</p> <p>As for "pre-announcements" of upcoming possible products, that falls in line with Microsoft's FUD campaigns of the last 20 years. Spread rumors, leaks and press releases stating that you are coming out with a game changer "very soon". That locks up those who don't know what they really want/need while the company tries to figure out what they are really going to do.</p> <p>I prefer to look at the current market and see if a product fits my current needs. If not, then wait until one does, if there is something that fits then get it. Don't sit around navel gazing trying to determine of the bis version will have something you didn't even know you needed.</p> <p>So my new camera made it to Des Moines, IA this morning...</p> <p>I am waiting. </p> http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1696#post-29075 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 14:54:45 +0000 jbl 29075@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/ <p>I'm having an argue on another forum (which I can't link too because it's private and all) but I'd like to copy paste some parts of it as I think it's a good discussion subject.</p> <p>My first post, it started when someone claimed it was art.</p> <p>girlnothing wrote:<br /> art.</p> <p>WHAT? how can you call "art" a multi million production that was only made to make several more millions. How can anyone take you seriously after saying such thing?</p> <p>==============================</p> <p>Some Guy: </p> <p>How can you possibly know that was the prime motivation?</p> <p>==============================</p> <p><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0499549/companycredits" rel="nofollow">http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0499549/companycredits</a> </p> <p>These company NEVER EVER invested a single cent in art and they never will. (Please note that I'm not saying that this is bad, I'm neutral on the subject, any company has the right to make a product in order to get a monetary profit out of it, it's what most do and I understand why.) </p> <p>Here's a quote that I love: </p> <p>"We have no obligation to make history.<br /> We have no obligation to make art. We<br /> have no obligation to make a statement. To<br /> make money is our only objective."<br /> -- Michael Eisner, CEO, The Walt Disney Company, wrote<br /> in a memo sent during his previous position at Paramount. </p> <p><a href="http://www.pennyfarthinginvestment.com/newsletter/Derailleur2004SeptemberProxy.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.pennyfarthinginvestment.com/newsletter/Derailleur2004SeptemberProxy.pdf</a> </p> <p>The Big Six (majors) all think alike, no need to be a genius to see what's going on there.</p> <p>==============================</p> <p>BadOranges: </p> <p>Did Michael Eisner foot the bill for this production ? Avatar was a huge endeavour and I don't understand how you can't see some artistic merits. Was it made to make money ? Well it certainly wasn't made to loose money. They probably could of cut corners but they didn't. They took a big risk and it paid off. As a cohesive art piece , ya not much there but the visuals are absolutely stunning. Wouldn't you at least call that an artistic breakthru?</p> <p>==============================</p> <p>BadOranges wrote:<br /> Did Michael Eisner foot the bill for this production?</p> <p>No, my point is that the Big Six all have a common goal, Fox acts exactly like disney would.<br /> BadOranges wrote:<br /> Avatar was a huge endeavour and I don't understand how you can't see some artistic merits.</p> <p>Because there's none.<br /> BadOranges wrote:<br /> Was it made to make money ? Well it certainly wasn't made to loose money.</p> <p>You're right, it was made to make money, lots of money. Is it a bad thing? No.</p> <p>BadOranges wrote:<br /> They probably could of cut corners but they didn't. They took a big risk and it paid off.</p> <p>They took no risk at all. Hollywood doesn't take risks that are this big, when you hire James Cameron, you are not taking a risk, you're investing money. When Hollywood take a risk, you don't even hear about it unless it's a success... when they fail, they lose a little money but they act like poker players, they risk when the odds are in their favor... on smaller budget releases that often end up as "straight to dvd" features.</p> <p>BadOranges wrote:<br /> As a cohesive art piece , ya not much there but the visuals are absolutely stunning. Wouldn't you at least call that an artistic breakthru?</p> <p>Seeing a space shuttle leaving earth for the first time was absolutely stunning.<br /> Was it an artistic breakthrough?<br /> No, it was not. </p> <p>I'd like to add that I wouldn't qualify Avatar as "absolutely stunning" anyway... but even if it was, it wouldn't be a piece of art. </p> <p>==============================</p> <p>BadOranges:</p> <p>I didn't ask any questions that weren't rhetorical. So I suppose the music playing isn't art. I suppose the pictures however the fuck they did them isn't art. You might argue that it is bad art but it is none the less art. The concept isn't that hard to grasp. Just like your ranting is idiotic, it is still an opinion. The fact that it is a lousy one doesn't make it any less of an opinion. </p> <p>I am not defending the movie. It sucked. But sucky art is still art.</p> <p>==============================</p> <p>Establishing a definition of art is not an easy task indeed but it has nothing to do with your attempts to throw personal attacks at me, that was completely inappropriate. </p> <p>While I think Avatar was not stunning, I never said Avatar was "sucky" I did not really like it, but it's definitely not "sucky". Avatar is just another Hollywood product: high production value, well timed story telling (time it, you'll see, most Hollywoodian movies are sooooo well made on this aspect, everything fits perfectly in the schedule that is the total length of the event) They also shine when it comes to organisation... Coordinating all these people into a single project, that's another strength of Hollywoodian productions. </p> <p>There are art pieces where the initial motivation of the artist was to create art from the start.<br /> There are sucky art pieces where the initial motivation of the artist was to create art. </p> <p>Then, there is entertainment where the initial motivation of the company was to make a few more million dollars. </p> <p>Calling avatar "art" is like claiming that Nick Carter (yes, THAT guy) is a contemporary artist while he clearly is a tool. Bad example, but I've seen worse.. plus, I like to refer to someone who's already "has been" at 30... I think it reflects today's society very well.</p> <p>==============================</p> <p>Some random useless posts here, I won't waste my time copy pasting these.</p> <p>==============================</p> <p>Alkazar:</p> <p>Is that really how it works? </p> <p>Are you suggesting that James Cameron, the writer and director of the movie, was hired by the production company? </p> <p>Are you suggesting that the production company conceived the whole project solely for the purpose of making a profit and then hired a writer to make it a reality? </p> <p>Maybe I'm naive, but I would have thought that, as writer and director, it would be James Cameron who provided the motivation for the creation and production of Avatar, and from what I can see, he doesn't seem to be motivated by profit. Whatever we may think about the film, it appears to me that Cameron considers the Avatar story to be an important message that reflects his personal ideology of which he is passionate. </p> <p>I can imagine that all the production companies who then got involved did so purely for financial reasons but that doesn't mean the production of the film was motivated by their lust for profit.</p> <p>==============================</p> <p>ohyeah wrote:<br /> i bet you there is a market in selling avatar condoms and avatar dildos...lol<br /> Of course there is, but I think it's too small so we won't see these items.</p> <p>Alkazar wrote:</p> <p>JBLanteigne wrote:<br /> Hollywood doesn't take risks that are this big, when you hire James Cameron, you are not taking a risk,</p> <p>Is that really how it works? </p> <p>Are you suggesting that James Cameron, the writer and director of the movie, was hired by the production company? </p> <p>Are you suggesting that the production company conceived the whole project solely for the purpose of making a profit and then hired a writer to make it a reality?<br /> Most of the time, writers (or writer's agents or simple people who own the writes to stories after buying them or something) try to sell these to big studios... The big studios then hire a producer who will make sure everything goes fine with the studio's investment, that's why movies like Blade Runner were so screwed up and are so much different from the initial ideas that were in the writer's and director's mind. The producer is usually the bad guy. He's the one who thought something similar to this: hey, star wars was a sci-fi movie with Harrison Ford and it worked, let's do this, I want Harrison Ford. Producers and the studio owners are those responsible for all the cheesiness you find in most of their creations, they have to turn the writer's story which is probably initially good, into something that follow the Hollywoodian ideology. The director's ideas are also often modified during post production.. that's what happened to Blade Runner also.. and Brazil, lots of movies suffered from that, and that's why soooo many writers are very angry when they see "their" movie. </p> <p>That's the way it goes most of the time.. however when you see a movie where the same person writes, producer and direct... it means this person proved to know how to make a blockbuster, the studio is then safe. James Cameron is not a moron he won't produce a piece of art and then hope the studio is satisfied with it... he's following very common rules... Visually, you are pretty free, the story can take pretty much any setting unless the story treats the bad guys as the American themselves.. I don't think there's a single American flag in Avatar... while there are usually several American flags in the usual Hollywood Blockbuster.. Unless the flag would be completely random of course, they are not as low as Canadians where Canadian content are often obligated in several television program, such content can be the Canadian flag or a moose, a mounted police or a beaver (NOT KIDDING, hilarious isn't it?) Well, it's a bit the same in Hollywoodian movie except for some reason I feel that it's less ridicule.. maybe it's because we're so used to see these American symbols... and since the government doesn't finance the tv or cinema productions, it doesn't have a word to say, that's different in Canada... (This financing has its bad sides too.) Back to topic, other Hollywoodian ideologies include the self-made man, the common man, the happy end, good vs evil, etc.. there are several more of these. </p> <p>Sometimes, some movie are simply never released... or some are going straight to dvd... Hollywood just doesn't care because they actually make more movie than what is going to be released, this is a good way to flood the market to make sure as little international features get into theatres. For the Big Six, the ideal number would obviously be zero. All that to say that they simply make sure their mistakes have the less impact as possible: they could stop the film while it's in production and best of all, they invest much, much less in advertisement. </p> <p>Now, my next point: advertisement. Since Jaws, advertisement and distribution is the priority in ANY big Hollywoodian releases. That's because of the way the studios and distributors make their money. When a movie is released, for the first week or first two weeks, 95% (or so) of the profits on the theater tickets go to the studios and distributors, numbers probably vary based on contracts, but it's always like this... and yes, that's why the popcorn is so damn expensive and that's why in the best theaters you probably walk in front of a series of snack kiosks before reaching your projection room... it's not malicious, it's called capitalism. After the first or two first weeks, the share of profit is more in favour of the theaters. What does this mean? It means the Big Six make all their money right when the movie is announced, before the critics, before the reviews, before the forums, so what do the customers have to based their choice of either going to see the movie? (here I refer to those who go see the movie in the first 2 weeks, if you wait 1 month it's not the same story, obviously) You have a preview of the cast (which is a form of publicity because of the big names they use) you have the trailer (some more advertisement) and you have the ads.. That's why the biggest chuck of the budget of every single "big" Hollywoodian movies since Jaws, including Avatar, were spent on advertisement. It's also not a random fact that they are always released on the same date in every part of the country... it's too create the event. Also you don't want to spoil how shitty your product was in some place so people can spread the word... </p> <p>Unfortunately, most Hollywoodian features were concieved and released with the single idea to make money out of it... if this means recreating an artist's story without modifying it at all, they will do it... if to make money it meant to feature some artists's real art without even being in the production process, they would friggen do it... they are not "evil" companies, they are just there for the profit and unfortunately, by definition it means you have to kill anything "art" in it. All's left is their storyline based on classic ideologies and some technologically oriented eye candy. If there's a coupable for screwing up so many ideas, it's the mass. Yes I'm acting like an elistist here and I'm trying really hard not too, but when I see what the mass likes and wants, it's impossible to lower myself to that level, sorry. (not referring to avatar here, which IMO was a bit over the average, due to an actual progress, in the visual department.. which is in no way related to art, since when does using high tech toys make you an artist? I just wish it wasn't that cliché and that there actually was a storyline over those goliath robots and giant smurfs) </p> <p>I hope I answered a few questions you had on the making and distribution of Hollywoodian products. </p> <p>Others that I did not quote either didn't offer potential discussion material such as some explanation of their ideas, or just don't know what they are talking about. </p> <p>A square is a rectangle but not every rectangles are squares.<br /> Art can use technologically advanced medias but not every technologically advanced productions are art.</p> <p>==============================</p> <p>I really do not understand how can someone see such product as art... but since some people do, I think it makes a great debate, what do you guys think? Is Avatar, art? </p> http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1697#post-29074 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 14:53:53 +0000 valonqe 29074@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/ <p>It's not jut me that requested that Niko but a lot other people as well. But any way lets get back to the subject because you and me Niko can argue for days and would change my mind about how I feel about Nikon lately.</p> <p>Remeber that I to am a NIkon user and I think that this blog is set for us to discuss and coment about our cameras and many, many more.</p> <p>Regards </p> http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1696#post-29073 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 14:36:40 +0000 JorPet 29073@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/ <p>I saw it the weekend it came out (back in December some time). I loved it as did the kids. We are planning to see it at the Seattle Science Center in full IMAX 3D one of these days, but they keep selling out all the weekend shows a week or so in advance, so haven't been able to coordinate it yet.</p> <p>As for the plot, yes, it is Ferngully on steroids and all the other combos that where listed. As I told my co-worker it is the classic boy meets girl, boy loses girl, boy wins girl back along with the classic battle scenes where all appear lost and many you have come to care about sacrifice themselves for the greater good, then a miracle occurs and pulls a victory out of the jaws of defeat. Of course that pretty much describes 90% of the movies that come out, so this one sparkles in the CGI people and that is what is all about... </p> http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1669&page=2#post-29072 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 14:35:45 +0000 jonnyapple 29072@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/ <p>Niko's right. That's on the low end for wedding photography in the US. I'd bet average would be somewhere in the $1,000-3,000 range. </p> http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1669&page=2#post-29071 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 14:33:41 +0000 chadleo 29071@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/ <p>"Where is your 28-70??"</p> <p>Hahaha, this made me laugh. Evidently Judge Joe Brown knows his stuff. </p> http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1697#post-29070 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 14:29:11 +0000 jonnyapple 29070@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/ <blockquote><p><cite>NikoDoby <a href="http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1697#post-29059">said</a>:</cite><br /> As unoriginal as I think this is, I'd still prefer it over Ashton Kutcher's uninspiring ads </p></blockquote> <p>You are so old school, Niko. </p> <p>(actually, the first time I saw an "Ashton's Nikon..." website, I had to go read the wikipedia page about him because I had never heard of him. true story) </p> http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1695#post-29069 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 14:25:15 +0000 shivaswrath 29069@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/ <blockquote><p><cite>jonnyapple <a href="http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1695#post-29067">said</a>:</cite><br /> Every night in my dreams, shivas. ;-)</p> <p>I've got a D90. The inputs I'm talking about are in the Zoom, and then I use the audio from the D90 as an aid to sync the real audio in post.</p> <p>I'm being serious about getting a D700 replacement when it comes out, though. Watching for that is what originally brought me to visit NR. </p></blockquote> <p>I hear ya brotha, waiting on the replacement to come out. . and then I'll wait another 2 years before I can afford it. . .so this D200 will be serving me WELL into 2012, haha. . .right now, championing for a 70-200 (figure glass before body, right?!) </p> http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1704#post-29068 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 14:24:02 +0000 shivaswrath 29068@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/ <p>any SDHC or SD card will work. . .how could have a problem?</p> <p>Don't read the "Nikon compatible site" . . .they are full of it, look at SanDisk, Kingston, etc. . . </p> http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1695#post-29067 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 14:23:22 +0000 jonnyapple 29067@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/ <blockquote><p><cite>shivaswrath <a href="http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1695#post-29046">said</a>:</cite><br /> JA - you've got a D3s or is this on the D300s? </p></blockquote> <p>Every night in my dreams, shivas. ;-)</p> <p>I've got a D90. The inputs I'm talking about are in the Zoom, and then I use the audio from the D90 as an aid to sync the real audio in post.</p> <p>I'm being serious about getting a D700 replacement when it comes out, though. Watching for that is what originally brought me to visit NR. </p> http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1669&page=2#post-29066 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 14:19:26 +0000 monty11 29066@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/ <p>Niko would those charges apply to the weddings of mere mortals who actually work to make a living or are those the high street prices? </p> http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1704#post-29065 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 14:06:29 +0000 zenyattafan 29065@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/ <p>I'm having some trouble finding memory cards that are available for the D5000. Anyone have any suggestions? </p> http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1702#post-29063 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 14:00:23 +0000 Kamerad 29063@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/ <p>I think keeping it makes sense, I probably can't get much for it.. </p> http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1702#post-29062 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 14:00:20 +0000 adamz 29062@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/ <p>I would keep it as a backup camera and welcome to the forum! </p> http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1703#post-29061 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 13:45:30 +0000 chadleo 29061@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/ <p>Yes, I shoot mostly rock concerts in low light clubs &amp; theaters. High ISO performance is my main concern but I would also prefer more mp than 12.1. </p> <p>If NikoDoby is correct, I would be better off waiting for the D700 upgrade. Of course these upgrades are all speculation at this point...so who knows??</p> <p>When I do get my full frame body, I don't want to upgrade it for several years. The D3s is a little out of my budget range now plus I don't need the video. I may just have to be patient and see what the D700 upgrade is... </p> http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1703#post-29060 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 13:33:02 +0000 NikoDoby 29060@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/ <blockquote><p><cite>Recent Convert <a href="http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1703#post-29058">said</a>:</cite><br /> I would imagine that a camera without mirror and with 18MP would just be the right tool: Leica M9. Except: ISO noise. To that end, the D3S is in a league all by itself. Does it have a "quiet mode"? </p></blockquote> <p>ISO performance would be the biggest reason you'd want a good camera for low light concerts. I'm not sure about what type of concert chadleo shoots but I was thinking rock concert. So a "quiet mode" would be pointless. </p> http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1697#post-29059 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 13:28:36 +0000 NikoDoby 29059@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/ <blockquote><p><cite>valonqe <a href="http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1697#post-29050">said</a>:</cite><br /> I had to buy the 7D because Nikon didn't bring the firmware that I've requested from them 4 times through e-mails.</p> </blockquote> <p>*facepalm*</p> <blockquote><p><cite>mb <a href="http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1697#post-29041">said</a>:</cite><br /> D300s lacks 18Mpix sensor, and ISO performance is about the same</p> </blockquote> <p>Which is amazing to me that a camera with "only" 12mp can hold it's own against a camera with 6 more megapixels! All you 12mp haters remind me of the time all the haters were crying about the D2H(S) "only" having 4mp when canon had cameras with 6 and 8mp.</p> <p>So enough about what valonqe wants and let's get back to discussing Nikon's new campaign. </p> <p>As unoriginal as I think this is, I'd still prefer it over Ashton Kutcher's uninspiring ads </p> http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1703#post-29058 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 13:25:50 +0000 Recent Convert 29058@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/ <p>I would imagine that for concert photography, the acoustical footprint of the camera is an issue. While I love my D700, I must say: the camera could be less noisy . . .<br /> I would imagine that a camera without mirror and with 18MP would just be the right tool: Leica M9. Except: ISO noise. To that end, the D3S is in a league all by itself. Does it have a "quiet mode"? </p> http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1669&page=2#post-29057 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 13:24:00 +0000 nfiorito 29057@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/ <p>wow, this is hilarious, but definitely a warning to wedding shooters to conduct yourselves professionally and appropriately. That being said, if you act anything like Ms. Geese, you probably deserve to be made the fool. I just wouldn't even want to deal with someone like that on my wedding day, no matter how good or bad the pics turned out. </p> http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1702#post-29056 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 13:19:36 +0000 NikoDoby 29056@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/ <p>Welcome to the forum PGN1. How's the weather in Turku, Finland? :^) </p> http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1703#post-29055 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 13:17:44 +0000 NikoDoby 29055@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/ <p>Welcome to the forum chadleo.</p> <p>I doubt whatever replaces the D700 will have the same ISO quality of the D3S. More likely Nikon's next camera and sensor will be around 18mp and provide ISO quality slightly better than the D700 at the same ISO range. </p> http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1702#post-29054 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 13:16:21 +0000 PGN1 29054@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/ <p>Oh, Hey everybody, Greetings from Turku, Finland. </p> http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1702#post-29053 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 13:14:39 +0000 PGN1 29053@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/ <p>Depends... I have a similar setup and will keep most but sell some lenses. The D80 is now also monetarely worthless it doesnt limit its use in worse or hazardous conditions. Which is nice.<br /> Compared to FX prices there is also temptation to sell the D80 and buy a D90 to replace it as such travel kit (something like 400e, when forthcoming FX will be closer to 3000e).<br /> I would probably do this if this was not my first DSLR, I might just keep it on my bookshelf for memories sake. </p> http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1669#post-29052 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 13:10:04 +0000 NikoDoby 29052@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/ <p>Charging $1300 is actually on the low end for wedding photography. I know some photographers that charge around $5000-$10,000USD for their wedding packages. Their photos look nothing like Damaris Geese's though </p>